Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

sassenach

California has TWO bills in the assembly

Recommended Posts

The fire inspection for homeschoolers bill was previously discussed and is still on the table, but I don't remember seeing mention of the 2nd bill. It basically states that they'll form a committee which will propose regulations might include home and health inspections, parent certification, and/or curriculum standards.

 

The big permanent change in this bill is the defining of home schoolers as a separate category from private schoolers. The rest of the recommendations remain to be seen, but it makes sense that once we're defined as a separate group, we're going to get our own set of regulations. 

 

I know there's a whole lot of debate around here about what homeschool regulations should be in place so I'm not going to do a call to action here. Act as you see fit.

 

You can find opposition info here: https://www.facebook.com/ParentsUnited4Kids/?hc_ref=ARSGwn6QzNPXOPTXTbP70jw0v8vJY09XJuxUY_xBPhn8v2Ho7SVmh3EtpmPBrLfHJis

 

Edited by Sassenach
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the heck will the "parent certification" work?

 

Based on the recent threads discussing CA, CA has now moved to the #1 spot previously held by NY on my personal list of "the state I would not want to homeschool in."

 

Hopefully, this bill, like other recent bills that infringed on homeschoolers' rights, will die a quick death.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly unconstitutional?

I doubt it. They require the same kinds of things for families who want to adopt or foster children, or run a home daycare. I'm not making the argument that these inspections are good, but I don't see how they could be considered unconstitutional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it. They require the same kinds of things for families who want to adopt or foster children, or run a home daycare. I'm not making the argument that these inspections are good, but I don't see how they could be considered unconstitutional.

 

Because there's a difference between taking in a child that is not your own, especially if he/she a ward of the state or you are running a business, and raising your own children.  In either case, you agree to certain terms and conditions of running a business, fostering a ward of the state, or applying to adopt someone else's child.

 

That's like saying because restaurants get health inspections, the government should come check my home kitchen because I cook for my own family.

  • Like 19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly unconstitutional?

If the bill makes it out of committee, which is doubtful, at some point along the way I would expect a ruling that the bill violates the 4th amendment.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt it. They require the same kinds of things for families who want to adopt or foster children, or run a home daycare. I'm not making the argument that these inspections are good, but I don't see how they could be considered unconstitutional.

In both of those scenarios you are dealing with someone else's child or children. I expect to make decisions I deem best for my children. I don't need anyone coming in and deciding my curriculum, doing inspections in my home and the like. Especially in light of the state being sued for high illiteracy rates in their schools.

 

I am glad I don't live there but I worry when California starts getting whacky ideas that Washington will start considering it too.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many more reasons I will never move to CA no matter how good the job offer might be for dh. Thankfully, he feels the same way! Ya'll need to move to TX!

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because there's a difference between taking in a child that is not your own, especially if he/she a ward of the state or you are running a business, and raising your own children.  In either case, you agree to certain terms and conditions of running a business, fostering a ward of the state, or applying to adopt someone else's child.

 

That's like saying because restaurants get health inspections, the government should come check my home kitchen because I cook for my own family.

 

 

In both of those scenarios you are dealing with someone else's child or children. I expect to make decisions I deem best for my children. I don't need anyone coming in and deciding my curriculum, doing inspections in my home and the like. Especially in light of the state being sued for high illiteracy rates in their schools.

 

I am glad I don't live there but I worry when California starts getting whacky ideas that Washington will start considering it too.

 

We aren't talking about whether it's right or wrong, though. We're talking about whether it's actually unconstitutional. No one wants to have home inspections, but in the context of homeschooling do they violate the Constitution? I'd have to see a better argument than, "I can do what I want with my kids," to convince me of that. The government can compel us to do all sorts of things with our children- educate them, vaccinate them, provide adequate medical care- and it doesn't violate the Constitution. Also, the government could probably make the argument that parents voluntarily homeschool, so no one is actually being compelled to allow the government into their home involuntarily, and that a home visit isn't the same as an unreasonable search of the home.

 

Again, I'm not debating whether this law would be a good idea or not, only if it's unconstitutional. Because I don't see that argument holding up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the heck will the "parent certification" work?

 

Based on the recent threads discussing CA, CA has now moved to the #1 spot previously held by NY on my personal list of "the state I would not want to homeschool in."

