How do protect homeschooling children from educational neglect? Can we discuss with some parameters?

[The Girls' Mom]

Having homeschooled in two states that had either zero supervision/reporting or very little, I do not want the government involved in my homeschooling  at all.  The homeschooling families I have known in these states are also handling things just fine without interference.  Children that are being neglected are going to be neglected at home or at school.  It has nothing to do with educational choice.  

 

 

[TammyS]

  We don't require parents to take tests, prove their parenting skills, or endure home visits.

 

Not yet, anyway.

[TammyS]

I think it's going to take a lot of push back from people like us who care, speaking up and public condemning and privately expressing concern directly to people who don't educate their children.  I think pastors need to address it, too.  

 

This is the only thing that might work, to some extent, in the long run.  Social pressure are powerful forces and will have a serious influence on most. 

[IsabelC]

Here is a list of homeschooling law by country. Looking at this, I consider I'm pretty lucky to be able to home educate with minimal interference, and I'm not about to start complaining about having to have a home visit every couple of years.

[mamajag]

How so? Not challenging you, just curious what you mean / how it should be addressed. My pastor knows my family pretty well, has spoken to my kids a lot, etc., but he wouldn't have any way of knowing if, for example, I was not teaching them any math or science. I know that if he saw signs of abuse of my children (or of me) he would take action, but, how would he know about educational neglect?

When I was converting, my priest was guarded regarding the whole homeschool deal. My parish pushes the school HARD. I noticed him giving lots of attention to the kids while I was listening to the speaker but said nothing. He was quietly, carefully, and almost invisibly (to the kids) assessing them. After a couple of sessions, he pulled me to the side and admitted his skepticism but told me what a wonderful job I was doing with the kids' educations. He then warned me that the pressure to make use of the parish school could be intimidating but that whatever I was doing was working and that he believed I should continue on that road. He has consistently backed me as a homeschooler and has personally intervened when I have had issues with the religious ed department and sacramental requirements.

[HS Mom in NC]

The ultimate questions are: 

 

1. Is there any level of academic instruction that all children have a right to like they have a right to a certain amount food, clothing, shelter and medical care or are parental rights absolute, including the right to deny a child basic academic instruction at home?

 

2. If there is a level of academic instruction all children have a right to what should be done if that right is violated? What's included in that level of academic instruction? Who should take action?

[foxbridgeacademy]

Citizens do not have a responsibility to the state.  The state has a responsibility to citizens.

 

We are not "given" the right to home educate.  It is a human right, not morally taken by any government, for all parents to direct the upbringing of their children. 

 

I agree that homeschoolers who do a bad job (or no job) of educating are unfortunate.  But I don't believe that there is any 100% solution to this.  Kids have always, and will always "fall through the cracks" (assuming that other even have the right to define what those cracks are).  This will always be the case as long as there is education.  Adding regulations will only add burdens to those who abide by the law, while failing to catch most who don't.  It probably will "catch" those who desire to do a good job, but don't realize they aren't.  But those who don't desire to do a good job (at least by state standards) will ALWAYS find ways around it.  There is nothing, NOTHING, that will ever change that.  It's a fool's errand to even try.

 

:iagree:

 

I couldn't agree more. 

[PineFarmMom]

Having homeschooled in two states that had either zero supervision/reporting or very little, I do not want the government involved in my homeschooling at all. The homeschooling families I have known in these states are also handling things just fine without interference. Children that are being neglected are going to be neglected at home or at school. It has nothing to do with educational choice.[/

 

This!!

 

I said more but deleted it. It probably wasn't that helpful. 😊

[Ms.Ivy]

But doesn't this assume there is some connection between religion and homeschooling?  Lots of people who homeschool are not religious.  There are religious leaders who don't agree with or approve of homeschooling. 

 

Just goes back to the fact homeschoolers aren't really a group.  Some organize and get together, many don't.  Since I've been homeschooling I've been in about 10 groups.  Groups come and go.  Homeschoolers come and go.  I know very few who have been in it for the long haul. 

 

I said that I think pastors should address it *also* -- I mean as one aspect of increasing the social unacceptability of educational neglect.  That has nothing to do with how many homeschooler actually have a pastor.  The fact is, many homeschoolers attend very conservative churches where homeschooling is pushed as a way to raise more godly children.  (Many doesn't mean most).  I was reading some comments on a Facebook post today in a popular homeschool group about why we need to learn grammar terminology.  It seemed like most of the replies were something along the lines of, "heaven, not Harvard," or "Moses didn't know grammar and God used him!"  A few people tried to explain why it could be important, but there was quite a reaction to it.  Many religious communities, especially those who push homeschooling, buck up against "intellectualism."  As if having a "worldly" education will make you part of the evil world.  That's why I think well-respected pastors could have some influence in this area.  

 

Generally though, I think having conversations like this are a good thing.  I believe that the state answers to the parents, as stated above.... but there should be a new movement socially to shame parents who don't educate their children.  

 

The problem in our society today is that people no longer place a high value on education.  This is why some public schools are failing, and this is why some homeschools are failing.  That's why I think it has to be a social problem addressed through the change of culture, not government.  

 

 

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I said that I think pastors should address it *also* -- I mean as one aspect of increasing the social unacceptability of educational neglect.  That has nothing to do with how many homeschooler actually have a pastor.  The fact is, many homeschoolers attend very conservative churches where homeschooling is pushed as a way to raise more godly children.  (Many doesn't mean most).  I was reading some comments on a Facebook post today in a popular homeschool group about why we need to learn grammar terminology.  It seemed like most of the replies were something along the lines of, "heaven, not Harvard," or "Moses didn't know grammar and God used him!"  A few people tried to explain why it could be important, but there was quite a reaction to it.  Many religious communities, especially those who push homeschooling, buck up against "intellectualism."  As if having a "worldly" education will make you part of the evil world.  That's why I think well-respected pastors could have some influence in this area.  

