From Lancaster And Morecambe Citizen we learn about the controversial Government proposals to monitor home educators:

If the bill is passed, home educators will be forced to join a register, and Cumbria County Council children’s services will have the right to enter their home to ensure they are providing quality education. Parents may also have to submit their curriculum plans for the year.

~~~
Jayne Richardson, of Gran-ge-over-Sands, who educates her three children aged nine, 12 and 15, has been heavily involved in a campaign to get the bill thrown out of parliament.

“A lot of us feel the proposed changes are not about benefiting the child but about control.” she said.

~~~
A spokesman for Cumbria County Council said: “The local authority wants to ensure all young people in Cumbria are able to reach their potential.

“We work in partnership with home educators to support children.

“While we have a monitoring duty, this is completed through developing good working relationships with parents and children.

Odd way to build trust to be sure. Read the entire piece here.

A post on the NH Parent First site makes a solid argument for trusting parents first:

It is wrong to conflate responsible home schooling parents with individual parents who might be irresponsible.

It is pretty incontrovertible that one should not demonize a whole group just because certain individuals from that group might do something wrong. Yet, for one reason or another, whether it’s fear, or ignorance, or the well-meaning intention of protecting children, people frequently support unwarranted restraint of a group based upon the potential abuse of these individual wrongdoers.

This type of action is morally wrong.

I have used the “hard cases make bad law” argument from a defensive position many times. It is good to see a proactive argument.

Read the entire post here.

In a roll call vote on the floor of the House, legislators in New Hampshire have voted 324 to 34 to finally accept the House Education Committee recommendation of inexpedient to legislate (ITL) on HB368 . HB368 was justified by its sponsors and supporters with the familiar, ‘falling through the cracks’ and ‘for the good of the children’ arguments, but would have weakened homeschooling freedoms by changing “the definition of home education and the evaluation procedure used to determine the child’s educational progress.” (Scroll to read HB368 amendments

An overview of the bill’s history can be found at New Hampshire Homeschooling Coalition. An announcement of the vote is here.

Video of homeschooler’ rallying for ITL on HB368:

Congratulations to homeschoolers for a great collective effort in New Hampshire!

Next for NH homeschoolers is Rep. Ingbretson’s HB1580 which being referred to as “Parent’s First” Legislation.

~~~~

From NH Parents’ First site:

Restoring the “Presumption of Innocence”

HB 1580 would restore the “presumption of innocence” (of educational neglect) for all parents who instruct their children at home.

NH parents are tired of Rep. Rous, Rep. Day and others presuming … without due process … that all parents are irresponsible.

On its face their presumption is illogical… as well as unconstitutional. A child wouldn’t fall for their line: “Please be responsible, but don’t ever expect us to treat you as such.”

It’s primarily the parent’s duty to instruct his child, not the state’s.

HB1580, as written, is a huge statement for trusting parents. It also directly effects the public school and private school industries. This will worth be watching closely.

A hearing on HB1580 is scheduled for Thursday January 21st. More info.

You have most likely read the headlines and seen the online articles. Arrests, charges, registration, approved curriculum, permission to homeschool – what’s next?

To put it into perspective, I quote from an email by John Munson on the NYHEN Yahoo Groups list:

I wouldn’t get too worked up over the use of the terms “register” and “approve curriculum” in these articles. I think it’s just a result of the fact that the articles were written by reporters who don’t know what they’re writing about. I think every news story I’ve ever been involved in has gotten stuff wrong.

As for this case, we don’t know what the parents’ reasons were for not submitting paperwork.

New York’s compulsory attendance law does require parents to “furnish proof” that their child is “attending upon required instruction elsewhere” than at a public school. This is in paragraph 3212(2)(d): http://nyhen.org/laws.htm#3212

It doesn’t say we have to “register” or “submit a curriculum” — it just says we have to “furnish proof” without defining what that proof is. That vagueness is the reason that the homeschooling regulation came about in 1988. (http://www.nyhen.org/regs.htm)

So, if the parents in this case didn’t communicate with the district or state at all, then they were violating Education Law 3212(2)(d), and as I said, it remains to be seen exactly why they were doing so. But in any event, here’s hoping that the heavy-handed tactics don’t last long.

Part of the homeschooling gig is to know your laws and the best way to do that is get connected with state and local groups.

Iowa City Superintendent, Lane Plugge says, “If you want a diploma, you have to go to school here:”

<a href="http://www.dailyiowan.com/2009/11/10/Metro/14260.html"School Board eyes homeschool rules
Daily Iowan

BY HOLLY HINES | NOVEMBER 10, 2009 7:20 AM

Homeschooled students in Iowa City may need to attend a district high school for at least two years to receive a diploma under a newly proposed policy change.

The Iowa City School Board will conduct a first reading of the policy — which would require the students to enroll full-time for two-consecutive years — at its meeting today.

At the moment, the district has no policies on the issue, officials said.

Superintendent Lane Plugge said district officials have seen a recent increase in homeschooled students transferring into the district for only one trimester to earn a diploma.

“If you want a diploma, you have to go to school here,” Plugge said, and he views district programming as an important element of graduating from the district.

So, families have been homeschooling and then at the last minute squeezing in a little school so they can get the ‘conventional’ diploma. Why?

Chris Kolarik, an administrator for the Iowa City Home School Assistance Program, said the number of homeschooled students reaching a high-school level of education has gradually increased since the program started in 1992.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kolarik said the students and district officials would likely benefit from the policy changes clarifying the requirements.

Jan Krieger, a teaching supervisor for the home-schooling program, agreed.

Diplomas are not necessary for homeschooled students to attend most colleges, she said, and many have webpages outlining admission requirements specific to homeschooled students.

The UI admits homeschooled students based on their transcripts, study areas, and ACT or SAT scores, according to the Office of Admissions website.