 

Hopefully, this bill, like other recent bills that infringed on homeschoolers' rights, will die a quick death.

Here in WA State a parent class is required for homeschoolers who do not have 1 year of college or more. The classes are in person or online, usually a one off thing and are taught by homeschooling parents. People here don’t seem to find it too difficult but I have a college degree so I can’t claim first hand experience.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since when has that stopped anything California has wanted to do?

 

Typically when federal judges strike down the unconstitutional laws, which is how the system is supposed to work.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright, I will bite.

 

Unlike the U.S. Constitution, the California Constitution has enshrined a right to privacy that is quite expansive -- it is expressly set forth as a fundamental, inalienable right in this state. Because people have a generally recognized right to privacy in their own home, it is likely IMO that AB 2756 (the so-called fire marshall law) would be struck down, especially where there are less intrusive alternatives to regulating homeschooling.

 

The second law (AB 2926) is more concerning, IMO, especially for private homeschoolers (versus those using a charter):

 

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB2926

 

ETA: I supported SB 277 (for a variety of reasons), so I am not anti-government regulation, but AB 2756 makes no sense. Even though I am not personally affected by AB 2926 at present, I still stand with my private homeschooling comrades. It's actually the religious charter school families, who whine about not being able to use public school charter funds for their field trips to the Creation Museum, that drive me nuts.  

 

 

 

Edited by SeaConquest
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many more reasons I will never move to CA no matter how good the job offer might be for dh. Thankfully, he feels the same way! Ya'll need to move to TX!

I’m pretty much a lifetime Texan (I lived in Louisiana for a couple of years).

 

When we moved to California, it took me less than a week to realize I never wanted to go back to Texas even for a visit.

 

I sure hope I never have to.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m pretty much a lifetime Texan (I lived in Louisiana for a couple of years).

 

When we moved to California, it took me less than a week to realize I never wanted to go back to Texas even for a visit.

 

I sure hope I never have to.

Ah, you’ve been assimilated.

 

Yeah, you couldn’t pay me a million bucks to move to Texas. And before you think that’s hyperbolic, consider that most Californians could sell their homes and buy a bigger house for cash if we moved there. Some do, but most of us don’t. Because Texas.

 

Right now, I believe Ca’s homeschool laws are easier than or comparable to Texas. We’d like to keep it that way.

Edited by Sassenach
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So many more reasons I will never move to CA no matter how good the job offer might be for dh. Thankfully, he feels the same way! Ya'll need to move to TX!

Let me tell you, there is no more maladaptive creature on the planet than a Texan forced to live in California (which is distinctly different than a Texan who has escaped to California). I’ve known a few, and not a day goes by that they don’t mention something that’s better in Texas or worse in California. Mostly both.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me tell you, there is no more maladaptive creature on the planet than a Texan forced to live in California (which is distinctly different than a Texan who has escaped to California). I’ve known a few, and not a day goes by that they don’t mention something that’s better in Texas or worse in California. Mostly both.

 

Although, I would be pretty darn maladaptive if I had to live in Texas. And, you can be sure I would kvetch about it every.single.day.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m pretty much a lifetime Texan (I lived in Louisiana for a couple of years).

 

When we moved to California, it took me less than a week to realize I never wanted to go back to Texas even for a visit.

 

I sure hope I never have to.

LOL. I understand, as a 5th generation Texan, who lived and home schooled in Texas most recently for almost a decade.

 

We moved to MN in 2015 and love it here. All the wild boars in Texas could not drag me back, lol.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me tell you, there is no more maladaptive creature on the planet than a Texan forced to live in California (which is distinctly different than a Texan who has escaped to California). I’ve known a few, and not a day goes by that they don’t mention something that’s better in Texas or worse in California. Mostly both.

Yeah, there is the other creature though, the conservative Californian that moves to Texas to avoid taxes, only to find they hate the seasons, the allergies, the lack of ocean breezes, the scenery, the extremely high property taxes and piss poor health care system and non-existent senior care services...

 

I have an aunt and uncle who made that move a few years ago. My sisters and I have a running bet on when they'll move back to CA.

Edited by Aelwydd
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now, I believe Ca’s homeschool laws are easier than or comparable to Texas. We’d like to keep it that way.