 

Generally though, I think having conversations like this are a good thing.  I believe that the state answers to the parents, as stated above.... but there should be a new movement socially to shame parents who don't educate their children.  

 

The problem in our society today is that people no longer place a high value on education.  This is why some public schools are failing, and this is why some homeschools are failing.  That's why I think it has to be a social problem addressed through the change of culture, not government.  

 

 

 

I have long believed that churches that push homeschooling on their congregants as the only holy option have an obligation to start their own schools instead of burdening families.

 

If they really and truly believe that public school is devilish and inappropriate for children of Christian families, open a school. Move the money to make it happen. Get some volunteers. Organize parents.

 

The reason homeschooling never becomes the solution for more than 5% of families is because it's HARD and most people are not suited for it. There's a reason we've had organized education since before the founding of the nation! People need schools.

 

If churches want to guilt trip and burden the mothers of their church by telling them that public school is not an option, they should get their priorities straight and build a school.

 

[kiana]

I said that I think pastors should address it *also* -- I mean as one aspect of increasing the social unacceptability of educational neglect.  That has nothing to do with how many homeschooler actually have a pastor.  The fact is, many homeschoolers attend very conservative churches where homeschooling is pushed as a way to raise more godly children.  (Many doesn't mean most).  I was reading some comments on a Facebook post today in a popular homeschool group about why we need to learn grammar terminology.  It seemed like most of the replies were something along the lines of, "heaven, not Harvard," or "Moses didn't know grammar and God used him!"  A few people tried to explain why it could be important, but there was quite a reaction to it.  Many religious communities, especially those who push homeschooling, buck up against "intellectualism."  As if having a "worldly" education will make you part of the evil world.  That's why I think well-respected pastors could have some influence in this area.  

 

I agree with this.

 

Certainly not all homeschoolers are religious, but that is where the primary "even if you don't feel you should homeschool, you MUST homeschool" push is coming from. 

 

A friend of mine works at a private, very conservative religious school. They see a fair number (a few every year) of middle/high school ex-homeschoolers come in who are frighteningly far behind, in some cases completely illiterate. In most cases it seems their parents bought the "you must homeschool" for a while and then when it became obvious that the kids were very, very far behind decided that the private religious school was the next best. (This person is quite anti-HS as a result, which I find understandable given their situation, although clearly I do not agree)

[Ms.Ivy]

Another issue that will have to be addressed culturally is *why* we pursue a liberal arts education in the first place, or bother to learn anything other than bare vocational skills.  Our society is asking that question and not getting a good answer.  So when the rubber hits the road, and school gets tough, there's not much motivation to continue something that is viewed as ultimately useless.  I think this is a bigger deal in traditionally blue-collar families where it's simply not expected that anyone will need a professional degree.  This may seem like a separate issue, but I think it does have some influence in families who don't value education enough to make hard sacrifices for it.  I think many truly neglectful parents don't properly homeschool because they have mental problems, but there's a lot of grey area where what constitutes educational neglect may just be a difference of opinion about what education *is*.  

[Stellalarella]

It appears to me that norms about the choices in basic parent prerogatives are changing.  

 

When a couple in Maryland can have an accusation of child neglect and a finding of unsubstantiated neglect just for letting their kids walk to a park--then the times they are a-changing.

 

We have entered the age when it feels right and good to strangers to see a kid at the park and call CPS.  These are folks who care about kids, who don't want to see kids get hurt, and who take a low view of parental direction/desires/plans/rights and a high view of the value of intrusive government agents.  

 

I don't want folks with THAT mindset coming into my home to evaluate how I'm educating and raising my kids.  

 

Having said that, I think that states like Arkansas that have a testing requirement should keep it.

 

If that minimal requirement goes away as some want, I think that it will just open the doorway later on to more regulation.  This is how it will go--state removes testing, we have several cases of poor homeschooling parents, the legislature shifts to folks who take a high view of government and a dimmer view of parents, and voila--10 years later they institute the "We're coming to check on you quarterly Law" 

 

I have a degree in education.  Some of my kids went to a good public school.  I have wonderful friends who are teachers and we talk often about educational methods.

 

I am telling you that what I'm doing for classical education would not fly with the current school norms.  I can see it now. "But, Mrs. Homeschool mom, how can you possibly teach this kiddo to read without SIGHT WORDS???"  "But Mrs. Homeschool mom, why isn't your first grader writing 2 paragraph essays?"  

 

I'm homeschooling my kids so we can do it the way I've researched that is best--the way we want to do it.  I am not having Ms. Government Agent, representative of the failed educational system of our state, coming in my house to tell me how or what to do, or to confirm if what I am doing is good enough for whatever flavor of education she is licking this year.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[IsabelC]

I have long believed that churches that push homeschooling on their congregants as the only holy option have an obligation to start their own schools instead of burdening families.

 

If they really and truly believe that public school is devilish and inappropriate for children of Christian families, open a school. Move the money to make it happen. Get some volunteers. Organize parents.

 

The reason homeschooling never becomes the solution for more than 5% of families is because it's HARD and most people are not suited for it. There's a reason we've had organized education since before the founding of the nation! People need schools.

 

If churches want to guilt trip and burden the mothers of their church by telling them that public school is not an option, they should get their priorities straight and build a school.

 

 

I do not agree with the bolded. I think that anything up to about half of families could currently home educate if they seriously wanted to, and of those who couldn't, at least half could given a bit more support than is currently available (including some material adjustment to mitigate the financial hit of not being able to have both parents in full time paid work*). So I believe that 75% of kids being homeschooled would be an achievable goal, with out-of-home schooling still available as a safety net.

