California peeps: Mandatory kindergarten looms ahead...

[LibraryLover]

is that the pre-school/day care requirements (with regard to everything from licensing etc.) currently apply to K. Since there isn't an exception to this requirement in that law they are looking at passing, then those regulations still apply. If you google the pre-school/day care regulations, you will see how difficult it will be for an average HS to complete all those items.

 

Even if that weren't the case, it's not the governments business! It just isn't.

 

The only reason they are pushing this is because of the powerful teacher's unions in this state. They run Sacramento!

Hot Lava Mama

 

 

You cannnot make that leap. Where does it say hsers would need a certain number of bathrooms? It doesn't say anything like that. If the bill doesn't express this , it's just crying wolf. That is so annoying and illogical.

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[LibraryLover]

Well when one reads the actual law it bears nothing in common with the lies and scare-tactics of HSLDA.

 

I'm so sick of this group. They. never. tell. the. truth.

 

Bill

 

 

Yes. I am sick of the rhetoric. You can only cry wolf so many times before most folks tune you out.

[beaners]

You cannnot make that leap. Where does it say hsers would need a certain number of bathrooms? It doesn't say anything like that. If the bill doesn't express this , it's just crying wolf. That is so annoying and illogical.

 

I believe one of the state options is to register your household as a private school. Umbrellas or charters may be another option. I'm not sure what other choices are available.

 

If registering as a private school is one of the only ways to homeschool independently, I could see being concerned about provisions that will affect private schools. I doubt it would be designed specifically to hit homeschoolers, but they would be caught up in the same requirements unless there are specific exemptions.

[Hot Lava Mama]

for the county I live in.

 

 

CHILD CARE FACILITY REQUIREMENTS

Indoor Considerations

California Child Care Licensing Standards Regulations

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Accreditation Standards: Best Practices

Facility must be approved by the California Department of Social Services, Community Care Licensing Division

Must comply with all local licensing requirements

Facility must comply with state and local fire and building codes; all facilities must pass inspection by the local Fire Department;

Staff is familiar with evacuation routes; practice evacuation procedures monthly with children

Smoke detectors, carbon monoxide detectors, alarms, and fire extinguishers are in each classroom and checked monthly with written logs; Staff is familiar with evacuation routes; practice evacuation procedures monthly with children

Minimum of 35 square feet of usable space per child; bathrooms, halls, offices, food preparation areas, and storage not included in square footage

Minimum of 35 square feet of usable space per child

1 toilet and 1 sink of appropriate height for every 15 children; separate bathroom facilities for adult staff; For the infant classroom, you will need to provide a classroom area with a changing table within arm’s reach of a sink; for school age children you will need separate bathrooms for girls and boys

Toilets and hand washing are easily accessible

Drinking water available both indoors and outdoors

Drinking water is easily accessible to children

Food preparation area with a minimum of sink, hot and cold water, refrigerator, and food storage

Stairways are well-lit and equipped with handrails

Outdoor Considerations

California Child Care Licensing Standards Regulations

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Accreditation Standards: Best Practices

Minimum 75 square feet of space per child. Separate outdoor space for preschools and infant/toddlers. Enclosed by fencing a minimum of 4 feet high

Minimum 75 square feet of space per child, including: surface variety (sand, grass, hard surfaces, etc.), shade, open space, digging space, and equipment for climbing, riding, balancing, and individual play; requires fences or natural barriers

Per California Department of Health and Safety code, all new and renovated playgrounds must pass inspection by a Certified Playground Safety Inspector. A list of inspectors can be found at http://www.cprs.org

All pieces

 

 

I am not trying to cry "fire". How I understand it is that the regulations for operating a facility that schools k's is STILL under the pre-school/day care regulations! That part has not changed! They have not put any exception to that in the law! HS are considered private schools, so I don't know why they would be exempt from that! I would want to see a SPECIFIC EXCLUSION FOR HS's to be comfortable with this law.

 

In addition, there would be tons of agencies that have to "approve" your facility, it appears (from what I have read on the web site that provided this information (which is http://www.childaction.org)) there would also be "fees" all along the way.

 

If my understanding is incorrect, please tell me how!

Hot Lava Mama

 

P.S.: Go to the web site yourself. Perhaps I am not understanding the law. But it appears that the county in which the school is located gets to make the regulations! I DO hope you can prove me wrong, because the whole thing is a nightmare as it currently sits. Not trying to be a trouble maker, here!

[Spy Car]

Yes. I am sick of the rhetoric. You can only cry wolf so many times before most folks tune you out.

