s/o Government Reimbursement of Home School Materials?

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

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".

 

Well, for starters, schools throw away a lot of stuff homeschoolers could use. If there were a day at the end of the school year when homeschool parents could come collect what they wanted of what was being thrown away, it would give the ones that wanted to a chance to use some of what their tax money has paid for.

 

I also think a community association of parents to replace the current PTA organization could do a lot of good in some places. Parents with school age children in the community could plan events and offerings for the entire community of children in the district.

 

Short term rental of equipment by the schools to interested parents is another thing that might be beneficial.

 

One of my teacher friends dreamed up a program where homeschool parents could come in to volunteer in classrooms and in return their children could be offered the opportunity to do end of year testing at the school, or have a teacher take an hour for a Q&A session or something.

 

There are a lot of ways I think school districts and parents could come together where the "rights" of the homeschooler are not threatened and the local schools could benefit too.

[sagira]

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

 

 

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

 

 

Then that's fine. The government would be offering you money, so it can decide where it wants to be allocated to. No big deal. If you don't want it, don't take it. I don't see a problem.

[Alaska Mom]

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:

 

Could you expand on this Kelli. Not to make myself sound like a fool but I'm certainly not in the "know" here, nor would I want to claim to be (my dd is in 1st grade, which is where I feel I am on this :tongue_smilie: - quite fun to be young again!).

 

Could you explain specifically what rights you're referring to and how Alaska's model has eroded them? Give me little homeschool 101 on this please :D!

[Sebastian (a lady)]

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 haven't read other replies.

 

We were reimbursed when we were stationed overseas away from US military schools. We were capped at about the amount that the federal government provides to public schools for each child of a federal employee (see Military Impacted Schools for more on this).

Each and every item we bought was approved or disapproved, line by line, by someone who had never met my kids, never homeschooled, didn't fully read the paperwork I sent in and who seemed convinced I was trying to cheat.

We had a terrible time getting the books actually used by the kids paid for because they refused to consider that a 1st grader might be able to read chapter books (not on grade level). Items disapproved on religious ground included a biography of Martin Luther, Jim Weiss cd's of Jewish holiday and Old Testament stories (although Greek and Egyptian gods were ok), a history of Israel/Palestine during Roman times that was completely secular (probably because the title used the phrase The Holy Land), and a Lauri rubber puzzle of Noah's Ark.

Even though we didn't need the financial assistance in order to homeschool, I found that it was harder to choose the right thing for our kids when I knew that I would have to fight to get it paid for when something less appropriate would be paid for without question. In the end, the program administrator spent more money fighting the claims (including the expense of sending up an educational psychologist) than the actual value of the claims. And since the psychologist found that we were doing a great job and that the kids' ability was exactly what I'd been claiming, we got carte blanche for anything in a six grade spread.

I'm in favor of homeschoolers getting what they can from programs like this. But I find that the financial incentives do make some decisions harder to make. And I'm not in favor of creating a whole lot more of these programs as a way of publically encouraging homeschooling. The strings quickly become ties that bind.

 

And FWIW, while we were authorized no more than $3,000 per year per elementary student, the allowance for private international schools in this city was over $12,000. They paid the school directly and didn't question how the money was applied. Nor did they have any certification process to judge the value of the private education. Given the expense of administering our claims, I think they would have been much better off just cutting us a check and leaving us alone until the next year.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

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 haven't read other replies.

 

We were reimbursed when we were stationed overseas away from US military schools. We were capped at about the amount that the federal government provides to public schools for each child of a federal employee (see Military Impacted Schools for more on this).

Each and every item we bought was approved or disapproved, line by line, by someone who had never met my kids, never homeschooled, didn't fully read the paperwork I sent in and who seemed convinced I was trying to cheat.

We had a terrible time getting the books actually used by the kids paid for because they refused to consider that a 1st grader might be able to read chapter books (not on grade level). Items disapproved on religious ground included a biography of Martin Luther, Jim Weiss cd's of Jewish holiday and Old Testament stories (although Greek and Egyptian gods were ok), a history of Israel/Palestine during Roman times that was completely secular (probably because the title used the phrase The Holy Land), and a Lauri rubber puzzle of Noah's Ark.

Even though we didn't need the financial assistance in order to homeschool, I found that it was harder to choose the right thing for our kids when I knew that I would have to fight to get it paid for when something less appropriate would be paid for without question. In the end, the program administrator spent more money fighting the claims (including the expense of sending up an educational psychologist) than the actual value of the claims. And since the psychologist found that we were doing a great job and that the kids' ability was exactly what I'd been claiming, we got carte blanche for anything in a six grade spread.

I'm in favor of homeschoolers getting what they can from programs like this. But I find that the financial incentives do make some decisions harder to make. And I'm not in favor of creating a whole lot more of these programs as a way of publically encouraging homeschooling. The strings quickly become ties that bind.

 

And FWIW, while we were authorized no more than $3,000 per year per elementary student, the allowance for private international schools in this city was over $12,000. They paid the school directly and didn't question how the money was applied. Nor did they have any certification process to judge the value of the private education. Given the expense of administering our claims, I think they would have been much better off just cutting us a check and leaving us alone until the next year.

[Kelli in TN]

Could you expand on this Kelli. Not to make myself sound like a fool but I'm certainly not in the "know" here, nor would I want to claim to be (my dd is in 1st grade, which is where I feel I am on this :tongue_smilie: - quite fun to be young again!).

 

Could you explain specifically what rights you're referring to and how Alaska's model has eroded them? Give me little homeschool 101 on this please :D!

 

I don't know that your rights are being eroded, I just remember Alaska being used as an example. I really think it was a scare tactic.

[Sarah CB]

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.

 

Coming from a province where educational funding is pretty high I'd have to disagree. Our schools get full funding per student (around $6000 per student per year) - they're doing quite well. Private schools, provided their students are also taught the prescribed learning outcomes for our province, are funded half of that amount. People who choose to send their kids to private school are not in any way harming families who choose public school. It's education and in our province education is funded on a per student basis.

