Texas, the Rapture, and Homeschooling

[umsami]

http://www.kwtx.com/content/news/Texas-Supreme-Court-sidesteps-key-home-school-learning-issue-384288681.html?llsms=1323941&c=y

 

"The Texas Supreme Court sided Friday with a family accused of not teaching its children anything while waiting "to be raptured,†but it didn't answer larger constitutional questions about whether home-school children must be properly taught."

[zoobie]

:huh:

 

Texit is okay by me... ;)

[Slache]

This is not biblical! And we wonder why people think we're nuts.

[Guest]

This stuff is irritating, and probably part of why most people we meet that find out we homeschool think we are doing it for uber religious reasons. I read on the other thread about this that THSC pushed this through as a test case. Why? Why would you pick these people as a litmus test???? To me it's no different as picking actual child abusers to test a case about overstepping by Chid Protective Services. THSC really has gotten on my nerves since I've figured out what they're really about.

 

ETA- I had someone this year ask me about the blood moon and if they affected our extracurricular activities last year because of the coming rapture. I had no idea what they were even TALKING about. Thanks THSC.

Edited June 27, 2016 by texasmom33

[Amber in SJ]

I am going to start saying "waiting to be raptured," when I am procrastinating or doing nothing:

 

 

What are you doing today?

 

Not much.  I just thought I'd head to the beach and wait to be raptured.

 

 

When Dh asks about what I am working on for school:

 

Are you still working on US History for next year?

 

Yes, I got distracted today waiting to be raptured.

 

 

My kids could use it as an excuse:

 

Why haven't you done your Math?

 

We're waiting to be raptured, Mom.

 

 

After a long work week:

 

What are you doing this weekend, Bob?

 

Just thought I'd hang around the house and wait to be raptured.

 

 

Amber in SJ

 

 

[happi duck]

Ugh.

[FaithManor]

I will say it over and over and over again. One person's "rights" does not extend beyond their own self. No one has a constitutional right to exercise a right in such a way that it over runs another citizen's right.

 

The child has a consitutional right to a basic education as this has become regarded as a fundamental human right because adults must be able to read, write, and do arithmetic in order to function and have access to necessary resources to maintain their other fundamental rights. Thus the parent's right to believe x, y, z does not inherently trump the child's right to education.

Edited June 27, 2016 by FaithManor

[Mergath]

I'm not a law expert by any stretch, but it sounds like the court ruled that this case only applies to this one family, and doesn't apply to all homeschool families in the state. Is that correct?

[Greta]

I will say it over and over and over again. One person's "rights" does not extend beyond theit own self. No one has a constitutional right to exercise a right in such a way that it over runs another citizen's right.

 

The child has a consitutional right to a basic education as this has become regarded as a fundamental human right because adults must be able to read, write, and do arithmetic in order to function and have access to necessary resources to maintain their other fundamental rights. Thus the parent's eight to believe x, y, z does not inherently.trump the child's right to education.

 

 

Beautifully said!

[FaithManor]

Texasmom, leave Texas because well, the Texit may be necessary and then the wall will go up around Texas which means in a few years you'll probably belong to Mexico. So head on out of there! :D

 

Of course their stupid, test case could cause the opposite reaction in other states - we better rein this homeschooling thing in so religious whackos don't use the homeschool statute to force stupid on their kids - and suddenly we are all left with new restrictions or worse having it become illegal again or to prevent that, incur costly legal battles to keep it legal.

 

Gah!!!!!!!!!

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I'm not a law expert by any stretch, but it sounds like the court ruled that this case only applies to this one family, and doesn't apply to all homeschool families in the state. Is that correct?

I hope so. Otherwise...uh oh.

 

It won't lead to hs'ing freedom, if that's what they're after.

[prairiewindmomma]

Um, this is actually a good decision.

 

Lower court said that the kids weren't being educated.  This is a case that's been dragging on forever in Texas.  At one point they were using workbooks, then they stopped (for several years).  Part of homeschooling regulations in Texas require you to use visual materials (books, workbooks, videos, whatever).

