… but they’re not homeschooling.

• Journal Sentinel, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 28 April 2006, Small change a big deal in education  

  McCormack threw out a suit filed by the Wisconsin Education Association Council that charged the Wisconsin Virtual Academy violated state law regarding public education.

  …

  In ruling against the state’s teachers union, the court legitimized home schooling, opened the public education door to the digital age and expanded the degree to which state education spending follows children. All are things that can change everything when it comes to K-12 education.

If I’m not mistaken, homeschooling was already ‘legal’ in Wisconsin.  This decision did not legitimize it.

The writer gets it correct at the end, but there’s a lot of text between the top and the bottom.

• Unlike the programs under which most Wisconsin parents who home-school, the Wisconsin Virtual Academy is a charter school. Enrollment is free, supported by state education spending at a tune of more than $5,000 per child.

The article is not about homeschooling, but it caught my eye nonetheless.  I’m glad for the families for whom this arrangement works, but otherwise, no comment.

• Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 30 April 2006, Cyber hooky  

  State Department of Education regulations require cyber schools to send students back to their home districts after 30 unexcused absences.

  Sheri Rowe, chief of nonpublic, private and charter school services for the state Department of Education, said if a student has three unexcused absences, a cyber school should notify the school district of residence to pursue truancy charges.

  …

  Lynn Rodden, family coordinator at the school’s Pittsburgh Mills mall office in Frazer, Allegheny County, didn’t have figures on how many students had been dropped from the school. But she says about 100 students have been placed in an intensive academic assistance program, which requires mandatory log-ons at specific hours.

  …

  Trombetta’s school notifies the student’s local school district when there is a problem. The local school district files charges.

  He said students in his school get credit for work completed. If a student falls behind, there is a hearing.

  “In our world, the cyber world, we have a review with the parents,” he said. That review includes the assistant principal, the school’s director and possibly a guidance counselor.

  Sometimes, this visit to the principal’s office, so to speak, is enough, he said.

On one point of the linked article, I can’t do better than Daryl, who observed that the only point-of-similarity between the joint-subjects of the following article is that both homeless and homeschooled have ‘home’ in them.  Underscoring of the lack of connection between homelessness and homeschooling aside, the point of view that most needs debunking in the article is that homeschoolers, and apparently only homeschoolers, ”cost” schools the participation of children.  Daryl called the homeschool-focus a canard.  Quack!  I agree.

• New West, Missoula, Montana,  17 April 2006, In the West, Homeless Students and Homeschooled Kids Highlight National Trends   

  But the loss of students to homeschooling does cost the district $171,000 in lost state revenue.

The view that homeschoolers cause a loss to schools only works if you view children as serving schools, not as schools serving children.  The idea that homeschooling deprives schools of children must mean that the school organization is owed this young person’s presence, and the presence of all other young people.  The framework for the idea would be that schools must have students, not that children should be educated.

If that viewpoint is taken to the logical (and extreme) end, any married couple who do not have as many children as possible deprive the schools of revenue.  Further, any person who has the capability to do so, but does not have any children at all, does the same thing.  And that is ridiculous.  Schools are not owed the children of this country.  The Declaration of Independence does not state as one of the inalienable rights, “Life, Liberty and School Growth.”

Additionally, schools still receive money from the families of the children not participating, as well as from everyone else.  Schools receive tax money from all (in one way or another), but they want more.  They want ‘funding,’ too.

A similar train of thought concerning the relationship between children and schools, comes from the schools that ‘target homeschoolers.’  I’ve made the observation before about schools not providing the same sort of recruiting attention to private schools that they do to homeschooled kids, and Daryl echoes that thought.  Why is it that homeschoolers are the ones mentioned in articles about online public schools seeking pupils?  Don’t the students at the parochial school attached to St. Swithins of the Sign-up Sheets (what our priest called our congregation) also deprive public schools of kids and cash?

• Hutchinson, Kansas article via the Kansas City Star, Kansas City, Missouri, 7 April 2006, Hutchinson charter school still hopes to renew charter    

  The Hutchinson charter school targets home-schooled students in Reno County, providing some of their curriculum online. Charter students also participate in some classes, such as physical education and orchestra, at other district schools.

