Court: Parents Must Have Teaching Credentials to Home School Kids

[mpc863]

I thought that this was interesting. I'm not sure if it will hold up in court. Also, I'm not sure how this will be enforced. Do home schooled kids have to take the state tests?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,335808,00.html

[thedoorchick]

I agree this will be exceedingly difficult to enforce.

But it does address one of my most fundamental concerns about homeschooling - that it is often done by people not qualified to teach.

[KiKi'sMommy]

I agree this will be exceedingly difficult to enforce.

But it does address one of my most fundamental concerns about homeschooling - that it is often done by people not qualified to teach.

"Qualified" is a subjective term though. Although a person may not have a 4 year degree from a university, it does not mean that they are unable to teach their children. I was home educated by my mother back in the 80's and early 90's. My mother was not formally educated, but she was passionate about teaching her children and dedicated to our education. She may not have known everything about every subject, but what teacher does? She used a curriculum and integrated real life experiences into her teaching. I went on after graduation to complete a 4 year degree with honors from a state university. That being said, I do think that some parents are unfit to teach their children anything, let alone being responsible for their ENTIRE education. I think that monitoring the performance of home educated students is not entirely unreasonable, but requiring parents to have a formal certification is.

[curlyjr]

I agree with the others it might be difficult to enforce, but I think it is a great idea.

[Delta]

:confused:

A great idea? Are you kidding me? This is total BS.

[KK812]

:confused:

A great idea? Are you kidding me? This is total BS.

I totally agree. This is going further down the road of "The government knows how to better raise your children than you do." I certainly agree that home schooled children should be periodically tested, but are there states where this procedure isn't already in effect?

Most parents who are truly unfit to teach their children wouldn't want to take the time to do so anyway.

[Sevilla]

The headlines aren't even true - in California parents who wish to homeschool register as a private school and as in other states, private schools are not subject to the same regulations as public school** - which I think is a good thing. This court case has less to do with homeschooling rights per se and more to do with an abusive and dysfunctional family where the children are being neglected and abused and where CPS is actively involved - a situation that happens in both public schooled and homeschooled families.

**Sunland Christian School where the children were enrolled for homeschooling did not conform to the state requirements either which is another part of the problem - there are requirements for private schools and for registering with the state of CA, but they are not the same as public schools requirements (NCLB doesn't apply to them, teacher standards are different, etc...)

Back to homeschooling: Not every child will function well in a standardized-test driven environment, and i think that 'qualified to teach' can be considered subjective. Do people realize that the substitute teachers in the schools (even long-term subs) are often not qualified to teach - and that many don't have anything except a high school diploma?

Also, a lot of teaching education has to do with how to manage a classroom and teach a broad range of learning styles within the confines of space/time restrictions as well as within the requirements of the school district and NCLB. Many of those issues simply aren't relevant to homeschooling - which is one of its benefits.

As a classroom teacher for 5 years now, i have had some students who do not thrive in a typical classroom but would thrive in homeschool where the learning environment is more tailored to their learning style (this is especially true for kinesthetic learners and those who are more advanced or more delayed than 'average' when it comes to things like reading and writing).

Developmentally some kids, especially boys, aren't ready to read until age 8 - the developmental range for reading readiness is something like age 5-8. Yet our local public schools expect that the kids will be reading in 1st grade - age 6-7. This results in students who aren't ready at that age who come to hate and resent reading b/c they feel dumb and 'can't do it'.

Instead of being able to back off for 6 months or a year and let them go at their own developmental pace, they are pushed to be at a level where they're not yet ready - how is that good education? It's not - but it's the reality when you have a classroom of 30 students to teach and have to follow certain learning standards for the year regardless of whether Student A is developmentally ready for that yet or not - public school education is mass education, not education tailored for a student's specific needs (although teachers and school districts do their best to work with parents on these issues, some things such as backing off of a certain subject for a few months simply aren't possible in an institutional environment due to the nature of the system).

In that environment, you can't tell a student 'it's ok that you're not able to read yet - we'll come back to it in a few months and focus on another subject now' even if that is what they need. But with homeschooling, you have the flexibility to tailor instruction to where your child is at and help them learn at their own pace - something I consider especially important during the formative years of learning basic reading, writing, math, and a love of learning.

Society is pretty understanding of a developmental range when it comes to infant milestones such as sitting, crawling, walking, etc... - but once kids reach school age the 'range' becomes much more rigid and formulaic, and those kids who fall on either end tend to be left behind and have their love for learning squelched and their self-confidencce eroded b/c of this - i've seen it happen to both gifted kids and those who struggle to learn).

Also, in teacher education degrees you are learning how to teach in a public school classroom with many students. The classes that are specifically geared towards teaching methods also often assume one philosophy of education - when there are many out there (check out here (http://homeschooling.preschoolrock.com/index.php/homeschool_teaching_methods/major_homeschool_philosophies) for a brief list and description). Charlotte Mason, Classical Education, Montessori, Traditional School-at-home, Distancce Learning, Waldorf, etc... - a teacher ed degree from a college will not encompass those different approaches, and will teach many things that are simply not relevant to homeschooling.

Those are a few reasons that a 'qualified to teach' standard enforced by the state is less than helpful when it comes to homeschooling b/c it is comparing two different things - educating in a public school classroom with many students vs. educating at home.

[KiKi'sMommy]

Excellent post Sevilla!

[thedoorchick]

I understand and agree that qualified is a subjective term. However, I think it still merits discussion.

I am no dummy, I have a master's degree in fact, but I would not homeschool my children, because I do not consider myself qualified to be a teacher. I personally think there are a lot of parents out there who decide to homeschool because they don't trust the system or think schools are dangerous or whatever the reason is, but they have no business trying to teach and do their children a real disservice by denying them a good education.

I am not saying homeschooling is inherently bad, and I am not saying all parents who homeschool don't know how to do it. Do not misunderstand me. But I do think there are parents out there who overestimate their ability to guide their children's learning as well as a certified teacher. They are satisfying their own desires at the expense of their child's education.

The lack of qualification requirements for short-term substitutes doesn't concern me that much, though for long term situations (maternity leave, etc), I would think there should be some minimum qualification besides just having a HS diploma (Is that the minimum for subs in general? I don't actually know).

Sevilla makes some good points and in general I don't disagree with them, and I also have a high degree of respect for her well thought out points of view.

All I am saying, is that I think there is some merit in having some kind of qualifications for people who students depend on for all of their education, for a matter of years at a time.

[karlatta]

I am a certified teacher, and I can tell you 100% that nothing that I learned in any education classes is what makes me able to teach. I was just as "qualified" before I got my certification - it just wasn't written on a piece of paper. Education classes (at least here anyway) are a joke.

[Lauren23]

The lack of qualification requirements for short-term substitutes doesn't concern me that much, though for long term situations (maternity leave, etc), I would think there should be some minimum qualification besides just having a HS diploma (Is that the minimum for subs in general? I don't actually know).


In the state of NY you must have at least a 4 year degree to sub. Some school districts require you to be a certified teacher. And a sub without certification can only sub for 40 days total the whole year. (And I'm pretty sure you can't be a long term sub.)

Don't know what the qualifications are for other states, though.

[Asha]

each state's or local school district's standards for sub teachers varies. i was able to short term sub during college bc i had at least two years of a college education. this was in nc. in ny, you need a four year degree to sub, and in some larger schools, there are permanent subs on staff that are certified public school teachers.

the quality of teacher education varies by institution. i went to a college that did school teachers on how to individualize instruction. it didn't do so well on teaching teachers how to manage a classroom of thirty odd kids which is what teachers need to know to survive, especially in inner city schools. i can say that most of what i learned about teaching came from experience. i don't think a person needs a degree in education to teach, but i do think they need to have some basic knowledge. how do we know parents who homeschool know how to write, critically read a text, solve complicated (or even basic) math problems?

i am not really concerned about the parents who homeschool their kids to give them a better education, but who homeschool their kids out of fear.

[Delta]

Sevilla - You are right, of course. The media seem to have misrepresented or misunderstood the ruling.

Curly - I'm sorry for being so flip to you; the decision (now misunderstood we know) made me angry.

[Niobe]

The lack of qualification requirements for short-term substitutes doesn't concern me that much, though for long term situations (maternity leave, etc), I would think there should be some minimum qualification besides just having a HS diploma (Is that the minimum for subs in general? I don't actually know).

In the districts I've spoken with in Texas, they usually require a small amount of college education, around 20 credit hours of general courses. So basically, one year at community college. Not even an associate's degree. And that was for long-term or short-term subbing at any grade level, IIRC. It varies by state, and in some states (like Texas), by district.

[msnicolea]

I agree with TDC's post and think it's absolutely valid to have objective, measurable standards for parents who elect to home school. I have said this before--I would be hard-pressed to identify someone, even a very highly educated person, who is qualified to teach all high school subjects to someone, for example.

What is so wrong with having similar standards that are required of PS teachers applied to parents? Being a doesn't make you qualified to be a teacher--sorry.

[ysolde]

As usual, ITA with doorchick. My mother was a teacher, I have CP, and it never occurred to her to homeschool. She just was not qualified to teach a wide variety of subjects, and she knew it. I went to Montessori pre-schools, then to a small private school with a very good academic environment. I was reading and writing in two languages by the time I was five years old (thank you, Maria Montessori). By the time I graduated from high school, I was also fluent in French, having taken six years of it in school, had two years of Calculus under my belt, as well as two years of Biology, and one year of Chemistry. I know my mother could not have taught me any of these subjects at home (not to mention the lack of laboratory facilities). She is qualified to teach ESL and Social Studies at the elementary school level. English and American Literature? European History? US History? French History? French Literature and Language? Spanish Literature? The Latin American "Boom"? Algebra? Geometry? Pre-Calculus? Biology? Chemistry? Calculus? AP anything? Not really. Not at all.

She knew it. Thank goodness she knew it, and the thought of homeschooling never crossed her mind.

