Let's say teaching credentials were required of homeschooling parents...

[Tami]

Since my understanding of Scripture involves providing a specifically Christian education for my child, I would either get my teaching certificate, enroll my child in a Christian school. If both of those options were out of reach financially, I would have to make the painful choice of either violating my religious convictions or violating the law of the land. I would hope that I would choose to obey God rather than man, in that case.

[Carol in Cal.]

To me, though, still, the point is not whether I would get certified. The point is whether I would fight not to NEED to get certified.

 

I don't know whether I would or would not get certified.

 

But I know that I should not have to.

 

I know that parents should have the right to raise and educate their children as they see fit (with appropriate caveats around very basic health and safety.) This must be the priority that governs parenting law. It's not education law that is at issue in California. It is parenting law. And for that I will fight, regardless of whether or not I would ultimately comply.

[Plucky]

I agree. In WA its a homeschool class that might be needed. Really easy and I don't think its too much to ask because the point isn't to discourage homeschooling. I think getting certified as a teacher is something totally different and really its to discourage us from homeschooling.

[Storm Bay]

Well, this is a tough one. My kids and I are dual citizens, so if this became required in only one of the countries, we might seriously consider moving, although it could be tough for dh as he's not a dual citizen and that would make it harder. I have no idea if Immigration Canada is anything like the INS, but if it is, it would not be a picnic.

 

It would be a battle between my natural tendency to rebel from such strong coersion and my biblical beliefs which say to obey all laws that do not directly contradict the Bible and by that I would say what we're directed to do in the NT, not the Mosaic law. It would also depend on just what would need to be done in order to get this certification. Sell my soul? No. Take another 4 year degree program? Not bl**dy likely. (That's my angry BC-ism coming out here). Study for a basic written test? Probably if the cost isn't prohibitive.

 

But before that happened I'd be doing whatever I could to prevent such legislation from being passed.

[LizzyBee]

Hey, I got my first negative rep. I feel so special. :p Wanna give me another. :rolleyes:

 

Well, if it's any comfort, I gave you positive rep earlier this evening. :)

[Lakeside]

This is a really hard question. I'm almost at the point where I believe that the only reason a state would require this is so that they could feed you their worldview for 4-5 years. And it would never stop with teacher certification. The state would demand that you jumped through all their hoops. Would they begin to dictate what curriculum you use, what subjects you teach? Where does it stop? When do we stand up and say, "This is wrong and I will not comply to a law that takes away my freedoms as an American" When do we stand up and say, "Enough!"

 

This is a hard question. What I keep thinking is why are parents considered competent to educate their children until they are 5 or 6 years old, but then they suddenly are not capable of doing so.

 

Since this is hypothetical, rather than going underground, I'd move! :D

 

Shannon

[Audrey]

I have no idea if Immigration Canada is anything like the INS, ...

 

Oh gosh no! They're nothing alike. It's actually quite a straight-forward process if you are already married to a Canadian. Don't worry. Your "Plan B" will work. :)

[pixelroper]

This is a hard question. What I keep thinking is why are parents considered competent to educate their children until they are 5 or 6 years old, but then they suddenly are not capable of doing so.

 

 

is in the careful study of the social/political/philosophical history of our educational system and how it ended up in the shambles it is in today...

[nukeswife]

I wouldn't homeschool illegally. And I doubt that I'd go so far as to get a teaching credential in order to homeschool, unless there were some special "shortcut" credential available for homeschooling. It's not that I'd have a "beef" against it, it's just that it would be difficult to impossible for me to go back to college and earn a teaching credential in time for it to be of any use in homeschooling my children.

 

 

I'm in the same boat. I don't have an Associates or Bachelors degree. I have a few certificates in misc. health fields but nothing that would allow me to get a teaching certificate in an amount of time that would allow me to make it useful for my oldest 2 kids.

[Storm Bay]

This is a hard question. What I keep thinking is why are parents considered competent to educate their children until they are 5 or 6 years old, but then they suddenly are not capable of doing so.

 

Since this is hypothetical, rather than going underground, I'd move! :D

 

Shannon

 

I can't remember whose site it's on, but at least one of the presidential candidates has something on their website about preschool education. Of course, that may not mean mandatory education;), but nevertheless, it made me wonder about their entire educational agenda. But since I don't care for any of the three top contenders (unless anyone stepped down today and I don't know about it) I'm just plain irritated because I'll vote on principle, but won't like it one bit. Will I vote my conscience (that might be too late by then, but I'll have to check into every party again) or for what I deem to be the least of the evils? Let it not be said that I am impressed by most politicians, in either country (oh, please don't let my mother know I wrote that!)

[sdWTMer]

Patty, it's no wonder why I respect and admire you so much. Thanks.

