The Law of Homeschooling Education Law Association publication was written by Brian Schwartz, counsel for the Illinois Principals Association. This monograph is particularly intriguing to this Illinois homeschooler. The state of Illinois has no homeschooling law, for instance. I reviewed a copy and have a few thoughts stemming from my immediate reservations after seeing a press release about this monograph last December.
I would guess that planting an ‘expert’ seed in a brand new homeschooling parent’s brain via this “guide” might keep folks from researching their homeschooling rights and responsibilities themselves. Homeschool advocates are frequently enlightening ill informed school administrators (including principals) about education statutes. Going against mainstream societal school norms, we have to know our rights and responsibilities, or we might have an official coming to our home threatening our family’s well being.
Why is the Associate Director/General Counsel to the Illinois Principals Association, who is also a frequent education conference/event speaker (I don’t believe those would be homeschool conferences), and past chair of the IL State Bar Association’s Education Law Section Council so wrapped up in The Law of Homeschooling? One would think all these duties, along with an active private practice specializing in the very lucrative field of education law, makes for a full schedule without dawdling about concerning a tiny minority of homeschoolers.
Besides pointing out the most disturbing Business of writing a school advisor’s ‘guide’ for public perusal, I’ll lay out a few concerns I have of Schwartz’s opinions concerning homeschooling legalities.
In his first sentence in the first chapter, Introduction to Homeschooling:
In 1925, the United States Supreme Court effectively cleared the way for parents to provide for the education of their children at home.
This statement was in reference to Pierce v. Society of Sisters. I thought the way cleared when our Constitution was approved in 1787. Constitutionally enumerated powers over US citizens, while natural rights were to reign. The states’ Constitutions could allow (or not) for education with the limited power of the federal government. But things have changed, even if the Constitution hasn’t.
This piece of Pierce’s decision was pointed out by Schwartz.
Under the doctrine of Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U. S. 390, 43 S. Ct. 625, 67 L. Ed. 1042, 29 A. L. R. 1146, we think it entirely plain that the Act of 1922 unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control. As often heretofore pointed out, rights guaranteed by the Constitution may not be abridged by legislation which has no reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state. The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the state; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize an prepare him for additional obligations.
Standardization of children and their education was apparently unacceptable back in the olden days of 1925.
Mr. Schwartz’s opinion seems to be that a Supreme Court decision from Washington was the turning point allowing home education. But before and since then, natural curiosity and parents’ rational minds had found some quality means for their children to read, write and do their arithmetic.
The education of Abraham Lincoln, whose birthday is celebrated across Illinois today, is a prime example. He attended the “ABC schools by littles“ as a child. When he was a young adult, he felt the need to study English grammar and Euclid, but not because the government mandated such. He also mastered reading while walking or riding a horse. The Blackstone Commentaries and “Chitty’s Pleading, Greenleaf’s Evidence, & Story’s Equity” were checked off his reading list. Mostly self-educated Abraham Lincoln was admitted to the bar in 1837 at the age of 28.
Brian Schwartz noted reservations about homeschoolers’ bragging rights of past home education accomplishments in his Historical Overview of Homeschooling (Chapter 2):
Many homeschool advocates argue that seven early-American Presidents were homeschooled. While these assertions are true, it should be noted that these men were educated under far different circumstances than exist today. Mainly, a lack of any real opportunity for a public school education necessitated children of this era to receive their education at home. While no judgment is made as to the quality of these early homeschools, it is clear that today’s homeschool children are educated under entirely different circumstances and for entirely different reasons than existed prior to the Civil War.
It is interesting that he makes “no judgment…as to the quality of these early homeschools“. That would seem to be an important factor in the need for compulsory school attendance. I think a continuous hope of parents is that our children retain the same natural curiosity that inspired men, with poor and wearing childhoods such as Abraham Lincoln’s, to become a national leader. Some of us have turned our backs (but not our pocketbooks) on the “real opportunity for a public school education“.
This updated 67 page monograph was published and released last December to great press release fanfare. Market Watch was where it caught my attention. Did Mr. Schwartz check in with the acclaimed (in the homeschool community) law firms: Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, representing HomeSchool Association of California, and Baker & Mckenzin law firm, representing California Homeschool Network, and Munger Tolles & Olson LLP, representing Christian Home Educators Association of California? These attorneys provided services (some pro bono) to the California homeschool community regarding theRachel L dustup.
That case resulting in a California Appellate Court reversing their own decision was frequently in the national news last year. The reversal was to the advantage of families regarding educational freedoms.
Maybe Mr. Schwartz did chat with pro-homeschooling legal counsel, but I see no reference to such.
The National Home Education Legal Defense (NHELD) would be easy to find. Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) was referenced 4 times in this book; twice with this footnote reference: “Information in this section comes, in part, from the Homeschool Legal Defense Association website, located at www.hslda.org“. Interesting that it appears to be indirect shared information by the author with homeschool advocates. One might call it copy and paste.
The author’s preface states:
It is the author’s hope that the information herein will be used by homeschool advocates and public school officials to do what is in the interest of children, collectively and individually, and will help to ensure that each child receives and appropriate education within the context and scope of the law.
I cry foul to this supposed patronage for the homeschool family. The Illinois Principals Association is not known within most of the homeschooling association as a friend, but much too often as a foe. (There are individual principals who are supportive of homeschoolers.) However, the IL Principals Association is a lobbying group for public schools. The homeschooling community doesn’t need (and surely didn’t ask for) an official sounding “guide” from an often anti-home education/private school group, regarding the legal necessities of homeschooling. The Education Law Association’s liveilihood and funding comes from public schools. Who is this Law of Homeschooling guide supposed to serve?
