Texas Case Mulls if Home-school Kids Have to Learn Something

[umsami]

Sigh.  Ummm.....it's not home schooling if you're not actually teaching/learning.

 

http://www.krgv.com/news/local-news/Texas-Case-Mulls-if-Home-school-Kids-Have-to-Learn-Something/36190388

 

"Laura McIntyre began educating her nine children more than a decade ago inside a vacant office at an El Paso motorcycle dealership she ran with her husband and other relatives.

    
Now the family is embroiled in a legal battle the Texas Supreme Court hears next week that could have broad implications on the nation's booming home-school ranks. The McIntyres are accused of failing to teach their children educational basics because they were waiting to be transported to heaven with the second coming of Jesus Christ."

[abba12]

Oh for goodness sake.... I knew a family like this growing up. These are the people who give all of us a bad name. 

[maize]

Here's what I wonder: what kind of regulations would allow for reasonable differentiation between lack of education and unschooling that does facilitate education, experience and skills, though not in accordance with set standards or a structured time table?

[Pawz4me]

Oops .. . I just posted another thread on this same thing!

 

I'll fix it so we'll only have one.

 

Here's the link to the story I read.

[umsami]

Here's what I wonder: what kind of regulations would allow for reasonable differentiation between lack of education and unschooling that does facilitate education, experience and skills, though not in accordance with set standards or a structured time table?

 

I think a portfolio review would allow for unschooling to be monitored.

 

According to the article i read Texas has nothing in terms of requirements like a standardized test, portfolio review, etc.....so I think that's part of the problem.

 

It sounds like a lot of her kids are older now which makes it even sadder.  Much harder to make one's way in the world with a suboptimal education.  I wonder if they have SSNs and such?

[Butter]

Texas does having education/teaching requirements, though.

 

There are only three requirements to homeschool in Texas. They are as follows:

• 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.

 

This family didn't do these things so under Texas law they were not properly homeschooling.

[Pawz4me]

I think a portfolio review would allow for unschooling to be monitored.

 

According to the article i read Texas has nothing in terms of requirements like a standardized test, portfolio review, etc.....so I think that's part of the problem.

 

It sounds like a lot of her kids are older now which makes it even sadder.  Much harder to make one's way in the world with a suboptimal education.  I wonder if they have SSNs and such?

 

I'm guessing not.  If they were planning on being raptured soon enough that the kids wouldn't need an education, why bother with piddly stuff like SSNs?

[Lang Syne Boardie]

What do you all make of what she said in the article -- about using "the same curriculum used in private schools?" Does she mean A Beka, and did she really use that?

[Butter]

What do you all make of what she said in the article -- about using "the same curriculum used in private schools?" Does she mean A Beka, and did she really use that?

 

Possibly ACE.  Some private schools use that.  If she actually was using a curriculum she should be able to produce evidence proving her claim.  So far she has not.

[umsami]

Texas does having education/teaching requirements, though.

 

There are only three requirements to homeschool in Texas. They are as follows:

• 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.

 

This family didn't do these things so under Texas law they were not properly homeschooling.

 

So science and history are not required in Texas?

[Chelli]

Not under the homeschool laws, no.

[Butter]

So science and history are not required in Texas?

 

Required specifically by law?  No.  They weren't really specifically required when we lived in Virginia either (you only need to report standardized test results there in language arts and math).  A lot of states don't require every single subject.  Do most people teach subjects not specifically required by law? Of course.

[umsami]

Required specifically by law?  No.  They weren't really specifically required when we lived in Virginia either (you only need to report standardized test results there in language arts and math).  A lot of states don't require every single subject.  Do most people teach subjects not specifically required by law? Of course.

 

The reason I mentioned that is that Texas (well the State Board of Education) seems to be rather famous for ignoring both subjects.... so I'm not surprised they are not required. 

[JennyD]

 

Didn't Violet Crown post about this case back when the appeals court released its decision?  As I recall, that decision hinged on the 'bona fide' requirement, with  the court holding that the school district is the entity that gets to decide whether a homeschool is 'bona fide.'  

