Author Topic: California judge says no to homeschooling  (Read 73009 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2008, 09:04:28 PM »
<<The case wasn't about whether the Long children were being properly educated. It was about whether the state could legally require homeschool teachers to be certified.>>

So what?  If the state has a right of oversight to ensure that the kids aren't being short-changed educationally, HOW they go about enforcing that right of oversight on a cost-effective basis that still respects human rights to the extent of not trampling on them any more than is absolutely necessary to fulfilling their mandate is their business.  It seems to me that licensing requirements is one reasonable way to go.

Rich

  • Guest
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2008, 09:07:30 PM »
>>Folks like Tee & the Government simply know better than the rest of us schmucks<<

What other explanation could there be? It' right out of Mao's little red book.

fatman

  • Guest
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2008, 09:11:59 PM »
What other explanation could there be? It' right out of Mao's little red book.

At least he's literate enough to read it.  You'd probably read it and claimed Hitler wrote it.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16138
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2008, 09:28:31 PM »
Quote
So what?  If the state has a right of oversight to ensure that the kids aren't being short-changed educationally, HOW they go about enforcing that right of oversight on a cost-effective basis that still respects human rights to the extent of not trampling on them any more than is absolutely necessary to fulfilling their mandate is their business.  It seems to me that licensing requirements is one reasonable way to go.

One of the guiding principles of justice is that laws be applied equally. How is it fair for the state to issue an emergency credentials when it needs one yet set higher standards for home schoolers.


Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2008, 09:49:36 PM »
<<One of the guiding principles of justice is that laws be applied equally. How is it fair for the state to issue an emergency credentials when it needs one yet set higher standards for home schoolers.>>

I go along with what you say in general, although I haven't given this the same consideration as the judge did.  He might have figured that there are plenty of safeguards built into the school system already, maybe there is professional supervision of the emergency-credentialled teachers, maybe the emergency credentials are good for limited time only, maybe the standards aren't really higher, just easier for some reason to meet than for homeschoolers - - I don't really know.  If there's no logical reason to discriminate, then obviously they shouldn't discriminate.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27077
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2008, 09:52:14 PM »
One of the guiding principles of justice is that laws be applied equally. How is it fair for the state to issue an emergency credentials when it needs one yet set higher standards for home schoolers.

BINGO 
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #21 on: March 06, 2008, 10:53:46 PM »

the parents' right to decide on their kids' education stops short at child abuse and stops short at depriving them of the same educational opportunities as other kids.


Neither of which has anyone provided any evidence of having occurred. Until someone does, the argument is without substance.


They don't OWN those kids, you know.  They still have parental responsibilities and if they don't live up to them, the state will take those kids and put them with someone who will.


They still have parental responsibilities? Why, yes, they do. Responsibilities which they are trying to fulfill. If the children were being left wholly uneducated, you might have a point. But they aren't, and you don't.


Well in real life the law is never called on to deal with "average" children


Setting aside for the moment of whether that is true or not, there seems to have been a misunderstanding. I'll try to clarify by rephrasing. Homeschooled children perform, on average, better on standard tests than public school children.

(Aside to Stray Pooch: Shut up. Just don't even think about it.)



The parents who DO rear their kids must conform to minimal acceptable standards of rearing children and if they don't, they WILL lose those kids.  Don't kid yourself into believing that the state doesn't have the right and the duty to see that kids are reared and educated to at least minimum acceptable standards.  There is no property in a child - - the child has rights and the parent who won't provide those rights won't have that child.


Well, gee, that sure seems reasonable, except for the fact that this part of the conversation started with you saying, "outlaw all religious, ethnic and home-schooling, and mandate that every kid without exception attend a regular school week in a regular school year at his neighbourhood public school." You've essentially advocated removing from parents the power to choose how and where their children are educated. How can parents take responsibility for rearing their children when you take the power to effectively rear children away from the parents? And so the question remains, why even bother letting parents rear children at all?
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Stray Pooch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
  • Pray tell me, sir, whose dog are you?
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #22 on: March 08, 2008, 06:20:17 AM »
(Aside to Stray Pooch: Shut up. Just don't even think about it.)

Why UP, whatever could you mean by that?   :D

The obvious problem with this ruling is that the judge made the statement that parents have no "constitutional right" to home school.  Typical. This is the problem with liberals.  They view the Constitution as a source of rights, instead of a document designed to protect them.  I have always said the most ignorant argument anyone can make about a rights issue is "there is no such right in the Constitution."  I hate to see such an argument coming from a judge.

