We Stand For Home Schooling

we stand for homeschooling.org ^ | 5 Jun 2003

[steplock]

We Stand For Homeschooling

The very nature, language and essence of homeschooling are being challenged and even co-opted by a vast array of emerging educational programs which may be based in the home, but are funded by government tax dollars, bringing inevitable government controls. These new "home-based" publicly-funded entities are variously called: charter schools, cyber-charters, e-schools, Independent Study Programs (ISP), dual enrollment, Blended Schools Programs (BSP), Programs for Non-Public Students (PNPS), Public School Alternative Programs (PSAP), virtual schools, academies, community schools, home bound, and other newly devised terms and concepts. There is a profound possibility that homeschooling is not only on the brink of losing its distinctiveness, but also is in grave danger of losing its independence. A recent article in Education Week illustrates the problem.

Now, the situation has been upended in an unanticipated manner as proponents of home schooling in California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and other states use charter school regulations to launch cyber schools. In many cases, youngsters who were already being schooled wholly at home are simply turning to cyber charter schools as a conduit to public funding, but others who had been in classrooms are staying home, too, to take whole schedules of courses online.

(1)

This view is distorted and incorrect. The vast majority of homeschoolers has never sought public funding. The "proponents" are those who would make a profit from publicly-financed home-based education. These proponents are not homeschoolers. The newly-emerging consumers of these programs are being misled into thinking these programs are homeschooling. Anyone who is enrolled in a publicly-funded school program, even if that public school is based in the home, is a public school student and not a homeschooler.

Further evidence of an unprecedented crisis is seen in a report from the Ozaukee Press (WI). Reporting on the development of Wisconsin Virtual Academy, a for-profit K12, Inc. cyber-charter school directed by William Bennett:

[Northern Ozaukee] School Board member Kate Redmond said she liked the idea of using a virtual school to reach out to families that want homeschooling for their children. "It is bringing home schooling under the state's umbrella," Redmond said.

(2)

One of the most blatant examples of "blending" homeschooling with existing public school models is represented in the Okaloosa County (FL) Blended School Project (BSP):

This proposal is designed to create a seamless educational plan for two groups of students: students that are schooled at home and students that are schooled at "government schools" (public schools). The proposal on the following pages would add a third choice beyond just home school or government schools…Blended Schools.

(3)

In an additional report from the Akron Beacon Journal regarding Ohio's TRECA, a cyber-school consortium of multiple school districts:

Educating children at home is the fastest growing element of charter schools in the state. Enrollment could soar from about 3,000 cyberschool students last year to more than 12,000 in the next few years. The superintendent estimates that while the schools receive more than $5,000 in state and local money per child, the cost is only $2,500 per elementary pupil and $3,500 per high schooler. He said public school districts would use profits to fund other school programs, while for-profit companies would pocket the difference.

(4)

What happens to homeschooling when publicly-funded school programs come under fire as has already begun? What will be the inevitable results of this guilt by association? As cited in Education Week:

Ohio's first online charter school-the Electronic Classroom Of Tomorrow, or eCOT-received $1.7 million in state payments for students who may not have met enrollment requirements in September and October of 2000, a recent state audit concludes.

(5)

We understand that it is pure folly to define what homeschooling is because of its diversity; nor can any one group pretend to speak for all homeschoolers. However, some educational programs can be clearly identified as NOT homeschooling. It is time to take a strong stand. Any time home education comes under "the state's umbrella" through public funding, it is no longer homeschooling. It is now public schooling.

________________________________________________________________________

WHEREAS a significant aspect of homeschooling is the independence from government control that it holds for every family regardless of the approach to education they choose;

WHEREAS charter school enrollees are public school students;

WHEREAS publicly-funded programs have co-opted the very language which homeschoolers have developed and utilized for years, including words and concepts such as: home education, family-based, parent-directed, independent family education, and the very word homeschooling itself. Publicly-funded cyber-schools are often misidentified as homeschools and the public will view them as homeschools if they are allowed to co-opt the language of homeschooling;

WHEREAS it is clear that the strongest motivation of the proponents of publicly-funded programs is access to taxpayer monies;

