Texas court radically changing homeschool law? UPDATED

[texasmama]

It appears that the problem is they really didn't follow the law.  They simply weren't educating their kids and that's not allowed.  Texas really is a very, very, very low, rather than no, regulation state.  For most people, beyond withdrawing their kids if they were enrolled in school, there will never be another thing to do (or anything if the kids were never enrolled).  But we do have requirements.

 

http://www.thsc.org/homeschooling-in-texas/state-requirements/

• The instruction must be bona fide (i.e., not a sham).
• The curriculum must be in visual form (e.g., books, workbooks, video monitor).
• The curriculum must include the five basic subjects of reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics, and good citizenship.

 

Now, the vast majority of people will never have to prove those three things, but if a complaint is made, as in this case, you really do have to prove you were meeting those requirements.  If you are not educating your children, as it appears these people weren't, you are not in compliance with the law.

I guess I call it no regulation because nothing is required from the "average homeschooler".  Some entity (Which entity?) must request proof of meeting the standards.  I've not ever known anyone personally who had that happen to them, though no doubt it could happen.  I did not notify the school district that I was homeschooling.  To me, that is nothing required, though I concede that TX does have very basic and vague requirements.  To me, on a practical level, that is not being regulated.  No one is regulating me.

 

Probably splitting hairs again... ;)

[Carrie12345]

Not arguing with your point, but to split hairs, Texas is a NO regulation state.  Yes, there are laws governing homeschooling, but nothing is required of us in Texas, not even an LOI.

 

See, this is why I don't understand the outrage.  My quick google gave me:

 

"To home school legally in Texas, you must follow three state law requirements:

• The instruction must be bona fide (i.e., not a sham).
• The curriculum must be in visual form (e.g., books, workbooks, video monitor).
• The curriculum must include the five basic subjects of reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics, and good citizenship."

If (as in this case) there is suspected educational neglect, why WOULDN'T the authorities demand evidence of the above?

 

When authorities suspect physical abuse, general neglect, malnutrition, etc., they investigate and demand evidence even though the law doesn't require a LOI to feed and love our children.  And we expect a proper investigation for the welfare of the children.  Why not in education, as well?

 

A child was (allegedly, but come on) denied an education and sought help.  This wasn't a witch hunt or a homeschooling attack. A family did not meet state requirements (from what I can tell) and, instead of complying, or even just CLAIMING to have complied, decided to turn it into a circus.

[texasmama]

See, this is why I don't understand the outrage.  My quick google gave me:

 

"To home school legally in Texas, you must follow three state law requirements:

• The instruction must be bona fide (i.e., not a sham).
• The curriculum must be in visual form (e.g., books, workbooks, video monitor).
• The curriculum must include the five basic subjects of reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics, and good citizenship."

If (as in this case) there is suspected educational neglect, why WOULDN'T the authorities demand evidence of the above?

 

When authorities suspect physical abuse, general neglect, malnutrition, etc., they investigate and demand evidence even though the law doesn't require a LOI to feed and love our children.  And we expect a proper investigation for the welfare of the children.  Why not in education, as well?

 

A child was (allegedly, but come on) denied an education and sought help.  This wasn't a witch hunt or a homeschooling attack. A family did not meet state requirements (from what I can tell) and, instead of complying, or even just CLAIMING to have complied, decided to turn it into a circus.

Agreed.  I might not like it if some entity asked for my curriculum, and I might not comply if the local school district asked for it (because, as I understand, they do not have the authority), but if CPS or a legal entity asked for my curriculum list, I would provide it.

 

Everyone has a different tipping point for the invasion of personal rights, but that is mine, I suppose.

[73349]

So in 2007, they were offered the chance to just send in a letter affirming that the kids were being taught the required subjects, and everything would be fine, but they decided to spend another seven years arguing that it was too intrusive to ask even for that.

 

If the districts feel like it, they basically have a Massachusetts, then, don't they? Each ISD can work things out with each family or set a blanket policy for all. I'm thinking the families will quickly make enough noise that the legislature will do something to keep the districts in check.

[bobbeym]

From a quick read of the opinion, it seems that the family refused to let the ISD look over their curriculum to see if they were "bona fide" homeschooling, which refusal I would have said last week was perfectly within the parents' rights; but then they further refused the JP court's request to see their curriculum, which was idiotic. If "Leeper says you don't have to cooperate with the court" was the advice of the HSLDA attorney, it seems to have gone over badly with the state court.