 

I wish ;) :glare: :D

 

Bill

[LibraryLover]

I saw that! But Lava Mama! Nowhere does it say homeschools are day/child care centers.

 

Hsing is legal in all 50 states. There are no bills pending asking otherwise.

Edited June 4, 2012 by LibraryLover

[LibraryLover]

I wish ;) :glare: :D

 

Bill

 

 

You're right. You are.

[LibraryLover]

FACT:

 

Federal Regulations and Requirements

 

When you choose to homeschool your children, there are no homeschooling federal requirements that you need to fulfill. There are no federal laws or regulations that affect homeschools. This may come as a surprise in this era of increasing federal oversight in so many areas of our daily lives. In fact, homeschooling in the United States is actually protected from federal regulation by the US Constitution. Additionally many people believe that the power of parents to direct their children's education is protected as a fundamental right.

 

Me: Nothing concerning hsing has changed or been constituionally challenged. Nothing.

 

If there is, I'll be here (as will many others who follow Capital Hill bills) to rant, and work on legislation.

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[Hot Lava Mama]

First, can we stop with the "tripe" business?

 

I'm just telling you how I understand it to be. Tell me where I am wrong in my logic. I'm not trying to be difficult, because I HOPE I am wrong!

 

First, there is NO exception for homeschools in California. We fall under the "private school" umbrella.

 

Second, the regulations for K are currently under the pre-school/day care center regulations.

 

Third, there is nothing in the pending law that says that K will no longer be under the day care rules, and will now be under the 1-12 laws.

Therefore, if the law passes, any K school would be required to go through the day-care regulations.

 

They probably don't think it will make much of a difference since many will put their kids into existing K schools. However, since home schools in CA are not under the day care rules, they would then be required to if they have a K in their school.

 

Can you tell me where I am wrong? That's how I understand it. Is there something out there that I am missing? Again, I am not a lawyer, so I may be way off base.

 

But can you please explain where my logic went wrong instead of calling names?

Hot Lava mama

[Hot Lava Mama]

I am not saying that homeschooling K will be "illegal" in CA if this passes, I'm saying it will be EXTREMELY difficult to meet all the requirements and pay all the "fees".

[Hot Lava Mama]

this is the STATE of CA law.

 

Not the fed's.

[LibraryLover]

Nobody is calling anyone names.

 

This stuff is frustrating for those of us who are following constitutional law and congressional bills.

 

When you show me a bill that challenges federal hsing rights, I'll be with you.

 

I am not fighting with you at all. There is a rhetoric piece that is important to understand. SOomeone is working folks up for no good legal reason.

 

This is why states' rights V. ferderal rights is so important. There is nothing pending that challenges/disallows your right to hs in CA.

 

 

 

First, can we stop with the "tripe" business?

 

I'm just telling you how I understand it to be. Tell me where I am wrong in my logic. I'm not trying to be difficult, because I HOPE I am wrong!

 

First, there is NO exception for homeschools in California. We fall under the "private school" umbrella.

 

Second, the regulations for K are currently under the pre-school/day care center regulations.

 

Third, there is nothing in the pending law that says that K will no longer be under the day care rules, and will now be under the 1-12 laws.

Therefore, if the law passes, any K school would be required to go through the day-care regulations.

 

They probably don't think it will make much of a difference since many will put their kids into existing K schools. However, since home schools in CA are not under the day care rules, they would then be required to if they have a K in their school.

 

Can you tell me where I am wrong? That's how I understand it. Is there something out there that I am missing? Again, I am not a lawyer, so I may be way off base.

 

But can you please explain where my logic went wrong instead of calling names?

Hot Lava mama

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[Hot Lava Mama]

It's the state of California!

[Hot Lava Mama]

Not trying to fight, here, either. (The "tripe" thing was getting on my nerves)

 

But as I said before, I am not claiming that they are trying to make it "illegal" to homeschool. I'm saying that if this bill passes, it will be SIGNIFICANTLY more difficult for those with K in their school. They would have to jump through a lot more hoops with this change in the law. People can still homeschool, but they have to comply with the daycare regulations.

 

I don't know how to get around it. It directly affects me because I will have a K in my school. I care very much about this change in the law and I am following it VERY closely. I think I have my facts correct.

 

The federal/states right fight, by the way, is about the feds staying OUT of the states business. Not the other way around. States rights fights for CA to determine what is best for the state without the feds stepping in. I agree with states rights! If this passes, though, good by CA! We are out of here.

 

Lively discussion, Librarylover. Glad we could part on good terms.