 

However I do agree with your point that it is very remiss of some churches to present home schooling as the only acceptable option, leaving some members with the choice of either making a bad job of it or using a school and feeling that they are doing wrong.

 

 

*My simple solution to this would be to figure out a national schooling budget, calculate an annual per child amount, and allow parents to use this for their choice of public school, private school or documented home education expenses.

[Stellalarella]

My Ms/Mr Government Agents aren't like that at all.

 

In fact, judging by the content of several threads lately, they are a lot more open to what homeschooling means and how it can look, than are many of us here on these forums!

 

That is a blessing.  

 

But it's by no means guaranteed.  

 

I would find it incredibly ironic to be overseen by anyone from my local school district.  The elementary school my neighborhood is assigned to is ranked 407 out of 444 in the state.  That would be the bottom 10%.  The middle school is the worst in our city, out of 7.  Our assigned high school is the worst in the city, and in the bottom 3% of the state.

 

The state education department just took over our district because of THAT high school and THAT middle school  Now we no longer have a board of education.  The state will try to figure out how to improve those schools.  Talk about educational neglect.  Those schools have been on the failing list since we moved here 13 years ago.  That's an entire education--K-12.  Failed.  

[IsabelC]

The ultimate questions are: 

 

1. Is there any level of academic instruction that all children have a right to like they have a right to a certain amount food, clothing, shelter and medical care or are parental rights absolute, including the right to deny a child basic academic instruction at home?

 

2. If there is a level of academic instruction all children have a right to what should be done if that right is violated? What's included in that level of academic instruction? Who should take action?

 

I think you hit the nail on the head here. Most disagreements do seem to relate to a diversity of answers to those two questions.

Also, education does of course encompass more than academics. Hence one of the reasons given for the ban on home ed in Germany is that by not having kids in school, they are by definition neglected, because they are being deprived of the "normal" school experience (even if they pursued the exact same academic progression at home).

 

Here is what UNICEF has to say about educational rights of children:

 

Children have the right to an education. Discipline in schools should respect children’s

human dignity. Primary education should be free. Wealthier countries should help poorer

countries achieve this.

 

Education should develop each child’s personality and talents to the full. It should

encourage children to respect their parents, their cultures and other cultures.

 

Children have the right to learn and use the language and customs of their families,

whether or not these are shared by the majority of the people in the country where

they live, as long as this does not harm others.

 

 

The only suggestions on what kids should learn are that it should develop their "personality and talents" and that they should be able to learn the family's language and customs, insofar as these are not harming anyone else. (Interesting that both of these goals could be realized more easily at home for many, if not most, children, isn't it?) It is probably reasonable to infer that a functional level of multiliteracies would be required for most humans to "develop to the full", but to go much further than that you'd have to get pretty context-specific.

[Ausmumof3]

Another issue that will have to be addressed culturally is *why* we pursue a liberal arts education in the first place, or bother to learn anything other than bare vocational skills. Our society is asking that question and not getting a good answer. So when the rubber hits the road, and school gets tough, there's not much motivation to continue something that is viewed as ultimately useless. I think this is a bigger deal in traditionally blue-collar families where it's simply not expected that anyone will need a professional degree. This may seem like a separate issue, but I think it does have some influence in families who don't value education enough to make hard sacrifices for it. I think many truly neglectful parents don't properly homeschool because they have mental problems, but there's a lot of grey area where what constitutes educational neglect may just be a difference of opinion about what education *is*.

I don't love this stereotype. I come from a mostly trade family and if any of us have a hoarding problem it may just be books... I know "white collar" families that might read a book a year...

[Rosie_0801]

Another issue that will have to be addressed culturally is *why* we pursue a liberal arts education in the first place, or bother to learn anything other than bare vocational skills.  Our society is asking that question and not getting a good answer.  So when the rubber hits the road, and school gets tough, there's not much motivation to continue something that is viewed as ultimately useless.  I think this is a bigger deal in traditionally blue-collar families where it's simply not expected that anyone will need a professional degree.  This may seem like a separate issue, but I think it does have some influence in families who don't value education enough to make hard sacrifices for it.  I think many truly neglectful parents don't properly homeschool because they have mental problems, but there's a lot of grey area where what constitutes educational neglect may just be a difference of opinion about what education *is*.  

 

I've never heard of educational neglect in blue collar homeschooling families. (This is not to say it doesn't happen, of course. I don't know everyone in the world.) I've only heard about it in families where at least one parent is tertiary educated.

[marbel]

Okay, I'm awake before my kids are, and I'm not feeling so snarky today, so let me offer up my solution to this issue.  :)

 

 

If it comes down to it, I think a possible solution that everyone would be content with would be one where homeschoolers monitor themselves.  As such, there could be a private organization, consisting of homeschoolers, NOT government workers, that would offer up its "seal of approval" to its members.  You could be a member only if you pass a minimum set of standards (show progress in reading, writing, and arithmetic from the previous year, and show it whichever manner you deemed worthy, ie, test scores, portfolios, interviews/home visit, etc.).

 

<snip>

 

I was thinking about this some more today.  This is not exactly the same, but similar enough I thought I would post it.

 

In Pennsylvania, there are organizations that offer diplomas for homeschoolers.  The one I am most familiar with has 3 levels of diploma, with different requirements. The general diploma requires some number of credits, and (I think) 3 years of nonspecified math, 4 years of English,3 (?) science, 3 or 4 history, a few electives, etc.  The Academic diploma requires more credits, math through geometry, and a few extra requirements for English.  The Honors diplomas requires even more credits, math to ... pre-calculus I think?... and other things beyond the Academic diploma.  You get the idea, even though I lack specifics.