 

But they also refused to send in a letter of assurance as recommended by THSC, which they were members of.  The letter of assurance would have been, legally, enough to shut up the ISD and keep this from going any further.

[bobbeym]

Wanted to add that THSC feels this is a non-issue as far as having a significant impact on Texas homeschool laws.

 

http://www.thsc.org/2014/08/effect-of-el-paso-case-on-home-schoolers/ 

[texasmama]

Wanted to add that THSC feels this is a non-issue as far as having a significant impact on Texas homeschool laws.

 

http://www.thsc.org/2014/08/effect-of-el-paso-case-on-home-schoolers/

It seems that Atticus Finch was correct.

 

This seems to be an isolated case, and I predict that it will not affect homeschooling in Texas.

[Violet Crown]

That would be desirable.

[JennyD]

Wanted to add that THSC feels this is a non-issue as far as having a significant impact on Texas homeschool laws.

 

http://www.thsc.org/2014/08/effect-of-el-paso-case-on-home-schoolers/

 

 

Good to hear -- hopefully they have a good sense as to how things are likely to actually shake out.  

 

As to the question upthread about whether the decision would be binding precedent for other trial courts in TX, I'm afraid that I don't know nearly enough about TX practice to answer that.  My best guess is that appeals courts decisions are not formally binding precedent for trial courts in other jurisdictions but are nonetheless generally taken seriously in the absence of direct precedent and/or conflicting precedent from other appeals courts, but that's just blithely extrapolating from the federal system.  I have no idea how things actually work in Texas.  I hear you people like to do your own thing there. 

 

I do think it's notable that so much of the appeals court decision is devoted to refuting the plaintiffs' claim that they did not have to exhaust administrative remedies (i.e., hash things out with the school district, including going through the multilevel appeals process) before filing a lawsuit.  Again, of course, I am certainly no kind of expert on Texas law of any kind, let alone TX education law, but FWIW this strikes me as the heart of the decision, maybe even more so than the interpretation of Leeper.  

 

 

 

 

[PachiSusan]

There is a VERY SLIGHT chance that I may be living in DFW area for 4 months this year, so I am trying really hard to understand the ramifications of this. If I move there, do I have to file any paperwork at all if my child has not been in the school system?

[Alte Veste Academy]

There is a VERY SLIGHT chance that I may be living in DFW area for 4 months this year, so I am trying really hard to understand the ramifications of this. If I move there, do I have to file any paperwork at all if my child has not been in the school system?

Nope

[PachiSusan]

Nope

 

So it really is as easy as that? I am in Nevada currently and we had to file an Intent to Home School and an education plan.  We moved from CA where I had to do nothing because I used Seton and they are seen as a private school in CA, and I didn't realize until we were here for MONTHS that I was supposed to fill anything out. I don't want to make that mistake again. LOL 

[Alte Veste Academy]

So it really is as easy as that? I am in Nevada currently and we had to file an Intent to Home School and an education plan. We moved from CA where I had to do nothing because I used Seton and they are seen as a private school in CA, and I didn't realize until we were here for MONTHS that I was supposed to fill anything out. I don't want to make that mistake again. LOL

No registration or declaration necessary and you only need to communicate with a school if your child is enrolled and you need to withdraw them or if someone inquires about your homeschool (highly unlikely). In either case, you just let them know that you are aware of and in compliance with Texas requirements for homeschool instruction. Butter posted them above: http://www.thsc.org/homeschooling-in-texas/state-requirements/ .

[Kerileanne99]

Interestingly enough, an email arrived in my inbox this morning from the Texas Homeschool Coalition Association. They state very clearly that they advised the notification be sent and the repercussions. How dumb can you get?

 

http://www.thsc.org/2014/08/effect-of-el-paso-case-on-home-schoolers/

[PachiSusan]

No registration or declaration necessary and you only need to communicate with a school if your child is enrolled and you need to withdraw them or if someone inquires about your homeschool (highly unlikely). In either case, you just let them know that you are aware of and in compliance with Texas requirements for homeschool instruction. Butter posted them above: http://www.thsc.org/homeschooling-in-texas/state-requirements/ .

 

Wow, that's amazing. One last question, and I'm sorry it took so long for me to get back to you. 

 

If we go, it will only be for 4 months. Would I need to tell the state I'm leaving, or do I consider it just a really long vacation? We will be back to residing in Nevada after February if this works out. 