[angela in ohio]

Well, with my college work, I qualify to be a sub, and dh has a teaching degree still. So I would be a long-term sub. ;)

[angela in ohio]

What is the substance behind a teaching credential? Essentially, the payment of a certain amount of money to a certain college which has created its own agenda for "teacher certification" (which may have nothing to do with the nearby college's coursework).

 

I'm sure it differs by state, but dh had to take several state tests to get his teaching degree. A few were general and then there were some for his specialties. When he switched states, he had to take them all over again to be certified in the new state.

[percytruffle]

Actually, there is a national teacher exam. You must take it to gain certification in NY state. The year I became certified was the last year without the exam requirement. But, as you intimated, an exam is no guarantee of an ability to teach, only that you posess the appropriate knowledge. Even though I oppose many of the NEA stances on issues, I do agree that an exam is not the best method of determining worthiness for certification.

[sdWTMer]

In this case, I truly believe it is these individuals that do it as a labor of love.

[percytruffle]

The tests are subject area tests as well as general competency tests.

 

You said:

"My year was the last year that one was certified in a *subject* area at the secondary level; after my year, one was certified in *education*--an ART. How does one test for competence in that?"

 

The teaching of art is not necessarily subjective, but encompasses skill areas such as: the elements of art, the principles of design, art history, knowledge of materials and media within each area of art. Why would testing for certification be difficult? Art students are routinely evaluated as part of their Master's comprehensive. Also, the national testing, includes basic skills such as writing. Now that is a good thing. I have seen young teachers present themselves, through their written correspondence, to parents in such a way that was less than professional.

[sdWTMer]

While, I can't speak for Patty, I don't think that Patty was necessarily talking about an art class, but rather being certified as in a Bachelor of Arts Degree in Education. I could be wrong here and correct me if I am.

[percytruffle]

I was addressing what I saw as a legitimate concern that was brought up about testing within the field of art. I can certainly see how someone outside that particular field may not have an understanding of the objectivity which can exist within the field of art.

 

Patty wrote to another poster in this thread:

"What is the subject area your husband is in? I think it is a lot easier to certify in math than in English, for example, and so that might be an area where some progress is made."

 

I was merely trying to share some inside information with her about the types of things an art teacher could be tested on since art was not her field of study.:)

[sdWTMer]

Alrighty then. :-)

[Jan P.]

I hate these kinds of questions. I would hope that I would have the stamina to fight the decision. As the others have said a teaching certificate doesn't mean much. I had a professor in college that taught all freshmen via television. Boring! I could have easily passed the class by just reading the book and taking the tests. Millions of public school kids are taught by substitute teachers who do not have teaching credentials. Are these students hauled out of their school rooms and stuck into another school room with a certified teacher. Of course not! The whole thing is absurd. Even if we got certified then we are going back to having to cowtow to someone else's agenda (the certification testers). It's bad enough that we as homeschoolers have to teach to the test (SAT/ACT) in high school, but then to have to bow down to the state almost makes me what to take the first boat to an uncharted island!

[sdWTMer]

LOL. Thanks Jan. I agree. :-)

[Stacy in NJ]

part. Just to satisfy some irrational, arbitary state requirement? It would be legitimizing a higher eduational system that is functionally incompetent. No way.

[nancypants]

I would just move. Thankfully I live in a very pro-homeschooling province. :)

[sdWTMer]

Well, Nancypants, we might all want to come join you! ;-)

[CLHCO]

...which brings me to my objection to teacher certification PERIOD, for schools or otherwise. *What exactly is being "certified"?* The NEA and all the state EA have consistently and adamantly opposed teacher testing even as they have insisted on certification. Doctors, nurses, CPAs, lawyers, engineers, veterinarian--all have certification, and all obtain certification by passing a test of subject knowledge. This is what gives meaning to the certification. This does not mean that every doctor is an excellent doctor, or that a nurse will never make a mistake. But it does mean that they have passed a test displaying mastery of the subject matter at hand. The "credential" gains its meaning from the substance represented by it. What is the substance behind a teaching credential? Essentially, the payment of a certain amount of money to a certain college which has created its own agenda for "teacher certification" (which may have nothing to do with the nearby college's coursework).

 

So my problem is that I don't think the case can be made that it means anything.

 

I apologize in advance. This is just beyond me to not give a bit of a rant over. I have trouble with the whole "certification" process myself. It varies a great deal from state to state and even school to school but I know that the education classes I took were just plain stupid. Honestly. Stupid, lame, foolish, etc. I can't remember learning ONE thing in a class called "Reading Comprehension". I do know I did not learn the difference between teaching phonics and whole language until I started homeschooling - in a whole semester about reading. They don't usually teach you that since a teacher wouldn't have a say in the curriculum anyway and they don't want any rogue teachers on their hands with too much information and ideas. Not one critique of the current methods or issues facing the schools was brought up either.

