FReep Report on hearing of Pennsylvania Homeschool Law

Vanity | 6/13/02 | ArGee

[ArGee]

I attended a public hearing on Pennsylvania HB 2560, a new law which would significantly reduce government control of home schooling in PA. There were, perhaps, 800 in attendance (I've never been very good at such things). This was a hearing for the House Education Committee, not a public forum, so we were only there to listen. Here are my observations, for those who are interested:

• There were supposed to be two panels. One was to start at 10:00 and end at 11:00. the other was to start at 12:00 and end at 1:00. The first panel ended at 12:15. It consisted of an attorney from the Home School Legal Defense Association, a member of the National Home School Research Institute, a school superintendant, and a school board member. I'm sorry I don't have all the names.

• There were about 40 representatives listening to the testimony. Of those, perhaps 6 were not white males. Most of the questions hostile to the new law came from those 6. I have no idea what the party affiliation breakdown is.

• Those who supported HB 2560 were supposed to wear red. Those who were opposed were supposed to wear blue. The audience was comprised of perhaps 5-10% people in blue. The rest were in red.

• The audience was reminded that they were welcome to listen, but they were not participants. We were asked not to applaud, etc. It was hard to avoid applauding when the HSLDA attorney said, "These people are here for one thing - freedom!" However, most of the time we behaved ourselves. The most obvious violation came when one of the committee members pointed out the importance of education, telling us that prisons are full of people who didn't get a good education. An audience member shouted out, "They all went to public schools!" He was shushed by his neighbors, but the point was heard throughout the hall.
• This bill has to do with home schools. Naturally, there were lots of kids there. They were not at all disruptive. Some participated, others did school work. All got a touch of education into our political process.
• Although there was a lot of good information (I'll get to that later) in the first panel and a lot of questions asked of them, it was not contentious. It took 1:15 longer than was alloted, but it was respectful.
• I did not hear the list of everyone who was on the second panel, and I could not stay until the end of their testimony. The first two I heard were in favor of the new law. One was full of statistics (again, I'll get to information later). The next talked about the burden of the PA law compared to other states. She actually choked up when she talked about how hard it is to home school in this state, but she got control and was able to finish. The third was a woman who has home schooled for a long time here, and plans to home school for a long time more. She focused on the benefits of the current law and asked that we not gut it with the new one. Then a man spoke who was clearly only trying to protect a non-profit business he had formed to support home schoolers. I know it's not his fault that his voice was whiny, but it didn't help because all he was doing was whining. I was a little embarassed to be associated with him as a fellow home schooler. When he said, "This law will be a Statue of Liberty for dropouts" the audience laughed at him. That was when I left. Hopefully someone else can fill us in on the end of the meeting.

Here are some of the more interesting quotes I heard, in random order:

• One representative actually told us that he was concerned that this law would codify that parents would be free to teach their children according to their religious beliefs. He pointed out that religious beliefs are used to justify racism. The panelist pointed out that this law simply codified protections we already had under the constitution.
• The HSLDA lawyer pointed out that the only state in the nation that has as highly regulated a home school environment is New York, and they are "on the verge of changing their law."
• The school board representative actually said, "Freedom is wonderful, and we all support it, but..." I don't even remember what came after the "but..." since the red-alert warning was going off in my head. Hello! They want to take your freedoms away. Heellllllooooooooo!
• One rep. asked the school superintendant, "What percentage of home school parents are dedicated and committed in your district?" She answered, "99%." He then asked, "What percentage of the parents of the public school children are dedicated and committed?" She answered, "Probably not that high." At least she was honest.
• One representative said, "What we see here are bureaucrats of public education vs. parents who want to educat their children." A little later he said, "There must be more important things for us to do than bothering these people (indicating the audience)." (Yes, he got applause for that line.)
• Those who spoke in favor of HB 2560 tended to talk about government 'control.' Those who spoke against HB 2560 tended to talk about 'accountability.'
• The attorney pointed out that the Supreme Court of the U.S. has upheld the principle that parents are presumed to be acting in the best interests of their children. He also said there is no legal framework to sue a school for malpractice in education, but if someone who is home schooled isn't teaching their kids you can bring them up for violating compulsary attendance. Home schoolers are actually more accountable than public educators.
• The woman with all the statistics said that school districts spend $5 million a year reviewing the work of home schoolers. They only wind up questioning .09% of them. Hardly a good ROI.
• Here in PA we have to submit a notarized affidavit every year saying that we will comply with the home schooling law. One woman wanted to know why that wasn't enough? She asked, "Why do we then have to submit all this proof that we are complying with the law. They are assuming we are liars."
• Several times the point was made that, "under current law people are guilty until proven innocent." The attorney pointed out that it was illegal to use drugs, but that didn't mean that someone could demand regular drug tests of every citizen. You have to have probably cause to investigate illegal drug use. In the same way, parents should be presumed to be complying with the cumpulsary attendance law unless there is probable cause to believe otherwise.