 

I wonder what has happened since then?  I remember that the court was pretty emphatic that the plaintiffs did not have the right to simply bypass the district's administrative process and run straight to court (with their out-of-state lawyers).   I'd be surprised if the Texas Supreme Court is any more sympathetic to those claims -- liberal or conservative, judges tend not to be terribly enthusiastic about loading up their dockets.  

[Jean in Newcastle]

Shouldn't the title say "Texas case mulls if homeschool kids have be taught something"?  You can have good teaching and kids can still fail to learn due to LDs or even refusal to listen.  The issue before the state is whether they are being taught.  

[zoobie]

Texas does having education/teaching requirements, though.

There are only three requirements to homeschool in Texas. They are as follows:

• 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.

This family didn't do these things so under Texas law they were not properly homeschooling.

Can you homeschool blind children? Visual form seems to be an odd requirement. Audio books don't count?

[ThisIsTheDay]

Who's to say they aren't educating their children? Even if they are sitting (standing) around playing music, how is that different than some of those reeeallly unstructured unschoolers that you know? 

 

All I can say is that I wouldn't want someone judging my school based on those things:

-A relative reports they don't see the kids schooling.

-He overheard them say they're waiting to be raptured. (Well, I am too, but I have died small deaths when my kids told people they get to stay in pjs all day when it wasn't true!!!)

-A teenager runs away and doesn't want to be homeschooled.  And where I live, districts have the option of placing any homeschooled kid back in 9th grade, giving no credit for homeschooled high school work.

 

 

[Tsuga]

Can you homeschool blind children? Visual form seems to be an odd requirement. Audio books don't count?

 

Sounds like a really poorly written law to ensure that the mode of instruction must be verifiable, i.e. you can't just say you gave lectures but sorry, the past is the past. The law sounds poorly considered on many levels, actually.

 

I must say that none of us have information about whether or not the children were actually homeschooled.

[maize]

Does Texas actually have homeschool specific law? I thought they fall under private school law so those would be the requirements listed?

[Tsuga]

As private school law it's exceptionally poorly written, considering that people pay for private school and might assume that the state was regulating the operation of such schools!

[Farrar]

What do you all make of what she said in the article -- about using "the same curriculum used in private schools?" Does she mean A Beka, and did she really use that?

 

That's what I wondered too (or if it was BJU or ACE or whatever). And, honestly, when you throw in the dispute over the motorcycle dealership, I did wonder how much of this was a just is a "they said" vs. "they said" thing, with the parents refusing to provide proof of their curriculum thanks to some "get the government out of our business" mindset. It seems like these people are hoping to make some sort of a point. A point they're likely to lose, I suspect, whether they were actually using a curriculum or not.

 

That said, this didn't sound like a good family to grow up in. But I guess I'm just wondering if, based on what the mom said and the bias of the primary source of all this "sitting around waiting for the rapture" information, this is one of those cases that blurs the lines much more. I mean, is a child who has been educated to only a very basic level (as apparently required by Texas law) and kept from extending their education to a level that would allow them to, say, pass the GED, apply to college or apprenticeships, etc. educationally neglected? I think that's a question we as a community struggle with a lot more than a family that actually was sitting around, doing absolutely nothing for whatever reason.

[chiguirre]

Does Texas actually have homeschool specific law? I thought they fall under private school law so those would be the requirements listed?

Private schools are not regulated in Texas as schools. They do have to follow day care rules. They do not have to be accredited by any outside organization, public or private, although many of them are.

 

The high school student placed in 9th grade is not at all a reflection of anything. Public schools just do not give credit for homeschool work. If you want credit, you need to take the credit recovery/acceleration tests offered by Texas Tech U ISD or UT Austin extension.

 

What's truly bizarre about this case is that the parents sued the ISD. They're the ones that started the court case. They brought this funfest on themselves, and by extension, all TX homeschoolers. Gee, thanks!

[Carrie12345]

I don't understand why anyone would refuse to provide documentation when their family's fate rides on it.  I do understand protecting homeschooling rights, but protecting your own kids comes first.  In NJ, an equally "free" state, the law does specify that you must give evidence if accused of educational neglect.  Without that, there truly is nothing to insure a child's right to receive and parent's obligation to provide SOME SORT of education.

If this woman really was using a boxed curriculum, she could easily put everything to rest.  I very much do assume that she's either educationally neglected her kids or is currently using them as odd political pawns, which is just as bad.