~Susan Ryan
Mary said on February 13, 2009
I have a copy of the book as well, and I enjoyed reading your review. (I’m also glad you got some good Lincoln points and links in as well!) I heartily agree with your observations conerning his history lesson. Definitely a rewrite in my book!
Also in the preface, he writes that the monograph gives an overview of the history of homeschooling in the United States and updates homeschool statuary and regulatory requirements for all fifty states and Washington D.C. I’m not a lawyer, but I do abide by the philosophy that the best citizenry is an informed one. It has been my privilege the last few years to update HEM’s State Laws and Regulations’ pages. http://homeedmag.com/lawregs/lawregs.html While doing this, I’ve learned that the absolute best resource for keeping these updated is to rely on those homeschoolers who are on the ground in their state, following their changes and relying on their updates as changes happen.
In his footnotes I read that his “Appendix A- Homeschool Statutory Comparison” was current through June 30, 2008, but thankfully he does list the actually citations in Appendix B. Although Brian Schwartz includes homeschoolers as a part of his audience, it seems to me that the book is written primarily for bureaucrats. Some of what he writes is correct, but I do hope that homeschoolers will continue to look to other homeschoolers or the actual citations when they want to learn about their rights and responsibilities!
— Mary Nix
TMW2009 said on February 16, 2009
Of greater to concern to me are the inaccuracies in the monograph. I reviewed it when it came out and found several problems: http://learningis4everyone.blogspot.com/ After looking more closely, it became clear that, as NHELD pointed out, the most egregious factual errors were due to the author culling his information from HSLDAs website. (Not even HSLDA — but their *website*) I’ve reworked my comments into a single review that I’ll be sharing at the Education Law Association’s website and elsewhere. (By the way, ELA apparently welcomes reviews on their site).
No, we didn’t ask for a legal guide, true, but that’s not why books are or should be written. If someone wants to write a book, legal or otherwise, they certainly don’t need anyone’s permission or approval to do so. But accuracy – especially in a legal guide! – should always be paramount, and a writer owes it to his audience to do his homework on his chosen subject.
Terri Willingham
Susan said on March 3, 2009
The purpose of this post was to protest a “homeschooling guide” written by School/Education lawyers on a national homeschooling site. In particular, I hope my Illinois perspective and experiences would be helpful.
Florida might have a different perspective for this “resource guide for homeschool families and advocates”. I find information such as The Law of Homeschooling from rather hostile Illinois sources, such as the IL Principals Association, should serve as a Heads Up for homeschoolers.
Susan said on March 3, 2009
Clarification-This national homeschool site (HEM) did not sponsor an Education Law Association monograph. Sorry for the poorly worded sentence in comments.
My purpose was to protest a “homeschooling guide” written by School/Education lawyers and I wanted that complaint’s record on a national homeschooling (advocacy) website/blog. It likely wouldn’t hurt to have homeschool reviews on the Education Law Association’s site, as well.
Jennifer said on June 26, 2009
Are you kidding me? I have read the monograph and use it regularly as a reference tool. This book was obviously not written to be critical of homeschooling! It was written to provide all interested with objective information and state specific mandates. I can see how this book would benefit home school advocates. I can also see how this would allow school principals to understand the rights of children who are homeschooled. What is so wrong with that?
What evidence do you have that the Il Principals Assoc advocates against homeschooling efforts? NONE! IPA represents principals and provides professional development to educators on a large scale. In fact, they provide this resource to public school, private school, and charter schools. Attorney Schwartz wrote this book in an effort to educate any who are interested and he did an excellent job!
I would also like to point out this resource was incredibly well researched – did you take note of the numerous citations?
It seems your negative bias could use a little “fact” checking itself.
Susan said on June 27, 2009
You are a strong defender of this monograph, a piece that the Education Law Association would like homeschoolers to use as a reference tool. It does seem productive for school principals to be aware of school law and the exemptions to compulsory attendance laws. But I’m a little uncomfortable with his apparent focus in this book called “The Law of Homeschooling”: “The publication is intended to be used by parents, students, homeschool advocates, and public school officials to do what is in the best interests of the children: to ensure that each child receives an appropriate education within the context and scope of the law.
Homeschoolers have our own ‘reference tools’ in our state statutes/laws, and within the homeschool community.
This year, and last, California homeschoolers found some extra help with pro bono law firms (see above referenced post). Again, did Mr. Schwartz do any research i.e.. work, with any homeschoolers regarding this book?
Do you homeschool? Do you homeschool in Illinois? Since you see how this “book would benefit home school advocates”, are you a homeschool advocate? I ask because living this alternative lifestyle makes you very protective of your family rights, and properly suspicious of professional offerings from the education industry.
I hoped to provide some background about the author and his ’cause’. I think you answered your own question (after “NONE”), by stating this: “IPA represents principals and provides professional development to educators on a large scale”
Homeschoolers educate their families on a non-professional level and at a very individualized scale. We don’t make a lucrative living playing with education law.
Since Schwartz is making his living (see above referenced post) in Illinois via education law, I’ll remind there is no “homeschool” law in Illinois. I thought that was ironic.
I’ve sat in a hearing room or two (in Illinois), and can verify that the group he lobbies for (IL Principals Association) is no friend of homeschoolers. They lobby for public schools. (I do know a couple of individual principals/school administrators that I would describe as advocates of educational choice/learning in whatever manner works.)
Please let me know of any errors in my facts. I’ll be happy to correct them, as citations and accurate research is very important to me.
Thank you for your comments.