 

Family appealed saying, "Hey, well we might not have been using visual materials BUT the school district didn't even have the right to verify that we were or weren't teaching our kids."

 

Texas Supreme Court said, "Stop this crazy shiz. We're not going to look at the US constitutional issue because under Texas law, you are required to use visual materials. Go sort that out, district court. Either they were or weren't using visual materials."

 

Personally, I view this as a bonus for homeschoolers in Texas because generally whenever courts get involved, more regulations are put upon homeschoolers. The  Supreme Court decided not to make a ruling that would potentially apply to everyone.

[OneStepAtATime]

Um, this is actually a good decision.

 

Lower court said that the kids weren't being educated.  This is a case that's been dragging on forever in Texas.  At one point they were using workbooks, then they stopped (for several years).  Part of homeschooling regulations in Texas require you to use visual materials (books, workbooks, videos, whatever).

 

Family appealed saying, "Hey, well we might not have been using visual materials BUT the school district didn't even have the right to verify that we were or weren't teaching our kids."

 

Texas Supreme Court said, "Stop this crazy shiz. We're not going to look at the US constitutional issue because under Texas law, you are required to use visual materials. Go sort that out, district court. Either they were or weren't using visual materials."

 

Personally, I view this as a bonus for homeschoolers in Texas because generally whenever courts get involved, more regulations are put upon homeschoolers. The  Supreme Court decided not to make a ruling that would potentially apply to everyone.

Yeah, I agree.

 

If you read the details from reliable sources basically the courts weren't saying anyone who claims they are waiting for the rapture or whatever can just sit on their laurels and not educate their kids.  They are saying that it appears the family was not following the law of the state of Texas (using real materials and providing a real education not a sham) and the lower courts should have dug in to determine if that was the case or not.  They kicked it back down instead of creating more rules.  At least that is what it is reading like to me when I look at other sources.

Edited June 27, 2016 by OneStepAtATime

[....]

Um, this is actually a good decision.

 

Lower court said that the kids weren't being educated.  This is a case that's been dragging on forever in Texas.  At one point they were using workbooks, then they stopped (for several years).  Part of homeschooling regulations in Texas require you to use visual materials (books, workbooks, videos, whatever).

 

Family appealed saying, "Hey, well we might not have been using visual materials BUT the school district didn't even have the right to verify that we were or weren't teaching our kids."

 

Texas Supreme Court said, "Stop this crazy shiz. We're not going to look at the US constitutional issue because under Texas law, you are required to use visual materials. Go sort that out, district court. Either they were or weren't using visual materials."

 

Personally, I view this as a bonus for homeschoolers in Texas because generally whenever courts get involved, more regulations are put upon homeschoolers. The  Supreme Court decided not to make a ruling that would potentially apply to everyone.

 

That's what I interpreted it as, too.  I'm in Texas and I looked around to see if there were any articles, news or anything about it this morning and there really wasn't anything.  I found one news article.

[Guest]

Texasmom, leave Texas because well, the Texit may be necessary and then the wall will go up around Texas which means in a few years you'll probably belong to Mexico. So head on out of there! :D

 

Of course their stupid, test case could cause the opposite reaction in other states - we better rein this homeschooling thing in so religious whackos don't use the homeschool statute to force stupid on their kids - and suddenly we are all left with new restrictions or worse having it become illegal again or to prevent that, incur costly legal battles to keep it legal.

 

Gah!!!!!!!!!

Don't even get me started on Texit!!!! It's like they blocked out the fact that secession is frowned upon. I mean that whole pesky civil war thing? Why get hung up on historical facts and repercussions. And as for the wall, the irony is that around these parts they'd be using illegal labor to build it most likely anyway. Then I guess a certain oomp-loompa is just planning on catapulting them back over or something when they're done. I love my state but it's become an embarrassment over the summer thanks to some vocal wingnuts that receive more news coverage than they should.