WHEREAS savvy marketing and slick corporate styled PR campaigns are purposely blurring the distinct difference between a publicly-funded cyber-school conducted at a place of residence and a homeschool, and in the process they are insulting parents by stating that homeschooling is extremely "arduous", "you need not feel frantic," and you need an "expert;"

WHEREAS homeschool parents are capable, intelligent people who accept responsibility for their children's education and have been effective without the enticements of a computer, "experts," reimbursements or packaged curriculum, and have succeeded without standards-driven accountability models, testing and other government interference;

WHEREAS the biggest difference between homeschools and publicly-funded school programs is that homeschoolers take direct responsibility by choosing a curriculum, an approach to learning, and the principles and values on which these are based while publicly-funded school program parents accept and follow detailed instructions about what to learn and how to learn it, using a curriculum designed to comply with state requirements and values;

WHEREAS cyber-public schools masquerading as homeschools are justifiably under fire for abuses, inevitably tarring homeschooling with the same brush; and

WHEREAS corporations are finding willing accomplices in school district administrations who are enticed by the financial gains corporations are promising their districts. Public school districts, because of the loss of funding, have pre-empted the for-profit corporations by starting their own publicly-funded in-home programs, even districts which object in principle to charter schools,

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the words and concepts of homeschooling should not be used by publicly-funded school programs, and/or by the corporations that control them, to seek legitimacy or profit;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the words and concepts of homeschooling should not be used to seek legitimacy by those who have chosen to enroll in a publicly-funded school program. These families should honestly call such enrollment what it is - enrollment in public school. Their choices should not compromise others' rights to remain independent.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the signers of this statement will work to ensure that the basic right to choose an education consistent with one's principles and beliefs is maintained for homeschoolers by informing homeschoolers and the general public that public school programs (including charter schools) that are easily confused with homeschools threaten the freedom to choose an education consistent with one's principles and beliefs; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the signers of this statement will encourage homeschoolers to make known explicitly and publicly how public school programs that are easily confused with homeschools, threaten our basic homeschooling freedoms and the nature, language, and definition of homeschooling.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the signers to this document reclaim homeschooling.

__________________________________________________________________________

We encourage you to print and circulate this document widely.
We also encourage others to join us by .

View the Original Signers by clicking .

Download this document as an Acrobat .

Print a printer friendly directly from your browser.

Download Acrobat Reader HERE.

_________________________________________________________________________

(1) Education Week "The Virtual Schoolhouse," by Gene I. Maeroff, February 26, 2003.

(2) Ozaukee Press, "Virtual school gets go-ahead in Fredonia," by Mark Jaeger, February 6, 2003.

(3) Okaloosa County (FL) Blended School Project Proposal at: http://www.okaloosa.k12.fl.us/stuserv/ci/blended_school_information.htm

(4) Akron Beacon Journal, "Funding falls short for cyberschools," by Dennis J. Willard and Doug Oplinger, July 17, 2002.

(5) Education Week, "Ohio Audit Reveals Difficulties Of Tracking Online Students," by Andrew Trotter, December 5, 2001.

[GOPrincess]

"Their venom was directed against those who accept government dollars to "homeschool.""

Right, and that's *me*. And I don't put any quotes around "homeschool."

[Diva Betsy Ross]

As I undserstand the school district does not get any federal money. I am in PA and there is much to do about this issue right now.

That being said I do not know for sure, I just don't to limit other people's choices for education. The way I see it, getting people to admit public education does not work is a step in the right direction.

[PMCarey]

Their premise is that if the government is involved it isn't a home school.

I don't agree with that premise. I think we need to differentiate between public homeschooling in which the curriculum and support is provided by the state and private homeschooling in which there is no government involvement.

[pgyanke]

I didn't see where she included government supported homeschooling as anything but a step in the right direction. I agree with that.

[pgyanke]

I put quotes around it when the government is doing it. Don't get me wrong, I'm new to this debate and learning as I go and I'm not against parents teaching their own kids in any format. I am concerned, though, that we let the government dictate the terms of this debate to the detriment of our programs.

They have been very aggressive in indoctrinating our kids. As the homeschool movement gains more momentum and the public schools lose more support, the government will likely get even more aggressive. I would rather not open the door to them to say that any publicly supported education be considered homeschooling. When the public dollars get rolling, the politicians put their own stamp on the programs which get supported.