The problem is that a more coherent and relevant argument can be made.  Although MTs claims of child abuse are typical hyperbole, a more realistic argument can be made with the same practical effect.  Though the right of a parent to teach his children is inherent, the state's interest in education is long since established.  As such, a simple application of the principle of equality established in Brown vs. Board of Education would suggest that home schooling, regardless of outcome, is not equal to public schooling.  The same argument could be equally applied (no pun intended) to private schools.  Competing claims about freedom of religion and expression would be weighed against the state's interest in educating the population.  The bottom line may well be that the state's right to impose educational standards and insure comnpliance supercede the right of a parent to control his child's education.   A legally sustainable conclusion would be that only public education could provide an equal opportunity to all children, as defined by the principles of Brown.

In other words, an unintended consequence of Brown, one of the greatest freedom-enhancing decisions in the court's history, would be to deny freedom to another segment of society half a century later.

There's a Shakespearian quote about lawyers in the back of my mind here . . .
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 08:46:52 AM by Stray Pooch »
Oh, for a muse of fire, that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention . . .

Stray Pooch

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 860
  • Pray tell me, sir, whose dog are you?
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #23 on: March 08, 2008, 06:47:30 AM »
How can parents take responsibility for rearing their children when you take the power to effectively rear children away from the parents? And so the question remains, why even bother letting parents rear children at all?

This line of reasoning with MT fails to consider a fundamental philosophical tenet of communism.  Allow me to quote the non-comedic Marx.


Quote from: The Communist Manifesto:  http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html
Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists.

On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among proletarians, and in public prostitution.

The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.

But, you say, we destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home education by social.

And your education! Is not that also social, and determined by the social conditions under which you educate, by the intervention direct or indirect, of society, by means of schools, etc.? The Communists have not intended the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class.

The bourgeois claptrap about the family and education, about the hallowed correlation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labor.

Oh, for a muse of fire, that would ascend the brightest heaven of invention . . .

Xavier_Onassis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27916
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #24 on: March 08, 2008, 02:29:36 PM »
If you want a job done right, you can either do it yourself, or hire a professional. I imagine that most people would hire someone to fix their car AC, for example. Is educating your child more or less important or complicated than a car AC? I'd say teaching the kid is both more complicated and more important. Most people have someone else do their income taxes, which I have found is not hard at all using software on the PC. I'd call this less complicated and more important than educating a child as well.


American schools are a long ways from the best, compared with schools in Europe and Japan.

The way we run schools, with elected schoolboards staffed by non-professionals results in out students knowing considerably LESS than students the same age in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, France, Switzerland and Germany, just to name a few countries that outdo us.

There should be SOME supervision over parents who wish to homeschool their children, They should have some degree of preparation evident. Perhaps the parents need to pass some sort of exam.

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."

Cynthia

  • Guest
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #25 on: March 08, 2008, 03:32:40 PM »
If you want a job done right, you can either do it yourself, or hire a professional. I imagine that most people would hire someone to fix their car AC, for example. Is educating your child more or less important or complicated than a car AC? I'd say teaching the kid is both more complicated and more important. Most people have someone else do their income taxes, which I have found is not hard at all using software on the PC. I'd call this less complicated and more important than educating a child as well.


American schools are a long ways from the best, compared with schools in Europe and Japan.

The way we run schools, with elected schoolboards staffed by non-professionals results in out students knowing considerably LESS than students the same age in the Netherlands, Scandinavia, France, Switzerland and Germany, just to name a few countries that outdo us.

There should be SOME supervision over parents who wish to homeschool their children, They should have some degree of preparation evident. Perhaps the parents need to pass some sort of exam.




One of the reasons that the schools in France are better than those in the US, is that they have a predictable and  consistent plan of action from year to year to year. Their system pulls no surprise punches on the community, the educators, or the parents andchildren. The expectations of all involved remain consistent with high standards year after year after year....
The parents know what is expected of the student from year to year. The teacher has a solid plan from year to year. The students are aware of exactly what is expected of them from year to year. Progress!

In our school system, we mess with the tangles in the hair so damned much that wearing a wig is required to walk into the society!!  We tend to cover the mistakes the system is responsible for creating, by blaming those very teachers who have had to endure such comb outs. Some of the educators in the system are bad apples...but NOT ALL. We blame on a daily basis. Schools ON THE NEWS for minor things....like recently in our own city....a speech therapist doesn't get to service a child for just three hours...and she is sued. When in fact, the lack of the three hours comes down to interruptions like assemblies, and other things principals require. But no one looked at that as the reason..the speech therapist is blamed and better make up the hours. 
A school fails to service a bi-lingual program by a mear two hours...and it is ON THE NEWS.. my god!