[LibraryLover]

Not trying to fight, here, either. (The "tripe" thing was getting on my nerves)

 

But as I said before, I am not claiming that they are trying to make it "illegal" to homeschool. I'm saying that if this bill passes, it will be SIGNIFICANTLY more difficult for those with K in their school. They would have to jump through a lot more hoops with this change in the law. People can still homeschool, but they have to comply with the daycare regulations.

 

I don't know how to get around it. It directly affects me because I will have a K in my school. I care very much about this change in the law and I am following it VERY closely. I think I have my facts correct.

 

The federal/states right fight, by the way, is about the feds staying OUT of the states business. Not the other way around. States rights fights for CA to determine what is best for the state without the feds stepping in. I agree with states rights! If this passes, though, good by CA! We are out of here.

 

Lively discussion, Librarylover. Glad we could part on good terms.

 

 

:)

 

As for the bolded. I don't read it that way. I read your post, and I do not see where it applies to families hsing their own children. We are constitutionally permitted to hs our children.

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[MyLittleWonders]

:)

 

As for the bolded. I don't read it that way. I read your post, and I do not see where it applies to families hsing their own children. We are constitutionally permitted to hs our children.

We are. But each state has their own regulations for homeschooling. In CA, there is technically no such thing as "homeschooling". Those of us that file private affidavits are notifying the state that we are establishing our own private school, much like any other brick & mortar private school in the state. That is where the concern seems to be (from what I understand). If we, as homeschoolers, are viewed as private schools by the state, then we, theoretically, fall under the same ultimate regulations. If there are specific regulations that apply to private schools offering Kindergarten, then the concern is that private affidavit filers in CA would also fall under those same regulations. CA is kind of weird like that, and up until now, it has greatly benefitted to have homeschoolers considered private schools in the eyes of the state. We are not homeschoolers. We are either established private schools (filing privately), or under another's umbrella (private umbrellas or public charter schools). Those, at least, are the most common way people homeschool in CA. But the key is that we are not recognized as homeschoolers by education code. We are private schools, plain and simple.

[Kirch]

:)

 

As for the bolded. I don't read it that way. I read your post, and I do not see where it applies to families hsing their own children. We are constitutionally permitted to hs our children.

 

Yes, but states are permitted to put regulations and requirements in place, right? Such as requiring a certain number of days/year or testing or whatever? If CA homeschools are considered private schools by the government of CA, then whatever is required of private schools is required of homeschool (it's the same here in TX, only TX is much better about keeping its nose out of our business!). If private schools will be required to meet the more stringent daycare guidelines because they have to add Kinder, then it follows that those requirements would fall on hs'ers since they're considered private schools unless some exemption is made. Hot Lava Mama's concern is that there is nothing that indicates that private schools--including homeschools--will be exempt from the requirements.

 

ETA--And with the kinds of legislation and court cases I've heard about coming out of CA, it would totally not surprise me for someone to push this with homeschooling if the opportunity arose, even though it seems nonsensical to those of us with some common sense.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Kirch

[Photo Ninja]

Hot Lava Mama is correct.

 

In CA, Kindy is included in the preschool laws and mandates. That is one reason K rooms in schools have their own bathrooms with low sinks and toilets, for example. They have to because of the preschool laws. Elementary schools don't have to meet those regulations for first grade and up.

 

Hsers in CA hs under the private school laws, so basically laws that apply to private schools apply to hsers, unless there is an exemption. This is why hsers in CA don't list their K students on their affidavits because they would then be subject to all the preschool regulations. In CA, K has not been mandated, so hsers don't list students until they are in first grade, and have avoided the problem of preschool laws.

 

That is one problem with this bill. As currently written, hsers with Kindy students would have to list them on the affidavit, subjecting the families to the preschool regulations, which would be expensive and difficult to meet.

 

So no, this bill is not stating that people can not hs Kindergarten, nor does it remove the right to home educate. However, as written, it will subject hsers to regulations that will be difficult to meet, likely resulting in families not being able to hs Kindergarten. It is a consequence of the bill, not the bill changing hs laws.

 

No, this bill does not specifically say that hsers will be subject to preschool regulations. It doesn't have to. The preschool regulations already include Kindergarten, so they apply. Anything addressing Kindergarten is subject to other laws respecting Kindergarten. Unless this bill exempts Kindergarten from the current regulations, hsers will be subject to the current laws regarding preschools when they begin hsing their Kindergarten student.