[Pamela H in Texas]

Someone probably already pointed this out.  I don't have time to read the thread til later.  But...

 

The quoted section versus what was reported are opposites.

 

First, they used a curriculum, likely one of the two main ones private schools use when they use a full curriculum.  We could argue the issues with those, but they ARE actually homeschooling at all.  And having a plan IS required in Texas, but doing a boxed curriculum or formal schooling daily or whatever is not. 

 

Second, in Texas, almost every child enrolled from homeschooling to public school has to start at 9th grade and do credit recovery, test through subjects, etc.  Texas only recognizes certain credits when transferring in.  So the reporting was a bit inflammatory there.

 

Third, a 17yo able to do 9th grade work HAS been educated at all, significantly even and/or will catch up easily enough.  Additionally, there is the issue of how many kids in public school have their own issues doing 9th grade work at 17.  

 

Now, I don't care for their "oh well, we're going to be raptured" attitude (not to mention the theology issues), but the fact is that they were learning ANYTHING.  The focus was based on what they wanted their children to learn and do.  EVERY school does that.  Even in public school, there are students who have art 6 weeks a year while others do it daily, for example.  

 

Anyway, it is very possible they have  had some educational neglect (and unfortunately, there are a lot of those here).  It is also possible that different people see their reasoning and style differently.  I'm glad no one is judging MINE based off of a brief article online  :glare:

[HomeAgain]

I know families that are near this, very close.  We dropped a group here because the conversations were alarming when taken altogether:

-letting little Suzy (age 8) drop math because she didn't like it, and she wants to be a midwife so she won't need it anyway. 
-what to do when CPS comes

-kids will learn at their own pace, it's a fact.  Johnny (age 15) just saw the need to get things underway and finished up 4th grade last year.

-it's crazy to think kids need more than a worksheet for each subject (math, language arts) each day.  Especially high school juniors.

-don't keep records!  You don't have to, so you really shouldn't!

 

 

This wasn't like a 1 or 2 member thing, it was a group attitude that fed itself.  Coming from a much more academically focused group (like, preparing kids for college and making transcripts) it was like walking into the twilight zone.  And they weren't unschoolers!  Or at least, they didn't see themselves that way.

I am all for an annual review of progress and keeping records.  I think it should be mandatory.

[Butter]

The reason I mentioned that is that Texas (well the State Board of Education) seems to be rather famous for ignoring both subjects.... so I'm not surprised they are not required. 

 

Really?  Not even sorta in my experience.  My kids were in public school for 1/2-1 year in K, 2, 6, and 9 and they all most definitely had those subjects.  My 9th grader had to take a STAAR end of course test (which is state-wide) in biology.  They can't graduate from high school without passing it.  US History EOC is also required for graduation.

[Ellie]

Texas does having education/teaching requirements, though.

 

There are only three requirements to homeschool in Texas. They are as follows:

• 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.

 

This family didn't do these things so under Texas law they were not properly homeschooling.

 

The thing is that in Texas, there is nothing that requires parents to prove anything. It is one of the reasons I love Texas.

[Ellie]

Does Texas actually have homeschool specific law? I thought they fall under private school law so those would be the requirements listed?

 

Texas is a private school state, based on a court decision (similar to California and Illinois). Private schools are unregulated by the state (hence the term "private"). The requirements are vague, and there is nothing that requires private schools (including homeschools) to prove anything to anyone.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Who's to say they aren't educating their children? Even if they are sitting (standing) around playing music, how is that different than some of those reeeallly unstructured unschoolers that you know? 

 

 

Not much difference from the unschoolers I have encountered. 

 

In NY one must present a yearly plan of instruction for each child.  That must be quite challenging for unschoolers.

 

I think some unschoolers are awesome.  I'm not bashing.  Not all are awesome though.  Far from it. 

 

These sorts of cases are difficult for sure.  I don't know where the line should be drawn. 

[Butter]

The thing is that in Texas, there is nothing that requires parents to prove anything. It is one of the reasons I love Texas.

 

Sort of.  For most people, yes.  If there is a CPS investigation that involves educational neglect, people can be required to prove they are meeting the requirements.  In this particular case they can be required to provide proof.  They seem to maintain that it is their *religious freedom* that allows them to homeschool as they deem fit and cannot be required to prove anything to anyone in the government/school district.