[Ellie]

So it really is as easy as that? I am in Nevada currently and we had to file an Intent to Home School and an education plan.  We moved from CA where I had to do nothing because I used Seton and they are seen as a private school in CA, and I didn't realize until we were here for MONTHS that I was supposed to fill anything out. I don't want to make that mistake again. LOL 

 

If your dc were enrolled in Seton, then no, you weren't supposed to fill out anything. That's because Seton files a California private school affidavit. If you had not enrolled your dc in Seton, then you would have filed a private school affidavit. FTR, if you had enrolled your dc in another distance learning school that did not file an affidavit--Our Lady of Victory, for example, which is in Idaho--then you would have had to file an affidavit yourself. To be exempt from public school attendance, children must be enrolled in a private school which files a California private school affidavit.

 

I know it doesn't matter for *you* :-) but I'm posting this for others. :-)

[OneStepAtATime]

Are you asking if you would need to file something in Nevada for being away then returning in 4 months?  Is there a reliable resource for Nevada homeschooling laws?  

[Alte Veste Academy]

Wow, that's amazing. One last question, and I'm sorry it took so long for me to get back to you.

 

If we go, it will only be for 4 months. Would I need to tell the state I'm leaving, or do I consider it just a really long vacation? We will be back to residing in Nevada after February if this works out.

Sorry. I know nothing of Nevada laws. And yes, Texas is amazing! :D

[PachiSusan]

I wasn't very clear-- sorry.

 

What I mean is should I notify Nevada I will be gone for 4 months of the year? I know I don't have to tell Texas a thing, but I don't know if being gone for that long will trigger me to have to notify Nevada again when I return.

 

 

Are you asking if you would need to file something in Nevada for being away then returning in 4 months? Is there a reliable resource for Nevada homeschooling laws?

[Ellie]

I wasn't very clear-- sorry.

 

What I mean is should I notify Nevada I will be gone for 4 months of the year? I know I don't have to tell Texas a thing, but I don't know if being gone for that long will trigger me to have to notify Nevada again when I return.

 

 

 

I'm not an attorney and I don't play one on TV, but if I were in your place, I wouldn't tell anyone.

[texasmama]

I'm not an attorney and I don't play one on TV, but if I were in your place, I wouldn't tell anyone.

I would likely not, either, since you are only changing your locale for four months.  Think of it as a long vacation.  :)

[Tidbits of Learning]

I have been in this situation with different states.  The rule of thumb is if you are gone more than 30 days you have to register in the new state.  You don't notify your state of residence at all since you plan to return.  Since TX has no registration for home schoolers if they have never attended the public school, you don't need to do anything.  It really only effects you if the state you are going to has stricter homeschool laws than the state you reside.  

[shawthorne44]

I'll go with this.

 

We are in a school district in which 90% of the families with kids in the schools live at or below the poverty line.  We homeschoolers are the least of their problems. 

 

But, if your kids are likely to bring up the test scores for the school, then they might make you a priority.  Hassling you into returning your kids to school would be less effort than actually bringing up the scores of the kids already in school.  

[laundrycrisis]

It appears that the problem is they really didn't follow the law.  They simply weren't educating their kids and that's not allowed.  Texas really is a very, very, very low, rather than no, regulation state.  For most people, beyond withdrawing their kids if they were enrolled in school, there will never be another thing to do (or anything if the kids were never enrolled).  But we do have requirements.

 

http://www.thsc.org/homeschooling-in-texas/state-requirements/

• The instruction must be bona fide (i.e., not a sham).
• The curriculum must be in visual form (e.g., books, workbooks, video monitor).
• The curriculum must include the five basic subjects of reading, spelling, grammar, mathematics, and good citizenship.

 

Now, the vast majority of people will never have to prove those three things, but if a complaint is made, as in this case, you really do have to prove you were meeting those requirements.  If you are not educating your children, as it appears these people weren't, you are not in compliance with the law.

 

It sounds very similar to IL.  We have requirements we are supposed to meet, but no structured way set up to regularly prove that we are meeting them.  We are private schools.  But if there is a truancy investigation, the burden is on the parents to prove we are homeschooling in a way that meets the requirements.  But there is nothing written about what would pass as proof.  This is all based on case law (Levison). 

[texasmama]

But, if your kids are likely to bring up the test scores for the school, then they might make you a priority.  Hassling you into returning your kids to school would be less effort than actually bringing up the scores of the kids already in school.  

Not at all concerned about this in my district.  It is small, and I have connections within the district.