 

Now, whether or not those diplomas are more valuable than a diploma from Marbel's Happy Homeschool (not my homeschool's real name) - that's debatable. Some say they are, some say they are a waste of money.   The political background of the diploma programs is somewhat murky to me, being a relative newcomer to the state.  I've seen more than one mom get cranked up about it on park day though. 

 

Anyway, I suppose that by encouraging homeschoolers to participate in similar diploma programs would be one way for homeschoolers to monitor themselves.  But since such diploma programs are optional (as they should be, imo), most likely the people who aren't really into homeschooling aren't going to sign up anyway.

 

[Stellalarella]

What if one takes the idea of going after parents for educational neglect farther out than just homeschoolers--

 

Is a parent neglectful if that parent sends a child year after year after year to failing schools and the child does not ever really learn how to read?  Is the public school parent culpable because they do not read to their children, provide reading materials at home, value education, help the kids do homework, provide a stable home environment that allows the kid to go to school and be able to think?  If the public school parent sees the child failing and does nothing, nothing, nothing is that not neglect?

 

Should agents of the government visit the parents of children who are failing in failing public schools?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Murphy101]

I've never heard of educational neglect in blue collar homeschooling families. (This is not to say it doesn't happen, of course. I don't know everyone in the world.) I've only heard about it in families where at least one parent is tertiary educated.

Me either. If anything I hear a LOT of degreed white collar people saying things like, "pfft. I never use my degree." And "*chuckle* they don't NEED and won't use advanced maths and sciences and if they do, they can just learn it later."

 

Most low income and blue collar type families are very much putting a LOT of pressure on their kids to go to college bc mom and dad didn't go and want them to do better and have more job prospects.

[marbel]

I've never heard of educational neglect in blue collar homeschooling families. (This is not to say it doesn't happen, of course. I don't know everyone in the world.) I've only heard about it in families where at least one parent is tertiary educated.

 

I wonder if it's because they take it for granted, that their kids will somehow become as educated as they are? 

 

I remember being sure that my first child would be an early reader because my husband and I both learned to read before kindy.  When he didn't, it was quite shocking to us. 

 

(We did teach him to read rather than let him flounder on his own.  The second child wasn't an early reader but she taught herself, most likely by hearing me working with her brother.  And then she didn't let us know she could read till she was ready to.  The stinker. She is still like that. :lol: ) 

[laundrycrisis]

External testing could raise problems for children that are being home educated because they learn differently. (Home Ed for religious reasons is not such a strong wave here in Australia.) Many families came to Home Education initially reluctantly because their children were slipping through the gaps.

I'm not saying they shouldn't be allowed to, just that it  may be harder to demonstrate that they are doing so.

My kid/s do external testing bi-annually though this is not a general requirement. Thankfully we now have some evaluations that explain to 'others' (the father) why their results are all over the board.

 

This has always been my fear about mandatory testing.  LD issues could make it appear on paper that a parent was not properly educating the child.  Then that parent would have to jump through more hoops to demonstrate that the home education is happening, and that there is a learning difference causing a performance issue.  

 

The end result of all that could be beneficial - I believe I have seen homeschooling situation where there are LD issues that are not diagnosed and not addressed, because the parents take the path of least resistance - a system that requires them to dig into why their child cannot perform academically could lead to some kids getting help they otherwise may not get.  But the stress on the parent could be significant.  I would hate to be in the situation of having a child who didn't test well, and then be under pressure to prove that it wasn't for lack of effort in the homeschool, and being worried about whether or not further testing would back me up.  I don't like the idea at all of, "your kid better test better next time or you will lose your freedom to homeschool".  I think the process of forcing a child into school would need to be a lot more careful than that. 

[Rosie_0801]

What if one takes the idea of going after parents for educational neglect farther out than just homeschoolers--

 

Is a parent neglectful if that parent sends a child year after year after year to failing schools and the child does not ever really learn how to read?  Is the public school parent culpable because they do not read to their children, provide reading materials at home, value education, help the kids do homework, provide a stable home environment that allows the kid to go to school and be able to think?  If the public school parent sees the child failing and does nothing, nothing, nothing is that not neglect?

 

I think it is, yeah.

 

 

 

Should agents of the government visit the parents of children who are failing in failing public schools?

 

Well. For a bit of white hat thinking, that'd keep a fair few people employed...

[MrsWeasley]

Me either. If anything I hear a LOT of degreed white collar people saying things like, "pfft. I never use my degree." And "*chuckle* they don't NEED and won't use advanced maths and sciences and if they do, they can just learn it later."

 

Most low income and blue collar type families are very much putting a LOT of pressure on their kids to go to college bc mom and dad didn't go and want them to do better and have more job prospects.

We are blue collar. My husband is a plumber. We are not low income. While I educate in a way that leaves college as a possibility, we will strongly encourage our kids to consider skilled trades, too.

[Murphy101]

We are blue collar. My husband is a plumber. We are not low income. While I educate in a way that leaves college as a possibility, we will strongly encourage our kids to consider skilled trades, too.

Okay? The topic wasn't that every kid has to go to college. The topic was whether or not low income or blue collar families put a low value on education. My stance was that that is not the impression I get from the low income and blue collar people I know. (Of which I am one of too.)

 

Encouraging your kids to be educated means it doesn't relate to you. Unless you think trade school means a lesser education? I don't think that at all. But I know many still do.

[Ms.Ivy]

I've never heard of educational neglect in blue collar homeschooling families. (This is not to say it doesn't happen, of course. I don't know everyone in the world.) I've only heard about it in families where at least one parent is tertiary educated.

