s/o Government Reimbursement of Home School Materials?

[Spy Car]

Alaska Mom mentioned in another thread that the state of Alaska reimburses for the cost of "non-religious" home school materials. I know nothing about the particulars of this, but have wondered if such a thing was "reasonable" (if not "fair").

 

Not sure how one determines "non-religious" exactly. But say there was a body that "approved" certain materials for reimbursement, I wonder what the opinion of the hive would be?

 

Bill

[Laura in VA]

Alaska Mom mentioned in another thread that the state of Alaska reimburses for the cost of "non-religious" home school materials. I know nothing about the particulars of this, but have wondered if such a thing was "reasonable" (if not "fair").

 

Not sure how one determines "non-religious" exactly. But say there was a body that "approved" certain materials for reimbursement, I wonder what the opinion of the hive would be?

 

Bill

 

I believe that families are assigned an "educational consultant" or something like that, and they review your yearly educational plans. I would not be interested.

[RebeccaC]

The state of IL gives us a tax rebate up to $500.00 for curriculum/books and labs and lab equipment. Last year I got back $300. We are viewed as a private school under IL law. I send in a copy of my receipts when we send in our state taxes and there has been religious material in those receipts for all of the years we have hsed. If a parent sending their child to a private religious school get the tax break then so should I.

 

I don't buy into the separation of church and state since it is not in the constitution. What the constitution says is that the gov. will not establish a church and what was meant was no official state church as in the Church of England. So I see no conflict. I do have a conflict with taking something out of a letter that Jefferson wrote as a private citizen and some how twisting that into law, as in the phrase separation of church and state.

[Mama Lynx]

Alaska Mom mentioned in another thread that the state of Alaska reimburses for the cost of "non-religious" home school materials. I know nothing about the particulars of this, but have wondered if such a thing was "reasonable" (if not "fair").

 

Not sure how one determines "non-religious" exactly. But say there was a body that "approved" certain materials for reimbursement, I wonder what the opinion of the hive would be?

 

Bill

 

If a state gives tax breaks of any kind to help a child attend private school, which may include religious private school, then if they offered homeschool tax rebates they ought to not discriminate against religious material.

 

Gah. I am so sorry for the syntax of that sentence.

 

I don't see how reimbursement of homeschooling texts chosen by the parent equates in any way to establishing a state religion, or favoring a particular religion.

 

That said, if they reimburse for Christian materials, then they should reimburse for Pagan materials.

[Spy Car]

The state of IL gives us a tax rebate up to $500.00 for curriculum/books and labs and lab equipment. Last year I got back $300. We are viewed as a private school under IL law. I send in a copy of my receipts when we send in our state taxes and there has been religious material in those receipts for all of the years we have hsed. If a parent sending their child to a private religious school get the tax break then so should I.

 

I don't buy into the separation of church and state since it is not in the constitution. What the constitution says is that the gov. will not establish a church and what was meant was no official state church as in the Church of England. So I see no conflict. I do have a conflict with taking something out of a letter that Jefferson wrote as a private citizen and some how twisting that into law, as in the phrase separation of church and state.

 

Let's say (for sake of argument in this thread) the reimbursement would ONLY be for materials the state certified as "secular". You could use non-secular materials as well, but WOULD NOT be reimbursed for these.

 

Yes, no, maybe?

[sassenach]

Alaska Mom mentioned in another thread that the state of Alaska reimburses for the cost of "non-religious" home school materials. I know nothing about the particulars of this, but have wondered if such a thing was "reasonable" (if not "fair").

 

Not sure how one determines "non-religious" exactly. But say there was a body that "approved" certain materials for reimbursement, I wonder what the opinion of the hive would be?

 

Bill

 

This is pretty much what many charter schools in California do. There is a price- oversight. We are part of a charter for 1 of my kids. It was the least intrusive charter that we could find. We get $1800 a year to spend on secular materials and services. There are approved vendors, which is how they ensure the material is secular. The vendor list has thousands of providers. For example- we purchased MUS through our charter. We mostly use our funds for services.

 

In exchange, we meet with an "educational specialist" once a month. I tell her what I'm doing (which includes a LOT of christian materials like Sonlight and Abeka) and she files a report. She is very hands off. We pretty much do whatever we want. If the charter was more restrictive, I would drop it. I chose this particular charter because of it's reputation for being easy to work with. Dd will take a once yearly test and we turn in work twice a year. I'm very happy with our experience.

 

I also independently hs one kid and ps another, so we're a bit of a sample platter of education.

[Spy Car]

If a state gives tax breaks of any kind to help a child attend private school, which may include religious private school, then if they offered homeschool tax rebates they ought to not discriminate against religious material.

 

Gah. I am so sorry for the syntax of that sentence.

 

I don't see how reimbursement of homeschooling texts chosen by the parent equates in any way to establishing a state religion, or favoring a particular religion.

 

That said, if they reimburse for Christian materials, then they should reimburse for Pagan materials.

 

Let's say the State does not help private schools. So no Christian rebates, no Pagan rebates. Only certified secular rebates. What then?

