California parents w/o credentials cannot homeschool

Post Reply New Topic

California parents without teaching credentials cannot legally home school their children, according to a recent state appellate court ruling. *check this online, it's an AP article so my copying it here would be a violation of copyrights. http://www.10news.com/news/15526132/detail.html

This is bad news for parents who homeschool in California. I know the judge meant well, and that there are undoubtedly a number of homeschooling parents who really are not capable and/or are not doing what's necessary to get their kid(s) up to speed academically. I have to tell myself that is what he was thinking when he made his ruling. Even with his best intentions considered, I think the judge is WAY off-base here. I do believe that the children should be tested on a regular basis using some sort of standardized testing to make sure they are progressing. If they are not meeting the standards, than further intervention is necessary. If they are, how they get to that point should be nobody's business other than of the student(s) and their teacher(s), whomever they are.

I also know, from having gone through a teacher education program, that possessing a teacher credential means nothing other than a marginal level of literacy and competency. I met some of the least educated people I've ever known in that program, and they are now out "teaching" in the California schools. (Basically, all they have to do is stay one chapter ahead of the kids.) When I was doing my student teaching I was placed with a "master teacher" who'd been in the field for thirty years who, one day, pointed to a map of the world and identified for the children the "Island of Barcelona" off Spain. (That's where the name of the city was written, over the Mediterranean Ocean, so it must be an island, right?). She also asked me what language the phrase terra firma might be in and if I knew what it meant. When one of the kids pointed out several errors in one of our textbooks, and I agreed that they were inaccuracies, I was told (as was the student) that whatever was in the book was "right" and that was what they should put down on their answer sheets when tested on the material. During an "off-topic" discussion of world events, this teacher mentioned to the class how Italy had been one of our closest allies all during WWII.... She was one of the senior teachers at the school, had the best classroom in the place, had an aide so she didn't have to grade papers or run the mimeo machine, and made close to $50K a year (this was roughly 20 years ago). The kids came into her classroom, did the workbook exercises, filled in the pre-made sheets, and did as well as they would have if the janitor had been sitting in the room instead of my "mentor" teacher. Having gone through the classes and the in-school apprenticeship to become a public school teacher in California - and having seen that - I made a decision that (I'm sure) saved my sanity. I went into another career.

I absolutely believe that someone having a four-year university degree plus the fifth year of required teacher education classes is not necessary ~IF~ the person doing the teaching is self-taught, intelligent, literate, and functional. I had no choice, financially, other than to send my child to public school. I spent at least two hours a day undoing what they were doing to her and providing her with a decent education for most of her academic career. She was three grade levels ahead when she started school and the system rapidly morphed her from a proactive, eager learner into one who did the minimum. She passed the high school exit exam at the start of the 10th grade, but the system required that she sit through the rest of the dross. I could go on for a very long time about our experiences with the California public schools, but that digresses from the point I mean to make: I do not agree that a child either needs to go to a formal school and/or be taught by a credentialed teacher to achieve. Some of the most intelligent, thoughtful, well-read people I've known never got past high school and would make (or would have made) excellent tutors.

This is a huge mistake, just a huge HUGE error on the judge's part.

That's my opinion.

Last edited by Nan on 07 Mar 2008, 3:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Well, the good thing about terrible, unqualified teachers is, a kid is usually only stuck with them for one hour of one school year. If they have a terrible, unqualified parent homeschooling them, they're stuck with them for 13 years.

True, but if they're tested periodically and found to not be performing where they should be, an intervention could then take place. Throwing all homeschooling out because of a test case (which is what this was) is just ludicrous. How long the kids are "stuck" with a bad teacher also depends on the grade level. The poor things that were in the classrooms in which I apprenticed were stuck there seven hours per day, five days per week.

I agree that the ruling is the wrong answer. The vast majority of home-schooled children thrive acedemically.

As with many things in life, the level of quality is going to vary a lot. In theory, in a public school, with a principal and a school board to answer to, there are more checks and balances on the inconsistency than in a home environment, which cannot in any practical way be monitored. Perhaps this is what they are trying to address but, still, wrong answer. Home schooling has proved to be a necessary and successful educational choice for many families.

I've been very happy with my son's public schools and teachers so far, in California. Some more than others but, still, your poor experiences are not universal.

It's still possible to homeschool in california if you register as a private school. The HSLDA will be involved with this case, I'm sure. I don't think they've ever lost a case.