[FaithManor]

I hear ya Texasmom. My state is currently a total embarassment because that nut and his "Let Them Marry Conference" and teaching is based here, we have had the largest municipal bankruptcy in history, our state leaders knew for far too lonf about the lead crisis in Flint and di nothinf about it, and a few other incidents of shame and stupidity.

 

I get it! Sometimes I think we should move to Delaware because when have you ever heard the media touting all the crazies there? Nevah!

 

Sigh....

[klmama]

Part of homeschooling regulations in Texas require you to use visual materials (books, workbooks, videos, whatever).

 

 

Going off on a bunny trail....

 

Is the point that students need to be able to see the materials or that someone checking up on the family needs to be able to see them?  Just thinking about blind kids....

[MercyA]

What ever happened to "making the most of our time" and "working while it is still day"? "Night is coming when no one can work," y'all.  :)

[Guest]

Going off on a bunny trail....

 

Is the point that students need to be able to see the materials or that someone checking up on the family needs to be able to see them? Just thinking about blind kids....

The requirement about visual materials usually follows the requirement that the instruction be bona fide (not a sham), so I think it's just to ensure that the students are actually getting educated and that it can be verified, if needed.

[Guest]

I hear ya Texasmom. My state is currently a total embarassment because that nut and his "Let Them Marry Conference" and teaching is based here, we have had the largest municipal bankruptcy in history, our state leaders knew for far too lonf about the lead crisis in Flint and di nothinf about it, and a few other incidents of shame and stupidity.

 

I get it! Sometimes I think we should move to Delaware because when have you ever heard the media touting all the crazies there? Nevah!

 

Sigh....

Don't go to Delware!!! Wilmington is one of the most violent cities in the country! We had no idea until my husband had to start traveling there for business. I hear Oklahoma is nice......:)

[SparklyUnicorn]

Well ok, it's a bit goofy, but to me all they really said was this isn't a matter for the higher courts.  Which I think at this point is fair.  It's one crazy case of one crazy family and not some widespread issue with homeschooling.

 

 

[Guest]

The requirement about visual materials usually follows the requirement that the instruction be bona fide (not a sham), so I think it's just to ensure that the students are actually getting educated and that it can be verified, if needed.

So I guess the fuzzy spot being said is WHO has the right to verify the materials? That's what was sent back to the lower court?

[Terabith]

How does that work with visually impaired kids, though? The visual part just seems...odd.

 

My kids were born in Texas. It's a unique culture for sure. They actually do have better grounds for secession than most states, since they joined by treaty. But I don't think the state would like the repercussions.

[Mergath]

How does that work with visually impaired kids, though? The visual part just seems...odd.

 

My kids were born in Texas. It's a unique culture for sure. They actually do have better grounds for secession than most states, since they joined by treaty. But I don't think the state would like the repercussions.

 

It does seem to be very poorly worded. I think it would probably get their point across better if they reworded it to say that you have to use some kind of physical or digital material to teach your child.

[Murphy101]

How does that work with visually impaired kids, though? The visual part just seems...odd.

 

My kids were born in Texas. It's a unique culture for sure. They actually do have better grounds for secession than most states, since they joined by treaty. But I don't think the state would like the repercussions.

Even visually impaired kids have materials. If I have Braille books for example, or software for the blind or many other things - I would have "visual materials". It is not a statement about how the materials are used, but that literally you can show in physical form what you are using or doing to educate the child. You could write your own nature study lesson plans, and then those lesson plans are the "visual material".

[Murphy101]

Oklahoma has similiar vague laws that are to the favor of homeschoolers.

 

For example, I have offer a "comparable" education to public schools, which is NOT interpreted as same, but I'm not required to keep any records whatsoever, and no one in the schools have any right to demand an accounting of our home schooling.

 

So if someone knocked on my door to investigate educational neglect, not only do I not have to keep records, I don't have to show any even if I did. We don't even have a "visual materials" or testing requirement.