Those are my observations. Did anyone else attend?

[ArGee]

There wasn't any particular FReeping going on, but due to the subject matter I thought you might all be interested.

I did talk to one woman whose daughter was concerned that she wouldn't be able to get a recognized home school diploma under the new law. I told the girl (maybe 14?) that I was over 40 years old, and I had only been asked to produce my high-school diploma once in the 24 years since I graduated - when I submitted the paperwork to home school my children in PA. I told her colleges won't care about a diploma. They will care about SAT scores and the transcript. Unless someone at the college personally knows the high school, the HS diploma isn't worth squat. We just have to keep educating them here in PA.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

Please add your observations.

Shalom.

[ZGuy]

Good job ArGee. Thanks for keeping us informed. A Freeper on the scene is better than a reporter any day!

[john in missouri]

School is dead. Learn in freedom.

[Jerrybob]

Public schools are going the way of the dodo bird and the HMS Titanic. The sooner the better. Parents have been trying for at least a generation to get the public schools to not do insane things; to no avail. May they (public schools) rest in peace.

[ArGee]

May they (public schools) rest in peace.

My officemate asked me if I thought there was any way the 'powers that be' could figure out how to fix the public schools. I told him, "Sure - make them compete for students."

It's time for freedom and choice in education. It's way past time, actually.

Shalom.

[SauronOfMordor]

I'm currently putting together my PA homeschool portfolios for my kids. It consumes about a man-day every year, that I could spend on other things, and does not accomplish anything productive IMHO.

[RikaStrom]

Excellent report ArGee. Very Concise.

Here in PA we have to submit a notarized affidavit every year saying that we will comply with the home schooling law. One woman wanted to know why that wasn't enough? She asked, "Why do we then have to submit all this proof that we are complying with the law. They are assuming we are liars."

This woman makes an excellent point.

[Pete]

Thank you very much for this report. Great job! I am in Philly and was not able to attend but I was very curious to hear how it went. Sounds like it went well.

The whiney guy you spoke of has a website. You are right about him. He is using scare tactics on his site to try to convince homeschoolers that this is a bad law. The bottom line is that he is trying to save his business. BTW, his complaints about the new law have been completed discredited by HSLDA.

[ArGee]

I'm currently putting together my PA homeschool portfolios for my kids. It consumes about a man-day every year, that I could spend on other things, and does not accomplish anything productive IMHO.

One of the panel members was proud - PROUD of the fact that it would only cost her about $315 (in cash) to home school each child. But what does she get for that $315? The Commonwealth will force her to comply with their rules, but they won't issue a diploma or certificate of completion or anything. All she gets for her $315 is the right to be left alone by the School District.

That's presuming the S.D. follows the law. The HSLDA attorney told us he had a file full of over 300,000 cases of trying to help home schoolers with over-active S.D.s. (I'm not clear whether those were all PA homeschoolers.)

Tonight I have to finish my objectives for next year - which I must submit to my S.D. and which the S.D. may not reject. How stupid is that?

Shalom.

[Pete]

Tonight I have to finish my objectives for next year

A while back I had heard that they were going to try to get this passed this year. Any word on that?

Our oldest is 8 this year and this will be the first time we have to file. It would be so nice if they were able to get this through before 8/1/02.

I know...wishful thinking.

[ArGee]

his complaints about the new law have been completed discredited by HSLDA.

He had the gall to quote Dewitt Black of HSLDA on his paper. It was clear that he felt his approach to home schooling is superior to everyone else's. I've checked out his program. He's an elitist who demands a lot of useless stuff rather than a valuable education.

Shalom.

[Pete]

He had the gall to quote Dewitt Black of HSLDA on his paper. It was clear that he felt his approach to home schooling is superior to everyone else's. I've checked out his program. He's an elitist who demands a lot of useless stuff rather than a valuable education.