Here is a petition to sign:

http://hslda.org/

Apatura - That's one of the issues. Previously it was possible to homeschool by registering as a private school. This ruling requires a Certificated teacher be involved. Hence, if you do not have a teaching credential, private school designation or not, you cannot homeschool your child. - Nan

I am afraid for our country when I see the lack of teaching ability and intelligence in some of the parents who home school. I realize that some school districts aren't helping students learn very well, but to have no standards and no accountability in a significant education segment is troubling. My parents (who were licensed, by the way) were my teachers for a number of years, and if they didn't have an understanding of a subject, they passed that lack of understanding on to my sister and me. It wasn't genetic, it was not having the intellectual resources available in our family unit. There should be a willingness to compromise on both sides of this issue.

Z

I was driving with NPR on and didn't hear the California part of the story. I'm sorry for Californians that hate their school districts but I have to say, I'm relieved it's not Arizona. I loved the school district we were in in Northern CA and wouldn't dream of homeschooling there. However, CA is a big state with a big variety of availability. I'm sure there are plenty of places there that have better homeschoolers than certified teachers.
The thing that really sucks in Special Ed is that the school doesn't have to comply but you have to send your kid to school. You can be tossed in jail for keeping your kid home unless you write a formal letter of intent to homeschool here. We got a warning letter a month after I kept my son home for 3 days for "personal reasons". I kept him home because they were giving him in school suspension automatically for something they wouldn't even conference with us about. They don't have to prove they are following the law, they can just say so and yet we have to document and prove all sorts of stupid stuff.

They think it's really funny and okay to talk about not being trained in autism, yet I'm supposed to trust them with my son! What about people who are fundamentally against promotion and education according to age? Some 4 year olds are ready for Kindergarten, some 6 year olds aren't ready. How about when the entire class is held back because too many students can't pass the proficiency tests? My son is in 2nd grade and they are still doing dittoes of 1st grade math, no multiplication and no cursive writing. They are repeating science lessons he's had since kindergarten!!

This better be appealed and forgotten and it better not set a precedent!! !!

What a bunch of BS!! ! The one I love the most from teachers is the one about "I don't mind if you homeschool, but the kids should be tested yearly or periodically...and if they fail, you should be forced to send your kids to school..." Well, no problem on that...next time a child fails ANY course at school, the teacher should be fired, PERIOD! If the teacher was any good, the kids would not fail any subject...right? This is just a bunch of teachers who think they are owed the world to teach children what most parents can teach them, what computers and video games can teach them, what the world can teach them...but the teachers need a job...and they need to feel important...

Sorry, there might be some good teachers, and I had a couple...not many...and I honestly have no tolerance for the government or anyone else out there telling me how I need to raise my child...There are enough children in the US school system who are constantly failing and whom the school system has failed...focus on those children first...when they ALL pass and meet/exceed your expectations, then come after the homeschooled children.

Ok, now that one I can't agree with entirely, Whatamess. There have to be some minimum standards ALL kids meet, just to ensure they can function eventually. The problem is, some homeschooled kids and a whole lot of public school kids aren't meeting them. And we're talking about some really REALLY minimum standards here - functional literacy, basically.

It's a child's duty to learn. That has to be taught to a kid from the time they are in diapers. In a formal classroom, the teacher can present the material, and should be able to present it in a manner that allows the child to learn, but it is up to the child to do the learning. Parents should be working with the teacher (if the teacher's functional) or on their own, and doing what they can to make sure their kid(s) is(are) exposed to the information and do what's necessary to keep them up-to-speed. Assuming the teacher is competent, they should be able to adapt - given that there's 35 bodies in a room and there's no way to accommodate each and every one of them - teaching styles. Reality is that when you've got 35 bodies in a room, and they're all at various competency levels, the teacher has to teach to the middle ground - unless there are standardized tests involved. Then s/he then has to teach to get the highest number of students to pass the tests. If that means parking the brighter ones in the "donothingbusywork zone" so s/he can spend extra time bringing the slow kids up to speed, that's what s/he has to do to keep their job.

When the children are younger, there has to be some sort of "strong arm" applied if a kid is slacking, perhaps, to make sure they get what they need later on. I believe that almost all of that needs to be coming from home - serious consequences for slacking off. But, ultimately, once a kid hits around 12 or 13, it's up to the kid(s) to learn via self-discipline. It's called working for what you get. You can put the best teacher in the world in a classroom, and if a kid is a slacker and there's no parental support, there's not a damned thing that teacher can do about a kid failing. S/he has dozens of other kids to manage and cannot allow one droid to pull the rest down. But then, the world needs ditch-diggers, too.