[Ellie]

This is not true in most states.

 

In California, parents can enroll their dc in government-funded charter schools or Independent Study Programs (ISPs, which are not as common today as they were 25 years ago); depending on how the charter school is set up, parents may get a stipend of up to $1000 per year per child (it varies). According to the California Constitution, these funds are not supposed to be used for sectarian materials of any kind. It happens, however, and all sorts of reasoning is used, but it isn't legal.

 

At any rate, in most states, the only way to receive funds from the government is to enroll one's children in government-funded charter schools. In that case, homeschool laws are not applicable, as the children are legally enrolled in the public school.

[sassenach]

Let's say (for sake of argument in this thread) the reimbursement would ONLY be for materials the state certified as "secular". You could use non-secular materials as well, but WOULD NOT be reimbursed for these.

 

Yes, no, maybe?

 

Maybe I missed your question. Are you asking if people would be in favor of a no-oversight (meaning not a charter school type of situation), secular only reimbursement of hs materials?

[Mama Lynx]

Let's say the State does not help private schools. So no Christian rebates, no Pagan rebates. Only certified secular rebates. What then?

 

I think it's unfair.

 

I think that if they're going to give me a tax rebate - that is, give me back MY money - to teach MY kids ... then who are they to tell me when they'll give me back my money and when they won't? Eh?

[RebeccaC]

Let's say (for sake of argument in this thread) the reimbursement would ONLY be for materials the state certified as "secular". You could use non-secular materials as well, but WOULD NOT be reimbursed for these.

 

Yes, no, maybe?

 

Well I can only go by the law in IL and that states that parents sending their child to a private school can get a tax break of up to $500. So the law would have to read that parents could only get a tax break for sending their child to a private secular school.

 

However most of the books I have sent in receipts for have been secular in nature since my kids have had LD issues and there are few quality religious curriculum that work for kids with LD issues. My view is milk the system for all the tax breaks we can :001_smile: Especially since we are a single income family. All that said if they only reimbursed secular materials I would leave the religious receipts out and take the tax break for the secular. No big deal.

 

If they made a law that said I could not teach my boys about God well that is a whole nother ball of wax.

[Spy Car]

Maybe I missed your question. Are you asking if people would be in favor of a no-oversight (meaning not a charter school type of situation), secular only reimbursement of hs materials?

 

In this scenario (I'm not saying this is what any State does) there would be a list of State approved "secular" materials with a price control (an idea picked up from your post). Any materials from that list (up to a point) would be reimbursed.

 

This would not stop anyone from adding "religious" materials, these would just not be reimbursed.

[Spy Car]

All that said if they only reimbursed secular materials I would leave the religious receipts out and take the tax break for the secular. No big deal.

 

This is the crux of the question. Would people support this or no?

 

If they made a law that said I could not teach my boys about God well that is a whole nother ball of wax.

 

No parents could use anything they want. They just could not write it off.

[RebeccaC]

In this scenario (I'm not saying this is what any State does) there would be a list of State approved "secular" materials (with a price control, and idea picked up from your post). Any materials from that list (up to a point) would be reimbursed.

 

This would not stop anyone from adding "religious" materials, these would just not be reimbursed.

 

Well I would get the reimbursement and eat the cost of the religious materials. However I have had to buy curriculum that most public and private schools never buy. Curriculum geared to kids with receptive expressive language delays and dyslexia cause by language and auditory problems and I would bet they would not be on a list created by stupid government bureaucrats. Of course to anyone reading this, if your dh, dw, mil, or any relative or friend is a government bureaucrat I know they are the exception to the stupid rule and are geniuses so please read past what I have written :rolleyes: In fact I would wager that approved curriculum would be similar to what the ps use which is all too often substandard at best. If that was all they offered I would bite the bullet and pay for what I had to out of my pocket.

 

Hope this all made sense :D

Edited October 10, 2008 by RebeccaC

[JudyJudyJudy]

I am 100% against rebates of any kind like this. I don't think people who put their kids in private schools should get a break, and I don't think people who choose to homeschool should get a break. People without children don't get a break for not using the public school system.

 

We all benefit from having an educated society, and I think our tax dollars for education should be used for the public good. If you choose to go another route (and I am 100% in favor of the right to do so), then so be it, but you shouldn't get a tax break or rebate for doing so.

 

Also, I don't want the government to have more say in how I homeschool than they already do. By doing this, there is a bigger chance that that will happen.

 

Another thing I've considered is this: If I choose to set up a library in my home instead of using the public library, should I get a rebate to do so? If I choose to set up a park on my property instead of using the public park, should I get a rebate to do so? To me, getting rebates for homeschooling is as ridiculous as getting rebates for doing those things.

[Aubrey]

I am 100% against rebates of any kind like this. I don't think people who put their kids in private schools should get a break, and I don't think people who choose to homeschool should get a break. People without children don't get a break for not using the public school system.