[SparklyUnicorn]

CT has similar hands off regs, but one can still be charged with educational neglect. 

 

And that makes perfect sense to me to do it that way.  In NY we have to file all sorts of paperwork and somehow this is seen as proof that learning is taking place.  Except for the testing requirement, the rest is just nonsense. 

[Ellie]

 

In NY one must present a yearly plan of instruction for each child.  That must be quite challenging for unschoolers.

 

 

No, not really. You can easily describe your plan for the year. A list of textbooks and whatnot are not required in NY, which makes it easier.

[ThisIsTheDay]

No, not really. You can easily describe your plan for the year. A list of textbooks and whatnot are not required in NY, which makes it easier.

 

My state also requires that you provide a list of subjects you plan to teach as part of your NOI.  But there is never any follow up. If you change your mind, or don't teach to your plan, no one ever knows.

 

I admit that this is really nice during the uncertainty of August when the NOI is due and I haven't completed school planning.  I have included wording similiar to "electives yet to be determined." I think some school districts may be more stringent. Mine is quite reasonable.

 

[texasmama]

Really?  Not even sorta in my experience.  My kids were in public school for 1/2-1 year in K, 2, 6, and 9 and they all most definitely had those subjects.  My 9th grader had to take a STAAR end of course test (which is state-wide) in biology.  They can't graduate from high school without passing it.  US History EOC is also required for graduation.

I agree.  As a product of the public schools in Texas for twelve years, I actually received a thorough, varied, and appropriate education which I consider to have prepared me for college quite well.

[Ellie]

My state also requires that you provide a list of subjects you plan to teach as part of your NOI.  But there is never any follow up. If you change your mind, or don't teach to your plan, no one ever knows.

 

I admit that this is really nice during the uncertainty of August when the NOI is due and I haven't completed school planning.  I have included wording similiar to "electives yet to be determined." I think some school districts may be more stringent. Mine is quite reasonable.

 

 

NY's regs have lots of words, but it isn't all that difficult to be in compliance. :-)

[Farrar]

I don't understand why anyone would refuse to provide documentation when their family's fate rides on it.  I do understand protecting homeschooling rights, but protecting your own kids comes first.  In NJ, an equally "free" state, the law does specify that you must give evidence if accused of educational neglect.  Without that, there truly is nothing to insure a child's right to receive and parent's obligation to provide SOME SORT of education.

If this woman really was using a boxed curriculum, she could easily put everything to rest.  I very much do assume that she's either educationally neglected her kids or is currently using them as odd political pawns, which is just as bad.

 

I do sort of understand this. I think the vast majority of parents will pretty much do anything - within reason, this being totally within reason - to keep their kids, protect their kids from violence and abuse, make government trouble go away, etc. However, there are a few families who are willing to risk their own kids in order to prove a greater point that they think is deeply important. Some examples might be black parents during the period of integration who were willing to send their kids through abusive parents or more recently the Meitev parents in Maryland who were willing to send their kids out alone even though they knew the police had warned them not to. I think these parents are possibly trying to prove a point - that the burden of proof shouldn't be on them to show that they used a curriculum and that they're not required to do anything for the state, that their right to homeschool as they choose trumps the state's interests in their kids. I don't believe that it's just as bad to use your kids as "pawns" like that. I think sometimes it's important enough to do. I would strongly disagree though that this is such a case...

 

Of course, it's also possible she's lying and didn't use a program and thus can't produce any proof. I could totally believe it either way.

[Murphy101]

I need more info.

 

This says her husband's twin and co-owner of their business and with whom they are embroiled in a dispute over the business is the one who leveled the claim of nit educating the children at all. I'm disinclined to give much credence there without more info.

 

Also the article seems to give conflicting information. It says that her eldest is 17 and they placed her in 9th grade after she ran away from home bc she wanted to return to school. Return? When had she previous been there? They placed her in 9th grade bc they were unsure if she could handle higher level work - why did they think that? But then it later says most of her children are now grown but she is still home schooling her youngest. Wait? How is that if her eldest is 17? And if she has grown children, how have they managed?

 

Rather shoddy article on some pretty important details?