[kedzieb]

I agree with TDC's post and think it's absolutely valid to have objective, measurable standards for parents who elect to home school. I have said this before--I would be hard-pressed to identify someone, even a very highly educated person, who is qualified to teach all high school subjects to someone, for example.

What is so wrong with having similar standards that are required of PS teachers applied to parents? Being a doesn't make you qualified to be a teacher--sorry.

I agree with this too. In fact I think it would make homeschooling be seen as an adequate alternative to public school if the parents were held to the same standards. To me, without this kind of structure, the quality of education is going to vary from family to family. You would think pro-homeschoolers would want the legitimacy requirements would bring.

[ysolde]

I agree with this too. In fact I think it would make homeschooling be seen as an adequate alternative to public school if the parents were held to the same standards. To me, without this kind of structure, the quality of education is going to vary from family to family. You would think pro-homeschoolers would want the legitimacy requirements would bring.


True. And then there are the "unschoolers," who propose . . . I have never been quite sure what? Just letting their children learn by being, or something like that.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml

[Sarah]

Insane. I can't believe that.

I have an el ed degree, so technically, I am qualified (I homeschool my DD). However, it's so stupid to ask parents for these qualifications. First of all because repeated studies have shown that parents who homeschool have better outcomes than public schools,. no matter what level of education they've completed. So even when they control for GED/high school/college/post grad degrees, HSers do better. The moms I know who HS with GEDs are still better teachers than many of the urban public school teachers I've known.

Secondly, it should be a parent's right to educate as they see fit, whether other people think that's a good idea or not.


True. And then there are the "unschoolers," who propose . . . I have never been quite sure what? Just letting their children learn by being, or something like that.No, not really. The USers I know are amazing- their kids are building miniature bridges, participating in science fairs, running soccer clinics for low income kids, taking college courses, etc. They allow their children to study the things they want, with varying levels of structure.
without this kind of structure, the quality of education is going to vary from family to familyAre you under the impression that public schools don't vary in quality? The local public school here doesn't have toilet paper in the bathrooms, so kids bring their own. Classes are held in bathrooms, and kids watch R rated movies on a daily basis, just to take up time, whereas in a local suburban district, kids go on to Ivy League schools.
pro-homeschoolers would want the legitimacy requirements would bringI'd like legitimacy as a parent who wants to educate her child as she sees fit, and I am deeply troubled by the government telling me what my child needs to know. Of course quality of HSing will vary, as will quality of parenting, or socioeconomic status. That's life. But it's not the government's job to ensure that every child gets the same education.

[kedzieb]

Secondly, it should be a parent's right to educate as they see fit, whether other people think that's a good idea or not.

Seriously? However they see fit? Our next generation is screwed.

[Sarah]

I agree with TDC's post and think it's absolutely valid to have objective, measurable standards for parents who elect to home school. I have said this before--I would be hard-pressed to identify someone, even a very highly educated person, who is qualified to teach all high school subjects to someone, for example.

What is so wrong with having similar standards that are required of PS teachers applied to parents? Being a doesn't make you qualified to be a teacher--sorry.

I think the issue is that maybe many of you aren't familiar with homeschooling as a way of life, or with it's methods. Many parents who HS their child for high school (something I don't think I would do, but who knows?) have a lot of different ways to teach these higher level subjects. Things friends of mine have done, off the top of my head:

-hired private tutors who weren't "qualified" to teach since they didn't have ed degrees, but had degrees in their field (ie a physicist to teach science).

-participated in co-ops with other parents who were mathematicians, scientist, foreign language speakers, writers, etc.

-allowed their kids to take community college courses.

-used online tutorial services

-allowed kids to self teach using textbooks, videos, online materials, etc.

-allowed kids to go to local schools for a class or two they couldn't teach.

And again, I'll reiterate that though it doesn't necessarily seem intuitive for this to be true, on the whole, HSed kids are very well educated and go on to amazing colleges. They test excellently, and in all measures of educational performance do as well as or better than public schooled kids.

[Sarah]

Seriously? However they see fit? Our next generation is screwed.Yes, however they see fit. I think that generally speaking, parents are the best people to know what's good for their kids, and that most parents will make good choices for their kids, if allowed to do so. I also think public schools (especially in urban areas) are struggling, and allowing parents more choice would really improve things.

[Sarah]

I am no dummy, I have a master's degree in fact, but I would not homeschool my children, because I do not consider myself qualified to be a teacher. I personally think there are a lot of parents out there who decide to homeschool because they don't trust the system or think schools are dangerous or whatever the reason is, but they have no business trying to teach and do their children a real disservice by denying them a good education.But I don't think that happens a lot. The research doesn't support that!

What most people don't know is that many states already have rules for HSers- it's not just that you register and can do whatever you want. In my state, for example, you must submit a loose curriculum, you must assemble a portfolio of your child's work and have a certified teacher grade it. You must sit for standardized tests I think at least twice. It's not a ton of structure, but enough to ensure that kids aren't just being taught about aliens or groundhogs or whatever. Also, I don't think it actually happens a lot that people who are unqualified want to HS. It's sort of self-selecting; those who want to do it generally make themselves qualified, and those who don't don't sweat it. For example, I don't know a ton about Eygpt. But my DD is studying it, so I have been learning along with her. I have the skills to find books and primary sources, to research stuff alongside her, and to help her make sense of it all, but it's not necessary for me to be the authority on this stuff in order to teach it.

In short, I think we're talking about different pedagogical theories here. Some people believe teachers have knowledge, and that they impart it to students (the "Banking" theory; the teacher "deposits" the knowledge into the kids, who get filled up with it). Some people think the teacher is there to help kids learn stuff, but that the teacher guides the kids along, helping them, giving them boundaries and structure, and exposing them to good materials, but the teacher is a learner along with the kids.

[thedoorchick]

I think that generally speaking, parents are the best people to know what's good for their kids, and that most parents will make good choices for their kids, if allowed to do so.
I agree, generally speaking. However, there are parents out there who just don't know what's good for their kids; we see examples of this every day. What if a parent thinks school is BS just because? Should these children be handicapped by not getting any education, just because the parents are misguided (to put it nicely)? I'm not talking about homeschooling them, I'm talking about their just not being schooled at all. If we're going to support parents' rights to educate their children any way they see fit, then we have to support the right to not educate children at all. That is an incredible travesty. Kids deserve better than what some parents are prepared to do for them.

Sarah, I agree that homeschooling comes in all varieties, and that some parents are very diligent in working through co-ops, etc. to ensure their children are taught appropriate subjects by appropriate people. Especially in high school, I think this kind of preparation is absolutely critical. I have less concern about these cases than I do in the cases of one parent trying to be a jack of all trades.

I am also confused by the assertions that HSed children do better on standardized tests than public/private schooled ones. If this is true, how does that jive with the statement that many children are HSed because they don't test well?

[kedzieb]

Yes, however they see fit. I think that generally speaking, parents are the best people to know what's good for their kids, and that most parents will make good choices for their kids, if allowed to do so. I also think public schools (especially in urban areas) are struggling, and allowing parents more choice would really improve things.

I've never heard this attitude with the people I know who homeschool successfully. They think of themselves as the people who can give their children the best education in their particular situation, but also recognize their lack of knowledge on a variety of subjects and get outside tutors to teach their children. They'd never presume to be able to know enough about as many subjects as are covered in school to think they could go it alone.

[thedoorchick]

What most people don't know is that many states already have rules for HSers- it's not just that you register and can do whatever you want. In my state, for example, you must submit a loose curriculum, you must assemble a portfolio of your child's work and have a certified teacher grade it. You must sit for standardized tests I think at least twice. It's not a ton of structure, but enough to ensure that kids aren't just being taught about aliens or groundhogs or whatever. Also, I don't think it actually happens a lot that people who are unqualified want to HS. It's sort of self-selecting; those who want to do it generally make themselves qualified, and those who don't don't sweat it.
This is what makes me wonder what is so heinous about the possibility that HS teachers have some kind of certification? If HSing is already regulated to this degree (although, it certainly varies by state and is looser than the requirements for public school curriculums and studies), what is the problem with requiring some minimum standard for teachers?

I also agree with kedzieb that I would think HS parents would want the additional legitimacy that a certification would provide. I don't think it's reasonable for parents to want others to see their methods as legitimate just because they said so.

[msnicolea]

Sarah, what kind of evidence-based, standardized evaluations have been conducted with home schoolers? I am asking this seriously, not being snarky!

And again, why shouldn't there be a basic level of standards expected of anyone who is going to teach children, parent or other?

[Sarah]

If we're going to support parents' rights to educate their children any way they see fit, then we have to support the right to not educate children at all. That is an incredible travesty. Kids deserve better than what some parents are prepared to do for them.
I agree. I don't think that happens much, if at all, however, and hence is a straw man. But, if it does happen, it sounds like a case for DHS to me, and should be dealt with as abuse, which it is. I really don't think it happens, though. I deal with kids every day in my work whose parents don't care about them one bit, and they love public schools because they keep them all day. the kids of parents who don't want to educate kids at all and don't care aren't the type who HS, generally.

And who is the government to decide what is a good education? To me, that's a question for local communities and ultimately parents to decide. Yes, some kids will be harmed by not learning certain things, but I think less than are harmed by unilateral education standards.

I am also confused by the assertions that HSed children do better on standardized tests than public/private schooled ones. If this is true, how does that jive with the statement that many children are HSed because they don't test well?I didn't make that assertion, I think Sevilla did. However, it does make sense in some respects. It's not my experience that my kids or my friends' (most HS) kids are HSed because they don't test well. My DD tests fine. My reasons are not about that. I don't agree with standardized testing (at least not in the way it works now, in elementary school), and I didn't even before I HSed.