I'm just going off my personal experience, too. In my extended family on both my side and my husband's, there is a common assumption that our families are not smart enough for college. On top of that, going to college is not supported or encouraged because of the strong emphasis on working independently as young as possible (and staying out of debt). I grew up in heavily religious homeschooling circles and the families with the least educated kids were families with parents who worked in trades like construction or landscaping. The thinking seemed to be, well my kid can love Jesus, build a shed, and run the family business without writing essays or learning geometry, so who cares? But this is just my personal experience. Obviously homeschooling can help break cycles like the ones in my family.... my hardworking blue collar parents did it. My parents homeschooled me for educational reasons. My friends were homeschooled for religious reasons. The only ones that had a better overall education than I did were those whose parents had professional degrees. So that's where my comment about the blue collar workers was comming from. I didn't mean to offend blue collar workers. My husband is a blue collar worker, neither of us have a degree, and our kids score very well on achievement tests. So now I basically have no idea what I'm trying to say, and I sould probably go to bed because I am a morning person... I think my brain shut down mid post!  :huh:

 

ETA: I believe that educational neglect can be rooted in cultural preferences mental health, or just plain selfishness.  Seems complicated.  And much too complicated for the government to sort out.

[simplemom]

I think educational neglect can be vague to define. By 1st world standards post 1900 it *might* mean failure to teach the 3Rs to the degree they are routinely taught within a given age range (a bare minimum standard might be: children should be reading to some degree past early readers, doing basic multiplication and division, and able to write a few sentences by the end of 4th grade/able to take a basic bubble filled multiple choice test, read a book, and write a book report by the end of 8th grade). However, ancient people groups survived just fine without educational standards and pen/paper education. In pioneer times, some boys sometimes got a bare minimum education in the 3Rs, while learning survival skills for tough times when farms didn't produce crops and winters were harsh with minimal shelter and heat (thinking Little House books....cheesy example, I admit). While I am all for top notch education in the 3Rs, I feel we are severely lacking in teaching our children to survive life circumstances if all our modern conveniences were stripped away (thinking famine, natural disaster, war, etc....). A primitive life style tribal group can look into our educated society and consider us neglectful for not training our children to survive off the land.

 

It is common to feed our children mostly junk foods as a society (junk foods being a loose term with different definitions among various people, I admittedly do not feed my dc the best foods all the time). It isn't consider neglect to only feed a child fast food or junk foods even though those children grow up sick. They have a poorer quality of life because at some point they have heart problems, strokes, diabetes, or major colon issues long term. However, it is considered neglect to not teach school by 1st world standards post 1900. It isn't considered neglect to not make children exercise and do enough chores for physical strength if a child had to do hard manual labor to survive (again, admitting that I don't challenge my dc in physical strengthening as I should). It isn't considered neglect to allow our children do nothing but watch TV or play video games all day when not in school, yet doing so can limit future adult opportunities and drive for those children to be actual productive adults someday. Then there are some people out there that should not reproduce due to lack of proper parenting ability, yet we can't define or regulate who should and shouldn't be allowed to have children.

 

I guess what I am saying is neglect is subjective depending on whose looking in. Being fed, clothed, sheltered, and loved (free of physical or emotional abuse) is the only standard I can think of that is a *must* regulation by outsiders for all humans across the board that would ever be practical to regulate. I would LOVE for education by my higher standards to be a must, but proper education is such a gray area depending on what society and time period in which one exists.

 

Sorry for the babbling and lack of clarity. It is late. And I don't have time to edit.

[MrsWeasley]

Okay? The topic wasn't that every kid has to go to college. The topic was whether or not low income or blue collar families put a low value on education. My stance was that that is not the impression I get from the low income and blue collar people I know. (Of which I am one of too.)

 

Encouraging your kids to be educated means it doesn't relate to you. Unless you think trade school means a lesser education? I don't think that at all. But I know many still do.

 

Saying, "Most low income and blue collar type families are very much putting a LOT of pressure on their kids to go to college bc mom and dad didn't go and want them to do better and have more job prospects," definitely makes it sound like college is better and provides more job prospects. Where we live, many of the trades are still paid internships, not trade school. There's a requirement of having a high school diploma or GED and a score on a math test is part of your overall score on admission to the apprenticeship program. Because of how difficult admittance to these programs can be, I wouldn't feel comfortable not teaching for college. But the academics needed for admission into trade apprenticeships are less rigorous, and I don't think it's neglectful to insist on a less rigorous course for the high school years for a handy young person committed to going into the trades, just not something I'd do.

[Ms.Ivy]

I don't think anyone believes it's neglectful to prep your children for a trade instead of university.  I brought up the topic of trades because I have seen parents use trade skills as an excuse to provide little more than a 3rd grade education.  My husband's assistant is a fellow like this -- a smart guy who slipped through the cracks and can't hardly read.  My husband had to teach him how many inches are in a foot and how to read gauges.  It happens, for a lot of different reasons.  

[Murphy101]

Saying, "Most low income and blue collar type families are very much putting a LOT of pressure on their kids to go to college bc mom and dad didn't go and want them to do better and have more job prospects," definitely makes it sound like college is better and provides more job prospects.

Ahhh. I see. You are totally right I suppose. I should have phrased it as pressure to get higher education instead of saying college. My apologies.

 

But the academics needed for admission into trade apprenticeships are less rigorous, and I don't think it's neglectful to insist on a less rigorous course for the high school years for a handy young person committed to going into the trades, just not something I'd do.

I don't think trades are less rigorous, just different and more focused rigorous. For example, I know lots of kids who can't do trig in high school even tho they are in advanced math classes, but my son had to do trig to work in machining design and operations. The math and science skills are still higher, they just aren't presented in only an abstracted textbook problem manner.