 

It is common for bills to have unintended consequences, and this is issue is one. If the bill included language to exempt hsers, then it could be okay. If the bill included language to remove Kindergarten from the preschool laws and regulations and add it to the elementary school regulations, then it could be okay. Unfortunately, neither of those are in the bill, so it is a problem for hsers in CA.

[LibraryLover]

Hot Lava Mama is correct.

 

In CA, Kindy is included in the preschool laws and mandates. That is one reason K rooms in schools have their own bathrooms with low sinks and toilets, for example. They have to because of the preschool laws. Elementary schools don't have to meet those regulations for first grade and up.

 

Hsers in CA hs under the private school laws, so basically laws that apply to private schools apply to hsers, unless there is an exemption. This is why hsers in CA don't list their K students on their affidavits because they would then be subject to all the preschool regulations. In CA, K has not been mandated, so hsers don't list students until they are in first grade, and have avoided the problem of preschool laws.

 

That is one problem with this bill. As currently written, hsers with Kindy students would have to list them on the affidavit, subjecting the families to the preschool regulations, which would be expensive and difficult to meet.

 

If CA hsing law would change federal law for hsers, please explain it to me. I honestly don't se how CA can do this.

 

So no, this bill is not stating that people can not hs Kindergarten, nor does it remove the right to home educate. However, as written, it will subject hsers to regulations that will be difficult to meet, likely resulting in families not being able to hs Kindergarten. It is a consequence of the bill, not the bill changing hs laws.

 

No, this bill does not specifically say that hsers will be subject to preschool regulations. It doesn't have to. The preschool regulations already include Kindergarten, so they apply. Anything addressing Kindergarten is subject to other laws respecting Kindergarten. Unless this bill exempts Kindergarten from the current regulations, hsers will be subject to the current laws regarding preschools when they begin hsing their Kindergarten student.

 

It is common for bills to have unintended consequences, and this is issue is one. If the bill included language to exempt hsers, then it could be okay. If the bill included language to remove Kindergarten from the preschool laws and regulations and add it to the elementary school regulations, then it could be okay. Unfortunately, neither of those are in the bill, so it is a problem for hsers in CA.

 

That is what I am saying. In no state does a hs have to comply with these sorts of square footage/toilet regulations. How would this affect hsing as a consitutional right as currently written? I want to understand.

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

Hot Lava Mama is correct.

 

In CA, Kindy is included in the preschool laws and mandates. That is one reason K rooms in schools have their own bathrooms with low sinks and toilets, for example. They have to because of the preschool laws. Elementary schools don't have to meet those regulations for first grade and up.

 

Hsers in CA hs under the private school laws, so basically laws that apply to private schools apply to hsers, unless there is an exemption. This is why hsers in CA don't list their K students on their affidavits because they would then be subject to all the preschool regulations. In CA, K has not been mandated, so hsers don't list students until they are in first grade, and have avoided the problem of preschool laws.

 

That is one problem with this bill. As currently written, hsers with Kindy students would have to list them on the affidavit, subjecting the families to the preschool regulations, which would be expensive and difficult to meet.

 

So no, this bill is not stating that people can not hs Kindergarten, nor does it remove the right to home educate. However, as written, it will subject hsers to regulations that will be difficult to meet, likely resulting in families not being able to hs Kindergarten. It is a consequence of the bill, not the bill changing hs laws.

 

No, this bill does not specifically say that hsers will be subject to preschool regulations. It doesn't have to. The preschool regulations already include Kindergarten, so they apply. Anything addressing Kindergarten is subject to other laws respecting Kindergarten. Unless this bill exempts Kindergarten from the current regulations, hsers will be subject to the current laws regarding preschools when they begin hsing their Kindergarten student.

 

It is common for bills to have unintended consequences, and this is issue is one. If the bill included language to exempt hsers, then it could be okay. If the bill included language to remove Kindergarten from the preschool laws and regulations and add it to the elementary school regulations, then it could be okay. Unfortunately, neither of those are in the bill, so it is a problem for hsers in CA.

 

:iagree: Thank you for putting this in a way that hopefully those not understanding Hot Lava Mama will be able to understand. I would hope that an average home would meet the pre-school/day-care guidelines, but not everyone lives in a good-sized home.

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

That is what I am saying. In no state does a hs have to comply with these sorts of square footage/toilet regulations. How would this affect hsing as a consitutional right as currently written?

 

Because homeschools in CA are private schools.

[LibraryLover]

Because homeschools in CA are private schools.

 

 

Yes. But the requirements are not the same, and this bill doesn't include hsers.