 

We all benefit from having an educated society, and I think our tax dollars for education should be used for the public good. If you choose to go another route (and I am 100% in favor of the right to do so), then so be it, but you shouldn't get a tax break or rebate for doing so.

 

Also, I don't want the government to have more say in how I homeschool than they already do. By doing this, there is a bigger chance that that will happen.

 

These are exactly my concerns. I'd *love* to get the $, but I don't want my choice to hs to have a negative impact on my neighbor's kids. Public education only works when everyone pays into it, whether or not they have dc. When you start slicing up the pie, it's privatized, & it's no longer equal. There's less power in 1 man's $1000 than there is in 1,000 men's $1000. So if everyone chooses to hs or private school except for, say the poor, single mom at the end of the street who can't add anything *to* that $1000 of gov't $, her dc are left w/ only the power of their $1000 slice of the pie. No one's standing w/ them. The system breaks down.

 

And, while less of a concern, I do see the potential for further gov't oversight as a red flag at least.

[Pam "SFSOM" in TN]

These are exactly my concerns. I'd *love* to get the $, but I don't want my choice to hs to have a negative impact on my neighbor's kids. Public education only works when everyone pays into it, whether or not they have dc. When you start slicing up the pie, it's privatized, & it's no longer equal. There's less power in 1 man's $1000 than there is in 1,000 men's $1000. So if everyone chooses to hs or private school except for, say the poor, single mom at the end of the street who can't add anything *to* that $1000 of gov't $, her dc are left w/ only the power of their $1000 slice of the pie. No one's standing w/ them. The system breaks down.

 

 

Wow. I've never seen it explained like that before. So simple, and makes perfect sense.

[RebeccaC]

I am 100% against rebates of any kind like this. I don't think people who put their kids in private schools should get a break, and I don't think people who choose to homeschool should get a break. People without children don't get a break for not using the public school system.

.

 

I am just curious do you also not declare your dependants on your taxes and not file as married? I mean there are some folks who have no dependants and are not married so why should you get a break because you are married and have kids..... Just trying to follow the logic not trying to debate. What about taking the mortgage interest deduction after all there are folks who don't own a house. Just wondering if you are consistent across the board with this logic......

 

I personally think a flat tax is the answer but that is just my opinion. Until there is a flat tax I am going to take all the deductions I can get.

[newlifemom]

Sadly, Bill, I think a lot of people would and do buy into these types of situations. I do not think it is wise to do so for the reasons mentioned by Judy and Aubrey. Give a mouse a cookie . . . KWIM? I have used some public school services for my LD son but even then I cringe b/c this gives the school system and hence the govt control to some degree over my homeschool. I do not have a lot of $. Heck I have no $, but this is a sacrifice I make to allow for the best education my dc can receive at this time. That doesn't mean I won't pay my taxes to support the local school system. I have and I do. However, these ps homeschool in a box programs really scare me. Thoughtful question Bill, I appreciate your contribution to this board tremendously. :001_smile:

[RebeccaC]

These are exactly my concerns. I'd *love* to get the $, but I don't want my choice to has to have a negative impact on my neighbor's kids. Public education only works when everyone pays into it, whether or not they have dc. When you start slicing up the pie, it's privatized, & it's no longer equal. There's less power in 1 man's $1000 than there is in 1,000 men's $1000. So if everyone chooses to hs or private school except for, say the poor, single mom at the end of the street who can't add anything *to* that $1000 of gov't $, her dc are left w/ only the power of their $1000 slice of the pie. No one's standing w/ them. The system breaks down.

 

And, while less of a concern, I do see the potential for further gov't oversight as a red flag at least.

 

I am not sure that I follow this logic.... and it is probably because I am miss reading :001_huh: If more money were the answer then ps kids would be getting an education superior to his kids and the test scores just don't show that. Following this logic we should all put our kids in school so that the ps system gets the fed dollars for their attendance.... For each kid not in ps the system loses money and so the slice of pie is smaller and....... this is Especially for kids like mine where the pc would get more fed dollars because they are twice exceptional (special needs.)

 

Bottom line your choice, having your kids at home, is having a negative impact on your neighbor's kids because your school district is not getting federal money for your child's attendance. Federal dollars are lost for each child in private school and hs. My fil was super of the richest school district in CA and he used to tell us how bad we were because we denied the ps federal money by keeping our kids home and he felt the same way about private school. Following the logic you have laid out, my fil was right and we should all stop hsing and send our kids to ps so it is equal for all or at least that is the way I am understanding what you wrote.

Edited October 10, 2008 by RebeccaC

[Emmy]

Well I can only go by the law in IL and that states that parents sending their child to a private school can get a tax break of up to $500. So the law would have to read that parents could only get a tax break for sending their child to a private secular school.

 

However most of the books I have sent in receipts for have been secular in nature since my kids have had LD issues and there are few quality religious curriculum that work for kids with LD issues. My view is milk the system for all the tax breaks we can :001_smile: Especially since we are a single income family. All that said if they only reimbursed secular materials I would leave the religious receipts out and take the tax break for the secular. No big deal.