 

Homeschoolers who choose to be accountable to a school are also funded the exact same amount as any other student in our province. Now, the entire amount does *not* go straight to the homeschooler, rather it goes to the school that has enrolled that student. We have an "anytime, anywhere" policy about education in our province - it's valued whether it takes place at home or at school. Most programs that enroll homeschoolers pass on some of the money (the average is probably $1000 per student) to provide the educational materials or classes the family wants.

 

Anyway, that was just a long way of saying that in our province funding alternative modes of education does not take away from the public system.

[buddhabelly]

that the Alaska reimbursement for homeschooling supplies and "guided instruction" (music lessons, etc.) has nothing to do with taxes. We pay the same federal taxes as everyone else does, and there is no state income tax so that is not at issue here.

 

If I am not mistaken, it is property taxes that go to public schools. We pay them just like those who don't have any children and like those whose children attend them.

 

We get reimbursed (around $1700 per school year, depending on grade level) for books, materials (like maps, microscopes, musical instruments) guided instruction like music lessons (or soccer), etc. Then the materials belong to the homeschooling organization and must be returned after you are finished with them. Except for the music lessons of course -- no way to return those! They do not reimburse for religious materials, but I'm not sure how religious the materials need to be. In other words, would we get reimbursed for Rod & Staff English? I think we would, actually. It will be interesting to see if we get reimbursed for Greek for Children, since all the memory verses are from the Bible.

 

Or we can just have the homeschooling organization order it for us with a purchase order, and then no reimbursement is needed.

 

I think the reason that religious materials are not paid for by the State of Alaska is the same reason that they would not pay our tuition to the local Christian school (or Hebrew school if we had one). The Montessori school here in our town is a public school, however, because they chose to be. I realize that many Montessori schools are private so that they have more freedom. (Our Montessori school is always at odds with the public school administrators, so I'm sure they wish they were private. They just didn't have the money to rent or buy a space.)

 

Obviously I have no problem getting money from the state for my homeschooling supplies. They do not PAY me for being the teacher, so I figure I am still $40,000 in the hole.

 

I haven't homeschooled in any other state, so I can only speak to Alaska. I do understand with my conversation with Tammy (Tamy?) of Growing with Grammar that we have a rare situation here. (She had never paid much attention to their receipts at GWG because most people don't need to use them for reimbursement purposes.)

 

Sorry so wordy.

 

Julie

Edited October 11, 2008 by buddhabelly
clarity

[Tutor]

If the state I lived in provided reimbursement for homeschooling materials, I may consider participating depending on the level of oversight the state was going to impose. I would also hope that such a program had an "opt out" option as well. (If there were no opt out option, I'd move to another state.)

 

If the federal government provided such a program (as has been proposed in "follow the student" vouchers), I would be against such a program because I feel that it violates the constitutional bounds of the federal government.

[JudyJudyJudy]

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.

I agree with most of your post, but I want to address the part I bolded. The same is true here. However, having taught sixth grade last year, I can tell you that this is not a good thing. The kids are expected to do research papers without truly being taught about the parts of speech and parts of a sentence, how to construct a complete sentence, how to spell correctly, etc. While they've done research papers and lots of "free writing" as well, the writing they're doing is horrible. I personally think it's more important to teach grammar and how to write correct sentences and simple paragraphs before trying to teach how to write research papers. This is yet another example of "the system" biting off more than it can chew and teaching a little bit of everything without teaching the mastery of anything.

[JudyJudyJudy]

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).

Thank you. Rebecca was very nice. :)

[anissarobert]

For Alaska Mom and Kelli, and anyone else who is curious:

 

I believe that Alaska was held up as an example several years ago primarily because it was one of the first states that allowed charter schools. When considering the charter school issue, the main concern is the fear that they could lead to greater oversight. If the majority of homeschoolers in a particular state choose to participate then it would be tempting for the legislature to propose a law making participation mandatory. I live in one of the most conservative states in the nation, but even here there are several attempts every year to limit our homeschool freedom. I love our homeschool law. I do not need to register, or provide test results to the government and that is the way I would like it to stay, so I am concerned about the possibility of the charter schools here being made mandatory.

 

That being said, I can see how the many charter schools here have helped my friends. The money is very tempting and over 1/2 of the homeschoolers I know use them. Since the charter schools came to my state I have personally seen several changes in the homeschool climate. Many more people defer to "experts" like their reporting teacher, many are tempted to put their children in brick and mortar schools because it is a smaller step back into the system, and they are moving toward using secular materials, because they are the only ones that are reimbursed.

 

These are only the surface effects though, the bigger problem that I have noticed is the lack of homeschool vision and community. Homeschoolers here no longer seem to have a common vision for the future. Homeschooling has become just one of many choices on the school choice continum. I am sometimes not sure this "success" is truly worth celebrating. We have won the right to homeschool, but we have sold our souls back for money.

 

Please don't take this as criticism of you personally if you are part of a charter school. As I said many of my friends are involved in these programs, and I can certainly see how the extra $ would be helpful, as we never have any! Every family has to make their own choice. I just want people to look at the big picture and see how charter schools are changing the face of homeschooling.

[Peek a Boo]

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

 

It's only "free" money if I never paid anything INTO a system or i never provided a service FOR that money.

 

Homeschoolers ARE providing a service.

A service that each state has a compelling interest in.

Are all homeschoolers doing a good job? no.

Are all public schoolers doing a good job? no.

 

Homeschoolers are not "choosing not to accept it" --we are choosing to pursue the same goal --education-- in a different manner. But then again, i don't see our current public school system as some untouchable holy grail. I've seen great examples of at least half a dozen workable education systems that look nothing like what we have now.

 

Teachers I've spoken with have said FUNDING is NOT why kids aren't learning. Private schools pump out well educated kids on less funding --

funding is NOT a problem. "Buying power" to the tune of a thousand 1000s isn't necessary when we're talking about real education. Smaller schools can do what homeschoolers already do: band together to increase their buying power where necessary. It's not always easy, but it's possible.