But it makes sense that some children would test poorly in elementary school, but ultimately do better in high school tests. The statistics I was talking about refer to kids leaving high school, finding out how they've done overall. As Sevilla said, a 6 year old boy might fail a public school assessment on reading, because he's not developmentally there yet. But when that boy is 16, he might ace the SATs because he's past that developmental age and to the point where the developmental differences between the material in schools and kid's brains catch up.

Let me say, though, that as much as I am a passionate defender of HSing, I intend to send my children to public school at some point along the road, and I love public schools. As I said, I am a certified teacher and intend to go back to teaching one day. Just so no one thinks I hate the "establishment." (although I do have problems with inequalities in schools!).

[Sarah]

http://www.hslda.org/docs/study/rudner1999/Rudner2.asp
http://www.hslda.org/docs/study/comp2001/default.asp

I should clarify, because in re-reading my post, it was unclear, or maybe I said it incorrectly- that kids whose parents are poorly educated and still HS don't do as well or better than the national average. They do better than their peers in public schools, meaning those kids who have poorly educated parents and go to public schools.
:)

No snark assumed, Msnicole. :D

Speaking of HSing, I should probably go rescue my children from the TV and teach them something!

Oops, one more thing. This is what makes me wonder what is so heinous about the possibility that HS teachers have some kind of certification? Well, I would still be annoyed (but not that much) at the possibility of some bare minimum standard. But this article seems to be talking about a teaching credential, which is hard to get in many states. You need (usually) 2 years of classes, decently long practicum, papers, 3 long standardized tests, recommendations, evaluations, sample lesson plans, and a physical. It's not just some loose standard. It would stop a lot of devoted and loving parents from HSing in places where it's the only option. I'd say more than 50% of my friends live in really bad urban areas and simply cannot send their kids to school because the schools are so dangerous and atrocious. HSing is their only real option.

[thedoorchick]

And who is the government to decide what is a good education?
A fair question indeed. I guess that brings me back to my initial thoughts that there are parents out there who vastly overestimate their ability to teach, or even to decide what ought to be taught. Though I am not a parent*, I do not think I know more than the "government" (whichever area of government or regulation we are talking about) about what kids ought to be learning. It's fair to say that some parents do. But some don't. That brings us back to the whole point about applying some minimum standards to the whole thing.

* therefore this whole conversation might be irrelevant for me to participate in, but I'm enjoying it anyway.

[Sarah]

* therefore this whole conversation might be irrelevant for me to participate in, but I'm enjoying it anyway.It's not irrelevant, you're a member of society who benefits from well educated people. :)
Though I am not a parent*, I do not think I know more than the "government" (whichever area of government or regulation we are talking about) about what kids ought to be learning.Clearly you've not been involved in the insane horrible bureacracy which is educational policy. It's so stupid and contrary to what the evidence says is best practice. I would bet you'd do a better job of deciding curriculum, given the research and evidence, than any government body.

And if you look at the second page of that study I linked to, you'll see that even HSed kids whose parents have less than high school are still doing quite well as compared to other kids, so though there might be isolated instances of bad HSing happening, it's not the norm.

[ysolde]

I think the issue is that maybe many of you aren't familiar with homeschooling as a way of life, or with it's methods. Many parents who HS their child for high school (something I don't think I would do, but who knows?) have a lot of different ways to teach these higher level subjects. Things friends of mine have done, off the top of my head:

-hired private tutors who weren't "qualified" to teach since they didn't have ed degrees, but had degrees in their field (ie a physicist to teach science).

-participated in co-ops with other parents who were mathematicians, scientist, foreign language speakers, writers, etc.

-allowed their kids to take community college courses.

-used online tutorial services

-allowed kids to self teach using textbooks, videos, online materials, etc.

-allowed kids to go to local schools for a class or two they couldn't teach.

And again, I'll reiterate that though it doesn't necessarily seem intuitive for this to be true, on the whole, HSed kids are very well educated and go on to amazing colleges. They test excellently, and in all measures of educational performance do as well as or better than public schooled kids.

First of all, in light of your position, and your position of authority with regards to your children's education, I sincerely hope that is a typo in your first sentence. I don't usually harp on these things, but in this instance, well . . . ;)

OK, now that I am no longer hearing nails being dragged on the proverbial chalkboard . . .

Do all HSers get these outside tutors? Why not opt for a private school? How does HS work in terms of labs?

I have seen HS messageboards, and the overwhelming Leitmotif expressed therein seems to be, "Sending my child to school tore me apart. I was not ready for us not to be a family. Having my child at home feels right." It is all about the parent (overwhelmingly the mother) and her feelings, and very little is said about the child and the quality of the education s/he is receiving. Oh, lip service is paid to how "terrible" public schools are, but, like you, it is always about these mythical urban public schools, with classes held in dirty bathrooms. No one talks about private schools (ever heard of Montessori, Piaget, Friends?), of suburban public schools, of (gasp!) becoming actively involved in your local public school so that it (what a concept!) becomes a reflection of your community. It's bizarre, and, frankly, somewhat paranoid.

[DallasLady]

I am a certified teacher, and I can tell you 100% that nothing that I learned in any education classes is what makes me able to teach. I was just as "qualified" before I got my certification - it just wasn't written on a piece of paper. Education classes (at least here anyway) are a joke.

I am a certified teacher and I am with you 100% on this. Education classes are crap, and do not make you a good teacher.

This is going further down the road of "The government knows how to better raise your children than you do." I certainly agree that home schooled children should be periodically tested, but are there states where this procedure isn't already in effect?

Most parents who are truly unfit to teach their children wouldn't want to take the time to do so anyway.

Totally agree with this as well.

If home schooling parents are going to be required to be certified, then private school teachers should have to also. Because around here, to teach in a private (especially religious private) school, all you have to do is say you believe in Jesus and the Bible :rolleyes:

[Sevilla]

One issue with private schools vs. homeschools is cost - you can homeschool for a couple hundred dollars a year, vs. 6k, 7, 10, 15k/year for private school (per child!). If you are faced with an average middle class income and 2-3 children with a bad public school - private school really isn't a viable option. Our local middle schools are horrendous - gang violence, teen pregnancy at 13-14 years of age, bullying, etc... We have friends who have done public school all the way through - except for middle school. They pulled their kids out and hs'd for middle school and it was been really good for their family - it allowed their kids to be protected from that garbage as they went through the difficult 12-14 year old years, and then when they went back to public high school at 15 years old they were far more grounded and did great.

Also, the number of parents who homeschool for elementary/middle school is FAR higher than those who homeschool for high school because of the reasons you mentioned - curriculum needs become more complex. The vast majority of high schooled homeschoolers use coops, community college classes, or distance learning courses for subjects such as science and foreign language. Their kids aren't doing all school at home - they're just doing it outside the traditional 8 hour classroom day. And many do a few classes at their local public school too.

ETA: I agree with Sarah that many people don't understand what a homeschooling lifestyle looks like and what it involves. I know a number of people who homeschool (using different methods) so i've seen it work in action in many different families so that's probably why i'm very supportive of it and see it as a good alternative choice for different educational needs/philosophies.

ITA also that we're working from different educational theories - and the 'teacher imparting knowledge/students acquiring her knowledge' is just a small part of what homeschooling education looks like - it's more about teaching the child to become a self-directed learner with the parent as a guide and mentor vs. school at home where kids sit at the kitchen table and mom or dad delivers a lecture on a given subject. The learning is more dynamic and varied than that.

[hub1176]

No one talks about private schools (ever heard of Montessori, Piaget, Friends?)

I think that it comes down to cost. A very good private school in my area costs over $6,000 per year. And I know that's less expensive than other areas of the country.

[Sarah]

I have seen HS messageboards, and the overwhelming Leitmotif expressed therein seems to be, "Sending my child to school tore me apart. I was not ready for us not to be a family. Having my child at home feels right." It is all about the parent (overwhelmingly the mother) and her feelings, and very little is said about the child and the quality of the education s/he is receiving. Oh, lip service is paid to how "terrible" public schools are, but, like you, it is always about these mythical urban public schools, with classes held in dirty bathrooms. No one talks about private schools (ever heard of Montessori, Piaget, Friends?), of suburban public schools, of (gasp!) becoming actively involved in your local public school so that it (what a concept!) becomes a reflection of your community. It's bizarre, and, frankly, somewhat paranoid.Well, they're not really mythical, since I run an afterschool program for inner city kids, and I have conferences with their teachers all the time, and I've seen it. One of my kids watched Sleepers (you know, the film showing child molestation?) in social studies yesterday, because his teacher thought it was a good film. I've seen kids carrying their own TP around.

Oh goodness, I know it's its, BTW. :) Mea culpa. See? Teacher education doesn't guarantee quality!

Private school here costs (starting at, for K) 16k per year. We asked about financial aid and they'd give us 3 k per kid. No.

I am sure you're right, there are people who HS for the wrong reasons, but that doesn't make it an invalid way of teaching, just like the parents who send their kids to public schools for the wrong reasons doesn't make public schools bad.

My local public schools are horrible. When we went to visit the one nearest us (zoned to last year, before we moved to a better neighborhood) the principal asked us not to send our DDs there. He implored us. He told us they'd "had white families try it before, and it's always been a disaster." WTF? It wasn't even safe for the kids there. Becoming involved wasn't going to change that. Our school was a reflection of our community, and it's not a good one, generally speaking.

Anyway, my overwhelming reasons for HSing have nothing to do with wanting my kids around. I'd love to send them to school and get them out of my hair a few hours a day. I'd say this is a sacrifice for me, because I don't like early elementary and I'd love to have my kids in school and be working. But I just don't think "school" is in my kids' best educational interests right now. I think they learn better at home, and I think our family is more peaceful and tranquil. I think my kids are close and our family has more time for experiences outside the norm, like extensive volunteer work as a family, long spring days at the park, amazing field trips, etc. Getting to teach my own kids to read and write is an amazing privilege.