[Greta]

 I hear Oklahoma is nice...... :)

 

 

Whispering:  you've heard wrong.     :leaving: 

 

 

:001_smile:  I grew up in OK, and I have no desire to move back.  But that's just me.  I was always a misfit.  I knew by the time I was 10 that I didn't want to stay.  

[Greta]

Um, this is actually a good decision.

 

Lower court said that the kids weren't being educated.  This is a case that's been dragging on forever in Texas.  At one point they were using workbooks, then they stopped (for several years).  Part of homeschooling regulations in Texas require you to use visual materials (books, workbooks, videos, whatever).

 

Family appealed saying, "Hey, well we might not have been using visual materials BUT the school district didn't even have the right to verify that we were or weren't teaching our kids."

 

Texas Supreme Court said, "Stop this crazy shiz. We're not going to look at the US constitutional issue because under Texas law, you are required to use visual materials. Go sort that out, district court. Either they were or weren't using visual materials."

 

Personally, I view this as a bonus for homeschoolers in Texas because generally whenever courts get involved, more regulations are put upon homeschoolers. The  Supreme Court decided not to make a ruling that would potentially apply to everyone.

 

 

Ah, thanks for this explanation.

[prairiewindmomma]

So I guess the fuzzy spot being said is WHO has the right to verify the materials? That's what was sent back to the lower court?

 

The court is choosing not to address this question. I do agree that this is a fuzzy point in the law.

[Daria]

Even visually impaired kids have materials. If I have Braille books for example, or software for the blind or many other things - I would have "visual materials". It is not a statement about how the materials are used, but that literally you can show in physical form what you are using or doing to educate the child. You could write your own nature study lesson plans, and then those lesson plans are the "visual material".

 

Wouldn't that be "visible materials"?

[Guest]

Whispering: you've heard wrong. :leaving:

 

 

:001_smile: I grew up in OK, and I have no desire to move back. But that's just me. I was always a misfit. I knew by the time I was 10 that I didn't want to stay.

Man. Maybe Alaska then, but I'm not sure how well I would go from coping well with high humidity and hot as hades summers to freezing my arse off! I really do love my state. I mean I could wax poetic about it most days. I am native. It's just so weird how all of the wingnuts are getting so much air time- I wish the media would stop focusing on the vocal extremists, like we ALL (or even implying that a majority) drive around with Confederate flags and Secede! bumper stickers on our trucks.

[Murphy101]

Wouldn't that be "visible materials"?

Yes. That was my point.

 

I'm curious as to how educational neglect was determined.

 

I mean what did they do all day? Were there no books at all in the home? No projects? No cooking? No anything? I mean a certain minimal level of learning that necessitates basic arithmetic and reading happens just getting through our days, yes?

 

Did the investigator to the home try to have stricter standards than the law? For example, insisting visible materials meant they had to use textbooks and such? Was a standardized text given at any time? Or was the simple lack of textbooks and tests enough for the investigator to determine educational neglect? (It wouldn't be enough to my mind, but heaven knows no one is required to share my mind on anything these days.)

 

The laws are intended to be vague on purpose. It permits both parties, the family and the state, some significant discretion and lassitude in how they educate and evaluate. The presumptive expectation being both that most parents value having their children educated and that the govt should have better things to do than police whether students not in a state school are using arbitrarily deemed acceptable materials.

[poppy]

The background is, their 17 year old daughter wanted an education, and to get one, she ran away from home so she could go to school.

When she tried to enroll in public school, she faced questions about where she should be placed and what education she'd had until then.

 

There definitely seems to be something wrong with that .  Children should be blocked from getting an education by their parents.  I don't know what the ruling on this case should have been, but I think the  fact that it was a course case--- based on the red flags --- is entirely appropriate.

[Murphy101]

The background is, their 17 year old daughter wanted an education, and to get one, she ran away from home so she could go to school.

When she tried to enroll in public school, she faced questions about where she should be placed and what education she'd had until then.

 

There definitely seems to be something wrong with that . Children should be blocked from getting an education by their parents. I don't know what the ruling on this case should have been, but I think the fact that it was a course case--- based on the red flags --- is entirely appropriate.