[Reefgazer]

I think the bolded is relevant to the discussion. When you speak of state laws, you are speaking of state enforcement. But if the state can't get their own schools and educational act together, then they really are in no position to police the homes or educational acts of homeschoolers. I am not talking about public schools providing instruction and a student not learning; I am speaking of districts in NYS that I know of personally where certain classrooms have instruction in a foreign language to accommodate several weak learners (no, this was not a special ed, ESL, or foeign language class). IMO, that is non-instruction for the majority of the students in the class. I am speaking of classes where the teacher sits at the front of the room where chaos reigns and doesn't speak about the subject at hand. IMO, that is not instruction.

 

So, if the state is incapable of policing homeschoolers, who is? Maybe the state homeschooling association, if one exists and is willing to take it on. But with so many homeschoolers using so many methods of teaching, who decides whether learning is being offered or if learning is effective? We can't even agree here, on a message board for enthusiastic and rigorous homeschooling, what constitutes educational neglect. Perhaps it is not practical or possible to regulate homeschooling, but we can regulate neglect in general. But we already have a system in place for that, CPS. I'm not saying there should be no simple standard, like telling someone you will be homeschooling and submitting the results of a standardized test. But home visits or evaluations by public employees? Nope; not until they get their own house in order, which is saying "not until they demonstrate capability and competency to do so".

Can we have a discussion on ideas or ways the homeschooled children can be protected from educational neglect? This could include state laws, non-profit organizations, or self-policing within the movement.

 

I really feel that homeschoolers will lose some of the liberty they have today if this issue isn't addressed somehow. Ultimately, they could lost the privilege to homeschool altogether. More and more stories come out about children that have been ill-served by homeschooling, particularly as there are now more adults that were homeschooled growing up and are telling their (often sad) stories.

 

Yes, we acknowledge there are many, many homeschool success stories. It is a wonderful form of education for many families, including ours.

 

 

First, How should educational neglect be defined?

 

In order for this not to spin out of hand, can we follow the parameters below?

 

--Can we have this be a broad discussion and not focus on specific children you know or exceptional situations that wouldn't broadly apply?

 

--Please don't use this discussion to bring up other areas of neglect in the home. While these may or may not be paired with educational neglect, this should probably have a different thread.

 

--Please don't use this discussion to bash public schools. i.e. "Until public schools raise their standard and keep kids from fall between the cracks, people need to lay off homeschoolers." So, even if people educated in other ways have been failed, it is not relevant for this discussion.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I don't think anyone believes it's neglectful to prep your children for a trade instead of university.  I brought up the topic of trades because I have seen parents use trade skills as an excuse to provide little more than a 3rd grade education.  My husband's assistant is a fellow like this -- a smart guy who slipped through the cracks and can't hardly read.  My husband had to teach him how many inches are in a foot and how to read gauges.  It happens, for a lot of different reasons.  

 

Well the Amish get away with it.  Not 3rd grade level thankfully, but 8th grade. 

[Catwoman]

Well the Amish get away with it. Not 3rd grade level thankfully, but 8th grade.

I think the Amish are learning a lot more than many people realize. I have dealt with many of them over the years and they seem well-spoken, informed, and intelligent -- and their business skills are excellent.

 

Obviously, I can't speak for all Amish people and I'm sure there are some complete losers among them, just like in any population, but I have to say that the Amish people I have known have impressed me just as much as others who have had far more formal education.

[justasque]

...

 

In contrast, my state doesn't have those sorts of umbrella groups, but we have to turn in a list of objectives every year. They aren't allowed to hold you to the objectives, nor ask why you didn't fulfill any of them, or anything like that. The objectives are completely meaningless. My evaluators have never seen the objectives I've turned into the school, and now, the school will get the objectives but won't see our portfolios. How is that at all helpful? ...

 

...

 

Just nitpicking here (and several pages behind!) - I think the purpose of the objectives is to remind the school district and any other officials that the homeschooling family sets the objectives for their child - not the school district, not the state.  In an atmosphere of ever-increasing state standards for public school students (Common Core, love it or hate it, being only the latest version of these generic, one-size-sorta-fits-some attempts at standardizing instruction), I think this reminder, however ceremonial, is useful and important.  Viewed in the right perspective, it can be quite empowering to say to the school district, "This is what WE are teaching this year in OUR school, even if you have quite different standards for YOUR students.  This is what WE value; this is what we feel THIS child needs to learn this year."

[Ellie]

Well the Amish get away with it.  Not 3rd grade level thankfully, but 8th grade. 

 

The Amish get away with it because their strongly held religious beliefs prevent them from having anything to do with the government, including accepting any kind of government aid or funding. They don't pay social security taxes, and they don't receive any benefits.

[SparklyUnicorn]

The Amish get away with it because their strongly held religious beliefs prevent them from having anything to do with the government, including accepting any kind of government aid or funding. They don't pay social security taxes, and they don't receive any benefits.

 

I have strong beliefs.  Nobody cares.  LOL

[simplemom]

I have strong beliefs. Nobody cares. LOL

I care ;)

[SparklyUnicorn]

Me too, but I'm always too scared to come outright and say I homeschool as a protest against a consumer-capitalist society that sees children as economic units, and also to prevent the priming for group think that can occur in schools, which, imo, is a necessary condition for fascism to thrive.

 

lol

 

See why I never say it ?

 

I have to write on my registration forms why I homeschool. I just write 'because my children and I enjoy it.'

 

Oh yeah I don't tell people why I homeschool.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I care ;)

 

Thank you!

 

I appreciate that.