 

I don't see how CA can superceed fed law, but if you're worried, you're worried. If you all lose your right to homeschool, I will be all mea culpa.

 

Uncle. Let the chips fall where they may. I am even marking this so I can eat crow if I need to.

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[chepyl]

That is what I am saying. In no state does a hs have to comply with these sorts of square footage/toilet regulations. How would this affect hsing as a consitutional right as currently written? I want to understand.

 

The issue is not with the constitutional right to homeschool. It is the fact that there are laws to govern kindergarten schools, homeschoolers in VA are private schools subject to theblaws of private schools, this law would cause undue hardship on homeschoolers with kindergarten. You are arguing a different point.

[Kirch]

That is what I am saying. In no state does a hs have to comply with these sorts of square footage/toilet regulations. How would this affect hsing as a consitutional right as currently written? I want to understand.

 

Because homeschools are not homeschools in CA. They are classified as private schools and subject to the same regulations unless specifically exempted. It doesn't affect hs'ing as a constitutional right. It affects the state's requirements for private schools, which includes homeschoolers, just like they are included in whatever attendance, curriculum, or testing requirements CA has for private schools.

 

Texas is the same way--homeschools are considered private schools. If the TX legislature passed a bill tomorrow saying that all private schools had to paint their doors blue, I'd be having to go out and buy blue paint unless there was some clause exempting private schools in homes or with less than a certain number of students. Like I said before, though, TX is good about not butting in.

Edited June 3, 2012 by Kirch

[LibraryLover]

The issue is not with the constitutional right to homeschool. It is the fact that there are laws to govern kindergarten schools, homeschoolers in VA are private schools subject to theblaws of private schools, this law would cause undue hardship on homeschoolers with kindergarten. You are arguing a different point.

 

 

I am only arguing federal law.

 

If CA starts to tell parents they need two bathrooms for every 3 people, I promise I will start writing letters. This bill looks to me that it is trying to care for the youngest, and most dishenfranchised public schoolers. I don't believe this is meant to cause undo hardship for hsers. What politician in their right mind would want to take on CA hsers? ;)

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[Snickerdoodle]

 

I am only arguing federal law.

What federal law? Sorry, I missed something with this conversation.

[Kirch]

Yes. But the requirements are not the same, and this bill doesn't include hsers.

 

I don't see how CA can superced fed law, but if you're worried, you're worried. If you all lose your right to homeschool, I will be all mea culpa.

 

Uncle. Let the chips fall where they may. I am even marking this so I can eat crow if I need to.

 

?? She's not worried about losing her right to homeschool. You are right--no state can take that away. They CAN and do impose regulations and requirements and have a lot of license in doing so. If the bill includes private schools, then it includes homeschoolers because homeschools ARE private schools in the eyes of the state of California. The requirements for private schools ARE the same for homeschoolers because legally they are private schools. The only exception would be if there is some sort of exemption made--possibly for private schools with fewer than "x" number of students or for private schools located in private residences. If there is no provision made, those regulations would apply to all private schools, which includes homeschoolers.

[chepyl]

I am only arguing federal law.

 

If CA starts to tell parents they need two bathrooms for every 3 people, I promise I will start writing letters. This bill looks to me that it is trying to care for the youngest, and most dishenfranchised public schoolers. If CA becomes the first state to make hsing impossible, I will certainly take my lickings.

 

But this is not about Federal law! What Federal laws are there about homeschooling? Education is state regulated.

[LibraryLover]

What federal law? Sorry, I missed something with this conversation.

 

 

That constitutionally hsing is legal in every state in the US.

 

If CA changes that, I will be on the block. lol

[Snickerdoodle]

That constitutionally hsing is legal in every state in the US.

 

If CA changes that, I will be on the block. lol

Is that a federal law? I thought education fell under state law? I'm pretty sure there is no federal law with regard to homeschooling.

 

Maybe I missed something?

[Kirch]

If the bill is passed and it does have the feared consequences, I would imagine things would eventually be cleared up, especially if it imposes undue hardship on homeschools. But I can imagine that it would be a nightmare of a mess for parents to have to deal with in the meantime. It reminds me of the CA homeschool flap within the last few years about whether homeschools had to be taught by a licensed/certified teacher. Eventually it was dismissed, but things looked iffy for a while. I'm not up on my CA homeschooling stuff, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was a similar case--are private schools in CA required to only employ certified teachers?