But that brief summary of yours really makes it seem more like the school is just incompetent? Evaluating where to place a student is a fairly common situation just about any school faces no matter why the student is entering the system. It's not that hard. Give her a math, reading, and writing assessment. Problem solved. I find it difficult to believe she would be the first student to test woefully behind either.

[Greta]

Man. Maybe Alaska then, but I'm not sure how well I would go from coping well with high humidity and hot as hades summers to freezing my arse off! I really do love my state. I mean I could wax poetic about it most days. I am native. It's just so weird how all of the wingnuts are getting so much air time- I wish the media would stop focusing on the vocal extremists, like we ALL (or even implying that a majority) drive around with Confederate flags and Secede! bumper stickers on our trucks.

 

 

I can certainly understand your frustration!  But if you do love Texas, you might like Oklahoma.  They're very similar -- well, my only experience living in Texas was Dallas, so I don't know how that compares to the rest of the state.  But to me Oklahoma seems a lot like Texas, but without so much state pride.  Few states have as much state pride as Texas!  :lol:

 

The only part of Alaska I've been to is the inside passage, and I LOVED it!  My understanding is that the climate there is pretty mild year round because of the proximity to the ocean.  And it's stunningly gorgeous.  Sadly, I didn't stay long enough to get a real feel for the culture.  But the natural beauty there is . . . wow.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

But that brief summary of yours really makes it seem more like the school is just incompetent? Evaluating where to place a student is a fairly common situation just about any school faces no matter why the student is entering the system. It's not that hard. Give her a math, reading, and writing assessment. Problem solved. I find it difficult to believe she would be the first student to test woefully behind either.

Public high schools have only one option for new kids who are more than three grade levels behind: special needs track. If the student has no special needs (doesn't qualify for a 504, etc), they'll have a serious problem. One hs principal told me that he couldn't accommodate a 15yo with a second grade math level, and it was abusive to the child to enroll them knowing they would fail at everything. He said he'd be concerned about damage to their emotional health, which would almost inevitably end in a dropout situation.

 

This level of educational neglect/failure is unexpected when they (the schools) see it, because the law of the land is that hs'ers have to teach...or rather that the children have to learn. So when they literally don't learn enough to even fake through high school, of course it's a problem.

 

Public schooled students who are more than three grade levels behind -- presumably, someone in the system already knows that. There's a record, a cum file, a diagnosis, an IEP. That kid might not be advancing far in the school for various reasons, but he's not a wild card as far as what to do with him.

[poppy]

But that brief summary of yours really makes it seem more like the school is just incompetent? Evaluating where to place a student is a fairly common situation just about any school faces no matter why the student is entering the system. It's not that hard. Give her a math, reading, and writing assessment. Problem solved. I find it difficult to believe she would be the first student to test woefully behind either.

 

Here's the story:

 

 

It wasn’t until the McIntyres’ 17-year-old daughter Tori ran away from home so she could “attend school†that the family was more closely scrutinized. When Tori’s high school needed to know her level of education and what curriculum she had used so they could properly place her, administrators contacted her parents, who refused to cooperate. They argued that a previous Supreme Court ruling let them off the hook from compulsory, regulated education for their children beyond eighth grade.

 

This not "our home is a place of education even if you don't see textbooks lying around".   This is "we have no obligation to educate any child past 8th grade". 

[Guest]

Here's the story:

 

This not "our home is a place of education even if you don't see textbooks lying around". This is "we have no obligation to educate any child past 8th grade".

Putting aside the rightness/wrongness of the defendants...

 

I can't wrap my mind around WHY anyone would purposefully handicap a child's long-term future possibilities by limiting their BASIC K-12 education. Why??? Why would anyone do that to someone they love? Is like breaking both their legs so they can't ever walk again on their own. Why???

[zoobie]

Putting aside the rightness/wrongness of the defendants...