Right after 2560 was announced, I followed a thread on it in his message board at his site. It was a HUGE thread. What I was left with after following the whole thread was that he has a diploma program that would be even more irrelevant if the law is passed and he was worried about his revenue stream. He never came right out and said that. Instead, he tried to scare everyone. The thread got somewhat heated when folks started pointing out the truth.

[twyn1]

My family attended also -- husband, myself and our two teenage children. I took extensive notes, but will try not to bore everyone with too much information....
Here goes...

Attendance--I thought it was over 1,000 people, one of the legislators mentioned 1,200 towards the end of the meeting.

Red definitely outnumbered blue, red was a great choice, bright colors really grab the eye, while the "blues" blended in, esp. since the seating was blue.

Speakers--
First Session

• Jess Stairs (Education Committee Chairman)-- general welcome, intro of committee/panel members
• Rep. Sam Rohrer (Sponsor of the Bill and homeschooling father) -- gave a little info. about the 1988 H.E. Bill and the new Proposal
• Carol Saylor (Manheim Central SD Superintendent) -- supports and recognizes high achievement of home education/homeschoolers but wants to keep the current standards and requirements, wants to have accountability, due to "concerns" about lack of protection for children (mentioned immunizations, no testing or review under proposal, no knowledge of "felony" charges for home educating parents, etc.)
• Idetta Groff (School Board Member/Lancaster Area) -- mentioned the high homeschool numbers in her area (Amish/Mennonite population) and the fact that the children seem to do well, but also wants to keep the accountability because it is the State's responsibility to provide for an educated citizenry
• Chris Glicka (Home School Legal Defense Association)-- Freedom !! eliminate burdensome laws, he listed the unfair & arbitrary requirements by many school districts that are outside and above the law. Also said that HSLDA deals with many more cases of District problems and abuses in PA than in other states. Regulations do not make better students, parents have a fundamental (Supreme Court upheld) right (14th Amendment) to educate (or direct the education of) their children as they see fit
• Brian Ray (NHERI-research & stats, was also a public/private teacher) -- homeschoolers proven to have high academic and social achievement, this success is NOT tied to the amount of state regualtion. No cause and effect can be proven between high regulation and high achievement of HS'ers, however the less regulation an district has over the HS'ers in their district, the BETTER their own PS students perform

There were then some questions by the committee members -(I have notes on these if anyone has specific concerns I can let you know if they were addressed)

Second Session

• Maryalice Newborn (PHEN) -- PHEN is the oldest support group in PA. They feel the proposed Bill upholds court findings regarding parental rights (and that they supersede governmental/state concerns).Took a survey and of reported Districts (~20% of total SD's), 92% exceed the law in requirements for HS'ing families. Only .09% of HS'ing families are found to have given/be giving an improper or inadequate education, at a great cost to districts. HB2560 will save state education money. People are moving from or refusing to move to PA because of the rigid HE law (she had 60+ confirming letters attached)
• Ellen Kramer (Catholic Homeschoolers of PA)-- present law is ambiguous and burdensome, and leads to abuse/ignorance by districts. ALL diplomas should be equally recognized (including parent-issued), Some kids are denied State Grant money for college, they cannot get the SD to sign a certificate EVEN thought they have fully complied with the law and their HE program has been approved after each year in high school
• Carol Lugg (North Central PA HS'ers)-- felt the law was fine, did not mind having to comply with the regulations (alltho' she did admit she would not mind if a few "hoops" were removed). Said she spent less than $400 a year per child (*note* this is a LOT of money to a low-income family, esp. if they have a large family--the woman next to me had SEVEN children, all close in age...that adds up to quite a bundle of cash, eh??). Carol uses a diploma program (I believe it is Richman's) and felt these programs offered accountability and maintained high standards, resulting in the high regard towards PA HS'ers.
• Howard Richman (PA Homeschoolers, PHAA)-- runs a family business that "helps" homeschooling families. Offers (for "moderate" fees) "recognized" (NOT accredited) diplomas, evaluations, testing, sells booklets/materials to families on how to comply with the PA law (booklets that recommend overcompliance). Howard is a former educator and part of the original committee that came up with the current PA Home Ed. law (which he "surprise !" just happens to make a living from). I was a bit "irritated" by his satements which came across as a complete lack of trust in the ability and integrity of home educating parents and implicated that the only reason HS'ers in PA do so well is because they are held accountable and FORCED to, otherwise we'd all be too "busy". Howard seemed terrified (and a bit angry) that the proposed law would eliminate diploma programs and would lead to a downfall in standards of HS'ed students in PA. He recounted a meeting in which he was told that his diplomas would be protected/included in the new law, and was upset when this offer was removed (I was later told, by more than one person who were in attendance at the above mentioned meeting, that this was not true, Mr. Richman has refused from the get-go to agree to any Bill that did not conform to his strict desires and has refused any offer of compromise-- he will not acknowledge the worth of a parent-issued diploma). Mr. Richman proposed keeping the current Bill as is, but allowing a new "alternative" law for others who do not use a diploma program (implication is that this second choice would be "substandard" to his diploma program).
• Bruce Eagleson (CHAP) -- the present law is complex and difficult to interpret, Districts enforce the law in an uneven, and often, unfair manner. HS'ers are known to be successful, devoted and diligent, but waste money and time in order to comply with a law that is not proven to raise performance, this $ and time is better spent on the HS'ed children within the families.
• Edi Thomas (Erie Co. Homeschoolers) -- also runs a diploma program but supports the new Bill. Feels many parents would still choose to use a diploma program and yearly evaluators, and this would be allowed and recognized under the proposal. She was not threatened by the new Bill and welcomed the freedom.