 

If they made a law that said I could not teach my boys about God well that is a whole nother ball of wax.

 

Rebecca -I live in IL as well, I remember seeing in our state taxes that we could submit homeschool expenses for a deduction but I was thinking it was only for consumable items, did I get that wrong or are you using a different deduction? PM if you'd rather chat privately.

[BusyMum]

In NZ we get up to $746 per year 'supervisory allowance' for home schooling our kids. There is no review of how we choose to use it and no strings attached.

[Kelli in TN]

I would take the money, in a heartbeat, if it did not come with excessive oversight.Even if it only covered half of my expenses, it would help. This year my homeschool budget was $0.00. I have been robbing the grocery budget when someone finishes a math workbook.

 

Don't tell my real life friends, but I am in favor of virtual charter schools and wish Tennessee had one or two available.

[RebeccaC]

Rebecca -I live in IL as well, I remember seeing in our state taxes that we could submit homeschool expenses for a deduction but I was thinking it was only for consumable items, did I get that wrong or are you using a different deduction? PM if you'd rather chat privately.

 

 

Here is what the law says sort of;

 

Illinois

 

In 1999, Illinois established a program granting income tax credits not to exceed $500 for qualified education expenses. Parents are eligible for a tax credit for 25 percent of whatever they spent on their child's books, tuition and lab fees. To be eligible, parents must spend at least $250. See Illinois Statute Chapter 35, Article 2, Sec. 201(m) for more information.

 

 

In Griffith v. Bower (2001) and Toney v. Bower (2001), two different panels of the Illinois court of appeals upheld the constitutionality of the Illinois state income tax credit for educational expenses.

 

I have deducted piano lessons but I wrote up a curriculum guide and IEP for the year that stated piano was part of the curriculum and that I would teach theory and the boys would have the lab at...... I ran this by a couple of lawyer friends a few years back and what I was doing was legal as long as it was written into the IEP I created for my boys each year. Did the same with swimming lessons. Hope this helps and if not we can do the pm thing :D

Edited October 10, 2008 by RebeccaC

[dirty ethel rackham]

Here is a link to the IL Department of Revenue publication on tax credit for homeschoolers.

 

The tax credit is not specifically for homeschooled students, but it can be applied. Basically, it covers tuition, book fees (rentals), consumables, and lab fees. The point of it is consumables. Purchased books, textbook or other non-consumables are not covered. Last year was the first year that we could claim it. (We are not big workbook users and did not use many outside classes that cost money.)

[Ria]

Just as an aside to your discussion:

 

I wrote one of the "approved" science programs available to homeschoolers in Alaska. I have no idea how they heard about the program (perhaps they checked out Rainbow Resource? LOL) but they contacted me about offering it. If one of the families in their "charter group" specifically requested my program, the charter would pay for it. I think the state ordered from me three times.

 

Ria

[Plucky]

In my state, school districts encourage homeschoolers to join partnerships and so much money goes towards curriculum and other lessons. The school district then receives nearly the full amount of student funding minus the stipend set aside for homeschooling. Schools themselves are finding these good extra money makers.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I am just curious do you also not declare your dependants on your taxes and not file as married? I mean there are some folks who have no dependants and are not married so why should you get a break because you are married and have kids..... Just trying to follow the logic not trying to debate. What about taking the mortgage interest deduction after all there are folks who don't own a house. Just wondering if you are consistent across the board with this logic......

 

I personally think a flat tax is the answer but that is just my opinion. Until there is a flat tax I am going to take all the deductions I can get.

You and I don't see society in the same way, but, yes, I am being consistent. I don't believe in a flat tax. I believe that tax rates should be based on how much a family makes and on how many people must be supported on that income. I only have one child whereas many others have multiple children, and I'm okay with the fact that they get bigger deductions than I do. I was single and childless for many of my adult years, and I was okay with the fact that I was paying a larger percentage of my income than most. I was a capable member of society, and I was okay with doing my part.

 

I do believe that we owe members of our society an education. When we're offering that to everyone, I don't believe we should get a "break" for choosing not to accept it. Like I said, that would be like my expecting a tax break for setting up a library in my home instead of using the public one. Perhaps I should even take the law into my own hands and get a tax break for that, too.

 

As for interest on homes, I have mixed emotions on that one. Yes, we do take the deduction because we plug our info into the formula, and it's given, but I'm not sure that it's fair. Of course, the argument can be made that paying interest on a home helps the economy, so that's something else to consider. I don't know, though, how I really feel about it at this point.

[Kris]

Alaska Mom mentioned in another thread that the state of Alaska reimburses for the cost of "non-religious" home school materials. I know nothing about the particulars of this, but have wondered if such a thing was "reasonable" (if not "fair").

 

Not sure how one determines "non-religious" exactly. But say there was a body that "approved" certain materials for reimbursement, I wonder what the opinion of the hive would be?

 

Bill

 

I don't know if this really addresses your question, but --

 

I wouldn't be interested, whether there was a restriction on religious materials or not. Any government program has too many strings attached, so we wouldn't participate.