I will admit that this is partially an issue of culture- I think many of you are imagining the Duggars or whatever (which I know is a paradigm that exists) and what I see everyday is so different from that. I know I used to think HSing was dreadful and insane before I knew anyone intelligent who did it. My DH was HSed for 5 years and he's one of the best educated people I know.

[msnicolea]

I don't think you need to be a parent to have an opinion on what's good for children!!!

[thedoorchick]

If home schooling parents are going to be required to be certified, then private school teachers should have to also. Because around here, to teach in a private (especially religious private) school, all you have to do is say you believe in Jesus and the Bible
You've got no argument from me. My sister attended a private Christian high school, and from what I saw, the education was not of the quality that I would want for my own kids. She went there because she hated junior high and "popular kids" were "mean" to her. For pete's sake, show me one person who enjoyed junior high. I didn't love it either, but the preteen phase of life is just downright painful. I don't want to dismiss instances of kids truly being harassed and picked on, but in her case, it was nothing outside the norm of the discomfort of being 12-13 years old. And for that, she got what was IMO a very subpar high school education. Maybe it doesn't matter now, as she's a college graduate with a (ironically, considering this thread) teacher certification, but the point is, some standards of quality in her high school education would have benefited her and the other students there.
I am sure you're right, there are people who HS for the wrong reasons, but that doesn't make it an invalid way of teaching, just like the parents who send their kids to public schools for the wrong reasons doesn't make public schools bad.
I agree, and I really don't think anyone is saying that HSing is invalid, just that it's reasonable that some minimum standards be applied to its use.

[msnicolea]

HSing isn't right for me, but would support it, to a degree, in instances where there are standards and accountability!

[ysolde]

Again, ditto doorchick. Doorchick, I'mm jsut gonna shut off my brain, and let you do the work, kay?

[kiddo]

I think some sort of minimum standard for all educators (home school, public, private) is a good idea.

One issue with private schools vs. homeschools is cost - you can homeschool for a couple hundred dollars a year, vs. 6k, 7, 10, 15k/year for private school (per child!). If you are faced with an average middle class income and 2-3 children with a bad public school - private school really isn't a viable option.

I don't understand this argument. Most homeschooling families I have encountered are 1 income households because the mother stays at home to teach. So, yes, based on 1 income, a private education may seem out of reach. However, if the parent got a paying job while the kids are in school instead of staying home to teach them, they could probably afford a private school.

[Sevilla]

I don't understand this argument. Most homeschooling families I have encountered are 1 income households because the mother stays at home to teach. So, yes, based on 1 income, a private education may seem out of reach. However, if the parent got a paying job while the kids are in school instead of staying home to teach them, they could probably afford a private school.
If both parents work full-time, you run into issues like paying for childcare during summer months/afterschool care/care on days off - that is expensive. You run into increased expenses via higher taxes, work attire, work lunches, childcare, etc... You also are not able to be involved at the school if you are working - so the type of involvement that parents who homeschool would want to have at private school (volunteering, room mom, doing class parties, tutoring, etc...) would be unavailable to them. Not to mention that this is really only even partially feasible when all children are school aged - if you have 3 kids spaced 3 years apart, that means the oldest would be 11 before the youngest would be old enough for kindergarten (assuming the private school offers full-day kindergarten).

So let's say the mom goes out and gets a job that pays $25k net per year after taxes/401k - and then deduct an additional $5k from that for all the work related expenses listed above. 3 children at a private school that costs 8k/year per child (an average price in my area) means that they will not even break even financially!

[Delta]

If the kids are learning and testing OK then what is the point of making the parents get "credentialed"? What does that even mean? True teaching credentials would be costly in terms of money and time. And anything less sounds like more useless government red tape and bureaucracy to me.

[Sevilla]

If the kids are learning and testing OK then what is the point of making the parents get "credentialed"? What does that even mean? True teaching credentials would be costly in terms of money and time. And anything less sounds like more useless government red tape and bureaucracy to me.
ITA. If the kids are meeting standards - testing every few years, having a portfolio of work - then it seems to me that the concern about whether they are getting a good education or not would be resolved and answered.

[thedoorchick]

The problem with that is that it's after the fact - I would rather deal upfront with ensuring a teacher, in a traditional school or otherwise, has some minimum qualifications, than a child spend a few years in a subpar learning environment and only then have a problem surface. You could just as easily make that same argument for a public school student.

And if getting "certified" or whatever term you choose is too much trouble, then why is it required in public schools and why should public school teachers have more stringent requirements than HS parents/teachers (or private school ones for that matter). I don't understand why it is important for some children to be taught by teachers who have met some minimum standard but not important for others. What is the benefit of certification then?

[Sevilla]

And if getting "certified" or whatever term you choose is too much trouble, then why is it required in public schools and why should public school teachers have more stringent requirements than HS parents/teachers (or private school ones for that matter). I don't understand why it is important for some children to be taught by teachers who have met some minimum standard but not important for others. What is the benefit of certification then?
That is a very good question ;). Sometimes i don't think a certification is much more than jumping through hoops to get a piece of paper and doesn't really help you be qualified to teach in terms of helping you learn things. Like I said earlier - a large part of certification involves learning how to navigate a large classroom of students and work within the institutional educational system - two things a homeschooling parent doesn't need to do.

[Delta]

The problem with that is that it's after the fact - I would rather deal upfront with ensuring a teacher, in a traditional school or otherwise, has some minimum qualifications, than a child spend a few years in a subpar learning environment and only then have a problem surface. You could just as easily make that same argument for a public school student.
But getting credentialed or certified still doesn't guarantee anything with regards to what the kids are learning. Sure there are some parents out there who have no business HSing, but the vast majority are doing a great job and in many instances better for their kids than their local public school.

And if getting "certified" or whatever term you choose is too much trouble, then why is it required in public schools and why should public school teachers have more stringent requirements than HS parents/teachers (or private school ones for that matter). I don't understand why it is important for some children to be taught by teachers who have met some minimum standard but not important for others. What is the benefit of certification then?Teaching other people's kids as a career is not the same as teaching one's own children. Parents are inherently going to have their kids' best interests at heart and they generally can be trusted. But in order for society to have trust in the public schools there needs to be regulation of the teachers. Parents who send their kids are going to want to know that their kids' teacher - about whom they otherwise probably don't know anything - has met some sort of standard.

[Delta]

And I'm saying all of this as someone who would rather gouge their own eyes out than homeschool.

Ok, maybe not that extreme but HSing sounds hellish to me personally.

My strong feelings about this come from what I see as government encroaching more and more into our families' lives on a day-to-day basis.

[phoenics]

My local public schools are horrible. When we went to visit the one nearest us (zoned to last year, before we moved to a better neighborhood) the principal asked us not to send our DDs there. He implored us. He told us they'd "had white families try it before, and it's always been a disaster." WTF? It wasn't even safe for the kids there. Becoming involved wasn't going to change that. Our school was a reflection of our community, and it's not a good one, generally speaking.


Wow this is so sad - it gives 'white flight' an even shadier meaning. I wonder if the principal begged non-white families not to send their children there.

:mad:

[ysolde]

Teaching other people's kids as a career is not the same as teaching one's own children. Parents are inherently going to have their kids' best interests at heart and they generally can be trusted. But in order for society to have trust in the public schools there needs to be regulation of the teachers. Parents who send their kids are going to want to know that their kids' teacher - about whom they otherwise probably don't know anything - has met some sort of standard.

I wonder about that, especially in light of things I have read in hs messageboards. Statements like these:

But only in pulling her out of ps did I discover the real reason. I have my daughter back. Our family feels whole again. This is where she belongs. That's the reason. No one is going to care for her the way we do. School consumed all her energy from kindergarten on. She was exhausted at the end of her day at school and then had homework.

And, from another parent:


We want to homeschool for many reasons, but one of my personal reasons is that I have missed her this year! I am excited about getting her back, as you so aptly put it.

I agree with everything you said. How can you be a family if you are away from each other most of the time. I am so glad I am not the only one who feels this way

[Emphasis mine]

Make me wonder whose interests these parents really have at heart.

Source:

http://homeschooling.about.com/library/weekly/aa041802b.htm

[Sarah]

Wow this is so sad - it gives 'white flight' an even shadier meaning. I wonder if the principal begged non-white families not to send their children there.I know, I was horrified.

Digression:
Once, when I was student teaching for my El Ed Degree, I was talking to the teacher (in a school which was a pretty good school in a very bad neighborhood, with a basically entirely African American student base). The kids were great, IME. But the teachers constantly yelled at the African American kids, and not the white ones (who did generally come from middle class backgrounds, and yes, we better behaved as a result). I said something about the yelling and the teacher, who had until then been a kind gentle woman, said "Well, you just have to yell at black kids. That's all they understand."

[Sage]

While I have no doubt that the majority of parents out there who homeschool their kids are excellent at it, not all are. My FIL's ex-girlfriend pulled her 10 year old out of school to homeschool him for awhile and it was an absolute disaster. We were all shocked when she decided to do it b/c she was not the brightest bulb nor very attentive to her kids, and it seemed to be more of her cause du jour rather than because of any commitment to her son's education. She put him back in school a few semesters later when she finally admitted she was in way over her head, but by then he was way behind all of his peers. Totally sucked for him, and probably turned him off from school even moreso than he was to begin with since now he was *really* behind. In that case at least, requiring his mom to have some kind of teaching certification before totally disrupting his education would have been a good thing.

[PinkMartini]

Once, when I was student teaching for my El Ed Degree, I was talking to the teacher (in a school which was a pretty good school in a very bad neighborhood, with a basically entirely African American student base). The kids were great, IME. But the teachers constantly yelled at the African American kids, and not the white ones (who did generally come from middle class backgrounds, and yes, we better behaved as a result). I said something about the yelling and the teacher, who had until then been a kind gentle woman, said "Well, you just have to yell at black kids. That's all they understand."

