South Carolina has a new House bill  [HB 3478] that concerns homeschoolers.  Here’s an alert from SC’s Homeward Education Association. The HEA is one organization currently allowed as a “third option” oversight group via South Carolina homeschooling regulations:

On Tuesday, February 5th, Representatives Brannan, Anthony, Horne and Jefferson introduced H3478 in the SC House of Representatives. This bill would require ALL home schoolers to take state approved standardized tests, would require SCAIHS and all third option groups to report NAMES, not numbers, to the Department of Education each year and would eliminate ALL third option groups effective July 1, 2014. The bill is currently in the House Committee on Education & Public Works. We need homeschoolers to write, email or contact House Members on the Education and Public Works Committee and let them know our opposition to this bill. As with all communications, please be polite and respectful!

As explained on the Carolina Homeschooler site:  Third Option homeschoolers are those who choose to register through an accountability association which operates under Section 59-65-47 of the SC Code of Laws.  South Carolina homeschoolers may also check on the  Carolina Homeschooler forum for more information. 

One Representative, Jefferson,  dropped his sponsorship for this bill 2 days after it was introduced.  Here’s some media coverage about the bill sponsor’s apparent worries pertaining to the third legal option.  From WYFF

Changes could be coming for South Carolina’s home-schoolers – Upstate legislator proposing new laws

Representative Doug Brannon said he’s proposing it because he’s noticed problems in the system from his work as a legislator and as a family court attorney.

“I’m not going to say there’s no accountability, but there’s very, very little accountability,” Brannon said.

I think Representative Brannon might mean he doesn’t see enough accountability to the public school agencies.  It’s been proven there is plenty of accountability within homeschool families.  There’s a huge difference in that clarification.  Here’s WYFF video:

A new Senate bill has been placed on the Connecticut Children’s Committee agenda scheduled for hearing on February 14.  National Home Legal Defense  (NHELD) offers more information about this bill in the organization’s new Bulletin - More CT Proposed Legislation Regarding Children’s Mental Health Assessment.

There are now two proposed CT bills regarding children’s mental health assessments: Senate Bill 374 [held in Public Health Committee] and Senate Bill 169 [held in Children's Committee].

The new bill, SB 169, does not contain language specifiying homeschoolers in this mental health assessment proposal.  SB 374 did  include homeschoolers in the proposed mental health assessments at 12, 14 and 17 years of age.  From the NHELD Bulletin and Deborah Stevenson pertaining to the new SB 169:

This bill is before the Children’s Committee.  It apparently was placed on the agenda of a committee meeting, and it has been scheduled for a public hearing on February 14, 2013.  While at first glance, it sounds as though Senate Bill 169 purports to do the same thing as Senate Bill 374, it is extremely important not to jump to conclusions.  Legally speaking, one needs to review the exact language in any bill to determine its true effect.
For example, Bill 169 does not include the word “homeschool” at all.  Therefore, as it stands right now, based on the plain language of the bill, this bill has no direct effect on parents who homeschool their children.  In fact, Bill 169 says that the statutes are to be amended to require the assessments. It does not even specify when those statutes are to be amended, or in what manner.  To be sure, there are many arguments that can be made that the bill, as it is written now, should not be adopted.  But it would not be accurate to say that, at this time, this bill directly affects the rights of homeschooling parents.

There are many stages in the life of any bill.  The chairmen of each committee may change the language in the bill before it gets voted on, before or after a public hearing takes place on the bill.  The public hearing on Bill 169 is scheduled to take place on February 14.  If anyone wants to comment on the bill, they are certainly free to do so.  But, NHELD suggests that those who do comment on it be very careful not to allege that this bill is a direct threat against homeschooling. If we approach the legislature as homeschoolers, it is most important that we speak with accuracy and intelligence.  Remember that the key is to persuade.  Appearing to react to something that is not actually contained in a bill will not achieve your goal.  It may have the opposite effect and may even make legislators disregard your opinion.

Read more at the NHELD site.

A teen boy in Missouri was taken out of school in September of 2012, reportedly to homeschool. He was found in a cold basement, handcuffed to a pole, lying on the concrete floor, with few blankets.  Claiming to homeschool as this one family did, while an overwhelming number of homeschoolers serve in the role of educating and nurturing their children, should not be a call for increased homeschool regulations.

The police report describes the stark conditions, along with the frightened and emaciated state of the boy.