What Texas home school laws? There are none. All TX home schooling is defined by one court case, Leeper vs. Arlington. That case, which has been upheld in multiple rulings since 1987, classifies home schools as private schools, and therefore not subject to oversight by state education officials. Home schools are expected to cover only five areas: good citizenship, math, reading, spelling, and grammar.

 

If certain subjects like history, arts, economics, foreign languages, and science seem to be entirely missing from that list...well, yeehaw lol.

 

There are no testing requirements, no minimal attendance set, no record-keeping, paperwork or reporting required. No oversight, period. Zip, nada, nothing.

 

If California matches Texas' "standards" I'll eat my cowboy hat.

 

Here are two sources, one pro and one critical of Texas home school law:

 

Pro:

https://www.thsc.org/homeschooling-in-texas/the-history-of-home-education-in-texas/leeper-case-decisions/

 

Con:

https://www.responsiblehomeschooling.org/statement-on-texas-supreme-court-homeschool-decision/

Edited by Aelwydd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the heck will the "parent certification" work?

 

Based on the recent threads discussing CA, CA has now moved to the #1 spot previously held by NY on my personal list of "the state I would not want to homeschool in."

 

Hopefully, this bill, like other recent bills that infringed on homeschoolers' rights, will die a quick death.

 

I'm in NY and there is no parent certification requirement. 

 

I'm with you, how on earth would that work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Texas home school laws? There are none. All TX home schooling is defined by one court case, Leeper vs. Arlington. That case, which has been upheld in multiple rulings since 1987, classifies home schools as private schools, and therefore not subject to oversight by state education officials. Home schools are expected to cover only five areas: good citizenship, math, reading, spelling, and grammar.

 

If certain subjects like history, arts, economics, foreign languages, and science seem to be entirely missing from that list...well, yeehaw lol.

 

There are no testing requirements, no minimal attendance set, no record-keeping, paperwork or reporting required. No oversight, period. Zip, nada, nothing.

 

If California matches Texas' "standards" I'll eat my cowboy hat.

 

Here are two sources, one pro and one critical of Texas home school law:

 

Pro:

https://www.thsc.org/homeschooling-in-texas/the-history-of-home-education-in-texas/leeper-case-decisions/

 

Con:

https://www.responsiblehomeschooling.org/statement-on-texas-supreme-court-homeschool-decision/

K, you win. But not by much. Ca currently doesn’t define homeschooling as a separate thing. We run tiny private schools around here. We have to file one form a year, no follow up after that. We need to teach the main subjects in English and keep an attendance calendar, which amounts to keeping track of absences (um, zero?). No testing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Texas home school laws? There are none. All TX home schooling is defined by one court case, Leeper vs. Arlington. That case, which has been upheld in multiple rulings since 1987, classifies home schools as private schools, and therefore not subject to oversight by state education officials.

That is how California is set up, too. The state dept of ed has no authority over private schools. The only thing we do is put our name and address in a state directory of private schools every year to say that we are, in fact, a private school. The law currently exempts private schools with no commercial private school building from all the codes meant for brick and mortar campuses (gun laws, fire codes, etc). That's because if the place where kids learn is their own private residence, the law acknowledges that the primary use of the building is a home (privacy laws apply) and not actually a campus. The records we are required to keep (but not required to submit to anyone unless maybe investigated for a crime?) are shot records and attendance, but the law also says if you are not in a classroom based school you are exempt from mandatory vaccine laws, too. In 30+ years of being in the homeschool community in California, I have never heard of anyone having to show records of any sort to anyone but colleges. We are to teach the same branches of study as public schools, but there are no reporting requirements. It is just assumed that if a private school is bad, the parents will pull their kids out of it and put them in another one. The state is supposed to answer to parents for the education of kids, not the other way around. We will see if that changes. I hope not.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in NY and there is no parent certification requirement.

 

I'm with you, how on earth would that work?

Washington does this and it isn't too bad. I may get this wrong because we utilize an umbrella school who does all of the paperwork filing for me but the parent has to have some level of college education, take a training course for homeschoolers, or use a certificated teacher who oversees the homeschool. I am college educated so it hasn't applied to me plus through our umbrella we have an hour of contact or more weekly with a certificated classes through the elective classes we choose to take there. I know a parent who did the training and she found it helpful.

 

I actually don't mind this aspect of oversight to homeschooling. What would cause me to bristle would be how they would address curriculum choice. I am sure it may start out innocent enough but I wonder how and what that would look like.