[PineFarmMom]

Me too, but I'm always too scared to come outright and say I homeschool as a protest against a consumer-capitalist society that sees children as economic units, and also to prevent the priming for group think that can occur in schools, which, imo, is a necessary condition for fascism to thrive.

 

lol

'

This cracks me up!! You should just make some homeschool business cards and put it on the back!! I laugh to because I have those types of reasons as well but typically just smile and keep it to myself. 😄

[simplemom]

Me too, but I'm always too scared to come outright and say I homeschool as a protest against a consumer-capitalist society that sees children as economic units.

 

 

OT, but here's a vent along those lines...

 

Are you saying that you have an aversion to monthly fundraisers where children are forced to sale overpriced wrapping paper and cheap cookie dough for the schools? And the pizza parties they talk up to the students who go out and sale atleast $50 in overpriced junk? Then the kids come home and cry because they won't get to attend the pizza party because they only sold $30 worth of stuff, and the parents don't want to buy another $20 worth of cookie dough to make up the difference? (I told ds when he was heartbroken about this in ps K that he could have 2 pizzas to himself for $20 I would save by not buying the stuff.) Or the coupon books that cost way too much money to get 1/2 price at all these overpriced restaurants and entertainment venues? Or the school fundraising at $5 a scoop/cone ice cream places that the principal announces at the end of the school day, " tell your family to go to IceCream Joe's tonight so our school can make 10% of the proceeds spent." Then little Billy gets excited at school pick up because surely mom will want to go (since the principal told the kids their parents should take them there in an exciting way), and mom doesn't have $20 to splurge on one IceCream cone each for a family of 4 just because it's Tuesday night and there's nothing to celebrate!

 

Wow, just the above in K was enough reason to homeschool. Although, it's far from the only reason we homeschool. Sorry for veering off the thread topic, but couldn't resist the opportunity to let that frustration out, lol.

[happypamama]

OT, but here's a vent along those lines...

 

Are you saying that you have an aversion to monthly fundraisers where children are forced to sale overpriced wrapping paper and cheap cookie dough for the schools? And the pizza parties they talk up to the students who go out and sale atleast $50 in overpriced junk? Then the kids come home and cry because they won't get to attend the pizza party because they only sold $30 worth of stuff, and the parents don't want to buy another $20 worth of cookie dough to make up the difference? (I told ds when he was heartbroken about this in ps K that he could have 2 pizzas to himself for $20 I would save by not buying the stuff.) Or the coupon books that cost way too much money to get 1/2 price at all these overpriced restaurants and entertainment venues? Or the school fundraising at $5 a scoop/cone ice cream places that the principal announces at the end of the school day, " tell your family to go to IceCream Joe's tonight so our school can make 10% of the proceeds spent." Then little Billy gets excited at school pick up because surely mom will want to go (since the principal told the kids their parents should take them there in an exciting way), and mom doesn't have $20 to splurge on one IceCream cone each for a family of 4 just because it's Tuesday night and there's nothing to celebrate!

 

Wow, just the above in K was enough reason to homeschool. Although, it's far from the only reason we homeschool. Sorry for veering off the thread topic, but couldn't resist the opportunity to let that frustration out, lol.

Oh, that would annoy me so much! UGH! (Our support group did a Friendly's night as a fundraiser, but we advertised it to the parents, not the kids. Marketing anything directly to kids really ticks me off.)

[Pod's mum]

This has always been my fear about mandatory testing.  LD issues could make it appear on paper that a parent was not properly educating the child.  Then that parent would have to jump through more hoops to demonstrate that the home education is happening, and that there is a learning difference causing a performance issue.  

 

The end result of all that could be beneficial - I believe I have seen homeschooling situation where there are LD issues that are not diagnosed and not addressed, because the parents take the path of least resistance - a system that requires them to dig into why their child cannot perform academically could lead to some kids getting help they otherwise may not get.  But the stress on the parent could be significant.  I would hate to be in the situation of having a child who didn't test well, and then be under pressure to prove that it wasn't for lack of effort in the homeschool, and being worried about whether or not further testing would back me up.  I don't like the idea at all of, "your kid better test better next time or you will lose your freedom to homeschool".  I think the process of forcing a child into school would need to be a lot more careful than that. 

 

I was pushed into assessment in both cases for my girls.

In neither case was it by our Home Education department.

It took me several years of dead-horse-flogging with the eldest to realise some things were not going to happen. Then school dragged the same horse out for her for a further couple of years before I was able to provide documentation for what I had been saying. They required assessment documentation to try to provide an appropriate curriculum for my extemely 2e girl. She proved even more extreme than my prediction and returned to Home Education.

The similar younger was done by their father (and back-fired wonderfully).

 

In both cases it was a useful document that allows us to choose or dismiss curricular and continue to work to abilities.

It also armed us and will be required later for tertiary education.

 

By the way, the school system recommended but was unable to provide assessment, particularly for 2e kids, because they can generally muddle along.

[Pod's mum]

Me too, but I'm always too scared to come outright and say I homeschool as a protest against a consumer-capitalist society that sees children as economic units, and also to prevent the priming for group think that can occur in schools, which, imo, is a necessary condition for fascism to thrive.

 

lol

 

See why I never say it ?

 

I have to write on my registration forms why I homeschool. I just write 'because my children and I enjoy it.'

 

We also place missing out on school socialisation as a reason FOR home education. Though maybe not on official forms.

 

Having said that this dd happily joins in with one of the local schools for sports days etc.

[Catwoman]

Where we live, I honestly haven't seen any educational neglect among the homeschoolers I have met -- or else those moms are very clever about hiding it.

 

I'm sure it exists, but it seems as though a few people on this forum make it sound like it is a very big deal, so I'm wondering if it is something that others see happening on a regular basis where they live.