~~~~~~~~~

As homeschooling becomes more popular, these are issues that need to be addressed,” she said.

WRITE THESE LAWS ON YOUR CHILDREN: Inside the World of Conservative Christian Homeschooling By Robert Kunzman

The book was released in August of 2009 and published by Beacon Press of Boston.

A Review by Susan Ryan, Illinois Homeschooler

In one of Robert Kunzman’s interviews with six “strongly conservative” Christian homeschooling families, a California homeschooling mom related her kids “get a lot of life, real life that goes on, that they don’t understand when they are separated for several hours a day.”  She went on to explain that their family of nine children was able to spend valuable time lovingly caring for their grandparents as they reached the end of their lives. Whatever different views, philosophies and lifestyles any homeschooling family has, the incredibly diverse homeschool community can appreciate that, as Mr. Kunzman points out, “homeschooling is…woven into the fabric of everyday family life.”

Indiana University Associate Professor of Education Robert Kunzman’s name – and his quotes – have been floating into general homeschooling news over the last few months.  Many homeschool advocates have been wondering what collective influence he has had, to be sought after so frequently in articles about homeschooling. (It is an odd feeling, as homeschoolers carry on with our busy lives and then discover that some unknown entity is talking about us in an authoritative fashion.)

Often, Mr. Kunzman’s feedback was requested regarding a perceived homeschool growth trend.  The National Center for Education Statistics data is reported on his site with their supposed 74% homeschooling increase since 1999.  He has developed an impressive Indiana University website called: Homeschooling Research and Scholarship. It gave a start to see that on a university link. (The University of Illinois has a homeschooling applicant section in order to study at the University, but not to be studied.)

Kunzman researched and analyzed the families who were located in California, Indiana, Oregon, Tennessee, and Vermont. Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) co-founders Michael Smith and Michael Farris, former Generation Joshua leader Ned Ryun, and a Teen Pact college student were also interviewed. The book offered observations and reflections on “four crucial questions that framed [his] homeschooling journeys“: “What do homeschoolers do, and why do they do it? Do children learn to think for themselves?  What do they learn about the relationship between faith and citizenship?  And how, if at all, should homeschooling be regulated?”