 

If they are going to reimburse for materials, I don't think there should *be* any restrictions as far as whether they're religious or not, but I would like to see a yearly cap.

[swellmomma]

I think there is a middle ground to be had. I have mentioned before how homeschooling families here in Alberta receive funding. Now The way a family registers here is different, with funding related to how one schools. One can register fully aligned, which means they do the provinces mandated curric for all subjects, this is not actually considered homeschooing by the gov't but rather correspondance. This kind of registration gives a family the most money, but because it is not considered homeschooling also involves the most oversight.

 

The next way to register is blended, where some courses are done based on the province's curric and some are not. Again the gov't does not consider this homeschooling. Funding is based on the percentage you are blended, over sight is in the courses you are signed up to do based on the province as for those classes you have an assigned teacher to submit work to etc just like aligned.

 

Lastly you have traditional, which is how I am registered. This is the only form considered actual homeschooling by our gov't and it means I have 100% say over my children's education. It also means I get the least amount of funding $715 per child this year. I am assigned a facilitator who I happen to adore, from the school board I chose. I went with a board that mainly has unschoolers because they are more relaxed than other boards out there. I meet with my facilitator at the start of the year to let her know my goals for the year for the kids, and how I plan to assess those goals. In about February I get an email asking if I need any help reaching my goals. In May we meet again and I let her know if we reached our goals. I always have lots to show her, but most families with this board do not since they are unschoolers. SO for a total of about 2 hours a year having coffee and visiting, and 1 email I get $1430 total to put towards the curric and extras I want. These can be religious, secular or anything else including extra curric fees, admission prices to museums, imax movies, even swimming and skating(we need PE after all). Being registered also gives us protection, because no one can call CPS and claim we are truant etc since we are registered with a school board.

 

I have heard over the last few years that I have been schooling from those who think that we are signing over our freedom here in Alberta to school by accepting the funding, but I have never experiences anything like that at all. I still have 100% freedom over their educations, with the help to buy the items I really want for them. Last year in addition to curric I bought our microscope. As a single parent on a limited budget I would not have been able to afford all the books etc I have bought let alone something like a microscope. I think the funding is a wonderful thing, and allows me to give my kids the best education I can without worry about straining my budget to by a book or curric I really want. I think that if people in other places could register with the minimal involvement we have here and the freedom to continue doing what they do, they would see the funding as big as a blessing as I do.

[RebeccaC]

You and I don't see society in the same way, but, yes, I am being consistent.

 

And that is what makes this country great :) that we can view society differently and it is interesting that you are consistent sort of :001_smile: or I guess as best as you can be. Which is great!

[WTMindy]

We have something similar in WA, but you have to go through a specific school district and different districts offer different amounts of money and/or classes for the kids. To get this, the family has to write up a learning plan and submit monthly progress notes. Our family does this, and in fact, I am one of the certified teachers for our district that approves the learning plans each month. So, I guess since we participate in a program like this, I'm OK with what you described. We can use the funds for secular curriculum, lessons, supplies, etc. We purchase them and are reimbursed for the materials.

[Aubrey]

I am not sure that I follow this logic.... and it is probably because I am miss reading :001_huh: If more money were the answer then ps kids would be getting an education superior to his kids and the test scores just don't show that. Following this logic we should all put our kids in school so that the ps system gets the fed dollars for their attendance.... For each kid not in ps the system loses money and so the slice of pie is smaller and....... this is Especially for kids like mine where the pc would get more fed dollars because they are twice exceptional (special needs.)

 

Bottom line your choice, having your kids at home, is having a negative impact on your neighbor's kids because your school district is not getting federal money for your child's attendance. Federal dollars are lost for each child in private school and hs. My fil was super of the richest school district in CA and he used to tell us how bad we were because we denied the ps federal money by keeping our kids home and he felt the same way about private school. Following the logic you have laid out, my fil was right and we should all stop hsing and send our kids to ps so it is equal for all or at least that is the way I am understanding what you wrote.

 

I'm not talking about fed $. I'm talking about property tax.

[Ellie]

Let's say (for sake of argument in this thread) the reimbursement would ONLY be for materials the state certified as "secular". You could use non-secular materials as well, but WOULD NOT be reimbursed for these.

 

Yes, no, maybe?

 

Not interested.

[Katrina]

I agree that I should pay taxes for public education, and I should if my kids attend ps or not, or even if I have kids.

 

 

(thinking out loud here...)

In my school district, each school gets $6,000 per student. Not all that money goes to "education" though, for example, utilities, janitorial services, lunches (even though kids pay for those, isn't it still subsidized? If it's not them my mistake.) I don't think it would be "stealing" from the ps system if maybe if I used $1000 per kid for homeschooling materials, and then allowing the other $5,000 to be given directly to the school to use. Right now the schools don't get any money because they aren't enrolled.

 

Now, as far as religious materials vs non religious materials, I think that depends. I think as long as the materials are akin to what is being taught in ps, then it should be okay. I've used Abeka math and it was a solid math curriculum. But say you had a catachism class, since that would be purely religious it should be paid privately. (Am I making sense???)