 

ETA: It also says they play musical instruments. I'd be curious to know how well and to what level.

[Jean in Newcastle]

As far as entering into the 9th grade at age 17...

 

This is not due to educational neglect. This is standard operating procedures for public schools here in Texas. If you homeschool some of the high school years and then put your child into public school, they will NOT award any credits for your homeschool courses birdcage you are not an accredited school. Every child will reenter at the 9th grade. In order to receive credit for courses done at home, the student must pass an exam for each and every course from each academic year. It is truly a hassle, and it's the reason why deciding to homeschool high school in Texas is an all-or-nothing endeavor.

It is the same in a lot of states, including my state.  When I talked to the schools about possibly sending ds there, they wouldn't even consider letting him test out of subjects even though he was at a higher level than they even offer at the high schools in some subjects.  

[Hwin]

CT has similar hands off regs, but one can still be charged with educational neglect. 

 

And that makes perfect sense to me to do it that way.  In NY we have to file all sorts of paperwork and somehow this is seen as proof that learning is taking place.  Except for the testing requirement, the rest is just nonsense. 

 

Exactly, I am in NY as well and I have lovely shiny IHIPs and quarterlies but the only proof they get is a possible 6 standardized tests over the entire course of education. They can require the cert teacher to do review/testing, though, which it seems more schools are insisting on.

 

I do like the homeschool panel option- the only way to avoid a cert teacher if you're in my district- although I was a reviewer for a non-compliant family recently, and that made me nervous.

[umsami]

Really?  Not even sorta in my experience.  My kids were in public school for 1/2-1 year in K, 2, 6, and 9 and they all most definitely had those subjects.  My 9th grader had to take a STAAR end of course test (which is state-wide) in biology.  They can't graduate from high school without passing it.  US History EOC is also required for graduation.

 

I guess you haven't followed the controversies regarding how Texas pressures the large textbook companies to change history and science.  When I say ignore...I mean ignore commonly held facts.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/150-years-later-schools-are-still-a-battlefield-for-interpreting-civil-war/2015/07/05/e8fbd57e-2001-11e5-bf41-c23f5d3face1_story.html

 

"Five million public school students in Texas will begin using new social studies textbooks this fall based on state academic standards that barely address racial segregation. The state’s guidelines for teaching American history also do not mention the Ku Klux Klan or Jim Crow laws.

And when it comes to the Civil War, children are supposed to learn that the conflict was caused by “sectionalism, states’ rights and slavery†— written deliberately in that order to telegraph slavery’s secondary role in driving the conflict, according to some members of the state board of education."

 

 

Texas teaching creationism in science class.  I'm sorry, but regardless of religious belief, that is not scientifically supported.  And according to a 1987 Supreme Court decision, it cannot be taught as science.  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/01/creationism_in_texas_public_schools_undermining_the_charter_movement.html

"When public-school students enrolled in Texas’ largest charter program open their biology workbooks, they will read that the fossil record is “sketchy.†That evolution is “dogma†and an “unproved theory†with no experimental basis. They will be told that leading scientists dispute the mechanisms of evolution and the age of the Earth. These are all lies."

 

 

"

[Tanaqui]

In NY one must present a yearly plan of instruction for each child.  That must be quite challenging for unschoolers.

 

Not really. We don't unschool, but our IHIP runs "We intend to educate $CHILD in all required subjects, including but not limited to $LIST_OF_REQUIRED_SUBJECTS". Then our quarterly reports go "$CHILD has completed 80% or more of all coursework in required subjects for this period".

 

[Kiara.I]

It's the same in CO--if you're out, you'e out. We even had one family with a 10th grader who was informed that the child would be starting in K. 

 

Wow.  That seems counter-productive.

I understand the requirement to start high school in Grade 9, regardless of age Gr. 9+.  I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

 

But to insist a child age 16 would go into kindergarten sort of seems to contradict that whole "No Child Left Behind" thing, doesn't it?

[Mergath]

They're not famous for ignoring those subjects, they are INfamous for mangling the hell out of them. The former BOE a few years ago was half creationist, so that may tell you what type of bunk they were pushing for in science classes. As for history, there was a huge debate about reducing the number of Hispanic leaders/topics from the books, for one example.  It's easy to Google the topics. Texans are super proud . The problem comes when the pride is central to their willful ignorance.