I found Mr. Kunzman’s attentive layout of each individual family’s qualities and schedule engaging, although he didn’t ever seem to take his professional evaluator’s hat off when stepping in the door. He asked the parents’ opinions of increased oversight of homeschoolers.  The feedback seemed to be a resounding negative on more governmental authority. One California mom’s adamant rejection of more bureaucracy brought about his acceptance that some homeschoolers “who have learning difficulties would be having at least as much trouble in an institutional setting.”   He maintained that “to assume outright that a parent-teacher is a failure because her child doesn’t meet a fixed standard at a particular age or grade level may be just as unfair as expecting a classroom teacher to have all students excelling in June, regardless of where they started in September.”  That is a worthy concept.

Still, Kunzman proposes homeschoolers be subjected to those standards in his concluding chapter: “General consensus should exist on standards for meeting those interests.”  (“Interests” are included as part of his first proposition that “vital interests of children or society must be at stake.”)

There is a societal disquiet across our communities concerning much of public school education and its standards.  Naomi Wolf laments in a Washington Post article [‘Hey, Young Americans, Here's a Text for You’] that the federal No Child Left Behind Act mandates tests which “assess chiefly math and reading comprehension,” while civics and history education has gone astray. However, Kunzman calls for “basic skills testing” (reading and math) of homeschoolers, along with his third homeschool oversight recommendation that “an effective way to measure whether standards are met” be fulfilled.

Professor Kunzman also expressed ambivalence about the Home School Legal Defense Association’s teen civic education program called Generation Joshua.  Kunzman observed that Generation Joshua has “genuine civic engagement.” While noting a 2006 National Assessment of Educational Progress civics assessment is distressing, in that “only 27% of high school seniors [were] scoring at or above proficient.”

Kunzman’s 2007 interview with former George Bush speech writer and founding Generation Joshua Director Ned Ryun occurred before Ryun unhappily exited from the HSLDA fold.  The reason for that departure is one example that the conservative Christian homeschooling community is not in lockstep with HSLDA. Many draw the line when homeschooling rights are risked.

There was another case in point concerning the interviewed Tennessee homeschooling family who did not follow HSLDA advice.  They were the only family in the book that had to deal with state social workers (“four or five different times”).  The family determined they had “nothing to hide” and allowed the social worker into their home to chat.  When asked if there was any follow-up to the visit, the reply was a negative, with the father’s comment that: “As a matter of fact, the last visit, the man opened up to me quite a bit about how he raises his children.  He told me he smacks his children!”

The mother observed that was a touchy issue.  This family had a “thin black rod about eight inches long” that rested on the table.  They were also former neighbors of Michael Pearl, whose book “To Train Up A Child” is a deep source of dismay for many homeschoolers.  Conversely, the Tennessee homeschooling father was inspired by the book:”I have never read anything more encouraging, more uplifting, more knowledgeable in homeschooling.”

When Kunzman returned home from Tennessee, he looked up Pearl’s book on Amazon and discovered there were nearly 700 [currently 859] reviews of the book.  Many of the negative reviews were from dismayed homeschoolers not supportive of this type of discipline, and very active in the Stop the Rod movement.

Most homeschool advocates counsel to not let social workers or truant officers in the home without a court order.  We recognize and agree with the author that “some public school officials and social workers do have a decidedly jaded view of homeschooling.” Abuse is unwanted in the homeschool community.  That would include governmental bullying of law abiding families because they choose to homeschool.

That prudence should be understandable when homeschoolers’ educational base is located in the family’s private living space.  The call for regulation by Mr. Kunzman and others thrashes the very opposition that these six families have to governmental interference. Ironic, isn’t it?

There seemed to be a definite agenda in this book that wasn’t favorable to homeschooling self-sufficiency. The last chapter is oddly named: Becoming A Public. The premise of Kunzman’s homeschooling concerns, framed in the first chapter’s last question regarding “Homeschool Regulation,” seemed to lead to this book’s foregone conclusion.

I’m also bewildered by Washington Post columnist Jay Mathews’ thought process in his recent Education column, 3 Smart Rules for Regulation of Homeschoolers, which focused on Kunzman’s book. Mathews’ position seems to be that unfavorable political winds could increase regulation and that we should do something about that by using the “sensible answer” of universal regulation as offered in “Write These Laws On Your Children.” Mathews also states, “Kunzman knows that many parents have chosen to homeschool for non-religious reasons, but focuses on serious Christians because they are the ones that public school professionals are most worried about.”

