The Narrow Path Ministries

For anyone out there who home schools their children in California, this article should frighten you. Frankly the whole thing sickens me.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... DVF0F1.DTL

Robin

This is the part that frightened me most. It's a quote from the ruling judge:

"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.

Also, this:

"With this case law, anyone in California who is homeschooling without a teaching credential is subject to prosecution for truancy violation, which could require community service, heavy fines and possibly removal of their children under allegations of educational neglect," Dacus said.

This is rather sickening, no?

Am I allowed to potty train my toddlers in California without a teaching certification? Wait...my children are supposed to be toilet trained before I can bring them to kindergarten. Now I'm confused.

I'm not sure how parents have taught their children anything without those magical teaching certifications. Alas, its a wonder we could figure out diaper changes.




Dave

roblaine wrote:For anyone out there who home schools their children in California, this article should frighten you. Frankly the whole thing sickens me.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... DVF0F1.DTL

Robin

Parents who home school their children in California should stay informed and vigilant, but there really is no reason for fear.

This story has been spread widely after if first appeared in the Los Angeles Times, and it has not been reported fairly. The courts have no right to create legislation in California, although they seem to delight in making the lives of educators miserable.

Curiously, the courts were correct in this case - the parents were in the wrong because they claimed the were home-schooling their children under the supervision of a charter-school which, by definition, is a public school, and therefore carries the requirement that teachers to hold valid credentials. Home-schooling is still very legal if the home-schoolers claim to be a private school which have fewer mandates about who is qualified to teach.

I always wonder when the Los Angeles Times or the San Francisco Chronicle carry such sensational stories. It's hard to imagine that they would be sympathetic to the home-school cause. I'm just cynical enough to think that perhaps they want to stir up a hornet's nest among a group by and large consisting of Christian parents. Perhaps later to mock them for their fundamentalism?

By the way, I am a public school teacher who believes that home-schooling, when done legally and correctly, is the best way to teach children. However, I have been burdened on more than one occasion by having to work with children who were supposedly home-schooled, but were actually just kept at home with little or no schooling. Apparently that was what was happening in this case, which made it's way to court. I could see that serious home-school families might appreciate that the individuals who give their movement a bad name would be admonished. But, I could be looking at this the wrong way.

By the way, I am a public school teacher who believes that home-schooling, when done legally and correctly, is the best way to teach children. However, I have been burdened on more than one occasion by having to work with children who were supposedly home-schooled, but were actually just kept at home with little or no schooling. Apparently that was what was happening in this case, which made it's way to court. I could see that serious home-school families might appreciate that the individuals who give their movement a bad name would be admonished. But, I could be looking at this the wrong way.

I agree with you because I myself is a witness to someone I knew who homeschooled her daughter but could not qualify for university because her knowledge is below the average kids. And I think her daughter is smart but the problem was that her daughter was not properly trained.

But there is always a solution and I think Christian organizations should create a training school for parents who want to homeschool their children or someone else kids.

Am I allowed to potty train my toddlers in California without a teaching certification? Wait...my children are supposed to be toilet trained before I can bring them to kindergarten. Now I'm confused.

I'm not sure how parents have taught their children anything without those magical teaching certifications. Alas, its a wonder we could figure out diaper changes. (Schoel)

Enjoy your freedom while you can! It might not last forever....

"Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license ... All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing." - David Brower, (first Executive Director of the Sierra Club; founder of Friends of the Earth; and founder of the Earth Island Institute - quoted by Dixie Lee Ray, Trashing the Planet, p.166)

And on a lighter note, leaving conspiracies aside:

August 08, 2007
Should they license parents?

I found myself asking this question when reading the following news report:

A New Zealand couple is looking to call their newborn son Superman - but only because their chosen name of 4Real has been rejected by the government registry. The couple originally decided on the name because when they saw the ultrasound they decided that their son was "for real". I only wish that the boy's parents were. I'm sure he's going to thank them profusely when he hits the playground, whatever his parents finally settle on.... "Superman!!! Are you for real?!"

Hi Schoel,

Im allowed to potty train my toddlers in California without a teaching certification? Wait...my children are supposed to be toilet trained before I can bring them to kindergarten. Now I'm confused.

I'm not sure how parents have taught their children anything without those magical teaching certifications. Alas, its a wonder we could figure out diaper changes.