 

I never learned about styles of education and philosophies. I didn't really see it until I started homeschooling and learning about education myself, but now it seems like they were just trying to come up with things to do with us without actually letting us think ourselves or do anything except accept the establishment. The teacher colleges usually bow down to the establishment rather than have open discussions of the needs in education.

 

To summarize: I do think one can have what would be a generalized expertise in "education" that one can "certify" if you like, such as a lawyer proved to know the law, a doctor to have a set amount of knowledge in medicine, etc. However, when they say "certify" it doesn't mean that. A general knowledge on education would include methods of education, such as classical models, accelerated, Charlotte Mason, Montessori, or new ones like Core Knowledge. It would mean you know the history of the modern movement, why it was started and when, methods of teaching reading and the effectiveness, the meaning of a linear approach to math and whether it is best to use algorithms or simply learn to problem solve intuitively, like new, new math, etc. Appropriate overview of classroom management methods or learning disabilities would also be helpful in areas where multiple children are involved. That's not what places like the NEA mean when they want certification, and there view is what the colleges teach.

 

I'm sorry, I got way off track on the original post. I would complete my certification and growl the whole way through. If it was too much of a hardship or impossible, I'd go underground at that point.

[Quiver0f10]

I don't know what I would do. I only have a HS diploma and so to go to college to get my teaching dregree would take a long time. I would do it if necessary I guess, but I don't know if I would go underground or not. It would sure be tempting LOL.

[Elaine]

Well, what it takes to obtain a teaching credential in CA is this:

 

"A certified teacher needs a four-year college degree PLUS a graduate study program for a teaching credential. It's about 30 units for the preliminary credential and another 12-15 units to "clear" the credential. A lot of time and money. Not to mention to student teaching for no pay. There are also a few state examinations involved." (This is quoted to me from a friend who has one.)

 

I don't believe that parents who wish to homeschool their own children should be required to obtain one. I think the whole idea begs the question of whether such a credential equips a teacher to teach any better than one without.

 

You know me too well to think I would ever support such legislation. :)

 

What she said! ;)

[elegantlion]

I would have a problem complying with any certification process. As a christian, my ideal to follow the law of the land, agree or disagree. However, I am a high school graduate and I haven't been in a classroom for over 20 years. I see so much potential to discriminate in the situation, that I certainly wouldn't be the first in line to go through the process.

 

Honestly, at this point my family and I would probably move out of the states and educate our son abroad.

[angela in ohio]

This is interesting and a development since I was involved (I posted nearby on a related issue, so will let that one stand and not repeat myself). What is the subject area your husband is in? I think it is a lot easier to certify in math than in English, for example, and so that might be an area where some progress is made.

 

It would be interesting to know the content of some of these tests...I had to take some "tests" too to be certified, but they were so banal that they are hardly worthy of the name or comparison with a bar or boards exam, for example. But that might have changed, at least in some areas.

 

They were tests in math, English, etc. Also tests in teaching theory, problem solving, etc. His specialties are in special education (I don't remember which two areas specifically.) I don't know what was on those tests, but I know they were more difficult than the general ones. I know dh learned a lot more in his teacher education classes than most people say they did, but he is very motivated and not the norm.

 

His graduate classes were a mix of (1.) really, really helpful classes that taught him very effective ways to teach and (2.) political-reprogramming classes designed to change his personal beliefs to those of the NEA. Maybe more actual teaching classes would have been more helpful. ;)

 

Most people I know say they didn't learn anything helpful to teaching in college, other than in their student teaching. I know what I learned in college in general helps me homeschool every day, but that was just my gen ed classes mostly, as I don't have a teaching degree. I would prefer my dds, if they would like to teach, to get a good liberal arts degree and teach in private schools.

 

Anyway, the teacher exams are, of course, not equivalent to a bar or board exam, but then teachers aren't paid what lawyers, doctors, and nurses are paid. ;)

 

There are still teachers who are inadequate, even with certification. And doctors and nurses who are inadequate, even with certification. And there would still be homeschoolers who are inadequate, even with certification, but that is the first thing anyone can think of to fix a problem. "Let's stamp something offical on them all." LOL :rolleyes:

[angela in ohio]

Oops, some of the middle of this is actually replying to Cheryl's post, too.

[Aubrey]

This is an interesting question. I have a BA in English & an MA in Education. I'm certified for secondary English, & to be certified for elem, I'd just have to take another test.

 

But that's not really the point, is it? I admit, I've taken some comfort in the past in the thought that *if* anything were ever to happen, we'd probably be ok because of my ed., but reading this thread has changed my mind.