OMFG! That is absolutely horrible :eek:

[kedzieb]

I don't have a problem with individuals choosing to homeschool or send their kids to private school in response to bad schools, but it does have a negative effect on the school system overall.

For every homeschooling parents who is doing it to benefit their child (as opposed to themselves like the messageboard comments hint or in order to sheild them from other religions/cultures), that's a parent who would have been invaluable for a local public school. Sure, here and there it probably doesn't make a difference. But over the country I think it does.

[Sarah]

Make me wonder whose interests these parents really have at heart.
You have a point. There are moms who HS for bad reasons. But as I said, I know moms who send their kids to school for bad reasons- to get rid of them, because they're bored of taking care of their kids, etc. That doesn't really effect whether or not HSing is a good idea, or whether it's good or bad for kids. Research supports that it is good for kids.

And not that I agree with the parents quoted above, but it is nice to have my kids home all day, and not because I am creepy and overly attached. I do think they're closer than they might be otherwise. I don't try to make decisions in my kids' best interest, I try to make decisions in our family's best interest. For some families, 7+ (or 11+, if both parents work long hours and use after school care) away from home for a 5 year old is just too much, and that's okay.

There are, of course, huge benefits to school, which they my kids are missing out on, but there are also huge benefits to HSing. Both have pros and cons, and either way something is being gained and something sacrificed. What that balance should be really depends on a lot of emotional, social, economic, and personal factors. Even where you live, your level of education and income potential, etc matters. Different schooling situations are going to be needed for different families.



For every homeschooling parents who is doing it to benefit their child (as opposed to themselves like the messageboard comments hint or in order to sheild them from other religions/cultures), that's a parent who would have been invaluable for a local public school. Sure, here and there it probably doesn't make a difference. But over the country I think it does.
Maybe you have a point. But it's been my experience that there's not a lot for concerned parents to do in a failing school. I tried last year to become involved in our local failing school, and I wasn't allowed to do much, even with a degree. The entire system was flawed, there wasn't enough money, the teachers were apathetic and didn't care about the kids at all, the curriculum was horrible and pedagogically unsound, etc. I know most schools aren't like this, but I just couldn't sacrifice my kid to that, knowing that her presence wouldn't do much to help, nor would mine. She'd just be another kid for an already overloaded school.

IN principle I think what you're talking about it is a great idea, and if I knew how to make it work, I would. Right now, because I am HSing, I am able to work as the director of a nonprofit after school program and to work a lot in schools, with inner city impoverished kids. That's the difference I think I can make, and I can only do it because I HS. It's not black and white.

[msnicolea]

There are dads that home-school too. Just sayin'.

[jay&erinn]

I think credentials of some sort may be warranted. They shouldn't be the same credentials that those who teach publicly should have to meet, but there should be something.

I know a few families who HS- most do it beautifully. I'm in awe of them and their abilities to be that dedicated to their children. I have met 2 families who homeschool and have absolutely no business doing so. It definately should qualify as abuse. I have no idea what standards would be appropriate, but if anyone met these parents for 5 minutes they would realize those kids should be in some sort of formal education- I'm talking, they can't even form a complete sentence to communicate with another adult (and not in an "insanely intelligent, have a hard time communicating" type of way). My mouth hit the floor when she commented that her son was HS'd.

As for the private teacher requirements and subs- around here, everyone has to be fully certified to teach full time. Very short term subs (a few days here and there) don't have to be certified, but do have to have a 4 year degree and all of their FBI clearances to be in the classroom.

We have a pretty crappy school district that we live in (50% of the kids do not meet the minimum requirements for reading or math in the grades that are tested for state funding- 3rd, ?, and 9th I think). Older DD is in private school (which provides an amazing education) and is reasonable price wise as long as I keep working part time. If I didn't have the option to send her to a great private school, I would certainly look into HSing.

[phoenics]

I know, I was horrified.

Digression:
Once, when I was student teaching for my El Ed Degree, I was talking to the teacher (in a school which was a pretty good school in a very bad neighborhood, with a basically entirely African American student base). The kids were great, IME. But the teachers constantly yelled at the African American kids, and not the white ones (who did generally come from middle class backgrounds, and yes, we better behaved as a result). I said something about the yelling and the teacher, who had until then been a kind gentle woman, said "Well, you just have to yell at black kids. That's all they understand."

Yeah - I've heard similar things to this before. It's really sad.

[moderngal]

I don't understand this argument. Most homeschooling families I have encountered are 1 income households because the mother stays at home to teach. So, yes, based on 1 income, a private education may seem out of reach. However, if the parent got a paying job while the kids are in school instead of staying home to teach them, they could probably afford a private school.
A paying job? Minimum wage ain't gonna cut private school tuition and that's a "paying job." The nurse's aides I work with make about $10 an hour. It's a paying job, but it sure isn't going to pay private school. Not everyone has a 4 year degree that translates to $$$. And even many that do have a degree are out of work- the latest jobless claims are close to the level they were after Hurricane Katrina. Just going and getting a job really isn't as easy as you make it sound.

[kiddo]

A paying job? Minimum wage ain't gonna cut private school tuition and that's a "paying job." The nurse's aides I work with make about $10 an hour. It's a paying job, but it sure isn't going to pay private school. Not everyone has a 4 year degree that translates to $$$. And even many that do have a degree are out of work- the latest jobless claims are close to the level they were after Hurricane Katrina. Just going and getting a job really isn't as easy as you make it sound.

Where did I say it was easy? Or that everyone should work? Of course someone working minimum wage 'ain't gonna' pay for private school. I understand not everyone can get a decent paying job. I'm not saying that private school is achievable for everyone. That doesn't mean that there are no HS parents who could pay for a private school if they worked out of the home instead.

Some of the parents I have encountered that HS previously worked as engineers, teachers, and nurses. Their potential salaries could pay for private school for several children. Yet they use the argument that I've heard here "Well, we don't like public school and would put them in private school, but we can't afford it." I call BS. Yes, they can't afford it based on 1 salary, but they could if they both had paying jobs. It's a choice they made to HS and I respect that. Just don't try to pass it off that their only alternative to public school is to HS. In fact, their choice has nothing to do with whether or not they could afford private school. If they would really prefer private school to HS (which that statement implies), then they could probably get a job (or 2) to pay the tuition, even if that meant 'barely breaking even.' They HS because they want to HS, and that's their choice.

To say it only costs several hundred dollars to HS compared to 6-K to private school is just misleading. The actual cost of homeschooling is the amount of money that parent would make it they were to work outside the home. So the actual cost of homeschooling could range anywhere from several hundred to $25000+.

I'm not saying HS parents should work instead of staying home. In fact, I plan on being a SAHM myself. Each parent has to make the decisions they feel is best for their families. And as long as a child is being properly educated, I have no problem with a parent choosing to HS. I just feel that if a parent is confident about their decision to HS, then s/he should own that decision for what it is (a personal choice) rather than using excuses.

[Niobe]

The controversy with home schooling, as I understand it, is that children may or may not get a "proper" education (however that's being defined, which is another discussion entirely). It seems like, to me, evaluating the child's work would be a better measure of the education the child is receiving than requiring credentials for the parents. The parent can jump through all the hoops they want and still go home and teach the child that the Sun revolves around the Earth because that's what they believe. Or not teach the child anything at all. So to me, credentials for the parents are meaningless. They don't actually ensure the child will be properly instructed, only that the parent is capable of instruction. But the accountability required by states like Sarah's, outlines of curriculum and assessment of the child's work, would be a lot more effective in ensuring the child was receiving an education at least somewhat in line with mainstream society.

[msnicolea]

Even if a parent has their child's best inteerests at heart, which most do, of course, that doesn't qualify them to teach. I'd love it if Lucas were bilingual and could speak Spanish, for example--but since I don't, I wouldn't presume to teach him myself!

Loving your children isn't the qualification for being a good teacher, I'm afraid. And although I recognize that some HSers take classes from other teachers and sources besides a parent, not all of them do, and that truly concerns me.

And if "anyone" can teach, why have standards at all?

[Sevilla]

Msnicolea - This goes back to different pedagogical theories. In homeschooling, the focus is on the student learning how tot each themselves with the parents as a coach and mentor - not the parent as sole instructor. Homeschooling families I know have curriculums, field trips, co-ops, tutors, outside-the-home classes, etc... Students know where to go to find information and learn more about a subject that interests them - the kitchen table is not the limits of their classroom, the kids don't stay home all day every day learning only what mom (or dad) knows.

Take your example - For learning Spanish, you have several options - Rosetta Stone computer language program is excellent, there are many book-based curriculums you could also purchase if you have a basic knowledge of Spanish, you can enroll your children in a homeschool coop and learn Spanish from someone who knows the language (i currently teach spanish and latin at a homeschool coop ;), before that I taught in a traditional high school for several years), you can take foreign language classes at your local public school or at community college when you're in high school, etc...

The parents doesn't have to know Spanish in order for their kids to learn it - the parents has to know *how* and *where* to find resources for their child to learn Spanish and provide those opportunities.

[jennylou]

Even if a parent has their child's best inteerests at heart, which most do, of course, that doesn't qualify them to teach. I'd love it if Lucas were bilingual and could speak Spanish, for example--but since I don't, I wouldn't presume to teach him myself!

Loving your children isn't the qualification for being a good teacher, I'm afraid. And although I recognize that some HSers take classes from other teachers and sources besides a parent, not all of them do, and that truly concerns me.

And if "anyone" can teach, why have standards at all?

Parents teach their children every single day - at least I hope they do! Even if they send them to public schools/private schools/whatever, they are still teachers, no?

As I read to my daughter every day (and sometimes the same book, over and over and over again) is she not learning? When I take her to the park and we talk about all the things there (birds, trees, grass, slides, swings, etc) does she not learn?

My point is that, while it may seem simple, you can't discount that parents are teachers. In fact, they are their children's first teachers.