A few personal notes...meeting was informative & did not drag (too much). The kids in attendance were absolutely wonderful -- the 10 or 12 little ones near me were well-behaved and very quiet. The HSLDA guy was a bit long-winded but I could tell he was trying to get alot of information out in such a short time. The committee members asked some interesting questions, alltho' the guy asking about "religiously backed racism" made no sense. There was one woman legislator who had socialist leanings, she was very concerned about "state responsibility" in education. You could feel a bit of tension in the later session, esp. during Mr. Richman's statement, and at the end when he was visibly angry at a comment made by Maryalice Newborn (regarding "purchased" diplomas). Great comments by Rep. Bob Bastian, who has HS'ed grandkids) and by Rep. Paul Clymer (HS'ed teens rarely have drug/alcohol problems, are registering to vote & involved in gov't/society, and have a moral upbringing to care for others, along with strong family units/involved parents). On that note... Almost everyone had to admit that involved parents make for better students and one-on-one learning was the best, esp. for special needs children. Parental education level mattered very little in HS'ed children's achievement. I think the legislators were very favorably impressed by the large turnout and by the enthusiasm and passion that was evident in the audience. Special Needs was brought up a few times...there is an amendment to the Bill already in the works concerning these children.

For those who have cable and PCN...the meeting will be broadcast later tonight and I think tomorrow also---their website is PCN

[WillaJohns]

This is a great report. Thank you for posting and going to the meeting!

[twyn1]

I posted a few times on that PA Homeschoolers thread...and ended up being "banned" for about 2 weeks...and moderated/partially banned thereafter...guess they didn't like my attitude (I called Mr. Richman an "elitist")

[ArGee]

Thanks, twyn1. I wish I had heard the last presentations.

The issue really is freedom vs control. I have little to no sympathy for someone who wants to earn a living helping the state control people.

Freepers in PA, start letting your reps know you support HB 2560.

Shalom.

[ArGee]

(I called Mr. Richman an "elitist")

That's Dr. Richmann you insensitive, undeucated, undiplomaed boob!

;)

Shalom.

[ArGee]

He recounted a meeting

It's when he started that review that I really decided I had to get back to work. We were supposed to be talking about a bill, not about whether he had been treated with the respect he felt he was due. If that was all the more adult he could be then I was sorry for him - and embarassed for the "fellow" homeschoolers there.

Anyone need some whine?

BTW: I may not have mentioned that I moved to PA from Texas just about a year ago. None of the concerns voiced at our meeting are problems in Texas, which has a very freedom-oriented law. If the cowboys can handle it, certainly the farmers of PA can.

Shalom.

[Domestic Church]

That was Mary Hudzinski and not Edi Thomas. I heard the testimonies from Mary Hudzinzki, Mary Alice Newborne and Ellen Kramer will be on the web shortly if they aren't already. I just got in the door so I haven't checked it out yet. I was shocked at Howard Richman insulting Rep. Rorher and Dr. Eagleson. Carol Lugg is a Richman follower. I spoke with a corordinator from the Fisher campaign and he is very much supportive of homeschooling (and freedom too, of course.)

HB2560 Lobby site