Change(and not positive changes for the most part) are the only consistent things we can expect from year to year in US schools. I suppose that is par for the course to get on course in any system overhaul.

And of course, change is a good thing; but when there is a turn over of board members and superintendents year after year...... sometimes within the school year.....When there are curriculum switch-a-roos year after year sometimes month after month....when there are demands that teachers become highly qualified by taking a magic bullet test, or a one credit hour in math even if those veteran teachers after having taught for years and well....those types of changes do more harm than good. Inconsistent and damaging to moral, etc. The cure does not fit the illness.

While, I agree that changes are necessary in order to improve schools, it is also damaging when not done right.
The flip flopping of individuals who have the final say in a matter...i.e. board members, superintendents, make for a dysfunctional system if the child has to bear the brunt.

So you ask yourself.....are the French people better educated than we? Or...Do are they better prepared because they have been able to sustain growth through consistent best practices as a whole system?

More intelligent is not necessarily the outcome of such a system.

 NCLB is a good idea. Sure, there I said it..... I have always believed we need such an act to find that sense of consistency ...why? who the hell wants to LEAVE A CHILD BEHIND?
But, I also say that the way we are going about it has a lot more to do with politics than brilliant educators who know and have studied education and who are at the very top of the system ---guiding it into port.

But, we are headed in the right direction at least. I have a better feeling about the whole thing. If we can get through the storm, we might find that consistency and stay the course, if we don't throw the teachers who are good...out with the bathwater. The fear of being good enough is backfiring and leaving some children not only behind but scrambling to learn....THUS HOME SCHOOLING..Who in their right mind wants a child to go without all that can be offered in education? I wouldn't want that for my child. I would want my child to have a well rounded education.

 But, I do have to admit,  I feel more hopeful that through time we might see a solid base for educating our young people in the PS. I hope.  My biggest gripe is that we have had to throw out several vital subjects to make room for three basic subjects..."reading, writing and arithmetic".

When I started teaching, the curriculum included everything. Everything. Perhpas we have cleaned the chalkboard to start over? One step at a time? Bring in the jazz later? Well, god I hope so...or we will see very dysfunctional, culturally and artistically challenged beings in our society.

« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 03:36:09 PM by Cynthia »

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #26 on: March 08, 2008, 04:40:00 PM »

If you want a job done right, you can either do it yourself, or hire a professional. I imagine that most people would hire someone to fix their car AC, for example. Is educating your child more or less important or complicated than a car AC? I'd say teaching the kid is both more complicated and more important.


Possibly it is. That is hardly a reason to ban homeschooling.


There should be SOME supervision over parents who wish to homeschool their children, They should have some degree of preparation evident. Perhaps the parents need to pass some sort of exam.


Why? Is the priority the qualifications of the parent or the education of the student? Let the student take standard tests. If he can pass, say, the same tests local public school children take, then obviously the student is learning as well or better than the students in public school. If we must have standards, the child learning should be the standard since that is the outcome desired, is it not? Or is the desired outcome merely to prevent homeschooling?
« Last Edit: March 08, 2008, 04:54:35 PM by Universe Prince »
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27077
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #27 on: March 08, 2008, 04:52:50 PM »
Let the student take standard tests. If he can pass, say, the same tests local public school children take, then obviously the student is leaning as well or better than the students in public school. If we must have standards, the child learning should be the standard since that is the outcome desired, is it not? Or is the desired outcome merely to prevent homeschooling?

I think you may be on to something there, Prince
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #28 on: March 08, 2008, 04:58:55 PM »

As such, a simple application of the principle of equality established in Brown vs. Board of Education would suggest that home schooling, regardless of outcome, is not equal to public schooling.


But then, not all public schooling is equal either.
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--

Universe Prince

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3660
  • Of course liberty isn't safe; but it is good.
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: California judge says no to homeschooling
« Reply #29 on: March 08, 2008, 05:01:40 PM »
Quote

Do you charge us with wanting to stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To this crime we plead guilty.


No, I charge you with wanting to exploit children for your own purposes.
Your reality, sir, is lies and balderdash and I'm delighted to say that I have no grasp of it whatsoever.
--Hieronymus Karl Frederick Baron von Munchausen ("The Adventures of Baron Munchausen" [1988])--