Would I attempt to teach my children at home once they are school age? Well, I'm sure there will be teaching opportunities, but no, they will attend public school for their "official" schooling. And that's not to say that I don't think others aren't qualified. And it's not to say that I wouldn't attempt it if the schools (either public or private, because all private schools don't necessarily mean good schools) near me weren't good schools. But, since they are - I see no reason to try to do it myself. :)

[Sarah]

Even if a parent has their child's best inteerests at heart, which most do, of course, that doesn't qualify them to teach. I'd love it if Lucas were bilingual and could speak Spanish, for example--but since I don't, I wouldn't presume to teach him myself!

Loving your children isn't the qualification for being a good teacher, I'm afraid. And although I recognize that some HSers take classes from other teachers and sources besides a parent, not all of them do, and that truly concerns me.

And if "anyone" can teach, why have standards at all?

So what do you do with the info which suggests that kids don't fare poorly with HSing? (no snark intended, really asking. :))

Also,
And if "anyone" can teach, why have standards at all?I don't think our current method of teacher certification works at all, and I think we should change it. I know tons of people who'd love to teach and would be gifted teachers, but can't because they can't afford 2 more years of school to get certified. OTOH, I know and have worked with many dreadful teachers who are perfectly certified. The abysmal state of many urban public schools shows that even with Bush's (horrible!) NCLB standards for "highly qualified" teachers, certification does not in any way equal teaching ability. I went to private prep school for k-12, as a child, and not one of my teachers was certified, but almost all were excellent. The best way to show a teacher's skill is looking at his students, and as a PP said, looking at a kid's portfolio/lessons/work for the year is the best way of seeing if a parent is doing what he/she should.

[moderngal]

I think the point you're missing, Nicole, is that not everyone values your perception of a "good education." Education doesn't have to happen in a classroom for it to be "good." Institutional learning simply isn't best for all people.
Parents teach their children every single day - at least I hope they do! Even if they send them to public schools/private schools/whatever, they are still teachers, no?

Absolutely!!

they use the argument that I've heard here "Well, we don't like public school and would put them in private school, but we can't afford it." I call BS. Yes, they can't afford it based on 1 salary, but they could if they both had paying jobs.
I can see this is a losing battle, but this is short sighted and awfully presumptuous.
If both parents work full-time, you run into issues like paying for childcare during summer months/afterschool care/care on days off - that is expensive. You run into increased expenses via higher taxes, work attire, work lunches, childcare, etc... You also are not able to be involved at the school if you are working - so the type of involvement that parents who homeschool would want to have at private school (volunteering, room mom, doing class parties, tutoring, etc...) would be unavailable to them. Not to mention that this is really only even partially feasible when all children are school aged - if you have 3 kids spaced 3 years apart, that means the oldest would be 11 before the youngest would be old enough for kindergarten (assuming the private school offers full-day kindergarten).
A teacher or a nurse returning to work to send 1 child to private school- maybe. But more? I doubt it. Private schools can start at $10-12K and get more expensive as the child grows. The school my son is on the waiting list for starts at $12K for preK and will be over $20K a year for high school. I can hardly see how a teacher's salary could pay for private school and the extras listed above. Going back to work seems easy, but I assure you it isn't- and it isn't just an excuse.

[kiddo]

I can see this is a losing battle, but this is short sighted and awfully presumptuous.

A teacher or a nurse returning to work to send 1 child to private school- maybe. But more? I doubt it. Private schools can start at $10-12K and get more expensive as the child grows. The school my son is on the waiting list for starts at $12K for preK and will be over $20K a year for high school. I can hardly see how a teacher's salary could pay for private school and the extras listed above. Going back to work seems easy, but I assure you it isn't- and it isn't just an excuse.

I fear you are the one being presumptuous. The private schools around here cost $7K for highschool, less for the lower grades. Public school teachers average salary is around $40k, nurses closer to $55k+, and engineers up to $100k. If they wanted to, they could afford it.

I've known many single moms who have put their children through private schools. If they can do it, it is also possible for many 2 income families to afford it.

[Delta]

Institutional learning simply isn't best for all people. Bingo.

[moderngal]

The private schools around here cost $7K for highschool, less for the lower grades. Public school teachers average salary is around $40k, nurses closer to $55k+, and engineers up to $100k.
Wow. That's incredible. High salaries for traditionally lower paying/ public service jobs and cheap private schools. Of course they should all go back to work immediately for that!!

This is what is presumptuous:
If they can do it, it is also possible for many 2 income families to afford it.
You simply don't have the intimate knowledge to know what people can afford or the circumstances surrounding their budgets. Sure, some could do it, but asserting that "it's just an excuse" is ridiculous. A SAHP home-schooling sometimes is the best and most financially sound decision, regardless of potential income being lost.

[jennylou]

I fear you are the one being presumptuous. The private schools around here cost $7K for highschool, less for the lower grades. Public school teachers average salary is around $40k, nurses closer to $55k+, and engineers up to $100k. If they wanted to, they could afford it.

I've known many single moms who have put their children through private schools. If they can do it, it is also possible for many 2 income families to afford it.

Sometimes those private schools aren't very good. Sometimes, the SAHM has other younger children that she would have to put into daycare. Many people do not want their young children to go to daycare and would rather (for various reasons, including financial) stay home with their children.

[littlemia]

Just curious how many of you can say that you got a lot of added value by having been taught by a certified teacher at school? Because a lot of the time when I was in high school, it could have been anyone in the front of the classroom. And I don't think my experience was unusual.

[Niobe]

Just curious how many of you can say that you got a lot of added value by having been taught by a certified teacher at school? Because a lot of the time when I was in high school, it could have been anyone in the front of the classroom. And I don't think my experience was unusual.

*waves* I have extremely poor auditory learning skills. Telling me doesn't do crap. Just not how I learn. I figured out at a very young age how to teach myself from the textbook and got by fairly well. And from that point on, my teachers functioned as makers of lesson plans and test-givers. I'd have to agree with you entirely.

I'm one who probably would have thrived being home schooled and being able to learn at my own pace. I was a great student starting out, but a continual discipline problem because like I said, I taught myself from the book, so I was bored out of my mind sitting in class all day. I read, I drew, I wrote short stories, and the teachers complained about every one of those activities because I wasn't "paying attention". :rolleyes: Year after year of the same crap and I lost motivation. By high school, I barely bothered to even show up. Still did great come test day. It got to be pretty ridiculous and I almost failed for absences in classes I had As in but missed more then half the days that semester. I did fail classes that emphasized in-class work, because I just wasn't there to do it.

I didn't need someone to instruct me, I needed someone to guide me. Provide books, make out a schedule for working through the books, and keep my ass on it. A robot with a ruler could have been a perfectly sufficient teacher for me. :p

[kiddo]

Wow. That's incredible. High salaries for traditionally lower paying/ public service jobs and cheap private schools. Of course they should all go back to work immediately for that!!

Yeah, but it's true and not an exageration. And please don't put words in my mouth. Where did I ever say they should all go back to work? In fact what I did say was I'm not saying HS parents should work instead of staying home. In fact, I plan on being a SAHM myself.

Teachers and nurses around here are certainly not low paying jobs. And the private school I was thinking of is actually a very good one. The public schools in our town are very good as well. In fact, that is why our town is so popular for families who want to HS. They move here so they can use the schools for many of its resources and then claim its not 'good enough' for their children.

You simply don't have the intimate knowledge to know what people can afford or the circumstances surrounding their budgets. Sure, some could do it, but asserting that "it's just an excuse" is ridiculous. A SAHP home-schooling sometimes is the best and most financially sound decision, regardless of potential income being lost.

Give me a break. If we are talking strictly finances, then public school (which is free) would be the 'most financially sound decision."

My point is, a parent's choice to HS has very little to do with finances and has more to do with parents just wanting to HS.

[IrishEyes]

I've seen some programs on TV where HSing was done within a coop-type program. In that case, especially for high school level courses, it seemed that the students were getting good classes and guidance.

Time Magazine had an article recently about teachers, and it had some interesting information on programs in foreign countries where teacher training is very different, and they are higher paid jobs. There was also a lot more value in innovative teaching and hands-on type activities. I'd love to see the education system here overhauled, and it be less about teaching for the test.

I have no interest in HSing my children, though considering how much time teaching science has decreased in school (and I'm a scientist), I'll be doing lots of things to enrich their knowledge of science outside of class. Some days, science was the only thing I looked forward to.

When I was in graduate school working towards my doctorate, one thing a lot of us were interested in (as we found that we were not interested in pursuing an academic career) was teaching in high schools. Unfortunately, even after all the training we got, we'd have to go through all the requirements for certification, which I believe was another 2 years in school. Some places have discussed an accelerated certification program for people with expertise or advanced degrees, but I know Maryland has shot this idea down. I'd love to see more 'non-traditional' teachers out there.

[msnicolea]

I totally agree that parents are teachers to their children, and I am fully aware of different learning styles, etc. . .--I don't think I'm missing or disregarding those points. I just find some of the comments about teachers and the education system to be fairly dismissive and I the implication that "anyone" can be a good teacher to be a fallacy--good intentions or not.

I learned plenty outside of the classroom, because I was raised in a family that valued traveling and experiences and reading and learning opportunities of all types--and that's what I hope to pass on to my son.

And for the record, I'm not anti-homeschooling. The model you presented, Sarah, looks pretty amazing, and I think your children are going to benefit greatly from your education and commitment to them. However, I guess I fear that many HS parents don't use that system (bringing in experts, traveling, multiple teaching methods, etc. . .) and don't have the education and skills you have, so I think standards are a good thing. But you guys know what a fan of "big government" I am!

[Txfish]

kiddo's POV on this is making my brain bleed a little.

Not eveyone has a degree, so not everyone can get a really well-paying job. After our 2nd kid in 2 years, I didn't go back to work because I now can't afford to pay 2 daycare tuitions plus afterschool daycare for my 1st grader -- where exactly do you think I'm going to come up with tuition for private school??