 

The point is that *everyone* should have that right. What if I'd been smart enough to get a job & save $ before getting married & having dc INSTEAD of racking up tons of debt on my degrees? Would I be less qualified to teach them? For me personally, yeah, I'd be a little less qualified. I learned a lot in my undergrad degree, & I was raised w a pretty narrow world view. I'm glad I had it challenged a little & that someone forced me to read Plato & Faulkner.

 

In general, though, the WTM was the style of hs'ing I imagined both before & after my BA. Hs'ing was important to me before & after. So I've got my degree--what about my friends & neighbors? What about my dc? I hope that my reaction to such a law (requiring a teaching cert for hs'ers) would reach beyond my own situation.

 

And, yeah, I'm pretty stubborn, & likely to dig my heels in against something that I'm already qualified for. Otoh, I don't see going to jail, being fined, etc. I'm not going to risk *my* hs'ing...yet...not defending the next guy's rights to do so IS risking my own. Kwim?

 

So maybe, worst case scenario, I'd help open up the place that would print degrees for hs'ers. LOL. But if Quiver's not qualified, none of us is.

[mcconnellboys]

Ummmm, these two posts are right under mine and that might just be the quirks of posting to this new board, but just to clarify, I have never given anyone negative rep and never will. I will discuss differences of opinion in open messages. I might consider discussing something more personal in a pm, but never by way of negative rep. And I've only given positive rep anonymously a time or two, just because I forgot and hit the space bar before entering my name......

 

The entire point of coming here is for discussion. If someone doesn't want to hear a point of view any different than their own, they should stay away.

 

I don't even disagree with those who say they would comply with a ruling that we might have to be certified. Heck, if it came right down to it, I would do it, too, if it was the only way to continue. But I would probably be a test case for my state, first...... It's certainly something I'd be willing to go to court over..... I wouldn't let my children's education be disrupted by it, either, so I'd do what I had to do in that regard.

 

Regena

[Aubrey]

Ummmm, these two posts are right under mine and that might just be the quirks of posting to this new board, but just to clarify, I have never given anyone negative rep and never will. I will discuss differences of opinion in open messages. I might consider discussing something more personal in a pm, but never by way of negative rep. And I've only given positive rep anonymously a time or two, just because I forgot and hit the space bar before entering my name......

 

The entire point of coming here is for discussion. If someone doesn't want to hear a point of view any different than their own, they should stay away.

 

I don't even disagree with those who say they would comply with a ruling that we might have to be certified. Heck, if it came right down to it, I would do it, too, if it was the only way to continue. But I would probably be a test case for my state, first...... It's certainly something I'd be willing to go to court over..... I wouldn't let my children's education be disrupted by it, either, so I'd do what I had to do in that regard.

 

Regena

 

Nah, I think it's just trolls.

[DIY-DY]

 

Are there other laws with which you do comply even though you feel you don't "need" them? Or, conversely, are there laws by which you don't abide based on that reasoning?

 

The point of going "underground" is to be beneath the radar, so to speak. By its very nature, this is a choice which puts those who make it in a position of potential danger. They are Breaking The Law, be it by conscience or by conviction or by whatever reasoning. The authorities aren't particularly concerned with the reasons, are they?

 

To admit to such in a public forum, and particularly in a place where there are those who are well-known to be big fans of the State, with all it's "good government", specifically of governmental oversight for those of us who are simply too stupid to govern ourselves (ie. those of us who disagree on a number of basic principles), wouldn't be wise, would it?

 

It's not quite the same as discussing convictions and philosophies in a safe environment, where privacy is a given and one wouldn't have to worry about one's words (in print, no less) being later brought against them in a most disturbing manner.

 

Civil disobedience isn't new. It's also not particularly something one simply comes right out and says, "Look, Ma! I'm doing it! Right now! Look at me!" Not, at least in my mind, when there is a very good possibility that someone of an opposing mindset may find themselves inclined to make a phone call and stir up trouble for the fun of it (or for conviction's sake - I do believe some of the most terrifying oppressors in the history of man were so dangerous because they truly believed in what they were doing and that it was "for the good of ______", and not for maliciousness' sake.) I am NOT, most definitely NOT, insinuating that you would do so, Colleen. But we've seen trolls here already. We've seen the virtiol that can be spewed against anybody who disagrees with anybody else. This isn't a private forum, free from prying eyes or unsavory characters. It can get ugly, and in this context, it seems to me that answering this question straight out is much like putting the can of worms in the hornet's nest and beating the whole contraption with a stick.