[suzf242]

I am 100% against rebates of any kind like this. I don't think people who put their kids in private schools should get a break, and I don't think people who choose to homeschool should get a break. People without children don't get a break for not using the public school system.

 

We all benefit from having an educated society, and I think our tax dollars for education should be used for the public good. If you choose to go another route (and I am 100% in favor of the right to do so), then so be it, but you shouldn't get a tax break or rebate for doing so.

 

Also, I don't want the government to have more say in how I homeschool than they already do. By doing this, there is a bigger chance that that will happen.

 

 

Completely agree!

 

I am not sure that I follow this logic.... and it is probably because I am miss reading :001_huh: If more money were the answer then ps kids would be getting an education superior to his kids and the test scores just don't show that. Following this logic we should all put our kids in school so that the ps system gets the fed dollars for their attendance.... For each kid not in ps the system loses money and so the slice of pie is smaller and....... this is Especially for kids like mine where the pc would get more fed dollars because they are twice exceptional (special needs.)

 

Bottom line your choice, having your kids at home, is having a negative impact on your neighbor's kids because your school district is not getting federal money for your child's attendance. Federal dollars are lost for each child in private school and hs. My fil was super of the richest school district in CA and he used to tell us how bad we were because we denied the ps federal money by keeping our kids home and he felt the same way about private school. Following the logic you have laid out, my fil was right and we should all stop hsing and send our kids to ps so it is equal for all or at least that is the way I am understanding what you wrote.

 

The problem as I see it is the FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT. If control of the school districts was back on the state and local levels, it would be much easier to become involved and influence what goes on in the schools. You can actually give a child an excellent education without spending much money. If it weren't for all of the federal control, No Child Left Behind, etc., I would most likely have my child in ps and be actively working within the system to make it better for all of the children in our community. But the way things stand right now, I feel that hsing is the best I can do.

 

Suzanne.

[Mama Lynx]

Let me add:

 

However, would I take it? Yes. I am all for getting as much of my money back out of the government as possible. I would take it ... unless it came with extra strings attached, such as curriculum approval. I'm willing to let them keep my money if it means they're hands-off my homeschool.

 

Make sense?

[joannqn]

We all benefit from having an educated society, and I think our tax dollars for education should be used for the public good. If you choose to go another route (and I am 100% in favor of the right to do so), then so be it, but you shouldn't get a tax break or rebate for doing so.

 

By homeschooling our kids, we are benefitting society. Not only do they get a better education and preparation for college which gives them a better change at becoming tomorrow's leaders and scientists, etc., they are also more involved in the community as adults. Seventy-one percent of homeschoolers are involved in community organizations compared to only thirty-seventy percent of U.S. adults. They are more likely to vote and twice as likely to work for a political campaign. They are more satisfied with life and their work which means they would probably have fewer divorces, few job changes, and few medical bills. Lowering those saves everyone money.

 

The way I see it, a homeschooler is more likely to accomplish advancements in math, science, finances, politics, etc. that benefit all of society than a public schooler simply because they were homeschooled. They have a better education from the get go. They learn how to study and research better. They can focus their studies on their chosen interest like no public schooler can. Everything about homeschooling points to the fact that homeschoolers have a bigger positive impact on society.

 

The way I see it, by homeschooling our kids, we are helping society as a whole. Isn't that something worth supporting, even with tax dollars?

Edited October 10, 2008 by joannqn

[joannqn]

Another thought about using tax dollars to homeschool...

 

My children are enrolled in a virtual academy in Washington State. We use Columbia Virtual Academy which is as hands off as they can be per state laws. They are very easy to work with. All I have to do is write a learning plan for each student (which can be rather vague), have my kids write a couple of sentence email to their "teacher" each week, and write a monthly report telling what we are learning about. They provide our state required annual testing. They provide me up to $1200 per student to pay for secular curriculum, supplies, and community-based classes.

 

In return, the school gets to count my kids as alternative ed, public schoolers enrolled in their district. In 2004-2005 (the most recent figures I can find), that district spent $7,168 per student. Take out my $1188 per student and the district has $11,960 ($5980x2 students) more than they had before we enrolled. We are seeing more districts offering these kinds of programs. Some are good, and some are not so good.

[teamturner]

This is the crux of the question. Would people support this or no?

quote]

 

I would be in favor of a tax credit or some kind of reimbursement for my homeschool purchases. I would really like to have the great deal that they have in Alaska. Isn't it something like $2000 per child and they can use it for extra curricular activities like piano lessons, martial arts, etc.??? That sounds great to me! And I don't have a problem if they want to exclude my religious curriculum choices. :D

[JudyJudyJudy]

Another thought about using tax dollars to homeschool...