 

I can't wrap my mind around WHY anyone would purposefully handicap a child's long-term future possibilities by limiting their BASIC K-12 education. Why??? Why would anyone do that to someone they love? Is like breaking both their legs so they can't ever walk again on their own. Why???

 

Control. Same reason those other nuts didn't get birth certificates for their children.

[Violet Crown]

The recent Texas Supreme Court decision was on an interlocutory appeal, addressing only the question of whether a plaintiff suing a school district is required to first exhaust administrative remedies before the suit can proceed. The Court held that the family didn't have to, because they were claiming that the ISD violated the Texas Constitution, not the education laws, and so the Texas Education Commissioner doesn't have jurisdiction. JennyD explained this all quite well I think in the relevant thread.

 

The appeal and Texas Supreme Court decision had nothing to do with the family's religious beliefs, failure or not to educate, or educational materials (visual or not).

 

Edit: here's a link to the Court's decision. It's not overly technical and is worth taking a few minutes to read it.

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

Edited June 27, 2016 by Violet Crown

[KarenNC]

I hear ya Texasmom. My state is currently a total embarassment because that nut and his "Let Them Marry Conference" and teaching is based here, we have had the largest municipal bankruptcy in history, our state leaders knew for far too lonf about the lead crisis in Flint and di nothinf about it, and a few other incidents of shame and stupidity.

 

I get it! Sometimes I think we should move to Delaware because when have you ever heard the media touting all the crazies there? Nevah!

 

Sigh....

 

NC is certainly falling over itself to stay in the "crazies" category, so I am right there with you, unfortunately.

[chiguirre]

My kids were born in Texas. It's a unique culture for sure. They actually do have better grounds for secession than most states, since they joined by treaty. But I don't think the state would like the repercussions.

 

That might have been true if Texas hadn't lost the Civil War. We were readmitted the same way as all the other CSA states.

[OneStepAtATime]

The recent Texas Supreme Court decision was on an interlocutory appeal, addressing only the question of whether a plaintiff suing a school district is required to first exhaust administrative remedies before the suit can proceed. The Court held that the family didn't have to, because they were claiming that the ISD violated the Texas Constitution, not the education laws, and so the Texas Education Commissioner doesn't have jurisdiction. JennyD explained this all quite well I think in the relevant thread.

 

The appeal and Texas Supreme Court decision had nothing to do with the family's religious beliefs, failure or not to educate, or educational materials (visual or not).

 

Edit: here's a link to the Court's decision. It's not overly technical and is worth taking a few minutes to read it.

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

Thanks for the link and the clarification.  :)

[Guest]

Control. Same reason those other nuts didn't get birth certificates for their children.

Yep and the same reasons these kids will probably have their spouses hand picked by daddy unless they run far far away at the cost of most likely being shunned by their families as a prodigal for the rest of their lives. You know because the Bible has that whole part of the prodigal being rejected and not accepted back by his father with open arms and a feast. Your Bible has a misprint if it says different. Just take their word for it. ;)

[Desert Strawberry]

I am going to start saying "waiting to be raptured," when I am procrastinating or doing nothing:

 

 

What are you doing today?

 

Not much.  I just thought I'd head to the beach and wait to be raptured.

 

 

When Dh asks about what I am working on for school:

 

Are you still working on US History for next year?

 

Yes, I got distracted today waiting to be raptured.

 

 

My kids could use it as an excuse:

 

Why haven't you done your Math?

 

We're waiting to be raptured, Mom.

 

 

After a long work week:

 

What are you doing this weekend, Bob?

 

Just thought I'd hang around the house and wait to be raptured.

 

 

Amber in SJ

I am definitely doing this.

[Daria]

Public high schools have only one option for new kids who are more than three grade levels behind: special needs track. If the student has no special needs (doesn't qualify for a 504, etc), they'll have a serious problem. One hs principal told me that he couldn't accommodate a 15yo with a second grade math level, and it was abusive to the child to enroll them knowing they would fail at everything. He said he'd be concerned about damage to their emotional health, which would almost inevitably end in a dropout situation.