 

Just the thoughts that coursed through my mind as I read this thread. I would imagine there are those who would agree with what I'm saying, as well as those who wouldn't. But if I were engaged in some form of civil disobedience, this isn't the place I'd opt to pop on out of the closet about it. ;)

[Peek a Boo]

excellent points made already :-)

 

My thoughts--

In general and on principle I would be as involved fighting this legislation as I could no matter how "simple" it is. If the "teacher certification" needed to homeschool was a simple test like a driver's license thing [and crunchy --I was thinking about that too as I was reading --glad you addressed it], IF it was not expensive, was NOT necessary to take every year [once you got it, you got it for life], and i wasn't required to study for X number of hours, then i would submit to the law so I could get on w/ educating my kids. I like the suggestions so far of expecting some organization to fulfill this type of testing with a huge time/cost efficient system for single income families.

 

washington state: I'm not sure what the homeschooling test is like, but I would be willing to hear more about it.

 

 

If the "teacher certification" was anything more, then its obvious purpose would be more of control than concern. As has been stated by those who know way more than I about teacher certification, the certification process itself doesn't do much to actually help w/ homeschooling one's own children. Or even a small groups of kids.

State control of my children's education [for control's sake only] is not something I can allow scripturally or morally. i would be more likely to move. Or homeschool underground. I know my dh would be on board w/ me on this. And I don't have a problem answering that publicly cuz if it really came down to it, I believe we could go underground pretty quick, lol. :cool:

[Kelli in TN]

You know, the thought of experienced homeschoolers coming up with a course for new homeschoolers to take for some sort of "creditential" is really not that bad of an idea.

 

Even though the thought of a creditential hits me the wrong way, the idea of encouraging some sort of mentoring is not bad at all. I see new homeschoolers who don't know how to plug into resources and they could be helped by something like this. I also see homeschoolers who are somewhat lazy and are doing the bare minimum and I think they might be able to be helped somewhat by a mentor. At least it would do no harm.

 

I have had disagreements for years with various homeschoolers when I have suggested that if we did a better job, within the homeschool community, of watching out for each other and holding each other accountable, perhaps we would not be looked at with so much suspicion.

 

I actually have some incredibly radical ideas about homeschool oversight. Because I cherish my homeschool friends, I keep these ideas to myself. They are ideas that might be terribly offensive to folks who believe in absolute liberty in this area.

[Oak Knoll Mom]

My (currently expired) teaching certificate is for Special Education K-12. I guess I could get recertified fairly easily and then find someone to diagnose each of my kids with some kind of disability. (Hypothetically speaking.) ;)

[Daisy]

I'm curious what a High School Diploma is?? LOL. Has the meaning of a High School diploma become so empty that one assumes a person who has one would need additional education in order to teach their own children? You know it used to be that an 8th grade education meant something. Why add another test for homeschoolers to take in order to "prove" they can educate their children? Why not just make a high school diploma actually worth the paper it is written on? CA started requiring a High School exit exam and sadly many cannot pass it and many more pass by using various loopholes. I guess it stands to reason that CA feels the need to force a college education on potential homeschoolers. Their own homegrown teachers may be lacking in their basic education without a college degree. However once again, CA is making assumptions based on it's own inability to educate children.

[RoughCollie]

I'd have a huge beef with that kind of law. IMO, the proof is in the pudding. If a child can learn and does learn what s/he needs to know, that is enough. I think that a required method of proving that protects the child's right to receive an adequate education.

 

The intersection of parents' rights and children's rights is a sticky wicket. For example, in the Amish community, parents have the right to educate their children only through the 8th grade. But what happens to the Amish child who wants to go to high school? There must be a few of those. Does their parents' right to govern their education trump their right to receive one? Why should this be? [i don't want to derail the discussion to one about the Amish -- this is only an example.]

 

Your hypothetical doesn't give enough information for me to determine whether I would continue to homeschool even if I didn't meet the requirements of the law. Would the law require a 4-year college degree before the teaching credentials could be acquired? Would a standardized test be required, either in lieu of or in addition to, the degree? Would the parent have to be certified to teach in public schools in his or her home state? Would current homeschoolers be "grandfathered" in? What provision would be made for current homeschoolers -- would they be permitted to work towards certification while still teaching their children? What provisions, if any, would be made to tailor the requirements to homeschoolers, as opposed to public school teachers? Who would pay the financial burden of meeting the requirements?

 

On the other hand, maybe an expanded hypothetical is not necessary. Maybe the question is whether or not parents have the right to educate their children without government intervention. If so, what protects the children's rights to an education, and who determines what the quality and quantity of that education should be? If the government has determined that, via the public school system, then they have done a very poor job. I merely have to point to the difference between the quality and quantity of education received in the richest communities and the poorest, and then to the differences in quality of education received by children when comparing one state to another.