 

I'm not talking about objecting to a family whose method of homeschooling is different from our own choices, but true educational neglect among families who are actually claiming to be homeschooling their kids.

[Murphy101]

Where we live, I honestly haven't seen any educational neglect among the homeschoolers I have met -- or else those moms are very clever about hiding it.

 

I'm sure it exists, but it seems as though a few people on this forum make it sound like it is a very big deal, so I'm wondering if it is something that others see happening on a regular basis where they live.

 

I'm not talking about objecting to a family whose method of homeschooling is different from our own choices, but true educational neglect among families who are actually claiming to be homeschooling their kids.

I've only seen it 2 times in 14 years of home schooling. As in similar to what the OP on that other thread described. I've seen in considerably more in homes where the kids attend a brick school.

[kama]

I think before any kind of new system is set up first it needs to be established there is truly a problem. Is it sad and a problem when kids slip through the cracks? It definitely is. How common is it *really* though? Are the problems with the education the kids are getting or with the parenting in general?  Statistically how does the number of children in these truly failing homeschool situations compare to the number of children that are in truly failing public school situations? As I am sure most people on this board well know there are some truly awful, abusive public school situations as well. They are in the minority but some really awful stuff has gone down in public schools too.  I suspect that if the stats were looked at the cases of true educational neglect/abuse/failure actually wouldn't be that far off from public school cases. I had a friend when I was in school who was struggling in elementary school. She was put in to a special needs classroom where they basically did nothing but try to keep the kids out of trouble for the hours they were required to be at school and this continued until in JR high she refused (and got in huge trouble) to walk in to that classroom anymore and insisted she be allowed the same chance to succeed in a "normal" class room as any other child. She did too. It wasn't easy for her because of everything she missed but she managed to succeed. She had to fight for a chance to even have a chance to learn though. It isn't just her either, public schools fail students in terrible ways, just like homeschools do. So I would argue to establish that there is a problem worth taking a special interest in you would first have to prove that it is a problem that is much worse than it is in public schools. 

Then once you do that you have to come up with a system that is effective at addressing the problem that actually improves outcomes. I am talking about the "What then"
 of all this monitoring. If a homeschooler fails to meet whatever standards you have decided to implement, what then? Do they instantly lose their right to homeschool? Compulsory public school? Do they lose their children? What happens? Will this truly improve the educational and emotional outlook for these kids in life? Who pays for all this additional oversight? How? 

It is a complicated issue. It is for sure a problem when parents think it is ok to fail to educate their children and call it "homeschooling" and it does make other homeschoolers look bad when those isolated cases come out and get sensationalized. Unfortunately I think that without careful study and planning any increased level of monitoring or intervention is highly unlikely to be effective and very possibly will do a lot of harm.

[TammyS]

I think before any kind of new system is set up first it needs to be established there is truly a problem. Is it sad and a problem when kids slip through the cracks? It definitely is. How common is it *really* though? Are the problems with the education the kids are getting or with the parenting in general?  Statistically how does the number of children in these truly failing homeschool situations compare to the number of children that are in truly failing public school situations? As I am sure most people on this board well know there are some truly awful, abusive public school situations as well. They are in the minority but some really awful stuff has gone down in public schools too.  I suspect that if the stats were looked at the cases of true educational neglect/abuse/failure actually wouldn't be that far off from public school cases. I had a friend when I was in school who was struggling in elementary school. She was put in to a special needs classroom where they basically did nothing but try to keep the kids out of trouble for the hours they were required to be at school and this continued until in JR high she refused (and got in huge trouble) to walk in to that classroom anymore and insisted she be allowed the same chance to succeed in a "normal" class room as any other child. She did too. It wasn't easy for her because of everything she missed but she managed to succeed. She had to fight for a chance to even have a chance to learn though. It isn't just her either, public schools fail students in terrible ways, just like homeschools do. So I would argue to establish that there is a problem worth taking a special interest in you would first have to prove that it is a problem that is much worse than it is in public schools. 

 

Then once you do that you have to come up with a system that is effective at addressing the problem that actually improves outcomes. I am talking about the "What then"

 of all this monitoring. If a homeschooler fails to meet whatever standards you have decided to implement, what then? Do they instantly lose their right to homeschool? Compulsory public school? Do they lose their children? What happens? Will this truly improve the educational and emotional outlook for these kids in life? Who pays for all this additional oversight? How? 

 

It is a complicated issue. It is for sure a problem when parents think it is ok to fail to educate their children and call it "homeschooling" and it does make other homeschoolers look bad when those isolated cases come out and get sensationalized. Unfortunately I think that without careful study and planning any increased level of monitoring or intervention is highly unlikely to be effective and very possibly will do a lot of harm.

 

You not only have to identify a need and come up with a system, but you have to ask:

 

WHO is qualified to run this system and address the bad homeschooling?  The government that can't run schools properly, even though they have full control over the schools?  I'm thinking they literally aren't qualified.  This is a serious issue.  Who, exactly, would be qualified? 

 

I know one homeschool mom who had CPS come to her door and tell her that she had been accused of education neglect and that they were there to assess whether she was doing an adequate job.  She not only didn't allow them in, but she sent them away, telling them that they weren't qualified to assess her.  And she was right. 

 

CPS isn't qualified to assess.

The government has shown it can't run schools that it has full control over, so they clearly aren't qualified, either.

[Murphy101]

It doesn't matter if they were qualified or not. The gov't should have to have a warrant to enter someone's home to seek evidence of any wrong doing. Be it educational wrong doing or otherwise. Which is how it should be and why I would be adamant against any policy that said a gov't official could do a house visit.