 

Yes, i am all for homeschoolers/private schoolers receiving a cut of the property/federal taxes that are meant to be used for EDUCATION. They are providing a vital service to the educational system we have in place. Public school staff are already being paid via tax dollars, but I'd be fine w/ letting them have the measly tax break too since i don't think they get paid enough ;)

 

I will be supportive of oversight for homeschoolers when the public school's funding gets cut when it screws up too.

 

Libraries and parks:

I am a pretty staunch capitalist, so yes, I am a user-fee kinda gal. If you aren't using it, you shouldn't have to pay for it. more at capitalism.org.

 

I agree w/ JJJ's assessment of 2d grade grammar/writing.

 

i also agree w/ Jedi's ideas of public schools being more accommodating to helping EDUCATE all children. i always found it ironic that the exact entity that has a compelling interest in the education of its citizens is practically the ONLY one that closes educational doors to the very students it has a compelling interest to make sure get educated......

 

I like MamaLynx's replies ;)

Ideally i don't support "breaks" -- but as long as the gvt is inefficient enough to dole them out, i will absolutely do what i can to get what money i put in back.

 

If i could get a federal tax break for homeschooling the same way i get a federal tax break for dependents, I'd take it.

I don't have to provide proof of their well being, or statements about my parenting, or receipts for food and clothing. I don't have to have anyone else even so much as PEEK at them. They just want paper proof that i have them.

 

The only proof they need to show that i am a private/home schooler is to check the public school enrollment records. I'm not there, so i would get the tax break.

 

If any more oversight than that was required, I'd likely opt out.

 

and to answer SpyCar's original Q -- if they are going to give breaks, don't discriminate against religious curriculum. That's infringing. You are then infringing their right to educate their child in a manner they see fit. Not offering the break could very well cost them money and encroach upon their ability to express their religious views w/ an educational curriculum they deem suitable. Rod and Staff grammar is usually seen even by some secular families as a Good Eductional Course. But it wouldn't be available for a break cuz it's religious. That could directly affect the family's ability to choose a curriculum that best expresses their faith and still performs the academics necessary for the break.

 

Not to mention... You can bring in a lot of theology through secular spinning. Just set aside the Q altogether and either offer them or don't.

[Peek a Boo]

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.

 

ya know, when i was 18 and supporting my li'l bro, i did NOT take the earned income credit because "sibling" wasn't one of the qualifying definitions. My unemployed mom was crashing on a friend's house, he was staying w/ me, i was claiming him as a dependent, and my mom still had legal custody.

 

i received a letter from the IRA asking if i wanted to take the EIC. My accountant friend was floored : "they NEVER ask if you want MORE money back, lol!"

They offered me the options of:

1. do you want to figure the credit yourself, or

2. would you like for us to figure it for you?

 

i opted for number two and got another check back.

so see? the IRS isn't all bad :D

 

Even my RightWingWackoTalkRadioListeningStaunchRepublican pilot dh has to admit that the FAA isn't always evil ;)

[FlockOfSillies]

Same difference. I've heard those arguments regarding state and local funding as well.

[Zelda]

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.

 

:thumbup:

[JudyJudyJudy]

Zelda, we've found common ground. :D

[Zelda]

Whew!

 

It only goes to show how truly civilized and reasonable we both really are.

 

:D

[KarenNC]

It's only "free" money if I never paid anything INTO a system or i never provided a service FOR that money.

 

It's *never* free money. It always costs someone something.

 

Homeschoolers ARE providing a service.

Sorry, no. We are not providing a public service any more than we are doing so in feeding our children or buying books for our own use or driving our own cars. The public service part would come in, as I see it, if we were educating *other* people's children or maintaining a library that is for the use of the wider community or providing transportation for others.

 

Homeschoolers are not "choosing not to accept it" --we are choosing to pursue the same goal --education-- in a different manner. But then again, i don't see our current public school system as some untouchable holy grail. I've seen great examples of at least half a dozen workable education systems that look nothing like what we have now.

 

I don't see the current school system as any sort of holy grail or untouchable either, however it is the system that we currently have. Advocating that only those who are currently using it pay for it is a vastly different topic than is working to reform it.

 

Yes, we are "choosing not to accept it" just as a heterosexual couple who chooses to live together but not enter into a legal marriage is choosing not to accept the legal benefits that come from a legal marriage (yes, I did this, too, for a year), a person who chooses to buy their own books rather than use the public library (I've done this), to play in their own yard rather than go to a public park (and this) or use their own hose to put out their house fire rather than call the fire department (but thankfully never needed to do this;)). These services are there for your use and by law must be maintained for your use whether you choose to accept the benefits of them or not. I currently choose not to accept the benefits of public school (and they are undeniably there) because I am in a position to and desire to do otherwise. I am fully aware that that situation could change at any time for a variety of reasons.

 

"Buying power" to the tune of a thousand 1000s isn't necessary when we're talking about real education. Smaller schools can do what homeschoolers already do: band together to increase their buying power where necessary. It's not always easy, but it's possible.

....Libraries and parks:

I am a pretty staunch capitalist, so yes, I am a user-fee kinda gal. If you aren't using it, you shouldn't have to pay for it. more at capitalism.org.

 

To take this argument to what I see as the logical conclusion, envision the scenario in which education (as well as other services) are strictly pay as you go. Now the Smiths, who have a 3rd grade child and have been educating her at home, suddenly face a situation that means they are no longer personally capable of meeting her educational needs at home--perhaps one of them becomes severely ill. There is no publicly supported school building or program, no transportation, no employees, no infrastructure. If they can pay the fees asked by whatever private school is near them (if there is one) as well as pay for or manage her transportation, then she may get an education. Another option would be to hire a private tutor to come to their home. Otherwise she has only what she can pick up on her own (with whatever books she may have in the house because she can't go to the library---they can't afford the subscription as it isn't publicly funded--and she can't afford the fares for a taxi if one operates in her area because there is no public subsidy to support public transportation--and tv won't be of use as they can't afford cable or the yearly license).