 

Our umbrella does require us to track hours and list our curriculum resources. They don't care what we use as long as we can show how we track progress. We write progress updates that lay out the basics of what we did that month and how we assessed learning. So for example, as long as our unschoolers can show generally what they are working on or towards it is a non issue. We technically are not suppose to use Christian curriculum but as long as we use other secular resources we can report "so and so did 5 math pages and worked on multiplication of single numbers, measurement..." etc etc and those could be from Christian curriculum. I can say they did 3 copywork selections and I don't have to say they were bible verses for example. We do submit work samples but just a few each month.

 

They don't come into our house though. That feels like such a violation. As long as parents are showing the above, I don't see why it has to include doing it in the home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

K, you win. But not by much. Ca currently doesn’t define homeschooling as a separate thing. We run tiny private schools around here. We have to file one form a year, no follow up after that. We need to teach the main subjects in English and keep an attendance calendar, which amounts to keeping track of absences (um, zero?). No testing.

I find the lack of oversight actually a little disturbing. In Texas, the lack of any regulation at all means that home schools are, de facto, persona non grata- legally treated as though they are in a separate, parallel, and unrecognized educational universe.

 

School administrators didn't even see my kid on the educational map. It can make it difficult for formerly home schooled students to matriculate into public schools, especially high school. It's common policy among many ISDs not to recognize unaccredited high school credits. They are also frequently diffucult to work with when it comes to partial enrollment, and participation in school athletics and clubs.

 

So, a 16 year old gets enrolled as a 9th grader, regardless of his home school academic transcript, because most ISDs simply won't recognize those credits.

 

Basically, the state's attitude seems to be, yeah, we don't monitor you, but neither do we have to pretend that your "school" is real.

 

It's that dismissive attitude that causes me to rank Texas, overall, as unfriendly to home schoolers, regardless of how "friendly" the law appears on paper.

Edited by Aelwydd
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We aren't talking about whether it's right or wrong, though. We're talking about whether it's actually unconstitutional. No one wants to have home inspections, but in the context of homeschooling do they violate the Constitution? I'd have to see a better argument than, "I can do what I want with my kids," to convince me of that. The government can compel us to do all sorts of things with our children- educate them, vaccinate them, provide adequate medical care- and it doesn't violate the Constitution. Also, the government could probably make the argument that parents voluntarily homeschool, so no one is actually being compelled to allow the government into their home involuntarily, and that a home visit isn't the same as an unreasonable search of the home.

 

Again, I'm not debating whether this law would be a good idea or not, only if it's unconstitutional. Because I don't see that argument holding up.

You are absolutely right. It may not be considered unconstitutional. Mine was a knee jerk reaction for sure. Nothing causes my logical brain to shut off like too much government oversight when California should be busy fixing their own failing public schools. It probably isn't mine to worry about since I will never live there but like I said, I do worry about Washington feeling as though they need more oversight.

 

I have a tainted and possibly jaded view when it comes to government oversight. Having been on that counseling side of it I know how absolutely intrusive we can be in the name of "we know what's best" and as a green therapist back then, I trusted the process. I have seen real damage done to families. What I know now is those "experts" are so biased and fallible even when they mean well. They use shoddy research that cannot be reproduced to bolster their rationale. They also judge, misunderstand and manipulate. I just think it's a bad idea but again Mergath, you are right that it probably isn't unconstitutional.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the lack of oversight actually a little disturbing. In Texas, the lack of any regulation at all means that home schools are, de facto, persona non grata- legally treated as though they are in a separate, parallel, and unrecognized educational universe.

 

School administrators didn't even see my kid on the educational map. It can make it difficult for formerly home schooled students to matriculate into public schools, especially high school. It's common policy among many ISDs not to recognize unaccredited high school credits. They are also frequently diffucult to work with when it comes to partial enrollment, and participation in school athletics and clubs.

 

So, a 16 year old gets enrolled as a 9th grader, regardless of his home school academic transcript, because most ISDs simply won't recognize those credits.

 

Basically, the state's attitude seems to be, yeah, we don't monitor you, but neither do we have to pretend that your "school" is real.

 

It's that dismissive attitude that causes me to rank Texas, overall, as unfriendly to home schoolers, regardless of how "friendly" the law appears on paper.

Ca is the same. High school is an all or nothing proposition. Florida has a really nice middle ground, but I think the chances of Ca creating laws like that is unlikely.