As of now, no charges have been filed.  KSHB‘s reporter, Sarah Hollenbeck, discovered this family has been in the Juvenile Court in the past.

Gremli also said this family has been in Clay County Juvenile Court before where they argued that their son, who has developmental disabilities, was “problematic” and abusive to his stepmother. Gremli said on two occasions the state offered help to the family, but the boy’s father and stepmother in his opinion didn’t seem very open to dedicating their time to the programs.

It seems the father should have taken the time, along with the offered help. Reading the news acounts of the boy’s living circumstances, it appears many warnings were out there well before September.

The Kansas City Star‘s reporter,  Christine Vendel, talked to the neighbors:

 About four months ago, neighbors stopped seeing him. One caught a glimpse of him, pale and frail, taking out the trash. That neighbor had heard the teen was going to move in with his mother soon, and that the teen wasn’t attending school anymore because he would run away instead of returning home after school. A relative told that neighbor that the family restrained the teen because the teen “attacked” the stepmother and ate raw meat out of the trash can.

As always seems to happen in cases like this, the need for more homeschooling regulations pops up. Actually, I’m wondering if the question regarding more monitoring of homeschoolers was only raised by KSHB [Abuse case raises concerns about homeschooling].  But they did speak with homeschoolers.  I should note the interviewed homeschoolers were at Skate City, not in the basement.

KUAR reporter, Nathan Vandiver, updates about House Bill 1076 : Bill To Let Districts Count Home Schooled Dies In House Committee

Dana Higdon, superintendent of the Mulberry-Plainview School District said her schools can serve home schooled students if they choose, so they should be counted.

“We are prepared to provide any classes or services to the students who are home schooled in our district, and if we were allowed to count those home school students toward the required 350, it would help our district to be able to aid students to become productive citizens,” Higdon said.

This is certainly a new twist to the public school funding issue.  If passed, the Attorney General’s office predicted the bill would be struck down in the court system.  That premise is duly noted when other attempts occur using homeschools to fund public schools.  Consolidation of small public schools is a sad situation, but the answer would likely be satisfying the educational needs of public school students, not trying to pull in a larger quantity for the dollar amount.

The National Home Education Legal Defense (NHELD) –  Bulletin #74 responds to Connecticut’s Senate Bill 374 - An act requiring behavorial mental health assessments for children. Deborah Stevenson offered information and caution regarding this bill in the Public Health Committee with two sponsors.

Below is part of NHELD‘s response: CT Proposed Legislation Regarding Children’s Mental Health Assessment:

The bill does not specify anything about allowing any social services agency to become involved in your child’s healthcare. It simply states that the fact that an assessment was done will be provided to the State Department of Education. While anything is always possible, right now it is only a proposed bill - that is, an idea that is written down. We don’t know what the final language of the bill will look like, or whether it will be voted on in committee, or on the floor of the House or Senate. We need to be careful in how we approach anyone about this at this time.

Right now, it remains simply as a proposed bill, with only two sponsors: Rep. Toni Walker, and Senator Toni Harp. Before a bill becomes a law, after it is proposed, it must go through a screening process whereby legislative leaders determine whether it should be raised before the appropriate committee. In this case, the bill has been referred to the Public Health Committee. It is in the screening process at this point. The bill cannot go any further unless the appropriate committee acts upon it at one of its meetings. If the committee does not act on it, the bill dies. The first action the committee could take would be to place it on its agenda to determine if it will be scheduled for a public hearing. After the public hearing, the committee meets to vote on whether it will get approved to go further for action on the floor of the House and the Senate. If it gets a “joint favorable” vote in the committee, then the bill is placed on the calendar of the House and Senate and the leadership then determines when to call the bill for a vote on the floor of the House and Senate. At any point in this process, the bill also could be amended. If the leadership does not call the bill for a vote, the bill dies.

Deborah also adds:  If the leadership deem this to be a worthy bill to be placed on the agenda at the committee meeting, the Chairmen of the committee and the Legislative Commissioner’s office then can re-write the bill. So we don’t know yet if the bill will get on the agenda or what the final language of the bill will be. We certainly will be watching what happens and will advise accordingly. 

SB 374 states:

“AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.

That section 10-206 of the general statutes be amended to require (1) each pupil enrolled in public school at grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 and each home-schooled child at ages 12, 14 and 17 to have a confidential behavioral health assessment, the results of which shall be disclosed only to the child’s parent or guardian, and (2) each health care provider performing a child’s behavioral health assessment to complete the appropriate form supplied by the State Board of Education verifying that the child has received the assessment.