 

Also, how could my three kids improve the schools' scores, however bright and shining my kids are at academics?  Just doesn't seem statistically possible. 

 

This particular school district is doing their best with the cards dealt them.  It is a hard row to hoe.

[PachiSusan]

I'm not an attorney and I don't play one on TV, but if I were in your place, I wouldn't tell anyone.

 

Thanks. This is the likely outcome. :)

[shawthorne44]

Not at all concerned about this in my district.  It is small, and I have connections within the district.

 

Also, how could my three kids improve the schools' scores, however bright and shining my kids are at academics?  Just doesn't seem statistically possible. 

 

This particular school district is doing their best with the cards dealt them.  It is a hard row to hoe.

 

There you go being all logical and accurate.  

But, I've heard the reverse is one of complaints by educrats on homeschooling.  That homeschooling takes the high scoring kids out of school and therefore hurting the school by making it look bad by lowering the test scores.  Of course the idea that the homeschooled kids wouldn't have scored so high if they were in the local school is heresy.  But if they have the perception that forcing homeschoolers back into the schools will improve the numbers of the school, many places will do it if they can.  

 

I'm not personally worried.  Where we will be moving in a few weeks, the schools were so bad that the state took over a few years ago.  Because of that there is a large number of homeschoolers who were originally reluctant but now love it.  So, I figure we will be safe in numbers.  

[texasmama]

There you go being all logical and accurate.  

But, I've heard the reverse is one of complaints by educrats on homeschooling.  That homeschooling takes the high scoring kids out of school and therefore hurting the school by making it look bad by lowering the test scores.  Of course the idea that the homeschooled kids wouldn't have scored so high if they were in the local school is heresy.  But if they have the perception that forcing homeschoolers back into the schools will improve the numbers of the school, many places will do it if they can.  

 

I'm not personally worried.  Where we will be moving in a few weeks, the schools were so bad that the state took over a few years ago.  Because of that there is a large number of homeschoolers who were originally reluctant but now love it.  So, I figure we will be safe in numbers.  

 Yes, folks say all sorts of things, but that doesn't make it fact-based.  (I know you are aware of this.)

 

IME, homeschooling takes a wide ranges of kids out of the public schools, some that the schools would welcome with open arms and some whom the schools would need to provide special services to.  And there are plenty of average-ish homeschooled kids, of course. It is likely a wash in that regard.  It would be an interesting study, actually, the reasons why people choose to homeschool and the average of a range of homeschooled kids' test scores.

 

My late uncle was on the school board of our district for years.  A middle school is named after him.  I know a past superintendent and the current one.  I know most of the special education department, including the director of special ed.  I am in a unique position.  Not a one of them (including my uncle) ever suggested I put my kids in the public school.  They all know it would not be a good fit.  They would certainly welcome my kids, but I got no pressure.  One of my sons received ST, OT and PT for years as a walk in student so they had ample opportunity to try to reel me in.  Didn't happen.  :)  Everyone knows that the district cannot offer more than I can at home.  They can only offer less.

 

Are you in Texas?  We are the home of the free, baby!  :D

[shawthorne44]

I am in Texas.  But, I'm of the "we need to be ever vigilant" camp.  Part of that might be because I was in school in Arlington while they were prosecuting homeschoolers.  My first exposure to the concept of homeschooling was my government attacking the people doing it.  There was a major local politician proclaiming that not only did the government make better educators they made better parents.   *mumble mumble* excuse me while I spit these tacks out of my mouth.

 

I think my basic problem is that this case is saying that the school district is in charge of deciding that a homeschool is sufficient.  That is putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.  Some of these foxes will be honorable people who take the job seriously of doing their part to education the next generation.  It is the others I worry about.  And, honestly, I don't think public schools would be so crappy if they were led by honorable foxes like your relatives.

 

Although, how to weed out those who don't school at all is a thorny problem.  I used to have a co-worker who taught at one of the alternative schools.  He said it was great because there was no classroom management problems.  The cop in the classroom took care of that.  He said parents would frequently try to take their kids out of school saying they were going to homeschooled.  The judge would question the parents on curriculum and yell at them and tell them they weren't allowed to homeschool their kid.  Everyone knew that the parents weren't really going to homeschool the kids.  The parents would cave and leave their kids in the school.  But, when he was telling me about that, I remember thinking "I don't think the judge can do that".  

