|
Associated Press – March 7, 2008:
|
|
|
0
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
You could file a motion on the basis of either a Ninth or Tenth Amendment claim, but you are probably not going to win. It is going to be hard to argue that the Ninth actually applies to this case given that the Constitution is not actually involved (appellate court). Further, the Tenth is problematic because case law has generally shown that the federal government defers to the state in the matter of education and not the right of the individual. States generally have the right to make laws on the process of educating their underage masses.
A better route might actually be to use the 1st Amendment and argue against the denial of the freedom of association (parent to child). A much more abstract argument might be to claim that the 3rd Amendment is a violation because the inability for a parent to teach their children is the equivalent of a federal soldier being quartered in their house (abstractions on soldier and time of war). This of course pretty much requires the individual to admit that the education was federalized Under the No Child Left Behind Act.
(Problem)
I think given the specialization required even to obtain a high school degree it is very unlikely this is overturned if the State Supreme Court rules against it or refuses to hear the case. A compromise might be reached in ages prior to high school. However, to graduate from high school requires a familiarity in subjects like English Lit, history, psychology, biology, chemistry, algebra 1-2, calculus and often computer science classes (I had C++).
(Solution)… use wording of case against them
The real solution might be to require a professional to oversee the work and to meet with the children for a select number of hours per week. This can further be supplemented by taking courses at the local state or community college (not seeking a degree) while working on a high school degree. At this point, I think it would generally fall within certification guidelines.
#21, patrick,
We require foster parents to be approved using certain criteria in order to parent others children. How can parents have the right to raise their own kids?…
Totally different scenario. The children placed in foster care are usually there short term. They have been torn from their family by a Judge and some social workers. Very often they have been physically or mentally abused and sometimes both. Too often they are “crack” babies or suffer from fetal alcohol syndrome. Many will be physically disabled from birth and the parents are unable to care for the child. Many have never known a warm loving home. Some want so badly to be reunited with the birth parents, regardless of how bad they are and some so desperately fear returning to their birth parents. Others are placed half a State away from their siblings, not knowing if or when they will ever see them again.
There is no comparison between raising your own children and caring for foster children.
The idea that government exists to serve families is ridiculous. Parents exist to serve the government.
The real reason behind this is that the teachers unions hate the competition.
#29 – I also feel that High School should teach kids consumer math (how to do checkbooks, budgets and the danger of credit cards), as well as a bunch of other survival skills.
Yes
YES
OH FUCK YES!!!!!!
Nice one MikeN.
The unfortunate reality is the people have their heads in the sand about that fact. We like to fool ourselves into the idea that it’s the other way around when the reality is your right.
“Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the PEOPLE.”
oopps, I screwed up on #36. I pasted the wrong thing into the submit box.
#18, patrick,
“Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the PEOPLE.”
So what does that mean? That the law must be enumerated in the Constitution before it is valid?
1) If there ain’t no friggen law, then the right does not belong to the Government.
2) If there is a law, then that is that. The right now belongs to the Government.
3) Every State has the right to enact ANY law they wish provided it does not interfere with the Constitution.
4) There is nothing in the Constitution of the United States specifically regarding education.
5) As a State jurisdiction, every State may set its own rules, regulations, curriculum, standards, etc.
6) Any State may, under the Constitution, ban the wearing of the color Red, if they so choose. They could decide Red is too inflammatory a color for the people to wear.
7) As pointed out before, these leaders were elected by all of us. Unless you didn’t vote in which case you deserve even more of the blame for any mess. This though was a court decision by APPOINTED Judges applying California law.
8) The State of California may institute any regulation they wish concerning home schooling. There is nothing in the Constitution to stop them.
9) While I am unhappy with the ruling, I do understand it and agree with the goals. Just because you are a parent does not give the right to abuse the child. That includes the opportunity to a good education for the child.
10) Maybe I should have used an “X” for this one.
I love the pols who refuse to allow poor families to send their children to private schools, while their own kids attend.
Funny thing is that most of those who oppose are Dems. The champions of the downtrodden. I think it is because they get paid off by the teachers unions…
What the constitution actually says is irrelevant if it’s not enforced by the powers that be. Otherwise Federal powers would have needed amendments to be expanded for Social Security, education, healthcare, ect.