The concern about “serious Christians” is the theme throughout this book. Kunzman requested each of the six families fill out a General Social Survey to confirm their social, political and religious conservatism.  There must be a survey or study sought out for almost every curiosity, while most homeschoolers seem to be holding out as the last bastion.  Robert Kunzman reported that nearly a fourth of our homeschooled population don’t need to notify or verify educating their children.  He asked HSLDA’s Michael Smith if their ultimate goal was to be a “place like Illinois where parents don’t have to report, register, anything.”

Kunzman’s propositions suggested that free homeschooling states (such as Illinois) “runs the greatest risk of neglecting the interests of children and the state.” His unease seems to be baseless and cynical, as he didn’t provide proof of such neglect. An imagined problem, that school bureaucrats need to oversee already established parental accountability, will kill what we live – and what we love about homeschooling.  The former Social Studies and English high school teacher, coach and administrator describes a “triad of interests” (children, parents, society) as a concern of “advocates of regulation.”  (‘Anti-homeschoolers’ is the term I use for homeschooling regulation advocates.)  Even after hundreds of hours observing homeschoolers, Robert Kunzman either doesn’t understand the homeschooling way of life, or worse yet, he does.

Kyoko Aizawa of Otherwise Japan (a homeschool support organization) sent out word of a new law that is effective as of July 1.   Kyoko states this new law authorizes arbitrary governmental visits of any child’s home. 

Wendy Priesnitz of Natural Life Magazine also pointed out The Long Arm of the Law in Japan – July 12, 2009

I’ve just received an email from my long-time contact in Japan, Kyoko Aizawa (Otherwise Japan) about a change in the law about homeschooling in Japan. Until now, the law has been rather murky there, with a few (estimated at under 1,000) families labeled as “school refusers.” Now, it seems, the government is cracking down with a new law that passed on July 1 governing people ages zero to forty, some of whom could be willfully unemployed or otherwise not comfortable functioning in society…or who choose to learn at home. Kyoko worries it is “really dangerous” because it gives the police the power, among other things, to enter people’s homes and force children under the age of 15 who don’t go to school either “into school or a mental hospital to be medicated.” This is, says Kyoko, “forcing parents to raise children according to the government’s childrearing practices…and endangers basic parental rights to education children according to their convictions.” The stated aim of the new law is “to support people who have problems living as normal members of society.” But the definition of “support” is one I’d have to disagree with and, in fact, this law appears to violate human rights in some serious ways.

Zero to five is a popular catch phrase in the United States now.   It describes a plan to get children “school ready”, from the time they are first born until they walk in the kindergarten door.  That oversight (including home visits) is suggested far and wide, from the right heading over to the left. Universal screening for mental health is often part of that package.

Kyoko has legitimate concerns in Japan and there are alarming comparisons in the United States.

From the Home Education Magazine 1998 archives about the ramifications of “school refusal”:

In Japan, Alternative Ed Linked To Truants And Dropouts- -Linda Dobson

“Can Truants, Dropouts Find an Alternate Road to Education?” Mick Corliss, The Japan Times, January 4, 1998, pp. 1 & 2

In this one of an eight-part series of articles for this English language newspaper, reporter Mick Corliss takes a look at alternatives to state education in Japan. These alternatives appear not to be successful, viable family options, but options for kids who are truant or drop-outs, “the overlooked casualties of the rigid educational system.” “More than 77,000 students missed more than 50 days of school in 1996 for the expressed reason that they ‘hate school,’” states Corliss, admitting this is merely an official number, and when you add in those “who missed more than 30 days for other reasons, such as illness…the total exceeds 180,000.” Corliss notes a gradual change in society’s attitude toward these students; instead of problem youth they are “labeled” nonattendance students. Even the Education Ministry has been forced to acknowledge the country has a problem and accepts that “school refusal” can happen to any child and is not “akin to a sickness requiring treatment.”

Apparently the situation has not improved, as home education is still not legal in Japan.  The solutions for these problems don’t seem to be serving the children’s educational needs.  From Linda Dobson’s 1998 article:

Kyoko Aizawa, who runs the homeschool support organization Otherwise Japan and who attended the GWS conference last August, points out that Japan needs alternatives that are “not under government control.”