 

Let's hope that the family doesn't have a break in or a house fire because they can no longer afford the yearly fee to have a subscription to belong to the private police or fire department in their area. One hopes they live in an area with sufficient population density for the tolls at each road to pay for the upkeep of those roads (assuming they can afford to pay the tolls). Let's hope the disabled person is not the primary wage earner or that they have sufficient savings to cover pay as you go medical care as well as food, etc, as there is no public assistance other than whatever a charity might decide to do.

 

I am far from either a socialist or a communist, but a strictly pay as you go society is simply not desirable in the long run as far as I can see unless one is the one with lots of resources. Yes we have pretty dramatic class differences now, but we only have to look at the lessons of history to see how much larger those differences are when there is no public safety net for some essential services.

 

If a tax credit existed for homeschoolers, yes, I would likely apply for it if it did not cause what I considered to be onerous interference, but I see that as a vastly different issue than whether we have an inherent *right* to such a credit solely because we are choosing not to use a particular public service at the present moment. In that case, no one who did not currently have a child in public school should be penalized by not receiving exactly the same credit. I don't argue for a tax credit for not using the bus, for not going to the library, for not having my house burn down, for not being disabled, for not being elderly, etc. (shrug)

Edited October 11, 2008 by KarenNC

[Kelli in TN]

These are only the surface effects though, the bigger problem that I have noticed is the lack of homeschool vision and community. Homeschoolers here no longer seem to have a common vision for the future. Homeschooling has become just one of many choices on the school choice continum. I am sometimes not sure this "success" is truly worth celebrating. We have won the right to homeschool, but we have sold our souls back for money.

 

 

There was a time when I would have agreed with this. And I think this is the point our state leaders are making.

 

But WE wanted choice and now we, as a homeschool community, are trying to deny other parents the right to choose because their choice does not fit our vision or might erode our vision and sense of community? I have a problem seeing this as fair.

 

The girl I am tutoring may not get her credits in and graduate on time. Her parents were not going to send her to school and neither were they going to stay on top of her homeschooling. They often could not afford materials. If we had charters in our state to provide materials and oversight, this girl might not be in the pickle she is in today.

 

I want charters and I want the right to opt out of them. I hope I don't get thrown out of my state organization for saying so until after my daughter's graduation ceremony!:lol:

[kalanamak]

 

These are only the surface effects though, the bigger problem that I have noticed is the lack of homeschool vision and community. Homeschoolers here no longer seem to have a common vision for the future. Homeschooling has become just one of many choices on the school choice continum..

 

 

We had a common vision for the future back in some ideal past? HS *is* one of at least a few choices. What was this common vision that was lost, and if you don't want a continuum of school choices, what fixed one or few do you advocate?

 

Sorry, I seem to come from a different enough background that I don't understand you. Could you be more specific?

[anissarobert]

I'm not against choices in education. I think that competition makes the public schools work harder. I just think we have lost something in the process. Early homeschoolers had to fight for their rights and to do so they had to band together. It was this or hide indefinitely. Homeschoolers had to form support systems and share curriculum because there were few choices. They were changing the world and the risks they took bound them together. Homeschooling was scary and they needed each other.

 

We won this battle, and today we are surrounded by choices. Curriculum choices that would make those early moms who had only Bob Jones and Abeka to choose from drool with envy. We have a myriad of choices that combine public education and homeschooling. As I mentioned in my earlier post, this means we have succeeded, but I think we have also lost something.

 

We have lost that identitiy, that says we are doing something differently. We have die hard independent homeschoolers, public school at home with ps curriculum home educators, and public school at home with our own curriculum home educators. This diversity may eventually turn out to be a good thing, but right now I feel that by broadening the identitiy of homeschoolers we have lost something too.

 

All political movements change over time, and these changes may prove to be steps in the right direction, but I am doubtful. Nevertheless, I support the charter schools right to exist, as long as we choose to provide public education as a society, and as long as they are not made mandatory.

[Peek a Boo]

It's *never* free money. It always costs someone something.

 

I tend to agree w/ you on that in principle. The concept in question tho was whether one does something to earn that money vs just receiving a handout. Even the air we breathe isn't "free" -- it was quite a process to get it to our lungs via the environment ;)

person A makes something and gives it to person B.

it's free for person B because it cost THEM nothing;

it is NOT free for person A because it cost them resources.

 

"free" just defines who incurred the cost.

 

Sorry, no. We are not providing a public service any more than we are doing so in feeding our children or buying books for our own use or driving our own cars. The public service part would come in, as I see it, if we were educating *other* people's children or maintaining a library that is for the use of the wider community or providing transportation for others.

 

Normally I'd agree w/ you.

But in the case of education, the state HAS been granted a compelling interest to make sure its citizens are educated. Thus the "public" service. Feeding/caring for our children is even factored in on dependent exemptions for taxes. Buying books and driving cars are only deductible if they apply to "approved" education or business.

 

I don't see the current school system as any sort of holy grail or untouchable either, however it is the system that we currently have. Advocating that only those who are currently using it pay for it is a vastly different topic than is working to reform it.

 

Bingo. "the system that we currently have" is not succeeding.

When i say change, i want CHANGE :D

 

 

Yes, we are "choosing not to accept it" just as a heterosexual couple who chooses to live together but not enter into a legal marriage is choosing not to accept the legal benefits that come from a legal marriage,

a person who chooses to buy their own books rather than use the public library (I've done this), to play in their own yard rather than go to a public park (and this) or use their own hose to put out their house fire rather than call the fire department (but thankfully never needed to do this;)).

 

with the exception of fire risks to the community, none of the other examples are required by law like education.

 

 

These services are there for your use and by law must be maintained for your use whether you choose to accept the benefits of them or not. I currently choose not to accept the benefits of public school (and they are undeniably there) because I am in a position to and desire to do otherwise. I am fully aware that that situation could change at any time for a variety of reasons.

 

Parks and libraries and bus systems aren't required by law --lots of communities don't publicly support at the gvt level any of those.

i think our biggest difference here is in what it is we feel homeschoolers are rejecting/ accepting. I'll come back to this in a minute.