[theYoungerMrsWarde]

If the bill is passed and it does have the feared consequences, I would imagine things would eventually be cleared up, especially if it imposes undue hardship on homeschools. But I can imagine that it would be a nightmare of a mess for parents to have to deal with in the meantime. It reminds me of the CA homeschool flap within the last few years about whether homeschools had to be taught by a licensed/certified teacher. Eventually it was dismissed, but things looked iffy for a while. I'm not up on my CA homeschooling stuff, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was a similar case--are private schools in CA required to only employ certified teachers?

 

I don't think so. My fil taught at a private Christian school without a license, but that was 20 years ago.

[LibraryLover]

Is that a federal law? I thought education fell under state law? I'm pretty sure there is no federal law with regard to homeschooling.

 

Maybe I missed something?

 

 

Constitutionally, hsing is protected in all 50 states.

 

 

*The US. Constitution, under the First, Ninth, and Fourteenth Amendments, protects the rights of parents to get for their children the kind of education they want.

 

*The Supreme Court, in Pierce v. Society of Sisters (1925) and Farmington v. Tokushige (1927), in upholding this right, said that the states could not, either through laws or regulations, impose a uniform system of education on all children.

 

 

(From an article by John Holt)

Edited June 3, 2012 by LibraryLover

[ktgrok]

Constituionally, hsing is protected.

 

Yes, but each state has regulations you must comply with. There is no right to homeschool and not follow the state law.

[Kirch]

I don't think so. My fil taught at a private Christian school without a license, but that was 20 years ago.

 

It may have been a totally separate issue. It just made me wonder because this reminded me of the court battle not long ago.

[Ellie]

What is the motivation for this? I have never personally met anyone whose 5 or 6 year old was not in kindergarten, even when I lived in Idaho where the compulsory age was 7. In my experience, most 3 and 4 year olds are already in preschool and parents can't wait for them to transition to free kindergarten. Who is this going to benefit? Is it just a way to make school "free" at a younger age?

 

Will this mean that parents won't be allowed to delay entry for their 5-year-old who barely makes the birthday cutoff? Because that would be stupid IMO. If this passes I might breathe a sigh of relief that DS misses the Sept. cutoff to which CA is moving.

What this means is that homeschooling parents will be obligated a year earlier to file an affidavit or enroll in a PSP (private school satellite school)--a year earlier that they will have to hassle with compulsory education stuff.

 

I don't know how it will affect non-homeschooling parents, since, as you say, their dc are already in school anyway.

 

FTR, Mr. Ellie's birthday is September 7; he entered kindergarten at 4yo and had his 5th bday after school started, graduated at 17, and started community college before his 18th bday. :-)

[Citrusheights5]

Yes, constitutionally homeschooling is protected, but private schools are not. Since I do not homeschool, but run a private school out of my home, that teaches first grade, I must abide the rules put in place for private schools.

 

Children will now be required to have one full year of kinder, so now my private school must met the requirements set forth for accommodating kindergarten students, because I have a ker in one year and then another the following year. Since K, falls under daycare laws, my private school must accommodate these daycare laws.

 

Will I need a daycare licence in addition to my private school affidavit?

Will I have to to fingerprinted and TB tested?

 

Not to home school, but to operate my private school with a kindergarten.

 

If only CA offered the option to homeschool, that would be awesome... But they don't, what they do offer me, is the ability to run a private school in my home. Or enroll under a charter school.

[Ellie]

It is HSDLA spreading misinformation (read:lies) again? Or am I wrong?

 

Bill

You're wrong.

 

I have known HSLDA since the 80s, and I have the utmost respect for the organization.

 

You can disagree with HSLDA if you want, but it's really tacky of you to accuse them of lying.

[Ellie]

Well when one reads the actual law it bears nothing in common with the lies and scare-tactics of HSLDA.

 

I'm so sick of this group. They. never. tell. the. truth.

 

Bill

Seriously? You're saying that HSLDA makes public statements which can be documented such that it can be proven that they are lying, but they say it anyway?

 

It's your right to disagree with HSLDA's interpretation of any law, but you just make yourself look bad when you make such accusations.

[Roadrunner]

You don't need to have a license to teach in a private school in CA.

 

Just imagine what will happen if the state begins interfering with homeschooling rights because of lavatory and other irrelevant issues. Still, I hope somebody will have some sense to write an exception to the law for homeschoolers.

 

CA might be moving the deadline for school to sept. first, but they are also creating transitional kindergarten classes for kids born between sept. 1 and dec. 2. So now they will have to pay twice for K education for some kids and the state is broke.