More from NHELD regarding Mental Health Assessments

More from Home Education Magazine‘s Taking Charge column by Larry and Susan Kaseman:

Increased Mental Health Screening? Are You Crazy!?!

Why Children Are Not for Screening

ht to: Consent of the Governed

A couple of interesting articles from South Dakota and Maine floated across the homeschooling news radar.  One was a private citizen’s opinion and the other involved public servants’ opinion translated into a bill.

South Dakota Representative Don Kopp and 29 other sponsors have a prospect [HB 1173] for private school families.  It will be heard in the House Taxation Committee.

Private-school rebate proposed | The Argus Leader By Josh Verges

Oddly, the article (and a companion poll about the issue) includes the strong suggestion homeschoolers are involved with pursuit of this bill.  But towards the end of the article, this important point is (finally) noted:

Kopp said the bill initially would have included home-school parents, but their association no longer wants to be included. They worry that if the government gives them financial support, the state or school boards will take on a stronger regulatory role.

Larry and Susan Kaseman wrote a 2011 Taking Charge article: Tell Legislators “No Thanks to Tax Credits”

Homeschoolers have managed to keep state regulation to a minimum by using arguments such as the following:

• Private schools, including homeschools, do not receive tax dollars. Therefore, although the government can use tax dollars as a basis for setting standards and requirements for public schools and holding them accountable, a similar case cannot be made for government regulation of private schools, including homeschools, that do not accept tax dollars.

• State statutes require compulsory school attendance, not compulsory education. Therefore, homeschoolers should not be required to prove that they are being educated.

• Millions of homeschool graduates have successfully entered conventional schools, college, and the work force.

If we accept tax credits, we would be giving up the first of these arguments, which is one of the best ones we have.

Property tax rebates are also tricky if private school families are renting.  There’s always the consideration towards empty nesters and those with no children who would not be in the game.  The South Dakota Governor opposes it, as do public school advocacy groups.  I think I agree with the Sioux Falls Catholic School System Superintendent the “devil’s always in the details.”  It usually is, especially in this current state and federal legislative climate.

Across the country, a Maine resident offered a Morning Sentinel letter to the editor suggesting Save money; pay parents to home-school children

I think it would be plausible to pay parents to home-school their children. Why not pay a parent $9,000 per year to home-school a student? And then perhaps $4,500 for each additional child, with some type of limit to keep things realistic.

So parents with three children could educate them for $18,000 instead of $37,000. On a larger scale, if 19,000 students (about 10 percent) were home-schooled and 25 percent of those were “additional children,” the cost would be about $150 million.

When compared to about $240 million as the current cost, we can see that the aforementioned 10 percent shift of students creates roughly $90 million in savings.

My homeschooling friends and I have often dreamed of having the same amount of public school money calculated as per pupil funding. (I don’t imagine the amazing administrative costs and other trickeries feel like a learning opportunity to the child, but that’s a bit off-topic.)  What could we do with $10,000? The travel, art and dance classes, the zoo, museum memberships – what a whopper life that would be!  But it’s just a dream and not anything homeschoolers I know are pushing.

Because there’s always this important string following the generosity displayed by the letter writer’s suggestion. “Reasonable” is a relative term and there would be a strong possibility all that money will be tied together in a stack of burdens:

Due to the state’s vested interest, I think the students should be able to pass reasonable tests given by the state.

There must be some way to verify kids are learning something.

Homeschoolers measure their children’s educational progress in many different and efficient ways.  Those methods are backed up with love and concern, not mindless paperwork or tests that stress young (and older) minds. That result has been so important many homeschoolers put aside financial temptations.

HB 1128 is scheduled for the House Education Hearing tomorrow. This South Dakota Opportunity Scholarship legislation would change requirements where there is a higher potential for homeschool eligibility.  The bill has six Representative sponsors and two Senate sponsors. It seems the perspective varies as to whether the lack of set public high school coursework should allow more “certain students to participate in the opportunity scholarship program under certain circumstances”.

American Clarion - with a mind to American principles and the Judeo-Christian values that made this country the greatest in human history - reports:

South Dakota Homeschool Scholarship Eligibility by Bob Ellis

HB 1128 would change the ACT requirement so that homeschoolers simply have to meet the same requirement as all other kids.