Genji Tsuda is an attorney who specializes in child welfare law.

“Ever since the Meiji Era,” says Tsuda, “Japan’s educational system has been designed to strengthen the nation-state. The emphasis has been on producing people who can help Japan become a great power…The inertia of the status quo has preserved this antiquated system, embedding it deeply in the social psyche.” I’d say Tsuda has put his finger on the pulse of what is wrong not only in Japan, but in America and elsewhere.

Many homeschoolers are on the watch for back door legislation or other attempts to limit our families’ freedoms. “Universal” anything often gives us a heads up. Politicians discuss the potential advantages. Interested lobbyists look to see what they can get out of the deal.
HSLDA (a homeschool member financed organization) often warns of government policies sneaking in that will affect homeschoolers’ rights and liberties. This Virginia based group seems to understand these efforts so well. They themselves often use the practice out and about our country’s Capitol.

It’s been recently discovered that the Home School Legal Defense Association slipped in their business plan directing any military career interested homeschoolers to their site. Again.

Valerie Bonham Moon (The Military Homeschooler) posted this in 2006: The Army Recruiting Command changed its homeschool URL

Currently, and from the NATIONALGUARD.com Homeschool Eligibility Requirements

Current military policy requires homeschool graduates to be treated just like any other high school grad. In January, 2006 President Bush signed into law the National Defense Authorization Act that requires all four branches of the Armed Forces to institute a uniform recruitment policy for homeschool graduates that includes an exemption for homeschool graduates from any requirement to have a secondary school diploma or a GED.

*Links on this site do not constitute an endorsement by the Army National Guard

If the National Guard inserts a HSLDA logo and a link to the interested party’s site, I would say that is an engaged endorsement. You must click over to the HSLDA site to read the National Guard eligibility requirements.

These particular homeschool eligibility requirements don’t feel like a warm and fuzzy exemption. Rather, it seems like a Graham Badman produced nightmare, as in his Recommendation #4 calling for a representative opinion“. (I think GB forgot to consult home educators/parents for input about the well being of homeschooled children.) If you wonder why I bring up the Badman Report, I’ll mention that HSLDA is using that British Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England for another Parental Rights Amendment trumpet call. One of their arguments is that: The Badman report is a stark reminder of how government officials in an English-speaking democracy have interpreted the UNCRC. It’s clear that the right to homeschool in America will be negatively impacted if the U.S. Senate ever ratifies the UNCRC.

Some other thoughts are here about the Parental Rights Amendment:

Taking Charge – Larry and Susan Kaseman
Yes – Parental Rights No – Constitutional Amendment

But back to the current iron in the fire.  Maybe I don’t understand all of the bureaucratic gobbledygook on the HSLDA site regarding National Guard eligibility. But looking at these requirements, if my children wanted to join the National Guard, we would be jumping through hoops that were not there before HSLDA involvement.

Why is HSLDA interested?

Apparently the interest stems from the potential business offerings. Just as in the HSLDA written, federal legislation introduced in 2005 (109th Congress HR 3753/S 1691). Here’s that pertinent federal legislative documentation illustrated under Section 10 Sec. 503a. Recruitment and enlistment of home-schooled students:

(5) The graduate has provided the Secretary concerned with a third-party verification letter of the graduate’s home-school status by the Home School Legal Defense Association or a State or county home-school association or organization.’.

There’s that third party verification of homeschool status again, just as in the eligibility requirements for the National Guard Homeschool Path to Honor. National Guard Requirements: “A homeschool diploma and transcript from the parent(s) or guardian(s) accompanied by a third party verification memorandum.”

My family (and many others) would have to join a homeschool support group and seek their approval of our eclectic educational resources and successes. In the eligibility requirements, HSLDA points applicants to their listing of homeschool associations that are selective, Christian based support groups that do not encompass all of the very diverse homeschooling population.

What homeschooling organization would lobby for third party verification of a family’s learning successes while publicly proclaiming that they support limited government? What sort of homeschool group would narrow homeschoolers’ boundaries into adult ventures? Does HSLDA lobby for homeschoolers or for new business?