 

[Alte Veste Academy]

Although, how to weed out those who don't school at all is a thorny problem.  I used to have a co-worker who taught at one of the alternative schools.  He said it was great because there was no classroom management problems.  The cop in the classroom took care of that.  He said parents would frequently try to take their kids out of school saying they were going to homeschooled.  The judge would question the parents on curriculum and yell at them and tell them they weren't allowed to homeschool their kid.  Everyone knew that the parents weren't really going to homeschool the kids.  The parents would cave and leave their kids in the school.  But, when he was telling me about that, I remember thinking "I don't think the judge can do that".  

 

I agree with about the need to be vigilant. And the fox guarding the henhouse is exactly what it would amount to. 

 

As to the above, I worked with the schools as a Teen Court Coordinator, attended meetings about truant kids at the high school. The judge probably wasn't legally allowed to do that, sure, but at least he had the kids' best interests at heart. And that's a sticky wicket, I know...parental rights to neglect their kids' education and all... From my POV, the most problematic aspect of all of this is that the high school doesn't want those kids to come back. The high school was thrilled and relieved when parents removed chronically truant kids from school. Whether they were pulled to homeschool or "homeschool" didn't really matter to them. They just wanted the problem to go away from their end. Kids pulled to homeschool don't contribute to drop-out stats. Convenient for schools many times...

[texasmama]

I am in Texas.  But, I'm of the "we need to be ever vigilant" camp.  Part of that might be because I was in school in Arlington while they were prosecuting homeschoolers.  My first exposure to the concept of homeschooling was my government attacking the people doing it.  There was a major local politician proclaiming that not only did the government make better educators they made better parents.   *mumble mumble* excuse me while I spit these tacks out of my mouth.

 

I think my basic problem is that this case is saying that the school district is in charge of deciding that a homeschool is sufficient.  That is putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.  Some of these foxes will be honorable people who take the job seriously of doing their part to education the next generation.  It is the others I worry about.  And, honestly, I don't think public schools would be so crappy if they were led by honorable foxes like your relatives.

 

Although, how to weed out those who don't school at all is a thorny problem.  I used to have a co-worker who taught at one of the alternative schools.  He said it was great because there was no classroom management problems.  The cop in the classroom took care of that.  He said parents would frequently try to take their kids out of school saying they were going to homeschooled.  The judge would question the parents on curriculum and yell at them and tell them they weren't allowed to homeschool their kid.  Everyone knew that the parents weren't really going to homeschool the kids.  The parents would cave and leave their kids in the school.  But, when he was telling me about that, I remember thinking "I don't think the judge can do that".  

Given your experiences, I certainly understand your vigilance and would likely feel the same in your shoes.

[Orthodox6]

 

As a former Teen Court Coordinator in a DFW suburb and later as a Social Worker in TX schools, I saw bad stuff, man. Seriously. Non-schoolers. As much as I do not want my rights as a Texan curtailed, I have always worried about the non-schooled children in Texas. It is a real problem, and it is bound to come to a head at some point. This may be it. Being asked to confirm to a truancy officer that you are homeschooling according to the law is not tantamount to harassment. And if you don't answer and they keep asking, that is not harassment either. It is the truancy officer doing his job. I met too many kids who would have greatly benefitted from the truancy officer getting more involved than law would allow.  :(

 

As much as I cherish my rights (for I do believe they are inherent rights) to educate my children myself, in my own ways, I agree 100% with the text which I bolded.  Currently, we have the strange situation of parents getting away with providing a markedly sub-standard education (if even that much) to their children living side-by-side with parents who knock themselves out to provide the best education, tailored to fit each child, that they possibly can afford.  My only "reconciliation" for this is that freedom and free will overlap.

 

I don't read over at this board often, but am glad that I noticed this thread. 

[Orthodox6]

The recent understanding of Leeper was that you didn't even have to show that you were covering the required subjects, but just affirm that you were. That's the stated understanding of the ISDs in my area.

 

I'm chewing on this one. 

"Affirm" -- ?

No tangible proof?

 

If I go to the trouble of "affirming" that I am homeschooling my child(ren) in conformance to what the law requires, I cannot, in good conscience, refuse to provide proof that my bona fide educational materials and plans exist in concrete form. 

 

Verbal affirmation alone carries scant weight with me.  Every parent who is slipshod about providing a "real" education to his child(ren) is going to "affirm" until the cows, the rabbits, the emus, the yaks, all come home.   

 

My serious concern all along has been the nebulous character of "good citizenship."  What does that mean?  Recite the "Pledge" every morning, from pK-12?  Enroll in Boy Scouts, Awana, or The Temperance League?  Adopt a stretch of highway and pick up trash once a month?  . . .  ?!?! 