 

To take this argument to what I see as the logical conclusion, envision the scenario in which education (as well as other services) are strictly pay as you go.

 

-----

I am far from either a socialist or a communist, but a strictly pay as you go society is simply not desirable in the long run as far as I can see unless one is the one with lots of resources. Yes we have pretty dramatic class differences now, but we only have to look at the lessons of history to see how much larger those differences are when there is no public safety net for some essential services.

 

what your example assumes is a lack of philanthropy.

There's never really such a thing as "strictly" pay as you go. Individuals in companies have a lot more leeway for individual cases than the gvt does.

 

I'm not a no-gvt person, I'm a LIMITED gvt person. Lots of Communities run public schools on pretty low numbers. It would be easy enough to take taxes from all the people who want to send their kids to PS and all the people who WANT to help fund a public education system and let them fund it. It would be a big community co-op that anyone could join simply by paying the property taxes they are paying now. I'm sure there would be plenty of rich Democrats willing to offer personal scholarships, right? ;)

 

History shows there are always some people who are going to strive to help the people and community around them.

History shows that individuals often do this better than the gvt.

History shows what happens when so many services get tangled into the gvt and run inefficiently.

Yes, there's a lot of lessons to learn from history ;)

But we're now getting more into capitalism as a societal/ gvt model, and that would take a few more specific threads.

 

My biggest point is that Funding is not the biggest problem of the public school system. private schools doing a better job w/ fewer funds than the gvt is a striking example. If the public system fails w/ the addition of credits for private schoolers it WON't be because of the lack of THAT funding, but because of more serious issues that are refusing to be addressed.

 

If a tax credit existed for homeschoolers, yes, I would likely apply for it if it did not cause what I considered to be onerous interference, but I see that as a vastly different issue than whether we have an inherent *right* to such a credit solely because we are choosing not to use a particular public service at the present moment. In that case, no one who did not currently have a child in public school should be penalized by not receiving exactly the same credit. I don't argue for a tax credit for not using the bus, for not going to the library, for not having my house burn down, for not being disabled, for not being elderly, etc. (shrug)

 

i agree it shouldn't be any more onerous than seeing if our children are enrolled in the public system of required education.

 

and back to what homeschoolers are "not accepting" --

it's not that we aren't utilizing an optional public service --it's that we are providing a legally REQUIRED service.

 

Now if the education of children suddenly becomes a nice-but-unrequired option, then i would agree that homeschoolers have no more "right" to a credit than stuff like the library/ bus/ parks/marriage.

 

Fire and police are another entity though.

But to be fair, there's a lot of things that are legally required at the moment that i think are bunk. Or at least, the way they are legally handled/ not handled by the gvt is so bad they should concede incompetence and back out and let someone else locally take over. The education system is just one of them.

 

Since the thread was about what we'd LIKE to see instead of what we think will realistically happen, I'm just tossing out my thoughts of Real Change :D

 

back to capitalism.org ;)

[Annabel Lee]

First let me confess I did not read all 8 pages here. The programs are offered by many of the school districts here but are mandated under the same law. Each public school student, given their state-mandated "free" public education, is alloted a certain very high dollar allowance to be spent on that child's education. Homeschoolers in AK are allowed to be refunded what ends up being about one-tenth of that for their yearly allotment. You are also allowed to just "go it alone" here, tell the state you're homeschooling and just do it w/o any outside funding.

 

If you want the "free" (which I agree, isn't, but if the programs have a certain amount of funding available - why not participate? It's my tax dollars too) money, you have to use board-approved curriculum. The school boards review it not only for religious content but to make sure it's at least adequate to meet state standards. They deny reimbursement of anything religious - whether Christian, Jewish, Pagan, etc. They do however reimburse for some very limited texts that educate *about* religions but do not teach them as truth. Like SOTW for example, mentions many gods throughout, and it's covered. I agree w/ RebeccaC about separation of church & state, but it is what it is right now.

 

This reimbursement program is done through the public school districts. So, it's not tied to any kind of rebates for private schools. For me it just means that my kids get to benefit a fraction from the taxes we pay for public schools.

There are alot of very good points made, but like I said, I only skimmed pages 1 and 8. I guess it all boils down to whether you believe the federal government ought to be in charge of education. I personally, do not. But they are, and I wouldn't be able to homeschool w/o those funds. Since the gov't. on a national level took over education, the numbers prove that they have done nothing but screw the whole thing up. JMO.

Edited October 12, 2008 by Annabel Lee
noticed a spelling error

[Annabel Lee]

I think our forerunners would be overjoyed and teary-eyed to see how far homeschooling has come. They would be ecstatic that we don't have to hide from authorities, that we have so much help and so many options. Yes, it takes from the 'radicalism' of it. But isn't it great that so many people are doing it that it's not all that 'radical' anymore?

Yes, some people use ps curriculum. If we're doing something that we feel or know is far different than the majority of other homeschoolers out there, then fire up the 'vision' again! I think homeschooling with a classical education is really breaking through some of the pre-boxed 'mainstream' curriculum out there. Not any one method fits all though.

[Haiku]

I don't think that there should be government reimbursement for homeschooling materials. Homeschooling is a choice to bypass government-sponsored education, so what's the point of getting government money for it.

 

I am a liberal, but I would feel like receiving government funds to homeschool would be a) an unwanted incursion into my life and b) an unnecessary government expenditure.

 

Tara

[kalanamak]

\ Homeschoolers had to form support systems and share curriculum because there were few choices. They were changing the world and the risks they took bound them together. Homeschooling was scary and they needed each other.

 

We have lost that identitiy, that says we are doing something differently.

 

All political movements change over time, and these changes may prove to be steps in the right direction, but I am doubtful.

 

Ahh, I see what you mean. Social movements, institutions, and organizations, too all change over time, and lamentations about the past by the pioneers are common. Lament away. You are in good company. It is human nature, I think, to have both nostalgia and elitism. What's that old saying, it isn't the beginning of the end, its the end of the beginning.