 

Another factor is that homeschoolers, by and large, are a group of people who are determined to give their children a good education, who know they can do a better job of it than the public schools do, and who have the resources to enable this to be done. Make no mistake about it, to be a homeschooler is to have a career.

 

IMO, nearly every adult who would tackle homeschooling is competent to teach their children everything necessary in grades 1-8. There are plenty of materials and other resources to aid those who need them. The small percentage of parents who are not competent to homeschool but do it anyway -- well, my question is whether or not they can truly be called homeschoolers. Merely taking one's children out of a public school does not make one a homeschooler.

 

Teaching high school is more difficult -- but there are lots of resources, including outsourcing, books, curricula, and other homeschoolers, that can help the parent who is determined to do a good job at this.

 

My mantra is that is not what a person knows that is important. It is vastly more important that a person knows how to find and use the information they need, and knows how to differentiate the wheat from the chaff in that information.

 

If I consider the hypothetical as it stands, I think I would engage in civil disobedience if the requirements of the law were unduly burdensome to me, and if I thought it were both necessary and reasonable to do so. I would also be supportive of others who did so. I would help with the ensuing court cases, too, if I could.

 

Edited to add, thanks to Kelli's post, that I do not have much contact with other homeschoolers in real life, so I have not met anyone (that I know of) who needed to be mentored or who could be termed a "lazy" homeschooler.

 

 

Let's say, hypothetically, homeschooling parents were required by law to gain teaching credentials. (This is purely hypothetically. Would you abide by such a law? Those of you who would "go underground", so to speak, what's your beef against such a requirement? Those of you who would follow such requirements, please share your three pennies, too.

[CLHCO]

Well, hypothetically, it would be a non-issue for me because I am "qualified" insomuch as I have Ph.D. and in my Province that is undisputed as "qualified."

 

You should be more than qualified. But in the public schools, expertise in a field is not qualification to teach. To be certified you must have specific classes for a specific number of credits on things like classroom management, certain psychology courses, etc. Then you must student teach under someone who many be less competent in the field but does have their stamp of approval.

 

There are those top in their fields in the universities who are technically not "qualified" in many states to teach in the public schools. Here in Colorado, to homeschool without supervision of any type you must hold a Colorado Teaching Certification. You only get this through attending teacher classes through the colleges and student teaching. An experienced and qualified homeschooler would have to sit in with the undergraduates and make a diorama of their ideal classroom, learn about how they are observed by their superiors when they're teaching, and find out about the teacher's unions in the state. All things I remember from class. :rolleyes:

[Mama Lynx]

 

I understand. Are there other laws with which you do comply even though you feel you don't "need" them? Or, conversely, are there laws by which you don't abide based on that reasoning?

 

It sounds like you're really more interested in how people think about and respond to laws, than about homeschooling credentials. Has all the discussion about teacher certification missed the point of your question?

[CLHCO]

Well, hypothetically, it would be a non-issue for me because I am "qualified" insomuch as I have Ph.D. and in my Province that is undisputed as "qualified."

 

Sadly, in most of the US public schools, expertise in a field is not qualification to teach. To be certified you must have specific classes for a specific number of credits on things like classroom management, certain psychology courses, etc. Then you must student teach under someone who many be less competent in the field but does have their stamp of approval. There are a minimum number (usually around 100) hours of observation required in a classroom setting as well. It has little to do with expertise. A few states streamline this but many do not.

 

There are those top in their fields in the universities who are technically not "qualified" in many states to teach in the public schools. Here in Colorado, to homeschool without supervision of any type you must hold a Colorado Teaching Certification. You only get this through attending teacher classes through the colleges and student teaching. An experienced and qualified homeschooler would have to sit in with the undergraduates and make a diorama of their ideal classroom, learn about how they are observed by their superiors when they're teaching, and find out about the teacher's unions in the state. All things I remember from class. :rolleyes:

 

Thankfully, our state does have other options for homeschoolers.

[RoughCollie]

Twenty years ago, I taught college algebra to several hundred students in all.

 

The first day of class, I always gave a basic math test to the students. I got the problems from my elementary school stepdaughter's math textbook. It included addition, subtraction, long division, and multiplication (using whole numbers, decimal numbers and fractions; no calculators allowed). More than half of my students *failed* the test.

 

I gave the test so I could determine whether the majority of my students were minimally ready for college algebra. (The college did not pre-test them for math placement.) I was shocked when only 3 of them made an A on the test.

 

Unfortunately, I was not surprised that so many failed.

 

 

 

I'm curious what a High School Diploma is?? LOL. Has the meaning of a High School diploma become so empty that one assumes a person who has one would need additional education in order to teach their own children? You know it used to be that an 8th grade education meant something. Why add another test for homeschoolers to take in order to "prove" they can educate their children? Why not just make a high school diploma actually worth the paper it is written on? CA started requiring a High School exit exam and sadly many cannot pass it and many more pass by using various loopholes. I guess it stands to reason that CA feels the need to force a college education on potential homeschoolers. Their own homegrown teachers may be lacking in their basic education without a college degree. However once again, CA is making assumptions based on it's own inability to educate children.