[texasmama]

My serious concern all along has been the nebulous character of "good citizenship."  What does that mean?  Recite the "Pledge" every morning, from pK-12?  Enroll in Boy Scouts, Awana, or The Temperance League?  Adopt a stretch of highway and pick up trash once a month?  . . .  ?!?! 

Yes, what on earth does this really mean?

 

I have pondered it a bit.  I think by my children seeing me go to a voting booth, paying for what we get at a store rather than stealing it, doing volunteer work, and other things that dh and I do as a matter of course without thinking about it that they have observed good citizenship.  I truly do not have an understanding of what the law means by this, though.  I might be failing to teach this, as I do not do a "good citizenship" unit of study each year.  I'm certainly not teaching poor citizenship. <shrug>

 

But yes, I share your confusion on that one and if asked what I was doing to teach this, I would have to make a list of all the ways I act as a good citizen and discuss the importance of these things with my children, I suppose.

[Sdel]

Yes, what on earth does this really mean?

 

I have pondered it a bit.  I think by my children seeing me go to a voting booth, paying for what we get at a store rather than stealing it, doing volunteer work, and other things that dh and I do as a matter of course without thinking about it that they have observed good citizenship.  I truly do not have an understanding of what the law means by this, though.  I might be failing to teach this, as I do not do a "good citizenship" unit of study each year.  I'm certainly not teaching poor citizenship. <shrug>

 

Here is an article discussing this  http://homeedsa.com/a-course-of-study-in-good-citizenship-lower-elementary/15/

[Orthodox6]

Here is an article discussing this  http://homeedsa.com/a-course-of-study-in-good-citizenship-lower-elementary/15/

 

Thank you for sharing this information!  Not ever having belonged to any homeschool group in Texas, I did not know that anyone had bothered to grapple with the amorphous question.

 

At the risk of sounding pert -- and such is not my desire -- one meets the requirement simply by growing up in a family and developing social connections both among the family and outside of the family.  Most of the topics suggested come up during the course of an average life.  Some do not, of course.  I was raised in Texas from babyhood, and did not know until reading that article that there is a "Pledge to the Texas Flag". (Really?!)  Nor did I teach my children "patriotic songs" of any type.  Despite these lacunae in their educations, they have turned out well.  Three well-adjusted, voting, adults, one of whom is about to be turned loose on the Texas public schools to teach history.   :001_smile:    . . .  I still have time to "salvage" our high schooler, if need be.

 

[Sdel]

Thank you for sharing this information!  Not ever having belonged to any homeschool group in Texas, I did not know that anyone had bothered to grapple with the amorphous question.

 

At the risk of sounding pert -- and such is not my desire -- one meets the requirement simply by growing up in a family and developing social connections both among the family and outside of the family.  Most of the topics suggested come up during the course of an average life.  Some do not, of course.  I was raised in Texas from babyhood, and did not know until reading that article that there is a "Pledge to the Texas Flag". (Really?!)  Nor did I teach my children "patriotic songs" of any type.  Despite these lacunae in their educations, they have turned out well.  Three well-adjusted, voting, adults, one of whom is about to be turned loose on the Texas public schools to teach history.   :001_smile:    . . .  I still have time to "salvage" our high schooler, if need be.

 

 

Wow...we say the TX pledge fairly regularly. Our local university football games, yearly vacation bible school, and local political meetings to name a few.  Of course, they all provide the words for those who don't have it memorized.  As for us, outside daily life, we'll get to this in 7th grade or in the appropriate subject category as it comes up.  I plan to do a year long extra history that year for specifically TX history.  There is a lot of family history in this subject for us. 

 

I have a distant cousin related to Sam Adams, someone on DH's side was at the Alamo, we still have family property that was original survey along the OSR too....

 

Stefanie

[texasmama]

I've not been to any event in many years in which the Texas pledge was said.  I grew up in Texas and cannot say it myself.  We do not own a Texas flag.  We did do a short Texas history study this past summer.

 

 

[Violet Crown]

I'm chewing on this one.

"Affirm" -- ?

No tangible proof?

 

If I go to the trouble of "affirming" that I am homeschooling my child(ren) in conformance to what the law requires, I cannot, in good conscience, refuse to provide proof that my bona fide educational materials and plans exist in concrete form.