Indications are that the Department of Education opposes passage of this bill, likely because of the usual establishment bigotry against homeschooling. Education bureaucrats indicate they don’t believe that homeschool students have done the work, yet the ACT is a very objective test which reveals whether the student knows the material or not.

The Madville Times - From Madison to Spearfish: real liberal media for the great state of South Dakota - has a different perspective:

House Bill 1128 lowers that ACT standard to a 24, the same score that all other students must get to qualify for the Opportunity Scholarship.

In other words, HB 1128 sponsors Rep. Lance Russell (R-30/Hot Springs), Sen. Tim Begalka (R-4/Clear Lake), and their six co-sponsors, all conservative Republicans, want to effectively repeal the course requirements. They want to dumb down the Opportunity Scholarship.

The comments are good reads.

Here’s a  Legislative Update from the Organization of Virginia Homeschoolers (VaHomeschoolers)

House Subcommittee Votes 7-1 to Approve Sports Access Bill

HB 1442, patroned by Del. Robert Bell (R-Albemarle), addresses public school sports and interscholastic activities access for homeschooled high school students. The House Education Subcommittee on Students and Early Education amended the bill to include a sunset provision which would discontinue the provisions of the bill in June 2018 unless further action is taken.  HB 1442, as amended, passed the subcommittee by a vote of 7-1 (as compared with a vote of 6-2 for a similar bill in 2012).

The Senate Committee also had a companion bill
  to HB 1442 - SB 812. The Senate bill was scheduled for hearing in the Senate Education and Health Committee this morning. It was delayed by the sponsor to help ensure success. (Last year’s bill failed by one vote.)  The House bill should be considered by the full House Education committee next Monday and the Senate bill might be heard a week from today on January 31.

As often happens with homeschool-related bills, the homeschooled kids were seen and heard.  From the Legislative Update:

We were proud to introduce to legislators our two young Legislative Interns, Sydney Bowman (age 12) and Micah Fitz (14), who testified about why sports access matters to them.

Amy Wilson also offered lobbying information to families wishing to attend and participate in these hearings:

One of the primary arguments in favor of the bill is the benefit that it could extend to homeschooled students, so an audience full of families in favor of the bill will definitely make an impression on legislators.  There will also be an opportunity for a few students to testify, though we expect testimony to be limited due to time constraints.
 
If your child would like to testify, please help him or her prepare a written statement about the personal impact that homeschool sports access could have. Help your child practice reading the statement with a strong, clear voice and use a timer to be sure it is no longer than one minute.

More VA Homeschoolers Information on Tebow Bills

The Durham Herald Sun is running a Learning Life series.  The series follows a public high school junior, a public charter school freshman, a private school sixth-grader and a brother and sister that homeschool in Chatham County. 

Their latest article: Learning Life: Home school student helps with Nasher exhibit app by Wes Platt, looks at a North Carolina homeschooler’s smartphone application design team experience.

Edwards, a home school student from Chatham County, has worked with his team for the past eight months on an application destined for the Nasher Museum of Art at Duke University. It is specifically designed for an upcoming exhibit, called Light Sensitive, which opens on Feb. 14.

One more opportunity to gain life skills collaborating in a practical way with a local organization.

The Innovative Educator

NYC Department of Education official, Lisa Nielsen, helps with teacher training materials in the New York public schools.

Ms. Nielsen:

• Opposes High Stakes Testing
• Supports the Opt Out Movement Against Standardized Testing
• Approves of Homeschooling
• Denounces the federal Common Core Standards

She sounds like someone who is interested in children and their education.

What a crazy notion!

Susan Edelman and Candice Giove fought back against these wild ideas!  They pushed out a New York Post article outing Lisa Nielsen.  These stealthy reporters noted this below regarding the suggestion students skip school testing:

Department of Education official rips standardized testing, tells students to skip school

Parent at the Helm slammed back and gave these reporters and their “Exclusive” a big, fat F in their media world of unprofessionalism:

Dying Mainstream Media Slams Pro-Homeschool, Anti-Testing NY State DOE Employee

So, what should a couple of fine, upstanding reporters who regularly churn out trash for that beacon of outstanding journalism, the  New York Post do? They write a piece of yellow journalism, dripping with so much bias as to be laughable, slap the word “exclusive” on it, add a photo of their target celebrating a birthday at a wine-tasting party, and publish their “findings” in a Sunday edition. For good measure, they don’t open their online “news report” for comments.

Read the rest of Linda Dobson’s useful article and we’ll leave it at that.