 

And, although there are 800 some registered HS in my little area, and no one has given me any grief, I believe I am "doing something differently". Maybe not something as exciting as the Underground Railroad, but statistically still a tiny minority.

Edited October 12, 2008 by kalanamak
typo

[Peek a Boo]

I don't think that there should be government reimbursement for homeschooling materials. Homeschooling is a choice to bypass government-sponsored education, so what's the point of getting government money for it.

 

I am a liberal, but I would feel like receiving government funds to homeschool would be a) an unwanted incursion into my life and b) an unnecessary government expenditure.

 

Tara

 

I think the "point" is that the funds are there to educate children.

Since education currently falls under the realm of "legally required for all children" then we ARE doing the gvt's job.

Homeschoolers are saving the gvt time, money, and resources when we do the required education ourselves.

 

i do agree there are a lot of unnecessary gvt expenditures. But i can see how economic equity in educational endeavors [HA! how's THAT for alliteration?! lol] can be a good thing.......

;)

[Karenciavo]

In NJ if a township buses they have to either bus private schooled students or provide rebates, this applies to home-schooled students taking courses at a private school. The rebate of transportation charges is $1500 per student, per annum I believe. Is this something those of you who oppose government reimbursement would oppose?

[Haiku]

I think the "point" is that the funds are there to educate children.

 

I think that the funds are there to fund the schools, which to me is not the same thing as "to educate children."

 

Since education currently falls under the realm of "legally required for all children" then we ARE doing the gvt's job.

I see it the other way around. The gov't requires that children be educated. It does not require that the gov't educate them. To me, sending kids to school means that the gov't is doing MY job. (And I have a child in public school ... I relinquished my responsibility to the school, in a manner of speaking, when I sent her to school. I did not take the responsibility away from the schools when I chose to educate my younger kids at home.)

 

Homeschoolers are saving the gvt time, money, and resources when we do the required education ourselves.

Perhaps, but as I said, I don't think our taxes pay to educate children. They pay to fund schools. A child may be educated in a school, but the funds are not for education. They are for schools.

 

Your alliteration was lovely, btw. :)

 

Tara

[KarenNC]

I think that the funds are there to fund the schools, which to me is not the same thing as "to educate children."

 

I see it the other way around. The gov't requires that children be educated. It does not require that the gov't educate them. To me, sending kids to school means that the gov't is doing MY job. (And I have a child in public school ... I relinquished my responsibility to the school, in a manner of speaking, when I sent her to school. I did not take the responsibility away from the schools when I chose to educate my younger kids at home.)

 

Perhaps, but as I said, I don't think our taxes pay to educate children. They pay to fund schools. A child may be educated in a school, but the funds are not for education. They are for schools.

 

Yes, nicely said. I see the public school system as another social "safety net" to give some mechanism by which everyone has at least a certain base level of equality. It is there to provide a means by which all children can obtain a certain basic level of education whether their parents could afford to do so independently or not.

 

To clarify, I am not "against" things like reimbursement or public virtual charters, etc. My arguments have been aimed at those (as I see around here in my area) who want government funding, but expect it would happen without any requirements whatsoever for oversight or accountability for the use of those funds. It is a case of "be sure you know what you are wishing for because you might get it".

[Colleen]

I don't think that there should be government reimbursement for homeschooling materials. Homeschooling is a choice to bypass government-sponsored education...®eceiving government funds to homeschool would be a) an unwanted incursion into my life and b) an unnecessary government expenditure.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Peek a Boo]

I think that the funds are there to fund the schools, which to me is not the same thing as "to educate children."

 

well, i do agree that funding schools and educating children are two separate ideas ;)

 

 

 

I see it the other way around. The gov't requires that children be educated. It does not require that the gov't educate them. To me, sending kids to school means that the gov't is doing MY job.

 

except the law doesn't agree with you.

The state DOES have and hold ultimate control over a child's education.

As far as they are concerned, they graciously allow parents to do the educating if we really want to. Within certain parameters.

 

Even in states where you don't have to be approved to educate your children [like in TX] we can still be charged w/ educational neglect and still have to provide upon demand a statement acknowledging that we ARE educating the child. Even private schools are subject to the scrutiny of the state, not the other way around.

 

i tend to agree that it IS my job to educate children, but the law does not agree with us unfortunately. When it does, I'll be agreeing w/ you that any tax credits are not a right at all.

 

Your alliteration was lovely, btw. :)

 

Tara

 

thankyouverrrymuuuch :D

[Peek a Boo]

To clarify, I am not "against" things like reimbursement or public virtual charters, etc. My arguments have been aimed at those (as I see around here in my area) who want government funding, but expect it would happen without any requirements whatsoever for oversight or accountability for the use of those funds. It is a case of "be sure you know what you are wishing for because you might get it".

 

but as i mentioned earlier, we already have gvt funds w/o oversight or accountability in claiming our kids as dependents, so why would this "have" to be any different?

[ma23peas]

I don't agree with the government funding materials..but I do love there being bigger tax credits for families with children...really just doubling the tax credit would give me the funds I usually spend on our curricula.

 

Off topic, but when I've mentioned raising the tax credit for children, some of those without children complain...but the interesting thing is that if we didn't have children...who would pay for those folks social security?

 

Tara

[Lizzie in Ma]

. The kids are expected to do research papers without truly being taught about the parts of speech and parts of a sentence, how to construct a complete sentence, how to spell correctly, etc. While they've done research papers and lots of "free writing" as well, the writing they're doing is horrible. I personally think it's more important to teach grammar and how to write correct sentences and simple paragraphs before trying to teach how to write research papers. This is yet another example of "the system" biting off more than it can chew and teaching a little bit of everything without teaching the mastery of anything.

 

:iagree::iagree:

[KarenNC]

but as i mentioned earlier, we already have gvt funds w/o oversight or accountability in claiming our kids as dependents, so why would this "have" to be any different?