I'm afraid we're allowing the government to open a Pandora's box if we don't stop them early in their homeschool encroachment.

[GOPrincess]

Yes, from Mary Griffith's perspective she feels a charter homeschool is a step in the right direction. I have no problem with that as it's her personal opinion and who knows, one day I may come to agree with her.

But what I found most important in her essay was this:

"Drawing the line between who should be called homeschoolers and who should not can be complicated enough, but there’s an even more difficult problem to deal with: Who gets to draw the line? Who gets to decide on the standards for distinguishing real homeschoolers from faux homeschoolers? While there’s no way I’d want to have to draw that line myself, I can’t think of anyone else I’d be willing to let do it, either.

But even if there was someone I’d trust to label homeschoolers real and faux, I wouldn’t want it done. I know too many families who’ve struggled with conventional public and private schools and just happened to hear of a public independent study program that might better suit their kids. I’m not about to tell those families who are suddenly thrilled to discover more flexible options for their kids that they can’t call themselves homeschoolers...
What we don’t do is draw lines. We don’t exclude anybody who wants to homeschool. We don’t point our fingers and say, “Those are not homeschoolers. Those we don’t want on our playground.”"

"We Stand for Homeschooling" is doing this very finger pointing. To say otherwise is simply playing semantic games, IMHO.

[pgyanke]

I think we need to differentiate between public homeschooling in which the curriculum and support is provided by the state and private homeschooling in which there is no government involvement.

I can agree with that. However, see my earlier posts to know my concerns about government involvement. When compulsory education began in the 1800's its purpose was to teach the Christian religion and was taught directly from the Bible. The government concluded that Christianity was an important foundation to understanding civics and our way of life. Now we see that the importance of this lesson was dependent on the whims of the politicos in power.

My son is one year old. I don't want to see homeschooling "tainted" by the influence of government before I even get a chance to participate.

[GOPrincess]

"As the homeschool movement gains more momentum and the public schools lose more support, the government will likely get even more aggressive.'

What I would hope is just the opposite, that the government will finally become more *responsive*. And if they don't, that's exactly why private homeschoolers need to have broad-based support in order to stop new government regulation in its tracks. "Making friends and influencing people" always works better than saying "You're not one of us, how dare you refer to yourself as a homeschooler, you're [implied: so stupid/gullible you're] just being enticed by computers sold to you by greedy corporations."

The possibility of government intervention in private homeschooling is a legitimate concern, but I don't see attacking charter homeschools and homeschoolers as the solution.

[pgyanke]

The danger in this debate is the government's tendancy (and other's) for co-opting popular movements. When the power-hungry get involved, your program becomes their program. Suddenly, your life's work is "so important for the public good" that the use of it must be regulated for the public. This is usually done by "showing" how deeply your program is woven into the fabric of society.

What we call popular based on public demand, the power-hungry see as a tool to their future power. See what Congress thinks of the FCC not regulating who can own media. Rupert Murdoch owns 2% of media outlets but a far greater market share of popular media. Because his programs are popular and have drawn attention, he is a threat to the powerful and they seek to regulate him.

If even the government can operate a "homeschool" then I see a study done in the future comparing homeschooling to the public system. Low and behold, there won't be a statistical benefit shown to homeschooling, therefore kids should be in the public schools. Alternatively, there will be a study shown how great homeschooling is, therefore the government's homeschool efforts have been a successful reform of the system and there is no reason to allow "outside" education.

Either way, the government positions itself to regulate homeschooling when they can adopt the language.

Sound paranoid? Look at the history of our government and see if it's paranoid or observant.

[WhiteGuy]

Government out of education bump.

Anything less will only make things worse.

[pgyanke]

The possibility of government intervention in private homeschooling is a legitimate concern, but I don't see attacking charter homeschools and homeschoolers as the solution.

I agree these types of schools shouldn't be attacked. I don't see them being attacked. I do see where one group is asking for clarity of language in the education debate. If you accept public funds, you are part of the public system. Where you do your educating doesn't change the fact of public support. Those who shun public support to educate their children with zero government involvement don't want to be lumped when the government comes to see what their investment is purchasing.

[Lady Eileen]

Sound paranoid? Look at the history of our government and see if it's paranoid or observant.

Answer: Observant.