It doesn't matter if the child is home-schooled or "factory" schooled in that respect. I've been in classrooms observing teachers day in and out, I've been a student (for more years than I'd like to remember), and I've had a kid in several school systems. I've watched a few good teachers, and many more really abysmal teachers, deal with classes that were sometimes filled with hardworking kids and sometimes classes half-populated by slackers who expect everything handed to them. That's one of the reasons I disliked the public schools my daughter attended so much - the slackers, goofs, and generically slow kids held everyone else back. Put a bad teacher in with that population and you've got a situation that does way more harm than any good it can do for a serious student.

And then the parents come storming in - rarely, actually, in my experience - complaining how their precious Johnny or Suzy isn't doing well. When Johnny or Suzy is out toking up in the bathrooms at break and copping an "I don't give a damn" attitude, the "I'm special" attitude that they've been hearing all their obnoxious little lives.... The parent/teacher nights that I attended while in training (I sat in on maybe a half-dozen of them) at two different schools? Out of seventy students I met about a dozen parents/sets of parents. The rest couldn't be bothered to attend, even when we offered to schedule around THEIR schedules so they could do so. Gee, I wonder where Johnny and Suzy got their attitudes?

I had to work with my kid on the side, after working two jobs, to make sure she had a decent education for several years because of that scenario, and that's one of the most serious reasons I have for supporting home-schooling. Having her sitting in a room with kids who were three or four years, intellectually, behind her and who came in with an attitude of "you can make me be here but you can't make me learn or give a damn" was not where I wanted my kid to be, but that's what the schools were where we lived. Unlike what a lot of people may think, I do believe that once a kid is a certain age, their peers exert way more influence over them than their parents can do - especially when they're around their peers for 6 to 8 hours a day and see their parents for maybe two or three hours. And then having teachers who were only marginally more literate than their students... that was just scary.

I'd have given just about anything I'd owned to have been able to not have to work so that I could have stayed home and homeschooled my kid rather than have her in those environments, but that's the breaks. I did our homeschooling on the weekends.

Last edited by Nan on 08 Mar 2008, 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

For Californians who still wish to homeschool, Calvert (calvert.org, I think) has a teacher service for a small extra fee, cancelling out the requirement that the parent be the accredited teacher.

Thanks for posting that Nan. The children's well-being in this case is paramount. They have been subjected to abuse, and yet they still remain with their abusive parents on the provisor that they are returned to school. Credentials are a plus, but by no means essential for providing a quality education. Many of us have seen abusive teachers, who were never worthy of the role, in our own school lives. Many of us are or were unhappy with how our children were being 'taught'. There will always be good and bad in the system. I heartily support greater monitoring, if it weeds out the bad from the good.

For further information(said to be the other side of the story):
http://docsdomain.net/blog/?p=661

I've read a little more, and it sounds like what we have is an overly broad statement in what really was a "bad" test case. It seems like a host of people feel they have to get those children out of the home for schooling, in the situation that was litigated (child welfare is involved, and some of the children have been appointed lawyers to represent them), and there may not have been any ready tool in the law to do so, forcing the judge to "find" something.

I think that any parent who can successfully distinguish their situation from the one in the case will be successfull. That, however, is a very large burden to pass on to the parents.

The Governor has stepped in and is suggesting that legislative guidelines be developed. The funny thing is that most homeschoolers are opposing that, wanting to keep things free and loose instead. However, I think the case points out that you DO need some sort of guidelines, because the agencies that are in place to protect our children could use a little more than "gut instinct" for making decisions.

I think this issue is going to end up making some strange bed-fellows. In the Aspie community home schooling is an important alternative to support the emotional welfare of children who are not always able to find their unique needs met in a formal school environment. But the family in the court case is rather opposite: they are home schooling to enforce their unique vision of the world onto their children (the father makes this very clear), and not because their children are incapable of doing well in a structured school environment. Unfortunately, much of the homeschool movement in California is currently controlled by the later. I think everyone here has a much more sensible and balanced view than most of what we are hearing from the movement itself.

Wrong.

In my case, anyway.

Just an update: The governer issued a statement assuring us he will intervene if he has to. http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/336050.aspx

As to the musings that "educational milestones" and standardized tests are anything but total BS I just have to laugh.

Not to exaggerate but it sounds like a mass kidnapping to me. The good part of this is that I don't think the judge and prosecution in this case really thought this through and weren't making a general statement. I think they were just grabbing for straws in going after this family so that the kids could be better observed. If the case is appealed (which they say will happen) the decision will have to be revisited anyhow. Even the Dept of Ed was shocked at the potential truancy cases they'd have to deal with.
I just see the District bigwigs dreaming of attendance monies,
~ ~~
($ > $)
O