More information and history about this issue is provided from Happy As Kings‘ National Guard and HSLDA:

The National Guard entry requirements for homeschoolers must be re-written without preference given to HSLDA, and the requirements must not be primarily hosted at an off-site page from the National Guard site.

Contact information.

I thought this article below was interesting, in that it came from business media in Dubai.  But the piece covered a Maryland homeschooling family, and the usual (not necessarily accurate) rendition of  modern homeschool history.

Homeschooling goes from fringe to mainstream in US
Emirates Business 24/7 – June 25, 2009

At the height of the hippy culture in the 1960s, homeschooling enjoyed a renaissance as left-wingers seeking to buck the establishment taught their children themselves.

Christian conservatives were the next to embrace homeschooling, and “by 1990, 85 to 90 percent of all homeschoolers came from the ranks of the religious right,” Paul Petersen, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, wrote in Education Next, which he edits.

The number of home-schooled children soared by 29 percent between 1999 and 2003, from 850,000 to roughly 1.1 million, data from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) show.

85-90%?!  That ‘statistic’ certainly wouldn’t have been known in a few populous states like Texas, Illinois, etc; as there would likely not be records via registration or notification.  Let alone that they are from the “religious right”.

I’d want to hear some thoughts from a trusted long-time homeschooler who took a stroll down Memory Lane.

If homeschoolers are ‘going mainstream’, as I’ve seen in so many recent articles, then maybe the media/interested parties have a different connotation to the word “mainstream“.  Maybe mainstream means back to school, in one form or another.

Following the article’s trail, I saw that Mr. Petersen has a piece in Education Next called:

The Home-Schooling Special
Today’s choicest choice

If the baby was born in hippieville, the toddler was soon kidnapped by Christian social conservatives. By 1990, 85 to 90 percent of all home schoolers came from the ranks of the Religious Right. Even Holt could not resist a Libertarian cry:

Some may feel that the schools teach a dog-eat-dog competitiveness; others that they teach a mealy-mouth Socialism…. What is important is not that all readers…should agree on these questions, but that we should…work for…the right of all people to take their children out of schools.

John Holt seemed on the right learning track wanting to work for the “right of all people to take their children out of schools“, if parents believe that would be the best for their child(ren).

As appealing as it might sound, I don’t agree with Mr. Petersen’s hope for legislators:  “State legislatures are likely to become increasingly accommodating toward a movement that saves them money. The day may come when we hear the phrase, “We are all home schoolers now. John Locke would be pleased “.
It’s not just about the money, but seems to increasingly be about the control, as well.  Being from Illinois, while observing other states’ and national budget busts, I don’t see many legislators particularly concerned with saving money.  If the government was minimally, or not involved in the educational process, then I imagine Locke would be pleased.  That doesn’t seem to be the trend.  That control and/or hunger for more body counts in the schools certainly seems to come up in various state legislative sessions, along with the encroachment of federal “home-school” legislation via special interests. That query will have to be responded to again and again.

Petersen points out intriguing thoughts from Locke (proponent of “natural rights“,  whose philosophy had a strong influence forming  the US Constitution) concerning socialization and schooling:

“what qualities are ordinarily to be got from…a troop of playfellows [at school]…usually assembled together from parents of all kinds.” Even if the teacher’s industry and skill “be ever so great, it can[not]…be expected that he should instruct them successfully in anything but their books.”

The Educational Writings of John Locke

In Locke’s home grounds, British homeschoolers now have to fend off potential legislation resulting from interested bureaucrats. As if homeschooling families didn’t have anything better to do.  Ironic, isn’t it?

From Roland Meighan’s Response to Graham Badman’s Review Report
(Meighan is Director of Educational Heretics Press )

(In contrast, the bad news about schools is located and reported almost daily, and a motive for some families is that home-based education provides a much safer environment than schools. The evidence supports them – exposure to knives, drugs, petty crime, alcohol, smoking, bullying etc., are school-based problems.) The forthcoming report by Professor Clive Harber on Toxic Schooling assembles some of the key evidence on this.

Families escape schools to avoid bullying, and the government agencies attempt to follow them into their homes to continue the emotional bullying.