32 posted on 05/15/2003 11:24 AM PDT by Lady Eileen

To: f.Christian

It is plain to see ... for anyone who wishes to see --- that the government of the United States has begun the process of usurping parental rights, and dictating what our children may and may not know, believe, think and value.

The left talks of doing everything "for the people" but they don't believe it. Instead they believe "public school" is their private laboratory in which they have a sacred right to indoctrinate the children of others using funds coerced from their parents. That's why they fight so hard to prevent the taxpayers from leaving government school with their tax dollars.

Indeed ,for the left ... government schools --- are churches. They're temples to the sovereign state, before which all subversives (e.g. homeschoolers) must be brought to heel and bow down in the sight of their more malleable peers, who will thereby learn never to stray from secular orthodoxy.

1,348 posted on 05/13/2003 10:44 PM EDT by Law

[PMCarey]

I agree these types of schools shouldn't be attacked. I don't see them being attacked. I do see where one group is asking for clarity of language in the education debate.

If clarity of language is the issue, then certainly one must clearly distinguish between a parent educating his or her children at home using a curriculum provided by the state and a child in a public institution with hundreds of other children being educated by a public employee. It's equally disingenious to claim that those two situations are the same.

That's why I prefer to use the terms public/private institutions and public/private homeschooling when discussion the four possible ways of educating one's children. It has the additional advantage of borrowing the legitimacy that private institutions have in the educational arena and applying it to private homeschooling.

[GOPrincess]

"I do see where one group is asking for clarity of language in the education debate."

I actually don't have a problem with that, insofar as I am happy to let anyone know I am using a public charter for homeschooling, and that there is a difference from homeschooling privately. I am all for this clarity in part because it assists parents in understanding the variety of options available.

What I object to is the words that this particular group of homeschoolers wishes to "own," i.e., that only private homeschoolers are the "real" homeschoolers, and the way they are presenting their argument.

I believe you and I are in agreement that anyone who wishes to homeschool without government intervention should always be free to do so. Where we disagree is the manner of accomplishing this, and whether charter homeschools hold threat or promise.

[GOPrincess]

"It has the additional advantage of borrowing the legitimacy that private institutions have in the educational arena and applying it to private homeschooling."

Excellent point. In fact, a semantic point of interest, in California there is no government recognition of "homeschooling" by that specific term. You simply notify the state that you have formed a private school. The state does not regulate specific curriculum or testing in any private school in the state, whether that school is attended by 1000 children or 1.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Perhaps you are right. I am very, very outgoing naturally, though! I just feel uncomfortable around people. LOL. What a condradiction - that doesn't even make any sense!

[katz]

I think home schooling is the way of the future for patriotic Americans. The government schools are not meeting the academic needs of children. Government schools are too much diversity and too little three R's.

[ppaul]

Any involved parents who have children in public schools are already "homeschooling" their children. The actual time the children are in school is almost all babysitting, then the "teachers" send the kids home with tons of homework every night. Guess who gets to help the kids with the "homework"? It's homeschooling, with all day babysitting provided by the gubbamint! The teachers unions and administration bureaucrats will fight to protect their inflated salaries, perks, and benefits. So, parents with kids in public schools: Realize that you're already homeschooling. But we're all getting suckered by the gubbamint "school" monpoly in which we have no choice.

[Aquinasfan]

Indeed ,for the left ... government schools --- are churches.

That's it exactly. Temples of the secular humanist religion.

[Lady Eileen]

The teachers unions and administration bureaucrats will fight to protect their inflated salaries, perks, and benefits. So, parents with kids in public schools: Realize that you're already homeschooling. But we're all getting suckered by the gubbamint "school" monpoly in which we have no choice.

Posted by Lady Eileen to tcostell On News/Activism 04/28/2003 11:21 AM EDT #41 of 58

tcostell: The NEA is the real enemy of America.

Lady Eileen: The NEA is just another self-centered monopoly union that is determined to protect the above-market wages of its members and their jobs at all cost. They are enemies of America and of real education and liberty in America.

But they aren't half the problem of parents content to hand over their children to be educated in a socialist system instead of insisting on the complete return of their exclusive, God-given authority and responsibility to raise their children. It doesn't "take a village" to educate a child, even if that village is called a "public school."