I unintentionally broke my own rule on this and now suffer for it. The rule is that when this blog discusses a court case, they probably got it wrong. I let my own biases distract me from this, especially given that I have heard of such things happening in California in the past.
Turns out the rule wins again.
The actual case didn’t ban homeschooling, but rather the parents did not go through all the proper hoops. They were claiming enrollment in a charter school, with some homeschooling thrown in, and claiming they didn’t need to attend the charter school.
Nothing here prevents home schooling. You only can’t substitute nut bag incompetent parents for public/qualified teaching==just the way it should be.
Course–if I were interested enough, I’d read the article to see if gave college attendance and CAT tests scores etc. Every stat I’ve seen says home schooling is superior to public==but the matriculants certainly aren’t from the same group?
MikeN has it right “The real reason behind this is that the teachers unions hate the competition.”
Isn’t it interesting how Stanford feels about homeschoolers:
“Indeed, when he and his colleagues read applications last year, they gave the University’s highest internal ranking for intellectual vitality to two of the nine homeschoolers admitted. And an astounding four homeschoolers earned the highest rating for math–something reserved for the top 1 to 2 percent of the applicant pool. ”
“The distinguishing factor is intellectual vitality,” says Reider. “These kids have it, and everything they do is responding to it.”
That was 4 out of 9 homeschoolers admitted to Stanford.
Will the public school bigots please just go away? What you don’t understand is you are comparing students whose parents take an extreme interest in them to students whose parents drop them off to the babysitting institution – read that Public School.
There is no comparison.
>substitute nut bag incompetent parents for public/qualified teaching==just the way it should be.
That’s exactly what the public/qualified teaching ‘pros’ want it. You have to be licensed before you can teach, and they contgrol the licensing. Can you say monopoly?
Do a Google on John Taylor Gatto and read. The US public school system has nothing to do with “education”.
Every now and then, there is some nut who claims that people have the right to drive, and the state has no right to require licenses.
Its interesting that there aren’t many who would side with these people (there are always a few). But when there is an emotional charge to the issue, everyone is outraged.
The 10th ammendment delegates anything not specifically in the constitution to the states and to the people… in that order!!
As to the honor students at Stanford, more power to them. But this is cherry-picking the evidence. Studies that have looked at the whole home schooling movement have concluded that, on average, the result is about the same as for public schools. So at the very least, on average, a great deal of time has been wasted by these parents who think they are superior to properly educated teachers.
Another thing that is overlooked, and this is my opionion, is that school also has a socializing function. You have to learn how to interact with others properly in a group to do well in society. Home schooling seems intent on NOT providing this socialization. This may be damaging in the long run. So far, I know of no study looking at this, but there should be one.
All of the home schooling parents I’ve encountered were devout Christians (or at least that is what they claim) and they home schooled to properly educate their kids in the faith. In other words, don’t expose the kids to anything subversive like, oh, theory of evolution, or science! Maybe there are other types, but I haven’t met any yet.
This is a hot button issue, which is why few politicians will touch it, unless they feel they have to pander to the right.
Court decisions usually make more sense when you know the details of the case. Until I read the posts here, I had encountered nothing specific about the case. The media frames it as ‘blow to home schooling.’ No, it merely confirms that the state has the right to set standards: If you want to home school your kids, then you need to have the proper qualifications to teach.
Without this, high-school dropouts would be qualified to home school. Does anyone really think that a person with only a high school education, or less, is better qualified than a credentialed teacher who in California has to have a minimum of five years of college?
(Yes I know there are fast track programs that require teachers to start teaching in the ghetto.)
I am a product of the public schools. The single worst experience I had happened when my parents, with all good intention, asked the principal to put me into a class with better discipline. This was because my 7th grade teacher had poor discipline and the classroom was chaotic. Instead of being a help, I got put into an 8th grade class that had all of the disciplinary problem kids in it, and a teacher that was a good disciplinarian, but a lousy teacher! I didn’t know it was because of my parents at the time, by the way. I learned that later. In looking back, that teacher managed to destroy my love for reading right before I got into high school! Luck of the draw would have been so much better. I think trusting the experts and getting out of the way is a wiser approach.
So there are good and bad teachers along the way. There are good and bad bosses, and good and bad parents. Guess what? That is life. And kids need to learn about life too!!
This got longer than I intended, so thanks for reading.
Chris
#46, Chris,
But it is a good read and many can either sympathize or empathize with your history to some degree.