Also, no, at elementary levels it is not FREE to send your child to public school if you are working -- you must still pay for afterschool care.

I feel like you're totally missing a large chunk of reality. The private schools in my area cost nearly 15K a year. Per kid. So I'd have to clear 45K after taxes, plus my cost of working (clothes, transportation) and STILL pay aftercare for many years before it would be financially sound to send my kids to private.

I've never made more than 28K in my life. That's a lot of debt to take on for 35 more years of school cumulatively, even before we got to trying to helppay for college.

But yeah, it's all about my desire to have my kids home with me all day. :rolleyes:

[kiddo]

Whatever, you are missing my point.

Please reread my posts and tell me where I said anyone should do anything. :rolleyes:

You want to HS, fine. That is a luxury you have that many families don't.

[Txfish]

I don't believe I referenced a "should" anywhere in there at all.

Yes, the ability to stay at home whether you homeschool or not is a luxury to many people. In my case, you may say it's a luxury, but as I've pointed out it's the only smart financial option based on what I could reasonably expect to earn.

My point to you is that it's unreasonable to say that private school is a financially comparable choice to HSing. That was your original point I believe, so no I don't think I'm missing it. For families who can earn a lot of money, then yes it's probably possible for them to both work and therefore afford private school (which as you've said in your area is HALF the cost of p.s. in my area.) But don't try to tell me that's the norm for most people who are concerned about the quality of education in their school district.

I don't homeschool, not that it matters.

[ysolde]

Just curious how many of you can say that you got a lot of added value by having been taught by a certified teacher at school? Because a lot of the time when I was in high school, it could have been anyone in the front of the classroom. And I don't think my experience was unusual.


I loved school from Day 1. I went to Montessori for pre-school. It worked incredibly well for me. As I have stated before, I was not only reading and writing by the age of five, I was doing so in two languages. And I have to say, Sevilla, that I don't think a computer system is the way to go in learning a second language -- total immersion by the age of five is. Few HS environments can provide that.

[littlemia]

And I have to say, Sevilla, that I don't think a computer system is the way to go in learning a second language -- total immersion by the age of five is. Few HS environments can provide that.

I don't think many public schools are providing that either.

[PinkMartini]

Yes, the ability to stay at home whether you homeschool or not is a luxury to many people. In my case, you may say it's a luxury, but as I've pointed out it's the only smart financial option based on what I could reasonably expect to earn.

Same goes for me. I never got any type of degree from college and the only jobs I've ever had were retail jobs/customer service jobs. Barely above min. wage. So I definitely couldn't just get a job and afford to send my DC to private school. I SAH because daycare would cost AT LEAST what I could bring in, if not more. Doesn't make financial sense for me to work.

[ysolde]

In my home, they will have total immersion from the day they are born (if not before -- can fetuses hear in the womb?).

[Niobe]

I don't think many public schools are providing that either.

I don't think any are doing full immersion by age 5 - you have to be 5 to start kindergarten.

I was in Montessori for preschool as well, but I was reading before I started there. My parents were my teachers. Unaccredited, but they managed to teach a four year old to read pretty well. ;)

[Niobe]

In my home, they will have total immersion from the day they are born (if not before -- can fetuses hear in the womb?).

Wait, isn't that homeschooling? :D

[Delta]

Well, and again. Montessori is not traditional schooling. There is no teacher "in front" of the classroom. The teachers go through years of accredidation. But most of the good ones are private and pricey and therefore out of reach for many. And sure, immersion classrooms are best for learning languages but many people don't have access to that either.

For me it comes down to parental rights. The government has no business telling parents where or how their kids should learn as long as they are learning and keeping up with their peers. Especially if it means forcing them to go to subpar public schools when they could be getting a better and more worldy education from homeschooling and the hsing network.

[msnicolea]

Again, Delta, how do we know they are learning and keeping up with their peers if there weren't standards already in place? I think that's all anyone is saying. HS all you want--but at the very least, you should be required to submit to a basic level of scrutiny.

I also think it's fair to say that not all HS is alike, and that some children are HS for religious reasons, (just one example) and taught by parents without decent education themselves, and without being exposed to core curriculum; that concerns me, and that's the reason I support minimum standards and requirements!

And a shout out to my public school system, which though flawed in many, many ways, offers three language immersion schools beginning at K4!

[ysolde]

Wait, isn't that homeschooling? :D

Yup. Real homeschooling. In addition to. Not in substitution for. I cannot teach math. I wouldn't even know where to begin. I cannot teach grammar. I cannot teach history. I don't know how history is taught to children. I cannot teach art. I am lousy at it. I cannot teach music, no matter how many times I watch The Sound of Music. I cannot teach science. Now, will I take my children to the Met, to the ballet, to the opera, to the Museum of Natural History, to the Zoo, to the MoMa? Will I encourage them to read newspapers from all over the world, as my parents encouraged me? Will we spend Saturday afternoons strolling through Chelsea, wandering in and out of art galleries? Will they travel with me, visiting people and places they read about, seeing glimpses of worlds different from their own? Of course. But all of this is in addition to the classroom, the laboratory, the library. All of these things work together in harmony. It is not an either/or equation.

[kedzieb]

Again, Delta, how do we know they are learning and keeping up with their peers if there weren't standards already in place? I think that's all anyone is saying. HS all you want--but at the very least, you should be required to submit to a basic level of scrutiny.

I also think it's fair to say that not all HS is alike, and that some children are HS for religious reasons, (just one example) and taught by parents without decent education themselves, and without being exposed to core curriculum; that concerns me, and that's the reason I support minimum standards and requirements!

And a shout out to my public school system, which though flawed in many, many ways, offers three language immersion schools beginning at K4!

This is exactly how I feel about homeschooling. Plus I feel like government incentives for private schools & homeschooling make it even harder to improve public schools.

[Delta]

I think it's fine for the kids to have to pass certain standardized tests or for the curriculum to be submitted, etc. States vary on those requirements. What I don't agree with, and what is being discussed in this thread and ruled on in this case, is that HSing parents have to be credentialed.

[msnicolea]

And I think credentialing or licensing is ok, provided you make it accessible and achievable.

And ITA, ysolde!

I'm sorry, but I don't think a parent with a 9th grade education and no respect for science (just an example--someone on another message board I frequent) should be teaching anyone's children, even their own, if they can't achieve basic certification/requirements established by each state. There has to be some regulation and oversight.

[ysolde]

And I think credentialing or licensing is ok, provided you make it accessible and achievable.

I'm sorry, but I don't think a parent with a 9th grade education and no respect for science (just an example--someone on another message board I frequent) should be teaching anyone's children, even their own, if they can't achieve basic certification/requirements established by each state.

How can you be allowed to drop out of school in 9th grade? Let alone hs children with a 9th grade education?

This is a discussion that my friends and I often have -- does it seem that the more educated you are, the more you realize that you know very little, and are qualified for even less? It seems that education humbles you quite a bit. Even after a semester or two of college, we realized how vast the amount of knowledge was we would never attain (quantum mechanics? string theory? are you kidding?). So it would seem like hubris for people like us, who know so very little about so many things, to presume to teach our children about, well, just about anything. I mean, the bottom line is, people like us know a little bit about a lot of things, but we don't know nearly enough about anything to teach, and we certainly don't have the skills needed to break it down to teach anything effectively.

[yby1]

For me it comes down to parental rights. The government has no business telling parents where or how their kids should learn as long as they are learning and keeping up with their peers. Especially if it means forcing them to go to subpar public schools when they could be getting a better and more worldy education from homeschooling and the hsing network.

ITA. I don't need any more bureaucracy in my life.

I don't' plan to HS, but I think that parents should educate their students in a model of their choosing.

I think that there should be a standard through testing, reaching certain educational milestones, etc., but not with parents having to be credentialed.

[msnicolea]

This woman describes herself as having a 9th grade education--perhaps she was held back and then dropped out? Or maybe she just stopped going, which happens all the time. Regardless, what makes her remotely qualified to be her child's primary instructor?!?!?! I can't understand why those of you deriding the idea of standards wouldn't recognize that this scenario exists and want to remedy it!

Yes, I know some of you think I'm an academic snob and that I place too much value on formal education--but I can live that :-)

And I agree, again, ysolde--I feel like the more I learn, the more I realize how much I don't know! What I can give my son is a love for learning, a desire to read and broaden his boundaries, new experiences, etc. . . But the day he comes to me for help with his calculus homework, will be a sad, sad day indeed!

[PinkMartini]

How can you be allowed to drop out of school in 9th grade?

My brother didn't complete anything higher than 10th grade. So I guess it's possible. And he got 'lucky' and got a job as an iron worker and makes $40+/hour.

[thedoorchick]

does it seem that the more educated you are, the more you realize that you know very little, and are qualified for even less? It seems that education humbles you quite a bit.
Oh goodness, yes! The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know.

[Pawthorne]

For me it comes down to parental rights. The government has no business telling parents where or how their kids should learn as long as they are learning and keeping up with their peers.

Sorry to play devils advocate but by your quote, the government has no business telling me it's not ok to beat my kids with a pipe wrench if they don't pass a test that I give them during my home school sessions... as long as they are keeping up with their peers? I mean, as long as they're learning then the state has no right telling me HOW they should learn? And it's perfectly ok for me to hold my home school sessions for my kids in a strip club right?

Seems to me that we consent to be governed by the government to have consistent order and law ( among other things ). It appears that there needs to be a new/better definition of what the requirements for being a HS educator entail. Whether that be by Certification, credentials, etc yet still achievable by non-teacher parents, the system should be designed around the best course for the child.

Just because we are parents doesn't mean we know best. Now don't go assuming I'm suggesting the government is infallible... far from it imo. But the annoying cry of 'parental rights' bugs me when there are so many examples of people who got pregnant and squeezed out a child yet have no business or 'right' to be parents...

