Regarding the following from the other post, I shall continue my role as an outsider trying to make sense out of California homeschooling code.
Actually, this is the part of the California code that relates to qualification for a private tutor in the state of California. Thus, if you want to teach OTHER FOLKS’ kids (emphasized by Amendment10) privately, you must meet the requirements of section 48224.What's this OTHER FOLKS' kids stuff? You can say OTHER FOLKS' kids until you are blue in the face, but the idea is not properly codified. You've got to keep in mind that regardless if judges take liberties to "paraphrase" the code, you cannot.
As many California homeschoolers have actually directly said on many of these threads, most homeschoolers in California qualify through section 48222, not 48224, becoming a "private school" within their own home (emphasized by Amendment10). The qualifications cited to which you replied are for 48222, not 48224. To qualify through 48222, one must merely be “capable of teaching,” not a certified teacher.Home? What home? In fact, I searched for the word home on the page in question and it doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere (corrections welcome).
CA Codes (edc:48220-48232)Again, I appreciate that you are telling me what Californians have been practicing with respect to homeschooling. However, the actual code does not necessarily reasonably the nuances that you are suggesting, in my opinion, regardless of your good intentions. In fact...
One problem with poorly written code is that it gives people, including judges, a license to make it mean anything that they want it to mean. You are demonstrating this as much as the judges are.
Basicaly, a tutor is someone you hire to teach your childern.
Homeschoolers teach only their own children. They file as a private school only. It is under the private school laws that homeschooling legally takes place. Tutoring is different in that you teach others children for money.
There are different laws for the tutor.
And then there are different laws for private schools, of which includes homeschoolers.
I have filed the R-4 affidavit for nine years here in California. I have never done a criminal background check on myself, or have I given the state my childs name. I do not charge others for my services. Therefore I do not need to have a teaching credential. If all private schools need a teaching credential, then it is not just homeschoolers that are being affected. ALL PRIVATE SCHOOLS WILL NEED TO HAVE CREDENTIALED TEACHERS WHICH NONE CURRENTLY DO.
Boy, I am getting sick of people thinking that they understand California homeschooling when they do not.
In other parts of the California code, a “private school” is defined as a ““person, firm, association, partnership, or
corporation offering or conducting private school instruction on the elementary or high school
level.”
As I've read elsewhere, that's a pretty broad definition, and there's nothing in that definition of “private school” that would exclude someone teaching his children at home.
A parent teaching her children at home would be a "person... offering or conducting private school instruction..."
Thus, meaning is given because meaning is provided by the code itself.
sitetest