[dangermom]

You know, the thought of experienced homeschoolers coming up with a course for new homeschoolers to take for some sort of "creditential" is really not that bad of an idea.

 

Even though the thought of a creditential hits me the wrong way, the idea of encouraging some sort of mentoring is not bad at all. I see new homeschoolers who don't know how to plug into resources and they could be helped by something like this. I also see homeschoolers who are somewhat lazy and are doing the bare minimum and I think they might be able to be helped somewhat by a mentor. At least it would do no harm.

 

I agree with this. The thought of some sort of mentoring program or classes developed by experienced homeschoolers is pretty neat. (After all, it's only a little different than all those conference lectures and seminars we attend in droves.) My problem is that what the state would want is almost certainly something very different and would be more about exerting control than about helping homeschoolers reach their own educational goals.

 

The people who want the state to control homeschooling have little sympathy with the ideals of homeschoolers, and are usually the same people who want universal preschool from age 3, full-time day care from birth, and who generally just think the state can do a much better job than all those incompetent parents out there.

 

Which makes me start thinking that maybe we should be getting in before the state does...I dunno, how would you even do such a thing?

[Claire]

Most teacher education schools do a *terrible* job of mis-educating teachers in how to teach reading. They teach a lot of educational philosophy and theory, but completely miss the boat when it comes to techniques and curriculum choices.

 

Plus, I would expect that a lot of time is spent learning "crowd control" techniques, how to participate in meetings, how to handle paperwork, legal issues, and the history of education in the U.S. None of these contribute to learning how to actually teach a child. They pertain to how to function in a complex bureaucracy.

 

(Sorry, not enough coffee yet when I wrote this. Should be a *terrible* job of educating....._)

[hana]

I've only read about half of the responses. I am a teacher educator, and I do want to say that teacher education is what it is because of mandates from the states (at least here in Michigan). So, good or bad, it comes from the state.

 

Anyways, I would fight like heck.

 

Between my partner and I, we have K-12 special ed. certification, K-8 general certification, 6-12 English/language arts, 6-12 social studies/history. I guess we'd have to work on science and math.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Tossing this out there for the sake of discussion. Let's say, hypothetically, homeschooling parents were required by law to gain teaching credentials. (This is purely hypothetically. I don't foresee this happening, regardless of the current drama in CA.) Would you abide by such a law? Those of you who would "go underground", so to speak, what's your beef against such a requirement? (I am not looking for red herring arguments e.g. lamenting the fact that some credentialed teachers do a poor job, etc.) Those of you who would follow such requirements, please share your three pennies, too.

 

The problem I have with this is that it would probably require things far beyond what is helpful or necessary for homeschooling and would quite possibly fly right in the face of why many are homeschooling in the first place. The analogy I'm thinking of is the states that were requiring hair-braiders to become certified as cosmetologists or beauticians because that is what the requirement for women who cut hair was. It put a many braiders out buisiness and didn't improve the quality of braiding services (may have actually decreased quality) and resulted in a raise in the price of services because of fewer providers.

 

I can't think of a system of certification that would be approved by a legislature and then regulated by a state DOE that would actually improve the quality of most homeschools. I have a Masters degree in Education and I can comfortably say that few of those classes have any bearing on what I do with my sons. Most education classes are centered on the idea that there is a classroom full of kids that have to be managed, occupied or tracked. The class projects I completed had lots to do with trends in education (at risk students, drug use, racial equity in the classroom) and little to do with how to teach an individual student to read or calculate. Some of the classes were of almost no value, such as the special education course where the teacher was so loathe to be judgemental that she refused to give examples of what the characteristics of children with different diagnoses might be. Imagine a semester of having to write reports and do presentations on how you would deal with children with exceptionalities without being able to ever discuss what children with those exceptionalities could and could not do (even in a general on average sense). One of my favorite quotations from an education class was in Teaching Composition, a class on teaching and evaluation writing. One student announced how much he disliked writing and about half the other students nodded their heads in agreement. [Yet they were going to go out and be certified to teach young people how to write.]

 

I don't know how a state certification process would do anything to help me integrate our faith into our academics. Or how it would teach me how to challenge my gifted children. Or how to keep homeschooling when we move to yet another new state or country.

 

I don't think that I would be interested in becoming certified, even though I'm probably only a student teaching session away from having a teaching certificate with masters degree.