Education Otherwise has other updates on their site about Badman’s Review:

Lord Lucas Asks for Comments

EO Rejects Calls for Monitoring and Registration

Yesterday Delyth Morgan, the Children’s Minister, said she accepted in full the “proportionate and reasonable” recommendations set out in Graham Badman’s Report.

However today Education Otherwise says that they reject the disproportionate and unreasonable recommendations as set out in the Review Report for compulsory registration and invasive monitoring.

Best wishes that this will ultimately benefit educational freedoms.  I bet John Locke would like that; educational heretic, mainstream, what have you.

Naperville area homeschoolers negotiated with school authorities, and common sense prevailed. A potential district policy revision demanding that a “district-approved external accrediting agency” certified any homeschool credits and grades transferred onto a public high school transcript was dropped.
The Naperville Sun reports this news from Indian Prairie School District 204′s school board meeting:

D204 compromises on home-school policy June 23, 2009 By TIM WALDORF

“The difference that you’re going to see in this new version versus the old is that in the old we indicated that we were not going to accept any credits from a no-accredited school toward graduation. So they would all have to be accredited or else we weren’t going to issue a diploma,” said Mike Popp, District 204′s school improvement and planning director.

“In this version, we’re saying, ‘You know what? That’s not appropriate.’ We’re going ahead and saying we are going to accept those credits, but we put in what you talked about last time: is there a way for us to sit down with an individual student and talk about those individual courses to go ahead and honor the credit that he or she earned?”

The old version (and other pertinent details) was pointed out on News & Commentary here: Educational Rigor

It appears that Mike Popp was reasonable, and kept the dialogue open with local homeschoolers. If homeschoolers did choose to enroll in the public high school, then their previous hard work at home should not have been disregarded because of lack of accreditation.

I don’t see a pass/fail on a transcript as a problem. Our particular family does not do grades. Learning materials are either mastered or not:

However, honoring those credits is one thing. Honoring the grades attached to them is another.

District 204′s transcripts would separately list the unaccredited coursework, and not assign a letter grade to any of it. They would only note whether students passed or failed these unaccredited classes.

Consequently, home school students would have to turn in two transcripts — one from District 204 and one of their own making — when applying to colleges.

Universities and colleges seem to be scrambling and recruiting for that “homemade”/home education transcript. Our local IL community college admissions counselor said that he’s seen (and accepted) homeschool transcripts of various forms. He was part of a homeschool workshop at the college to recruit homeschoolers. Continuing in the article:

The policy will also require these students to complete two credits in a District 204 high school in each of two consecutive semesters prior to graduation. So, in their senior year, these home school students seeking District 204 diplomas — District 204 estimates there are roughly 15 of them a year — will have to attend a District 204 high school on nearly a full-time basis, and pass four senior-level classes in order to graduate.

That seems like a fair policy.

I was a little puzzled that homeschoolers would be entering the public high school just to get a public school diploma? That piece of paper didn’t seem as useful as a homeschool diploma, or as many Illinois homeschoolers do, just entering ‘higher education’ with transcript in hand. That’s my biased homeschool opinion, of course.

“The example, by way of analogy that’s in my head, is that it’s what a university would tell you,” said board member Mark Metzger. “You can’t accumulate credits at Eastern and Western and Southern, and then call up U of I and say, ‘I’m going to take a class there, and I want my diploma from you.’ It doesn’t work that way.”

Mr. Metzger’s thoughts are right on. If a public school diploma is sought, that public school should be attended.

But again, I don’t see the advantage of seeking a public school diploma, if homeschooled teens can finish out their education at home before college. Mark Metzger mentioned the University of Illinois, which is ranked 25th in this Graduate School of Education World University Rankings. It is a very competitive school, but yet “30-40 home school students are admitted each year“.

Home Schooled Applicants FAQ

Does the University of Illinois admit home school graduates?

Yes, we encourage home schooled students to apply to the University.

We are very interested in having talented, well-qualified applicants from a variety of settings. Home schoolers would provide a diversity of academic experiences to the campus.

From a homeschool advocate stance, I’m pleased to see that homeschooling credit was given (in more ways than one).