 

I don't believe that a homeschool credit *would* be any different. There is accountability in claiming kids as dependents and you are subject to audit if it appears that you do not meet those requirements (and to prosecution or fines if you have misrepresented deliberately). You can only claim the tax credit if you have a relationship with that child that meets with government-approved guidelines (and other income and tax liability related guidelines).

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc606.html and http://www.irs.gov/publications/p972/index.html

 

This is not including the fact that even if you meet the relational requirements you cannot claim the tax credit unless you have a Social Security number or other approved identification number for that child from birth. Now you can indeed choose not to get a Social Security number for that child, but without such, you cannot either claim the deduction or access a multitude of other services (don't abide by the rules, you don't get the benefit---exactly what I am saying about homeschool reimbursement). Obtaining these numbers comes with their own requirements and hoops to jump through.

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10023.html and http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=96696,00.html

 

Now how closely the government chooses to examine one's adherence to the law is another topic, but the laws and regulations for oversight are indeed there.

[Peek a Boo]

I don't believe that a homeschool credit *would* be any different. There is accountability in claiming kids as dependents and you are subject to audit if it appears that you do not meet those requirements (and to prosecution or fines if you have misrepresented deliberately). You can only claim the tax credit if you have a relationship with that child that meets with government-approved guidelines (and other income and tax liability related guidelines).

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc606.html and http://www.irs.gov/publications/p972/index.html

 

This is not including the fact that even if you meet the relational requirements you cannot claim the tax credit unless you have a Social Security number or other approved identification number for that child from birth. Now you can indeed choose not to get a Social Security number for that child, but without such, you cannot either claim the deduction or access a multitude of other services (don't abide by the rules, you don't get the benefit---exactly what I am saying about homeschool reimbursement). Obtaining these numbers comes with their own requirements and hoops to jump through.

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10023.html and http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=96696,00.html

 

Now how closely the government chooses to examine one's adherence to the law is another topic, but the laws and regulations for oversight are indeed there.

 

Well sure -- homeschoolers are already regulated by "oversight" --even here in TX. But that oversight --like the dependent claim-- is exercised by either random audit [not in TX] or reported concerns.

So as long as one is legally homeschooling, that should be all that is required. And since people are presumed innocent until proven guilty, there shouldn't need to be any additional requirements than what we already have.

 

Since homeschooling regs are a state-by-state thing, any credits would be dependent on you following your state's homeschooling law.

 

Since we're already doing that anyway, that sounds fine to me. :D

[Tammyla]

My amazing state has a new tax law that allows for tax write off of text books or other materials (computers, tutors, classes etc.) that are not supplied at school if they are used for the students course of study. Last year they closed it off to homeschool families.

 

I wouldn't mind a simple write off of educational materials for all families. Public, private and homeschooling are all expensive.

[RebeccaC]

 

 

except the law doesn't agree with you.

The state DOES have and hold ultimate control over a child's education.

As far as they are concerned, they graciously allow parents to do the educating if we really want to. Within certain parameters.

 

Even in states where you don't have to be approved to educate your children [like in TX] we can still be charged w/ educational neglect and still have to provide upon demand a statement acknowledging that we ARE educating the child. Even private schools are subject to the scrutiny of the state, not the other way around.

 

i tend to agree that it IS my job to educate children, but the law does not agree with us unfortunately. When it does, I'll be agreeing w/ you that any tax credits are not a right at all.

 

 

 

 

In IL the law is that the state is responsible for attendance only and the parents is responsible for the education. It is hard to almost impossible to sue the state of IL if they grad an illiterate child. So it depends on what the laws of each state are and in IL the only responsibility the state has is to make sure there is a warm body in the classroom.

 

In IL the county property taxes pay for education. The is a movement a foot to change that because kids/schools in rich counties get more money. The refund we get in IL is a tax rebate/credit on our state income tax so no money is lost by the school district by my refund. The school district got their share from my property tax.

[Peek a Boo]

In IL the law is that the state is responsible for attendance only and the parents is responsible for the education. It is hard to almost impossible to sue the state of IL if they grad an illiterate child. So it depends on what the laws of each state are and in IL the only responsibility the state has is to make sure there is a warm body in the classroom.

 

In IL the county property taxes pay for education. The is a movement a foot to change that because kids/schools in rich counties get more money. The refund we get in IL is a tax rebate/credit on our state income tax so no money is lost by the school district by my refund. The school district got their share from my property tax.

 

well, there certainly appears to be more required of IL schools in the learning standards than to just take attendance, but i do understand that it is difficult to hold a school accountable for educational failure.

http://www.illinoisloop.org/standards_law.html

 

 

the Supreme Court ruled that the state has a compelling interest in the education of its citizens --over and above a parent's right to completely decide a child's education or lack thereof.

 

This is demonstrated in the homeschooling law/oversight in IL:

 

http://homepage.bushnell.net/~peanuts/illaws.html#LAWS

( The Illinois courts have held consistently that if instruction is given as the compulsory education law contemplates then the term "private school" as a lawful substitute for public schooling has been extended to home schooling. The burden is on the parent to show that an adequate course of instruction in the prescribed branches of learning is being pursued.)

 

 

If contacted by state school officials, home schoolers must respond. They could submit a "statement of assurance" form to the local school district for the purposes of verifying that their childrens' private education is providing instruction as required by Section 26-1 of the Illinois State Statutes.

 

 

and as Karen mentioned, whether a state utilizes or enforces those accountability factors doesn't negate that they are indeed in place.

[RebeccaC]

well, there certainly appears to be more required of IL schools in the learning standards than to just take attendance, but i do understand that it is difficult to hold a school accountable for educational failure.

 

the Supreme Court ruled that the state has a compelling interest in the education of its citizens --over and above a parent's right to completely decide a child's education or lack thereof.

 

............

 

and as Karen mentioned, whether a state utilizes or enforces those accountability factors doesn't negate that they are indeed in place.

 

 

I stand corrected this is a fairly new law when it comes to testing and probably was made due to the only thing the state required was attendance. When I first started using in march of 96 the only law was attendance, had been since the days of Lincoln, that mandatory attendance began at age 7 to age 16.