 

Ca couldn’t afford to have all these kids enrolled. Where’s that money coming from? I’m hoping the finances of this squelch the legislature’s enthusiasm.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ca is the same. High school is an all or nothing proposition. Florida has a really nice middle ground, but I think the chances of Ca creating laws like that is unlikely.

 

Ca couldn’t afford to have all these kids enrolled. Where’s that money coming from? I’m hoping the finances of this squelch the legislature’s enthusiasm.

Too true.

 

Does California also use its lack of home school oversight as a way to shield its actual H.S. drop out rate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Federal courts in other states dealt with the issue of home visits in the 80s and found them unconstitutional. In order to pass constitutional muster, the state has to prove that home visits would make a real difference in educational outcomes AND prove that home visits are the least restrictive means of ensuring children are being taught to read. Due process means government officials cannot come into your house to look for evidence of a crime without proving that it is absolutely necessary for state interests. Social workers must have a warrant, building inspectors must have evidence that you are renting or have made significant building modifications, they can see your trash, etc. Courts have held that the only state interest in education is basic literacy. So they have to choose the least restrictive means of ensuring that. In the case of California, according to the state constitution, school officials cannot support or monitor religious education, which is why they have left private schools, including homeschools, alone.

Edited by Ms.Ivy
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ca couldn’t afford to have all these kids enrolled. Where’s that money coming from? I’m hoping the finances of this squelch the legislature’s enthusiasm.

This is my theory.... I have nothing to back it up, but I do think that finances are at the root of the lack of oversight. We pay our taxes, but don’t put our kids in school. If all of the sudden we said, this is too hard, i’m Sick of these regulations and flooded the schools with our kids....what would they do?? Continue to raise our taxes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my theory.... I have nothing to back it up, but I do think that finances are at the root of the lack of oversight. We pay our taxes, but don’t put our kids in school. If all of the sudden we said, this is too hard, i’m Sick of these regulations and flooded the schools with our kids....what would they do?? Continue to raise our taxes?

Maybe that is exactly what they hope happens. A huge rush of homeschooled kids that are doing well academically will flood the school, boosting their abysmal test scores and getting people off their back about their shockingly low literacy percentage. How's that for a conspiracy theory ;) Of course I am joking...I don't actually believe that is their goal...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too true.

 

Does California also use its lack of home school oversight as a way to shield its actual H.S. drop out rate?

I think it is more common for high schoolers to be put into online charter or public independent study programs where they can do credit recovery programs. Of course many then drop out of those public programs, which leads to anti-school choice groups pointing to charter schools as failures in and of themselves, when often they are just the last stop on the public school failure train.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is more common for high schoolers to be put into online charter or public independent study programs where they can do credit recovery programs. Of course many then drop out of those public programs, which leads to anti-school choice groups pointing to charter schools as failures in and of themselves, when often they are just the last stop on the public school failure train.

No, ma'am. Texas has multiple online charter schools, but these are all classified as public, meaning attendance is required and students sit for the same EOY testing. (A side note: in Texas, you cannot even enroll in the online charter programs unless you have attended a B&M public school for the previous year at least.) If a child drops out of a public online charter, it is accounted for by the same school officials.

 

What I refer to is the somewhat widespread practice of TX school officials formally reporting drop outs as "home schooled," when no such thing is occurring, not even ostensibly.

 

Some of these students drop out and then pay $300 for a degree from an online mill. These "schools" can do this because they call themselves online homeschooling, and are classified as private.

 

In both cases, the "private school" loophole helps TX mask a 30% overall drop out rate.

 

Sources:

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/how-private-schools-help-lower-texas-dropout-numbers/

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2015/06/07/411779238/thousands-of-high-school-students-getting-lost-in-texas

 

https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/Dropout-statistics-under-fire-780684.php

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant that I think it is more common in California to transfer to charter rather than private home school. I don't doubt it happens as you described other places, I just haven't personally heard of it happening in California.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant that I think it is more common in California to transfer to charter rather than private home school. I don't doubt it happens as you described other places, I just haven't personally heard of it happening in California.

Yeah, I think Texas holds that dubious crown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It may be that the simple CA requirement of needing to file an affidavit affirming the existence of a private school is what prevents public schools from being able lie like that. Interesting point to bring up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...