 

My children are enrolled in a virtual academy in Washington State. We use Columbia Virtual Academy which is as hands off as they can be per state laws. They are very easy to work with. All I have to do is write a learning plan for each student (which can be rather vague), have my kids write a couple of sentence email to their "teacher" each week, and write a monthly report telling what we are learning about. They provide our state required annual testing. They provide me up to $1200 per student to pay for secular curriculum, supplies, and community-based classes.

 

In return, the school gets to count my kids as alternative ed, public schoolers enrolled in their district. In 2004-2005 (the most recent figures I can find), that district spent $7,168 per student. Take out my $1188 per student and the district has $11,960 ($5980x2 students) more than they had before we enrolled. We are seeing more districts offering these kinds of programs. Some are good, and some are not so good.

Jo Ann, I think what you described here is wonderful. However, while I understand your argument in your previous post, I'm just not comfortable taking money from public schools and giving it directly to homeschoolers or private schoolers. As you said, with the virtual school the public school is actually benefiting financially.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

I am not in favor of taking money away from public schools. I think if the state is going to hand over $$$ for materials, there needs to be a lot of oversight. The K12 program is a wonderful program, and I have known a couple people who dropped out of a K12 charter because they couldn't keep up with the standards. It's very similar to the expectations in a public school. You can't finish in 2-3 hours a day.

 

I don't believe by homeschooling we are benefiting society. Homeschool kids have no more guarantee of success just because they are homeschooled. Here locally, I would say MAYBE 50% of local homeschoolers would be able to compete with grade-mates in a public school setting. Some of these kids don't even get science. All my schoolteacher friends agree that there are a lot of homeschool kids way behind in the writing department. In our public schools here, the kids do research papers starting in 2nd grade.

 

I think instead of giving parents money to send their kids to private schools, there should be more grants available to secular private schools so that more minorities and low income kids can attend. I do not think the public should be funding religious schools or materials of any kind.

[Ria]

I am not in favor of taking money away from public schools. I think if the state is going to hand over $$$ for materials, there needs to be a lot of oversight....

 

I don't believe by homeschooling we are benefiting society. Homeschool kids have no more guarantee of success just because they are homeschooled. Here locally, I would say MAYBE 50% of local homeschoolers would be able to compete with grade-mates in a public school setting. Some of these kids don't even get science. All my schoolteacher friends agree that there are a lot of homeschool kids way behind in the writing department. In our public schools here, the kids do research papers starting in 2nd grade.

quote]

 

I agree with you. Oversight is needed if the state is going to give out money. Oversight doesn't sit well with many homeschoolers, but hey, you don't have to participate if it bothers you.

 

As for a significant number of homeschoolers being academically behind their public-schooled peers, I totally agree. I homeschooled for 16 years, and taught writing and science to homeschoolers for 8 years. With very few exceptions, the homeschooled kids I've known over the years would flounder academically at grade level in our local public schools. I taught in a co-op last year (high school English; jr/sr high school science). The high school students couldn't write a decent paragraph. A paragraph! Forget writing an essay. And the complaints that I got from parents when I tried to assign work? Unreal.

 

Ria

[KarenNC]

This spin off came from a comment Alaska Mom made that Alaska has the most government support (specifically reimbursement) and least regulation for homeschooling. I don't think those two condition can actually exist simultaneously for the same family. One cannot have public funding with zero accountability for those funds (or at least should not).

 

In NC, we receive no funds, tax credits, etc at all nor can we access the publicschools for things like sports, music, etc as I understand happens in some states. We are required to:

1) have a high school diploma or GED in order to open a homeschool

2) inform the state that we are opening or closing a homeschool

3) maintain immunization and attendance records on site (but no requirement as to how many days, etc)

4) students must take a nationally normed achievement test each year (results to be kept on site, not turned into the state, no minimum scores required)

The state has the right to review that we have indeed done those things, but not to see results of tests, etc. (though it is rarely exercised from what I hear).

 

I mostly hear folks around here who want to get a tax credit or reimbursement without having to do anything other than the above (in fact some would also usually prefer not to be required do the above, especially the testing). No meetings with school board officials, no requirement to set a goal, put together a plan, show specific levels of progress, adhere to particular curricula, no portfolio reviews, etc. All I try to do is point out to these folks that it is inevitably a trade-off. If one accepts government funding, one is going to be under some increased level of government involvement. That is not intrinsically bad. It depends on whether the person deems that that involvement is worth the money to them. Personally, I wouldn't mind the option of a virtual charter school, but I'm not sure if I would use it or not. I like a lot of what I've seen of K12, for instance, but I can't afford it directly. Most folks here say they would prefer to have less government involvement.

 

I'm also not against public schools or public funding of education--I think they're a wonderful thing for the community and I'm glad they're there as a safety net for me. There are some things it is worth paying for even if I never personally use them, so that they are there to either enhance the health of the community or so that they are there just in case I do ever need them. I would hate to see a "pay as you go" situation where the fire department or police checks to see if you have paid up your "subscription" before it answers a call (the argument that only those who actually use a service should pay for it---look at 19th century England for how well that worked for policing). I pay for roads on which I may never drive (though I can if I want to), services for the poor, seniors and the disabled even though I am not using those services (though I may need them someday). It's part of being a member of a community. Education is in the same category.