 

In the 1960s something in IL all home schools were declared to be a private school. We are advised in IL not to submit a statement of assurance neither do we have to test all we have to do is show attendance and that we are teaching in English. Bottom line Peek, is it still comes down to individual state law and the Supreme Court ruling can be view through different lens, or read differently, or interpreted in different manners. I did not read Karen's post so I have no idea what she wrote. I read your post only, except what I read several days ago, and I remembered what I knew about IL law which was different from what you posted about TX law. The law has changed in IL but it still comes down to each state has different laws when it comes to hsing. We have looked at several states since 96 thinking about moving and they are different.

 

I have been at co-op all day and would have replied sooner. I am glad that you had the time and gumption to research IL state law.

[Peek a Boo]

I stand corrected this is a fairly new law when it comes to testing and probably was made due to the only thing the state required was attendance. When I first started using in march of 96 the only law was attendance, had been since the days of Lincoln, that mandatory attendance began at age 7 to age 16.

 

In the 1960s something in IL all home schools were declared to be a private school. We are advised in IL not to submit a statement of assurance neither do we have to test all we have to do is show attendance and that we are teaching in English. Bottom line Peek, is it still comes down to individual state law and the Supreme Court ruling can be view through different lens, or read differently, or interpreted in different manners. I did not read Karen's post so I have no idea what she wrote. I read your post only, except what I read several days ago, and I remembered what I knew about IL law which was different from what you posted about TX law. The law has changed in IL but it still comes down to each state has different laws when it comes to hsing. We have looked at several states since 96 thinking about moving and they are different.

 

I have been at co-op all day and would have replied sooner. I am glad that you had the time and gumption to research IL state law.

 

no hurry :D

 

yeah, I understand that the SC can be applied differently to each state, but the REAL bottom line is that the education of kids is legally considered the realm of the state, NOT of the parents. Even the NEA asserts that in their charter. I don't like that, but that's the way it is, legally. And as long as the state has the power to control a child's education, I absolutely believe that parents who are doing the state-required education should be entitled to a basic credit for doing that. And that credit shouldn't need anymore oversight than "are you legally homeschooling?" If I'm not legally homeschooling, then bring on the proof and prosecute ;)

[Jami]

I agree with most of your post, but I want to address the part I bolded. The same is true here. However, having taught sixth grade last year, I can tell you that this is not a good thing. The kids are expected to do research papers without truly being taught about the parts of speech and parts of a sentence, how to construct a complete sentence, how to spell correctly, etc. While they've done research papers and lots of "free writing" as well, the writing they're doing is horrible. I personally think it's more important to teach grammar and how to write correct sentences and simple paragraphs before trying to teach how to write research papers. This is yet another example of "the system" biting off more than it can chew and teaching a little bit of everything without teaching the mastery of anything.

 

Well-said, Judyx3.

[Alenee]

Originally Posted by JudyJudyJudy

I agree with most of your post, but I want to address the part I bolded. The same is true here. However, having taught sixth grade last year, I can tell you that this is not a good thing. The kids are expected to do research papers without truly being taught about the parts of speech and parts of a sentence, how to construct a complete sentence, how to spell correctly, etc. While they've done research papers and lots of "free writing" as well, the writing they're doing is horrible. I personally think it's more important to teach grammar and how to write correct sentences and simple paragraphs before trying to teach how to write research papers. This is yet another example of "the system" biting off more than it can chew and teaching a little bit of everything without teaching the mastery of anything.

 

Yep! And this is what makes me furious when I hear posters saying that ps'ers on the whole are writing far better than homeschoolers. I've seen some of the writing and it is either un-original or poorly written. Of course there are some who can and do write well but the majority I've personally seen have nothing over a homeschooler in this area. This is not to say that a homeschooler is better either. But those comments made earlier in the thread were just blatantly misrepresenting ps v. hs.

 

back to the topic at hand.....

 

I cannot see any reason why the state should give a tax credit to homeschoolers. I have no problem with my taxes helping to fund schools. I just want them to leave me and my family alone.:)

[Mandarinmom]

My friend in Washington state participate in some kind of homeschool program, and he gets funds for the cost of homeschool boks etc., I don't remember how much, and plus about $500 per child for field trip expenses in a year. It is only if you reside in WA.

[KidsHappen]

All political movements change over time, and these changes may prove to be steps in the right direction, but I am doubtful. Nevertheless, I support the charter schools right to exist, as long as we choose to provide public education as a society, and as long as they are not made mandatory.

 

 

I don't think that many people homeschool as a political statement. I think that most people do it for highly personal reasons based on what is best for their families. That is why cahrter school are so popular. They are the best choice for many people. :)

[Retired]

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.

 

:agree:

 

 

we don't get reimbursement and can't use any resources of the school system. No sports etc.

 

The state legislature is lobbied very strongly by the teachers union. They want us (home schoolers) gone.

 

I feel since my DH pays huge amount of taxes to fund the schools. WE should benefit. I think a reimbursement would be great for books. I would like to see in the form of vouchers. I think we as parents in free American should have a choice of education using our own tax dollars.

[Academy of Jedi Arts]

The state legislature is lobbied very strongly by the teachers union. They want us (home schoolers) gone.

 

What causes a lot of anger with the teachers is homeschoolers who try to negate all the good things many of these teachers do. Bashing the public schools, holding themselves up as superior, etc. etc. The homeschoolers are just as guilty of creating this divide as the NEA, etc. Most of the homeschool kids these teachers see in elementary classrooms are kids whose education was neglected. They see parents getting paranoid at the hint of even the slightest regulation, which gives the impression parents have something to hide.

 

There is middle ground. I have a lot of teacher friends- a few NEA teacher friends, and there is indeed middle ground. That is going to require concessions on both sides however.

[tricia]

When my sister in law lived in Alaska they did this. She said that if you live a certain distance from school you could stay home and use their books and supplies at now cost to you. But that's all I know about it. I don't know how that would apply to someone who homeschools from a choice of their own.