 

Verbal affirmation alone carries scant weight with me. Every parent who is slipshod about providing a "real" education to his child(ren) is going to "affirm" until the cows, the rabbits, the emus, the yaks, all come home.

 

 

 

Perhaps look at it not as "no tangible proof" but rather as "no tangible proof to whom." I presume you would refuse to provide proof of your bona fide curriculum to an officious inquirer with no business asking for it, especially if there was reason to suspect their intentions in asking.

 

Unlike the plaintiffs in the case, I would provide this tangible proof of my bona fide curriculum to a court on request. But no, not to the local school district. They have no right to know, and no business asking.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I have been in this situation with different states. The rule of thumb is if you are gone more than 30 days you have to register in the new state. You don't notify your state of residence at all since you plan to return. Since TX has no registration for home schoolers if they have never attended the public school, you don't need to do anything. It really only effects you if the state you are going to has stricter homeschool laws than the state you reside.

We have moved several times over the years and I think 30 days is pretty short fused, unless you mean within 30 days of moving to a new residence.

 

But if we are spending a month on vacation, or visiting family, or in transit between one residence and a new residence, it may not require any action.

 

30 is less than summer vacation and only a bit longer than spring and winter break here, where the district has a year round schedule. For me it has always been about the nature of our presence. If I knew we weren't staying, we didn't file with that state, but did continue to homeschool in accordance with our home state.

 

Also when we arrived, we waited to file paperwork until we were in out permanent address, not a hotel room. We were doing school, even in the hotel. This was clearly a non temporary situation. Had we rented an apartment, thinking that we would move when we found a good house, I probably would have filed. In that situation temp could become long lasting.

 

Also, the pressure to file would depend on the time of year. More when local schools are in session than over a long break.

[Orthodox6]

Perhaps look at it not as "no tangible proof" but rather as "no tangible proof to whom." I presume you would refuse to provide proof of your bona fide curriculum to an officious inquirer with no business asking for it, especially if there was reason to suspect their intentions in asking.

 

Unlike the plaintiffs in the case, I would provide this tangible proof of my bona fide curriculum to a court on request. But no, not to the local school district. They have no right to know, and no business asking.

 

For sure! My mind skipped the step of needing to distinguish among enquiries.

[bobbeym]

Just got an update on this case from THSC in my inbox so I thought I'd share for those interested.

 

http://www.thsc.org/2014/09/el-paso-home-school-lawsuit-to-be-appealed-to-the-texas-supreme-court/ 

[Alte Veste Academy]

Just got an update on this case from THSC in my inbox so I thought I'd share for those interested.

 

http://www.thsc.org/2014/09/el-paso-home-school-lawsuit-to-be-appealed-to-the-texas-supreme-court/

Thanks for posting! I predict that if the TX Supreme Court upholds the ruling, that family is going to want to get out of TX rapidamente.... People are going to be furious.

[bobbeym]

Thanks for posting! I predict that if the TX Supreme Court upholds the ruling, that family is going to want to get out of TX rapidamente.... People are going to be furious.

 

Oh I agree.  If El Paso's claim is upheld then it will have major ramifications on all TX homeschoolers.

[JennyD]

Thanks for the update!

 

I think it's worth noting, though, that the chances that the TX Supreme Court is actually going to hear this case are very low.  Like the US Supreme Court, the TX Supreme Court controls its own docket, and only agrees to hear a very small percentage of the cases that are appealed to the court -- about 12-13%.  

 

http://www.courts.state.tx.us/pubs/AR2012/AR12.pdf

 

[JennyD]

So, contrary to my prediction, the Texas Supreme Court did take this case -- or more specifically, an interlocutory appeal over the question of whether the plaintiffs had to exhaust administrative remedies (i.e.,  appeal to the Texas Commission of Education)  before they could take their claims to court. Apparently there were conflicting opinions from different courts of appeal about the extent of the Commissioner's authority over school-related disputes, and so the TX Supreme Court took this case in order to resolve the issue.  

 

Anyway!  The plaintiffs won on this issue, more or less. The court held that because the McIntyres are claiming that the school district officials violated the Texas Constitution, not the state school laws, the Commissioner does not have jurisdiction over their claims and they are not required to exhaust administrative remedies before going to court.  The court then remanded the case back down to the court of appeals to address other ongoing jurisdictional arguments so  It looks like we are still a ways away from any decision on the actual merits of the case.  