 

This level of educational neglect/failure is unexpected when they (the schools) see it, because the law of the land is that hs'ers have to teach...or rather that the children have to learn. So when they literally don't learn enough to even fake through high school, of course it's a problem.

 

Public schooled students who are more than three grade levels behind -- presumably, someone in the system already knows that. There's a record, a cum file, a diagnosis, an IEP. That kid might not be advancing far in the school for various reasons, but he's not a wild card as far as what to do with him.

 

That isn't exactly true.  Public high schools see kids who are more than 3 years behind all the time, immigrant kids, kids from some of our failing urban schools, newly arrived international adoptees, etc . . .  They have structures to deal with it.  I'm not saying they deal with it perfectly, but perhaps better than this family was dealing with it in the garage. 

[Farrar]

I followed this a little. I get that this was an incredibly narrow decision that was entirely based on who they had the right to appeal to and file in court with and so forth. It has nothing to do with religious freedom or how good a job they're doing (or not) homeschooling. It doesn't change anything in practical terms for Texas homeschoolers at all.

 

But it's also sad. Sad for the kids, sad for homeschoolers who care about education, sad for anyone who thinks educational neglect is a real form of neglect (which it totally is). One of the ways I read this is that homeschooled kids in Texas have so little protection from educational neglect by their parents that the school district that was trying to help them in a case where educational neglect was extremely likely and where the state should have had cause to look into it further couldn't even figure out what to do and ended up grasping at straws (the wrong, inappropriate ones) in trying to just do something. It seems there's no good chain of due process for a case like this. I find that really sad.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

That isn't exactly true. Public high schools see kids who are more than 3 years behind all the time, immigrant kids, kids from some of our failing urban schools, newly arrived international adoptees, etc . . . They have structures to deal with it. I'm not saying they deal with it perfectly, but perhaps better than this family was dealing with it in the garage.

I was sharing what a high school principal told me. The local Sylvan tutoring director, and the state head of k12, also agreed. They didn't say the school would or could refuse the student -- everyone knows that by law the child may attend -- rather that the outcome would not be good. All of these people encouraged me to find a unique, one on one tutoring scenario.

 

We were trying to solve the problem of an educationally neglected child, so everyone was looking for an effective solution...leaving her in neglect at home wasn't an option, of course. I was glad to be told not to just park her in school, since the goal was for her to succeed. :) I tutored her for two years, we found other outsourcing solutions after that, and she is going to college this fall.

Edited June 27, 2016 by Tibbie Dunbar

[Laurie]

 

 

"The Texas Supreme Court sided Friday with a family accused of not teaching its children anything while waiting "to be raptured,†but it didn't answer larger constitutional questions about whether home-school children must be properly taught."

 

I hadn't heard about this case so I was looking for some additional information.   It's interesting to me that the rapture seems to be a bigger part of the story than the family feud over the business.  

 

Does anyone know where the 17yo daughter went to live after she ran away from home?  Who knows... Maybe she wanted to go to school so that she could go to the prom.  (I mention the prom because when I wanted to go to the university after my junior year of high school my public school guidance counselor discouraged me because I would miss the prom so apparently it's a pretty big deal to some folks!)    Also, wouldn't the high school have to put her in 9th grade classes so she could earn enough credits to graduate, assuming they wouldn't accept homeschool classes?  

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-home-schooling-case-mcintyre-national-implications-learning/

Edited June 27, 2016 by Laurie

[TravelingChris]

I tutored a kid in 5th grade who didn't understand about numbers.  He also wasn't reading.  By the end of the year, I thought him enough that he was reading (though still at a low level) but he still couldn't understand enough about numbers to do any addition even with sums under 10.  He was going to be passed into middle school.  He had no IEP.  The school's thinking was that he was a second language student.  He had been in English speaking classrooms for at least 5 years and his intellectual problems weren't due to being Hispanic.  Unless a miracle happened, he entered high school more than 3 years behind.