[Delta]

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding here about how homeschool works, or is supposed to work. But those details I'll leave to Sarah and others who are obviously more well-versed in it than the rest of us.

[msnicolea]

I think there's a fundamental mis-assumption that all HSing works the same way that Sarah described it--and that's simply not the case.

[Delta]

Sorry to play devils advocate but by your quote, the government has no business telling me it's not ok to beat my kids with a pipe wrench if they don't pass a test that I give them during my home school sessions... as long as they are keeping up with their peers? I mean, as long as they're learning then the state has no right telling me HOW they should learn? And it's perfectly ok for me to hold my home school sessions for my kids in a strip club right?

OK, well, I figured that common sense precluded me from the need to make disclaimers about abuse, etc. in homeschool situations (which is where this case actually originated from.)

[Delta]

I think there's a fundamental mis-assumption that all HSing works the same way that Sarah described it--and that's simply not the case.I understand that. But I still do not think it's the government's place to demand parents get "credentialed" before homeschooling their children.

For those of you who believe there should be credentialing or testing or whatever of the parents, what should the process entail?

[msnicolea]

Not sure, but some things I think should be included would be:

~minimum level of parental education
~submission and pre-approval of annual lesson plans
~enrollment in enrichment/CPU credits (annually)
~monthly or quarterly progress reports

[yby1]

Not sure, but some things I think should be included would be:

~minimum level of parental education
~submission and pre-approval of annual lesson plans
~enrollment in enrichment/CPU credits (annually)
~monthly or quarterly progress reports


What would that minimum level of parental education be? 2-year degree, HS diploma, 4-year degree?

[thedoorchick]

I still don't understand why it is objectionable to suggest that HS parents have some minimum credentials, but apparently no one has a problem with public/private school teachers having these requirements. If certification is such a hassle and so unnecessary in the grand scheme of determining whether someone is a fit teacher, why do we require certification of anyone?

[yby1]

I still don't understand why it is objectionable to suggest that HS parents have some minimum credentials, but apparently no one has a problem with public/private school teachers having these requirements. If certification is such a hassle and so unnecessary in the grand scheme of determining whether someone is a fit teacher, why do we require certification of anyone?

There is a difference between someone teaching multiple students for an income than a parent teaching their own child. I would want someone that is teaching a room full of children to have an understanding of what that entails.

A parent generally understands their own children and what they are capable of.

[Delta]

Because it is a total intrusion of government to demand credentials from parents for teaching their own children, especially if the children already have to meet standards set forth by the state.

I mean good grief, just look at the language used in the ruling:
A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare.
Does that disturb anyone else?

[moderngal]

Private school teachers are not required to be certified.

And yes, Delta. Its incredibly frightening.

[msnicolea]

Not sure what the minimum would be--just throwing out some ideas.

That language is quite disturbing--that's why I don't vote for flag waiving, patriotism-questioning Republicans.

But my comments aren't about this particular case as much as about the idea of credentialing/licensing/SOMETHING in general, which I still think is a good idea.

Understanding your own child and what he/she needs is not the same thing as being able to provide an adequate education for him. I am quite certain that there are many parents on this board who would do an excellent job as HS teachers--absolutely. But leaving it (as an institution) un-regulated and under-monitored--if that is indeed the case in some states, which it seems to be-- is a very bad idea, IMO.

[thedoorchick]

Understanding your own child, and being qualified to teach things like reading, writing, and 'rithmetic (or whatever) are two totally different concepts.

[msnicolea]

uh oh, TDC--here we go again--two peas in a pod. . .


I really cannot get my head around why some of you think it would be ok for a parent with a 9th grade education to attempt to educate her child through 12th grade without having any requirements to bring in other teachers, for example--what does loving her child have to do with being able to facilitate their learning of chemistry? Why is it unfair to expect that she be required to have a basic understanding of the concepts herself or at least a willingness to do research/seek out new and different ways of communicating information before "teaching" her child?

And where are the public school teachers in this discussion? if I were them I'd be pretty sick of being discounted and told that my training was basically irrelevant--apparently, anyone can be a teacher!

[thedoorchick]

Frightening, isn't it? ;)

But hey, I'm not ashamed of being a flag waving Republican!

[Delta]

A person with a 9th grade education teaching their kids high school-level material is not ideal of course, but nor is it the situation in the vast majority of homeschool situations. Furthermore, homeschoolers regularly outperform their peers on standardized tests, so why mess with something that is already working? The only answer I have for that is because the state wants more control.

I think the public school credential requirement (which varies in enforcement) has been discussed here already by multiple people. And frankly, I care more about the freedoms of parents in this situation than I do about the feelings of public school teachers who might be offended by the right of parents to teach their own kids.

[msnicolea]

Where are you getting stats re: the demographics of the average HSer? I'm genuinely curious.



Here are Wisconsin's "requirements":


Wisconsin Legal Home Schooling:

Legal Option:
Establish and operate a "home-based private educational program"

Attendance:
Must provide "at least 875 hours of instruction each year"

Subjects:
Must provide "a sequentially progressive curriculum of fundamental instruction" in reading, language arts, math, social studies, science and health; such curriculum need not "conflict with the program’s religious doctrines"

Qualifications:
None

Notice:
File a statement of enrollment with the state department of education by October 15 each year

Recordkeeping:
None

Testing:
None

Does this seem adequate? NO standardized tests are required.

And look at this map: http://www.hslda.org/laws/default.asp

Sarah's case appears to be the exception, as PA is a highly regulated state. Only 6 states require: parents to send notification or achievement test scores and/or professional evaluation, plus other requirements (e.g. curriculum approval by the state, teacher qualification of parents, or home visits by state officials).

[yby1]

Understanding your own child, and being qualified to teach things like reading, writing, and 'rithmetic (or whatever) are two totally different concepts.

They are two different concepts, but I think the two can greatly complement each other, even under average (basic HS / some college educated parent) circumstances. There are exceptions, of course, but there always are.

FWIW, I'm someone that is very pro-apprenticeships than standard academia. ;)

[ysolde]

Furthermore, homeschoolers regularly outperform their peers on standardized tests, so why mess with something that is already working?




I keep hearing this statistic bandied about, and I have to wonder, "ouperforming their peers" in what, exactly? AP exams? SAT scores? PSAT scores? SSAT scores? Sophomore standing as college freshmen (meaning they received scores of 4 or 5 in at least 3 AP exams)?

Because if they can memorize a whole lot of material short-term and regurgitate it on an exam, then forget it long-term, it's not really useful. But if they have great analytical skills, as evidenced on standardized tests that involve essay writing and problem solving, then that's a whole other kettle of fish.

[thedoorchick]

And frankly, I care more about the freedoms of parents in this situation than I do about the feelings of public school teachers who might be offended by the right of parents to teach their own kids.
FTR, my comments are not really related to how the non-requirements for HSers might make public school teachers feel. That's not to say their feelings (or perhaps more accurately, their opinions as professionals) are not valuable, but my concerns come from a different place.

To be frank, I think that taking steps to ensure children get a quality education by someone for whom that is a priority, is more important than a parent's opinion about what their child ought to be learning. Most parents have the best of intentions, and probably good outcomes. However, I'm very wary of going too far with the "parent knows best" way of thinking. Some parents, unfortunately, do NOT know best.

And I appreciate the concerns about bureacracy, over-reaching of government, and all those things. I'm certainly not a fan of bigger government just for its own sake. I just think the future of our children is important enough that we ought to be OK with some sort of basic qualifications for educators, whether in a school or at home.

I'm quite frightened by what msnicolea posted regarding Wisconsin and other states. No recordkeeping requirements? No approval of lessons or curriculum? In short, little to no accountability? I am just not OK with that.

[Delta]

Again, requiring parents to get actual teaching credentials to teach their kids requires a lot of schooling, and time and money and therefore presents a huge barrier for many if not most HSing families.

If you agree that this is overkill and just want some basic certification or qualification, I argue that this still doesn't guarantee anything in terms of what or how the kids are learning, and merely introduces more bureaucracy into the process.

I do not have a problem with testing the kids or recordkeeping or what have you as determined by each individual state.

[thedoorchick]

I don't know that I think HSing parents should have a teaching degree and the exact same credentials as public school teachers. I can submit that would be overkill. I just think they should be accountable in some way. Right now there's not even the barest minimum of requirement, and in most states, very little accountability.

Of course it doesn't guarantee anything. Public school teacher certification doesn't guarantee anything either. Nothing is certain but death and taxes, as they say.

I will say that I'm not concerned about whether cost, etc. of meeting requirements is a barrier to HSing families. HSing is an elective option, not a necessity, and if families choose to do this, getting set up for it is their responsibility. This is essentially the same as my theory on private school vouchers. If parents want private school, it ought to be on their nickel. Many millions of tax dollars go towards public schools, which are available to everyone.

[wendalah]

No strong feelings either way, just reading along with interest.

I found this particularly interesting:

Private school teachers are not required to be certified.

For real? That's startling.

Is it the same for parochial schools? (We plan to send DD to Catholic school.)

[ysolde]

No strong feelings either way, just reading along with interest.

I found this particularly interesting:



For real? That's startling.

Is it the same for parochial schools? (We plan to send DD to Catholic school.)


It varies from school to school. I went to a private, non sectarian school, accredited by the Middle States Association. Its standards are quite high. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_States_Association_of_Colleges_and_Schools

[isign]

Private school teachers are not required to be certified.
That's not so for every private school. In our state if a private school is to be accredited, than the teachers must be certified. I attended several private schools and know this to be true. The good private schools are the ones with accreditation. IIRC, those schools that receive any type of state funding MUST be accredited.

While I do think there needs to be some guidelines - in my state there are none - I don't think that requiring parents to be certified is the way to go. I have subbed in several public school districts, including the ones that DS would have to attend, and have been employed by another district. While there are some good teachers, there are also some bad ones. Certified does not mean that teacher/principal/school is a great place for each student. I worked in the special education department. Finding