 

As for the implications for other Texas homeschoolers, the decision is not quite as broad as some might hope -- the court specifically rejected the plaintiffs' arguments that they are exempt from the Education Code's exhaustion requirement simply because they are homeschoolers.  However, to the extent that the TX Supreme Court insisted that just because a plaintiff's claims involve the school laws does not necessarily means that she has to exhaust administrative remedies, this should come as a partial relief to other TX homeschoolers worried about the potential implications of the lower court's decision.

 

I don't know why I can't seem to link to the decision, but it's at txcourts.gov/media/1400121/140732.pdf

[Lanny]

I read the first couple of posts in this thread. This seems to be related to what happened a few years ago, in El Paso, where the family had a bunch of children they claimed they were home schooling, but who were not, in fact, being educated. That gave "Home Schooling" a "black eye".  People like that should be required to have their DC in brick and mortar schools and taught by people who are trying to teach.  What the impact of this will be on Texas Home Schoolers remains to be seen, when the Legislature meets in Austin, etc.  

[Renai]

I read the first couple of posts in this thread. This seems to be related to what happened a few years ago, in El Paso, where the family had a bunch of children they claimed they were home schooling, but who were not, in fact, being educated. That gave "Home Schooling" a "black eye".  People like that should be required to have their DC in brick and mortar schools and taught by people who are trying to teach.  What the impact of this will be on Texas Home Schoolers remains to be seen, when the Legislature meets in Austin, etc.  

 

The update is right above your post.

[Violet Crown]

Many thanks Jenny! This procedural stuff makes my head spin, but I'm reading through the decision to try to understand what's going on. So I gather then this decision doesn't address whether Texas ISDs can require verification of a bona fide curriculum, but that that might still be determined?

 

Btw the URL currently working is

http://www.txcourts.gov/media/1400120/140732.pdf

 

So, contrary to my prediction, the Texas Supreme Court did take this case -- or more specifically, an interlocutory appeal over the question of whether the plaintiffs had to exhaust administrative remedies (i.e., appeal to the Texas Commission of Education) before they could take their claims to court. Apparently there were conflicting opinions from different courts of appeal about the extent of the Commissioner's authority over school-related disputes, and so the TX Supreme Court took this case in order to resolve the issue.

 

Anyway! The plaintiffs won on this issue, more or less. The court held that because the McIntyres are claiming that the school district officials violated the Texas Constitution, not the state school laws, the Commissioner does not have jurisdiction over their claims and they are not required to exhaust administrative remedies before going to court. The court then remanded the case back down to the court of appeals to address other ongoing jurisdictional arguments so It looks like we are still a ways away from any decision on the actual merits of the case.

 

As for the implications for other Texas homeschoolers, the decision is not quite as broad as some might hope -- the court specifically rejected the plaintiffs' arguments that they are exempt from the Education Code's exhaustion requirement simply because they are homeschoolers. However, to the extent that the TX Supreme Court insisted that just because a plaintiff's claims involve the school laws does not necessarily means that she has to exhaust administrative remedies, this should come as a partial relief to other TX homeschoolers worried about the potential implications of the lower court's decision.

 

I don't know why I can't seem to link to the decision, but it's at txcourts.gov/media/1400121/140732.pdf

[JennyD]

. So I gather then this decision doesn't address whether Texas ISDs can require verification of a bona fide curriculum, but that that might still be determined?

 

 

That's my take on it, too, although the decision should make it more difficult for ISDs to force homeschoolers to engage in any kind of back and forth.  From the dissent (available here: http://docs.texasappellate.com/scotx/op/14-0732/2016-06-24.green.pdf):

 

"Under the Court’s opinion, whenever a student or parent challenges a school district’s use of its authority under the Education Code to determine whether a student or parent is in compliance with Leeper, the dispute may go straight to court, instead of first allowing the school board and Commissioner the opportunity to resolve such disputes consistently and without court interference."  

 

However, as the dissent also notes, "the true nature of the McIntyres’claims revolves around the question of what a school district has authority to do under the Education Code to determine compliance with our decision in Leeper,"  and it looks like we will have to wait for the decisions on remand to get clearer answers on that.  

 

In trying to read the tea leaves, it may be relevant that the majority tries to strike a middle ground on this procedural question, at least.  The decision rejects both the plaintiffs' argument that the Education Code just does not apply to homeschoolers *and* the school district's argument that anything that "involves" the school laws gives them jurisdiction, and then establishes a sort of compromise standard.  It's not hard to imagine the court producing a similar analysis for the scope of ISD authority generally, but who knows.  

Edited June 27, 2016 by JennyD