[Alaska Mom]

Hi Bill! Great to meet you and great thread you have here ;).

 

I have to compliment RebeccaC and JudyJudyJudy. Very civil exchange of differing views between you two! :cheers2: . My thread that started this one is totally irritating me (it wasn't intended to be political...lesson learned).

 

I don't really have much to comment on. But I will say I'm actually a little on the fence now. I'm still new to the hs world, so I have much to learn before I can offer much credible insight on this.

 

Participation in the hs program here is voluntary. You can choose to not participate with the school district and thus have very little govt. oversight imposed. To receive reimbursement, you must register with the school district, and there are some requirements, but pretty minimal. Reimbursement does exclude anything "religious" in nature, that does not mean you can't teach it. I'm not sure I can comment on the religious debate.

 

As for oversight, at the moment, my opinion is I have no problem with oversight if your receiving reimbursement. I personally think ours is too lax here. My concern with reimbursement w/o oversight is the parent who (unintentionally or unknowingly) thinks hs will be no problem, and "hey, the govt even pays you, with no accountability, how hard can it be?". It takes them a few years to figure out how far behind their kids are, and by then it's a disaster for both the public school that has to take over, and obviously the kids. I don't know......even as I write this I'm moving back and forth on this wobbly fence.

Edited October 10, 2008 by Alaska Mom

[runninmommy]

It is a wonderful program. There are several choices to go with (Raven, IDEA as well as Cyberlynx among others. Cyberlynx allows religious material. They will pay for as well as give credit for religious materials. Raven will not pay for it but will give credit for it. All these programs have different rules as far as religious curricula is concerned.

 

My opinion on it is that if they won't pay/give credit for religious materials, pay for it yourself and implement it in your homeschool.

 

I believe that I should get the money that would have been spent on my child in school if I choose to homeschool. The program I was a part of was very NON intrusive and had just the right amount of oversight. The fear is that if I sign up for this program than the government is going to be all up in my business and interfere with my rights and choices. If I let the government in a little, eventually they will have to much control and take my rights away.

 

This is not true with these programs. In my opinion the fear is a little irrational. The homeschool community here is extremely active in the school political arena. We have legistlators that homeschool as well as legislators that belive just as strongly as parents about homeschool rights and oversight. There have been several measures that have come up for stricter regulation or for taking more control of how we can spend the funds. They have failed. If anything, we have more choice and freedom on how to spend the money than when the programs started.

 

A few years ago we could only spend a certain % on P.E., music and art. That has now increased. A few years ago some curriculum would not be paid for, now it is. This is due to the heavy involvment of parents and a healthy balance of parental involvement and legislation.

 

Have to run for now but will post a bit more later..

[Kelli in TN]

I have to tell you Alaskans that here in Tennessee your state is held up as the model of why we would never, ever want virtual charters to come to our state. Seriously. Virtual charters have nearly destroyed homeschool rights, or something like that, in Alaska. I don't actually remember the particulars, but I remember the dire warnings from our state homeschool leaders about how charters undermine homeschool rights and I remember Alaska being somehow an example of this.

 

And yet, everyone I have ever talked to that lives in a state with virtual charters has seemed okay with it, whether they personally used them or not. What's up with that? Don't you people know that your rights have been eroded?:lol:

[Spy Car]

Great discussion everyone.

 

I intended to make this a poll, and had a lot of funny options (at least I can make myself laugh :lol:) that would have proved pretty spot on. But D'oh, not for the first time I messed up.

 

This does present a conundrum. FREE MONEY (like anything is "free").

 

But I've tried to work this out in my head. How could you "help" homeschoolers, who ARE lifting an expense "off" the State (State being used in this instance "generically" for "government"), in a practical sense, without causing a lot of other problems. Or even alienating some of the people you are trying to "help".

 

Someone (sorry to not be able to give credit) quoted Ronald Reagan the other day, who said the most terrifying words in the English language are: "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help" :D

 

I don't actually believe this myself, but I do see how this is a "sticky" issue, and I'm enjoying reading the input.

 

Bill

[Melanie]

I have to tell you Alaskans that here in Tennessee your state is held up as the model of why we would never, ever want virtual charters to come to our state. Seriously. Virtual charters have nearly destroyed homeschool rights, or something like that, in Alaska. I don't actually remember the particulars, but I remember the dire warnings from our state homeschool leaders about how charters undermine homeschool rights and I remember Alaska being somehow an example of this.

 

 

We started homeschooling when we lived in Alaska, and we chose not to participate in IDEA. When I pulled my son out of school, I notified the school in writing as a courtesy. That was the extent of my homeschooling paperwork. Seriously. We were not required to send in an annual notification, list curricula, write up education plans, have monthly contact with certified teachers, or have our children tested. (All of which is required for those who choose to receive funding.) I'm so sorry we had to move.

[KarenNC]

I believe that I should get the money that would have been spent on my child in school if I choose to homeschool.

 

Why?