[wy_kid_wrangler04]

I am not in Cali and I haven't read the replies past the first few but I can not imagine what I would have done if ds now 7 were forced to start school at 5. He has special needs and just was.not.ready. I can not imagine the stress I would have felt had I been required to start him. He just was not ready to learn. He is about 2years younger developmentally (though now I am seeing some slight improvements in certain areas :D) but at 5 he was developmentally between that of a 2 1/2-3 year old. No where near ready for school. This is so frustrating and I am not even in Cali. <sigh> Praying for this situation as I know there are other moms out there with kids with special needs that this will impact in a hard way.

[AndyJoy]

Now I'm really curious about the bathroom thing. Does anyone know what the specific regulations are? I taught at a private school in CA just 5 years ago and it did not have separate bathrooms for its K4 or K5 students. They were outside the classroom across a sidewalk and were used by students in grades K-4. This school is accredited and seems to be an above-board school that complies with CA laws.

 

I also know they have not remodeled in the last 5 years, so they haven't added bathrooms since I taught there.

[WIS0320]

If it works like TN, K is mandatory, but kids don't have to be in school until they're 7. So, what's happened is that most kids in middle class and above families don't actually start school until age 6, K is effectively taught as 1st grade (with the Kindergarten programs normally done in private preschools and daycares), and 12th grade is then used for enrichment classes, AP, and dual enrollment to beef up the college applications. Cutoffs keep getting pushed back earlier and earlier because there are always some parents who didn't get the memo (or couldn't afford an extra year of daycare) and horror of horrors, put their 5 yr old in K, and the poor babies just can't keep up with what is demanded of them.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

We are in Northern VA and this is the norm. My daughter attended public K and has a July birthday. She was the youngest in her class of 29 kids. Everyone I know "redshirts" their kids. She began to drown in the sea of older kids in her class and the expectations of the school. That is when I began researching homeschooling. :)

[AndyJoy]

In California, children who are 6 by December 2 must be enrolled in school. the law would change that to 5 by December 2.

 

Do you have a link to where it says that in the bill? All the links I read showed that the bill was amended to require K before 1st grade without changing the compulsory school age. I realize that this amended bill would definitely be considered a first step toward lowering the compulsory age, though, but does this current proposal actually go all the way?

 

Thus, it appears to me that this law would mean that if you want your child to be 6 in 1st grade, you must start them in K at 5. If you want them to be older, you wait until they are 6 to enroll them in K (per the compulsory education law). You wouldn't be able to keep your kid home at 5 and then expect them to jump into 1st at 6, but you wouldn't be forced to put them in K at 5. Is this inaccurate?

[Spy Car]

You're wrong.

 

I have known HSLDA since the 80s, and I have the utmost respect for the organization.

 

You can disagree with HSLDA if you want, but it's really tacky of you to accuse them of lying.

 

It is not "tacky", the HSLDA flat out lies. They do it over and over. How many threads have their been on this forum as a result of Urgent Scare-Alerts from the HSLDA, that (once examined for the actual facts) have proved to be based on comle misrepresentations and distortions of the truth? A lot!

 

This is their M.O. They do it cynically to whip up anger and to keep the $$$ flowing in. But people on on to them, and on to their agendas that have nothing to do with home-schooling.

 

This is just one more time (and it is typical) that the HSLDA did not tell it like is. And it worked, as we can see from pages and pages of angry replies in this thread. Then the truth of the actual bill comes out and—surprise—it bears little similarity to the fiction presented my the HSLDA.

 

Can I presume this thread was triggered by an HSLDA Ungent Action Alert? Or no.

 

Bill

[AndyJoy]

What this means is that homeschooling parents will be obligated a year earlier to file an affidavit or enroll in a PSP (private school satellite school)--a year earlier that they will have to hassle with compulsory education stuff.

 

I don't know how it will affect non-homeschooling parents, since, as you say, their dc are already in school anyway.

 

FTR, Mr. Ellie's birthday is September 7; he entered kindergarten at 4yo and had his 5th bday after school started, graduated at 17, and started community college before his 18th bday. :-)

 

I smile whenever I happen upon a thread talking about delaying K entrance because I know I can count on you to defend the standard entrance date.:001_smile:

 

FTR, my dh has an Aug. birthday, entered PS K just after his 5th b-day, skipped 8th grade, started taking college classes at 13, graduated a semester early at 16 with enough college credits to be a jr. Then there is my sister, who is 8 days younger than him. She started K at barely 5 and floundered socially and emotionally in a class of 33 kids. When we moved and attended a private school with smaller classes but more demanding curriculum, the school suggested she repeat K. She flourished. She's always been on a slightly slower timetable than her peers, so it was a good thing. Even after repeating K her friends tended to be a grade behind her, so nearly 2 years younger.