 

There was a documentary on Netflix about it, though I'm blanking on the name. The Revisionaries? Anyway, it was eye-opening. And horrifying. 

[Butter]

I guess you haven't followed the controversies regarding how Texas pressures the large textbook companies to change history and science.  When I say ignore...I mean ignore commonly held facts.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/150-years-later-schools-are-still-a-battlefield-for-interpreting-civil-war/2015/07/05/e8fbd57e-2001-11e5-bf41-c23f5d3face1_story.html

 

"Five million public school students in Texas will begin using new social studies textbooks this fall based on state academic standards that barely address racial segregation. The state’s guidelines for teaching American history also do not mention the Ku Klux Klan or Jim Crow laws.

And when it comes to the Civil War, children are supposed to learn that the conflict was caused by “sectionalism, states’ rights and slavery†— written deliberately in that order to telegraph slavery’s secondary role in driving the conflict, according to some members of the state board of education."

 

 

Texas teaching creationism in science class.  I'm sorry, but regardless of religious belief, that is not scientifically supported.  And according to a 1987 Supreme Court decision, it cannot be taught as science.  http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2014/01/creationism_in_texas_public_schools_undermining_the_charter_movement.html

"When public-school students enrolled in Texas’ largest charter program open their biology workbooks, they will read that the fossil record is “sketchy.†That evolution is “dogma†and an “unproved theory†with no experimental basis. They will be told that leading scientists dispute the mechanisms of evolution and the age of the Earth. These are all lies."

 

 

"

 

Yes, I've "heard" that, but IME, nope.  Creationism wasn't even mentioned in biology.  It was all evolution and nothing about the fossil record being sketchy or evolution being dogma or an unproved theory.  Not even close.  Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow are taught in US History.  Maybe our school district is unique, but I sincerely doubt it.  (Note that like many districts around the country, our district hardly uses the textbooks.  We've had threads about that on here before.)

[Jean in Newcastle]

If you dislike how Texas handles science and history, then put up a thread about that.  Don't disguise it with an article about a homeschooling family.  

[vonfirmath]

Really?  Not even sorta in my experience.  My kids were in public school for 1/2-1 year in K, 2, 6, and 9 and they all most definitely had those subjects.  My 9th grader had to take a STAAR end of course test (which is state-wide) in biology.  They can't graduate from high school without passing it.  US History EOC is also required for graduation.

 

Agreed. My kids are in a Texas school and even in 1st grade my son had both some science and some history. Now that he is in 3rd grade, it is happening more regularly, with testing every Friday and everything.  (Well, I think it is more "Citizenship" topics than straight history. They have done Constitution, Legislative vs judicial vs Executive branches, economics, and how companies get started as  topics I can recall right off hand.)

 

4th grade will be Texas history.

 

[Farrar]

If you dislike how Texas handles science and history, then put up a thread about that. Don't disguise it with an article about a homeschooling family.

Yes... This is such a huge tangent...

 

I think it gets to one of the bad arguments that people often present in defense of poor homeschooling: I don't have to do a good job because the state doesn't do a good job. In this case: They don't need to teach content subjects well because Texas does such a bad job with them. I may agree with criticisms of the schools, but this argument is not logical. If children deserve an education, then they do. Just like you can't defend yourself against a charge of theft by saying someone else also committed theft, you can't defend bad homeschooling by complaining about the state of schools.

[Dmmetler]

TN is that way as well-you start at 9th if you enter in high school unless you have done end of course testing in those subjects or have coursework from an accredited school (if you did a class through something like TTUISD or K12 with teacher oversight, that would be OK-but not the same course with the same books done at home or in a non-accredited co-op).

[umsami]

If you dislike how Texas handles science and history, then put up a thread about that.  Don't disguise it with an article about a homeschooling family.  

 

The article is about a homeschool family in Texas where according to Texas homeschool regulations posted above, science and history are not required to be taught.  There is a connection.

[MomatHWTK]

My state doesn't require that any specific subjects be taught.  

 

ETA: It would appear that many states do not have specific subject requirements.  http://education.uslegal.com/homeschooling/homeschooling-laws-by-state/