Children, specifically homeschooled children, are now ‘targets’ of schools.  Why?  Are the kids ‘targets’ because of school growth and the need for more and more ’funding?’  My entire adult life, I’ve heard of the need for more money for schools, and I understand, to a certain point, about inflation and increased costs.  Still, why hasn’t the inflating value of property kept pace with inflated costs for schools?  The same could be said for the popularity of building high-value homes whose owners must pay dearly at property tax assessment time.  Public schools already have most of the kids.  Why do they need all of the kids?  And when will the ‘funding’ ever be enough?  We have more than a few fiscal ’elephants in the room’ — among them rising fuel costs and health care — and ‘recapturing’ homeschooled kids won’t take care of the cost of feeding those elephants.

Ohio homeschoolers should prepare for advertising to appear in their mailboxes.

• Vindy.com, The Vindicator, Youngstown, Ohio, 10 March 2006, Is cyber school in district’s future?  The district would receive a fee for each pupil it can recruit for the cyber school.

  [Superintendent] Heuer said Austintown would get a fee for every student enrolled in the charter school. That number isn’t final yet, but Heuer said the district is looking at between $1,000 and $1,200 per pupil.

  …

  Northeast Ohio has an estimated 40,000 children being home-schooled, a large potential cyber school market, Heuer added. If you have a computer, you can be anywhere. You don’t have to be in a classroom, he said.

  Persuading just one-tenth of that number and Austintown’s current virtual school pupils to enroll in the Virtual Community School of Ohio could earn the district nearly $500,000 in fees, Heuer said.

  That would help offset the projected $800,000 loss in state subsidy revenue Austintown expects this year, Heuer said, pointing out the 270 Austintown children were lost to other school districts this year through open enrollment. Those children chose to attend classes outside the district, and state subsidies follow the students.

In Ohio, the change from homeschooling to public school enrollment via a virtual school brings with it a return to compulsory attendance.

• Students who have been excused from the compulsory attendance law for the purpose of home education as defined by the Administrative Code shall no longer be excused for that purpose upon their enrollment in a community school.

The fine print is at the bottom of the page.

Many electrons, and much ink, have been employed in the discussion about the programs for public-school-at-home, also known as cyber-charters, e-schools, ISPs and other noms des programmes educatifs, so to speak. Some people think the programs are an excellent way for families to ‘dip their toes’ into homeschooling, while other people aren’t quite so sure about the ‘dip.’ Many people see a service to all families, while others have seen a movement to return children, specifically homeschooled children, to the public school system. So far there has been no noticeable trend toward returning private school students to public schools.

In the instance in the clipping above, provided by a reader from Licking County, Ohio (who also provided the underscoring and the date), the intent is clear: bring homeschoolers back into the “fold” as if homeschooling families are errant sheep who have strayed from their appointed pasture.

On the theoretical plane, one doesn’t mind the provision of services. After all, what is best for one person, or for one family, isn’t necessarily the best for all. But why are homeschoolers the target and not private-school patrons? What makes a ‘strayed’ homeschooled child different from an ‘strayed’ privately-schooled child? Since the parents of privately-schooled children are already in favor of a brick & mortar venue for their children’s educations, why aren’t those families also the focus of ‘programs’ designed to bring them back into the public schooling “fold?”

No private school mention is made in the article, but it continues on with the homeschooling theme:

• “Last year, almost 200 students living in the district were home-schooled.”
• “A representative from Calvert School Education Services, the group working with the academy on home-schooling materials, will discuss Calvert’s home school curriculum in at least three grade levels: 2, 4, and 8.”
• “‘With these programs, we would like to stay as unobtrusive as possible, because parents of home-schoolers have chosen that route for a reason,’ [Ms. Ward] said. “

Never is there a word in the article about marketing any programs to private school students. Why are the schools so interested in homeschoolers, but not in private schoolers?

The reader who provided the newsclipping said that, in addition to the marketing by the Newark Digital Academy, a group called TRECA also provides a digital online program marketed to families in her area. At one of the site’s links, a pop-up window found by clicking informs the online reader that, “TDA [TRECA Digital Academy] students are given an iPod to use free of charge. Until the student graduates, TDA owns the iPod. Upon graduation, it is theirs to keep.”

Do all publicly-schooled teens in Ohio get complimentary iPods upon graduation?

Marketing is a fact of modern day life, and not so modern day life, too. But today’s targeted marketing, especially when one is seen as an errant stray, is tiresome, both from the viewpoint of the ‘target,’ and from the viewpoint of the taxpayer who may be paying for the latest gizmo as bait.