 

I always look for your posts with interest because I have gleaned a lot of wisdom and practical advice from them, even if I don't agree with everything.

 

I understand that some people are very knee-jerk with the "my child (esp. son) is on the young side so I'll delay K," but I think it is a legitimate, useful option for parents who know their kids. I subbed for a week at the private school where I used to teach full time and was very sad for some of the kids. A lot was demanded of them that I thought was inappropriate for their age. Yay, homeschool!

 

One of the things I think is awesome about homeschooling is that my son can work on whatever level he's at and I can choose to declare his grade when it matters. I'll fill out my affidavit with his "proper" grade listed based on the cutoff (which he will miss when he's close to 5), then grade skip him on paper later if necessary. I'll enroll him in outside groups based on where he fits instead of his grade as much as possible. If he's ready for college younger, we'll make that happen, but it is nice to not have him locked into being the youngest in his grade.

Edited June 3, 2012 by AndyJoy

[Spy Car]

Seriously? You're saying that HSLDA makes public statements which can be documented such that it can be proven that they are lying, but they say it anyway?

 

It's your right to disagree with HSLDA's interpretation of any law, but you just make yourself look bad when you make such accusations.

 

Rad the HSLDA Urgent Action Alert (or whatever they call it) and then read the proposed bill, and it is clear the HSLDA creates a deliberate misimpression of what is actually in the bill. Anyone can read the two side by side and see the deliberate distortions created by the HSLDA. They do it all the time.

 

It is not new. They cry "wolf."

 

Bill

[chepyl]

It is not "tacky", the HSLDA flat out lies. They do it over and over. How many threads have their been on this forum as a result of Urgent Scare-Alerts from the HSLDA, that (once examined for the actual facts) have proved to be based on comle misrepresentations and distortions of the truth? A lot!

 

This is their M.O. They do it cynically to whip up anger and to keep the $$$ flowing in. But people on on to them, and on to their agendas that have nothing to do with home-schooling.

 

This is just one more time (and it is typical) that the HSLDA did not tell it like is. And it worked, as we can see from pages and pages of angry replies in this thread. Then the truth of the actual bill comes out and—surprise—it bears little similarity to the fiction presented my the HSLDA.

 

Can I presume this thread was triggered by an HSLDA Ungent Action Alert? Or no.

 

Bill

 

Just to clarify, I received no alert from HSLDA, I don't live in California. I was responding to what I read in the thread and what seemed to be a complete misunderstanding of people's concerns. Whether you agree or not, I think they are valid concerns. The ripple effect of a new law can be bigger than intended.

[Hot Lava Mama]

Regarding the bathrooms, this is how I understand it:

 

In California, K is regulated under the California "pre-school/day care" regulations. Currently they fall under those regulations and this bill would not change that in its current condition. To see the "pre-school/day care" regulations, you then have to go to the regulations that apply to the county in which the school is located (ie: California lets each county set the standards for that). The county that I live in is quite strict, so there is specific rules as to the bathrooms. The county that the school in which you taught may not be as strict. You can see how the bill in the current state would be a nightmare for homeschools in California. If you google the health and human services under your county, you would be able to find it in there.

 

So you can't just "read the bill" and think that is the end of it. You need to also look at any related existing laws that would apply. For example, in this case, the bill looks like it doesn't do much, but when you look at the existing law that also applies (ie: the fact that K is regulated under the day care rules) you can see that the picture can look quite different.

 

Hope that helps.

Hot Lava Mama

[Hot Lava Mama]

Regarding the lowering of the compulsary age,

 

It says that a child must first complete one year of K before entering 1st grade. So, I'm not sure how a home schooler would get around that? Let's say you had an average child that was ready for K at 5. If you started K in your homeschool, then all the day care regulations would apply to your home school.

 

Can you start them directly into 1st without doing K? It appears that the bill would make that not possible. Can you start them in 1st at age 5 (but only do K material...ie: really be doing K and "call" it 1st), it appears that is not possible, either, because they would have to complete "one year of K" per the bill.

 

So it would appear a home school with a K student would have two choices if this bill were to pass:

 

1. Home school for K and abide by the day care regulations in your home, or

2. Put you child an a "traditional" K school for a year, then bring them home for 1st.

 

Is there a way around it? I don't know. Does anyone have any ideas? Perhaps someone can think of one. If so, please share!

Hot Lava Mama