Big news in education hit when a California appeals court passed down the digs whereby those who teach homeschooled children must be credentialed teachers, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. This ruling could affect an estimated 166,000 children and could lead to prosecution.
Excerpts from the San Fran Chronicle:
My first thought, is that one must have a license to cut hair, to practice law or to practice medicine. Regardless of the location of the practice, credentials are required. Lawyers who work our of their home must comply with laws the same as lawyers in traditional firms. Why should the instruction of youth be any different?
Home school advocates say that the ruling bans homeschooling, but that is not entirely true. The ruling only requires the teachers be credentialed, which assumes competence. The reason for all of the hubbub to begin with came from allegations of mistreatment.
By the way, certified private schools were a non-issue, even the religious ones. Those were just fine. The article is not about forcing children into public schools, only that those children should be taught by real teachers who know what they are doing. Just to clarify.
Other Articles:
Los Angeles Times
World Net Daily
Excerpts from the San Fran Chronicle:
"California courts have held that ... parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children," Justice H. Walter Croskey said in the 3-0 ruling issued on Feb. 28. "Parents have a legal duty to see to their children's schooling under the provisions of these laws."
"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," the judge wrote, quoting from a 1961 case on a similar issue.
My first thought, is that one must have a license to cut hair, to practice law or to practice medicine. Regardless of the location of the practice, credentials are required. Lawyers who work our of their home must comply with laws the same as lawyers in traditional firms. Why should the instruction of youth be any different?
Home school advocates say that the ruling bans homeschooling, but that is not entirely true. The ruling only requires the teachers be credentialed, which assumes competence. The reason for all of the hubbub to begin with came from allegations of mistreatment.
By the way, certified private schools were a non-issue, even the religious ones. Those were just fine. The article is not about forcing children into public schools, only that those children should be taught by real teachers who know what they are doing. Just to clarify.
Other Articles:
Los Angeles Times
World Net Daily
Posts
3 comments:
Nah, no big deal, next they'll be telling you that you have to be certified to give birth.
Oh, and the quote from the 1961 case? Loyalty to the State. That's exactly what this is all about. It's not about protecting the children, it's about extracting compliance.
Parents should have the rights and responsibilities in every single area of their children's lives.
No one, no matter how large their majority should have the right to infringe upon what the parents teach their children. Do you want some group coming in and declaring to you that you're a criminal because you teach that Jesus is the Christ? How about if you teach that the Theory of Evolution explains mans' origins? Should a majority be allowed to define these qualifications? The government tries to define these things for the Government schools, and that is the primary reason for the thriving Home Schooling movement.
Further, just because the government over-regulates the rest of society doesn't mean that parents have to roll over and give up their rights and responsibilities to the government as well. The government shouldn't own you, but the IRS and the state laws in places like California sure do make it sound like they assume they do.
I have to say I agree strongly with jeremy d. young.
There are some areas in which Big Brother just doesn't belong, and I fear that this issue is a very slippery slope.
I homeschool my children, and frankly, I have no question that I know my children and their needs best whether I am a "certified teacher" or not. I mean, c'mon. A recent post of yours suggested that the teachers in training are so competent that they even need special focus on not letting their breasts and cracks hang out in the classroom. If that's the level of common sense I get from a "certified teacher" I can't be blamed for feeling I can do better.
Kids who are homeschooled (rarely done by "certified teachers") have demonstrated their educational and social competence is often miles above those taught by "certified teachers." Colleges and Universities are recognizing the quality of student they get in those that were previously homechooled. These kids are very often showing much better educational and social training than those under the guidance of "certified teachers."
Sure, there are good teachers out there. I know you are training to be one of them. I am not belittling that or the profession in any way, but as long as my children are meeting and exceeding the "educational competency standards" I think it's ridiculous to suggest I am not competent. Next Big Brother will be controlling our religion.
Another reason not to move to California (not that I needed one). And another reason for me to shudder about the potential ripple effect of this.
Just had to add another thought. This issue really has be seething. "Real teachers who know what they are doing." ????
I know of know "real teachers" who know what they are doing with my children better that I do.
For crying out loud! Am I also supposed to be certified to cut my own children's hair? A certified nutritionist to plan their meals? An ordained clergy person to offer my children religious training? A license just to be their parent?
If I am DEMONSTRATED to be incompetent in the educational training of my children, that is one thing. But if my kids are kicking butt compared to those under the tutelage of a "certified teacher," that is just WRONG and infringing WAY TOO MUCH on the rights our country was founded on.
Post a Comment