I think there are major differences between secular education such as biology, calculus, physics, electronics, science and ethics training.

Parents who are not incline in calculus will not be able to teach their kids properly without being trained themselves. Not all parents are knowledgeable in science, biology, physics and calculus.

On the other hand I believe parents are the best trainer when it comes to morality and ethics.

They can increase their effectiveness if they will agree to be trained as a certified educator so that they can properly teach their kids with respect to subjects such as calculus, biology physics, science and more .

PAULESPINO wrote:
I think there are major differences between secular education such as biology, calculus, physics, electronics, science and ethics training.

Parents who are not incline in calculus will not be able to teach their kids properly without being trained themselves. Not all parents are knowledgeable in science, biology, physics and calculus.

On the other hand I believe parents are the best trainer when it comes to morality and ethics.

They can increase their effectiveness if they will agree to be trained as a certified educator so that they can properly teach their kids with respect to subjects such as calculus, biology physics, science and more .

I agree and would include myself and my wife in the group of folks who would have a learning curve when it comes to teaching the subjects you list above. We both took most of them in high school, but the information hasn't been used practically and most if not all of it has been forgotten (see post script below). If we choose to homeschool for the teen years, we'll be learning together with our kids, which will be a lot of fun.

However, I would take exception to the fact that a training certificate makes a person a better educator. We know a couple who both have their certification to teach, and they both consider that it didn't necessarily make them better teachers. This is not to disparage a teaching certification, but to paint a more realistic picture of it. Some who are certified teachers are terrible at teaching, while many are not. Since they all have the certification, what is the difference?

In my estimation, the 2 crucial elements to any kind of education for a child are relationship and commitment (not necessarily knowledge). Parents generally have more of both for their own children than anyone else on the planet. Of course, many teachers in the schools are committed to their students and care for them as well, but can rarely achieve the same level as most parents.

Because of these reasons, I assert that the best educators for children are loving parents. Loving parents will know their knowledge gaps and weaknesses and will seek to shore them up without a government mandate to do so.

Dave

ps. Science, physics, calculus, biology and many other modern educational topics aren't as important to learn as our culture thinks they are for the majority of people. I'd rather my children be Godly janitors than brilliant professionals who hate or ignore God.

Schoel wrote:In my estimation, the 2 crucial elements to any kind of education for a child are relationship and commitment (not necessarily knowledge). Parents generally have more of both for their own children than anyone else on the planet. Of course, many teachers in the schools are committed to their students and care for them as well, but can rarely achieve the same level as most parents.

Because of these reasons, I assert that the best educators for children are loving parents. Loving parents will know their knowledge gaps and weaknesses and will seek to shore them up without a government mandate to do so.

Well said. This is exactly what I believe, and I do have a teaching credential. By the way, you don't have to be an expert in a field to teach it; and the happy-accident that occurs is that you end up knowing more about it afterwards as well.

ps. Science, physics, calculus, biology and many other modern educational topics aren't as important to learn as our culture thinks they are for the majority of people. I'd rather my children be Godly janitors than brilliant professionals who hate or ignore God.

I agree wholeheartedly (as a quasi-scientist myself). I think most adults could (if applied) direct learning in these areas even if they feel somewhat incompetent themselves with some of the curricula that exist. Also, groups of families can do this together where one has a skill in a particular area. As you indicated earlier in your post, these skills are often lost anyway, which I think is due to the way they are taught in the schools. I would rather someone retain 50-80% of a core of the hard science knowledge rathern than 5% of the less useful. Having familiarity is of value even if not proficiency, but I think when you try, you can teach these materials sufficiently (especially with some of the electronic tutorials, etc. for such subjects).

I think it is the softer subjects like history and philosophy and literature that are hard to teach with "supplemental materials" and "training systems" and this is ironically where I think the schools fail the greatest and home schooling can provide the greatest benefit. Incidentally, I think these are probably the most important areas to a well-rounded individual to develop a working world-view (preferably Christian) and yet still fit within and understand and appreciate competing world views. (Paul was able to be all things to all people only because he understood and appreciated their cultures).

I'll face this difficult question one day soon, and can't imagine the challenge and commitment for both spouses (hopefully), but I don't think we can say with generality whether it is better or worse -- it depends I think on too many things like support systems and community resources.