 

The only model of professional qualification that I can imagine being useful would be something on the model of ordination. For ordination, the knowledge gained and attested to by the ordination authority is what is relavant to and in line with that authority. Furthermore, the ordination can be done by a large governing body like a large denomination or by an independent church (our church was an independent, non-denominational church that ordained its own staff). [but then that brings us back to where we are now. I am in effect designated by my family to conduct educational activities. If my knowledge is inadequate, I get a book or talk to someone who can help me out. Or I find another tutor.]

 

Now if the powers that be wanted to just improve my knowledge level, they might conduct classes that would be useful, like children's literature, Family Math, how to have a science lab at the elementary or middle level, local history symposium, local flora and fauna recognition and appreciation. But these are the very classes that often fall by the wayside in a teacher certification process. And topics like this often are disdained as not worth of classroom time.

 

Pardon my cynicism. I just finished reading Thomas Sowell's Inside American Education. This is a 14 year old book on our education system and I could only think reading it that things are getting worse and worse instead of better. Getting worse in spite of certification and master teacher programs. In spite of many dedicated and talented individual teachers. I've chosen to not take part in that system, in large part because I don't want to sacrifice my children for a nebulous greater good. I can't see a way that certifying homeschoolers does anything to improve American homeschooling.

[Kelli in TN]

 

Which makes me start thinking that maybe we should be getting in before the state does...I dunno, how would you even do such a thing?

 

 

This is how I think it could work without destroying our freedoms and rights.

 

In Tennessee we have two options under the law. We can register with the schools and be subject to their oversight, or we can register with a private school (we refer to them as umbrella schools here) and be subject to their oversight.

 

I think the umbrella schools should consider tightening up their requirements, voluntarily. I do believe that some sort of portfolio is a good idea. I am a dreadful record keeper, but if I knew someone was going to want to see what we had been doing all year, I would suddenly find it in myself to keep better records. I think if umbrella schools had field reps in the various communities they serve, these representatives could meet face to face with new homeschoolers as they sign up for the school's services and do some sort of year end review with either a portfolio or other means of recording the progress. I see no problem with a requirement (from the umbrella school, not the government) for a certain number of continuing education hours for parents. This could be homeschool seminars, college classes (even if just audited!), online courses, or programs offered by the umbrella school itself.

 

Each umbrella school could set its requirements as it saw fit. They could choose to be very loose or very tight or somewhere in the middle. This is no different than private schools do now. They do what they wish and let a free market system sort it all out. I will tell you that the private schools that are tougher and stricter are more successful financially, at least in our area. Most parents want their children to have the very best. The little schools that are not accomplishing much tend to have graduating classes of just a handful of children. I believe the umbrella schools could work the same way.

 

If a parent did not meet the minimum requirements of their umbrella school, their enrollment would simply not be accepted the next year. They would be forced to find another umbrella school, which might be hard if the umbrella schools communicated with one another concerning why the family had been turned down. If they could not find another umbrella school, they would have no legal recourse but to sign up with the local public schools. Of course, we don't want to be merciless in our approach, so umbrella schools could offer a probation period for families who were not in compliance with their standards. During this probationary period they could be offered extra help to coordinate their childrens' studies, find resources if it appeared that a learning disability might be the issue, etc.

 

I think it is a little bit crazy that after all the sacrifices the early generation of homeschool parents made on our behalf, that we are unwilling to monitor ourselves just a little bit. I think our "mind our own business" approach may be our undoing in the end. We do have homeschoolers out there that are doing absolutely nothing for their children. I would much rather we hold one another accountable than have the government step in and do it for us.

 

But I generally keep these crazy notions to myself. :D

[sdWTMer]

I don't think that I'd like that idea, I guess that I'm a shade libertarian in that way.

[PrairieAir]

I wouldn't get a degree just so I could homeschool, but I've only got one left at home. I'm not sure how much longer she will be homeschooled. I feel like I'm about done some days. Other days I think I could continue for a few more years with this child. She says she doesn't want to go to public school and she has several reasons for saying it, including the possibility of a longer practice schedule for gymnastics if she continues to advance in levels. We'll keep playing it by ear like we always have until dh, dd, and I all feel it's right to change.

 

If this came up earlier in our homeschooling, I might feel differently. I also might consider getting the degree if I decided I wanted to teach after I'm done homeschooling my own children. I've considered it before, and I hear WSU is offering a free education for those who will commit to teaching in Wichita schools for a certain number of years. At this point in my life I would not get the degree just to continue homeschooling.

 

I would be opposed to such a law, though. I think we already have enough unnecessary legislation and it would be better to focus on other issues. While there are people who homeschool in name only or who do a grossly inadequate job of teaching their children at home, I think that number is probably pretty small. In my opinion, the law would do more harm than good and be a waste of time and effort on the government's part.