4 ms·

Home-schoolers dismantled state oversight. Now they fear pushback

19 points by pretext 3y ago

throwup238 3y ago
https://archive.ph/L6wD6 https://archive.ph/L6wD6
chewmieser 3y ago
Gift article link: https://wapo.st/3tqC7tp https://wapo.st/3tqC7tp
zdragnar 3y ago
Most states don't have much or any regulation of home schooling compared to public schooling. Per the article, school choice advocates want home schooling to qualify for the same funding parents get for choosing a school. Home school advocates don't want the money out of fear that taking the money will raise the likely that they will be forced to take it, and any regulations or restrictions that come with it. One angle the article overlooked is that parents may have to pay union dues if they do take it. This is how the SEIU got access to payments make to families of disabled people in Minnesota; they pushed the government to classify home caretakers as "employees for the purpose of bargaining" and therefore were required to pay the SEIU dues. This process was repeated in Michigan, I think, and probably other states.
- jonp888 3y ago
  American has laws which force you to join a Union even if you hate them, want nothing to do with them and don't want them to represent you!? No wonder so many Americans hate Unions.
  - christophilus 3y ago
    It's a per-state thing, but yes; it's one of the reasons for the hatred.
  - zdragnar 3y ago
    Some states are "right to work" states that allow you to not join or pay dues. They tend to be the more conservative / Republican learning states. More liberal states allow unions to form closed-shop contacts, and most government positions are the same. If you want to be a teacher, you must join the union that contacts with the school you want to teach at. If you want to get a summer job as a teenager or college kid at a Pepsi warehouse in Minnesota, you must join the union.
    - eesmith 3y ago
      I think you have you details wrong? "The Taft–Hartley Act outlawed the closed shop in the United States in 1947. The union shop was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop Perhaps you are thinking of how the teachers' union could collect agency fees from non-union public school teachers? As I understand it, that ended when Janus v. AFSCME was decided in 2018. "The Supreme Court ruled that such union fees in the public sector violate the First Amendment right to free speech" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus_v._AFSCME https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus_v._AFSCME That decision only applies to the public sector, not a Pepsi warehouse in Minnesota. However, you are still not required to join the union to work in the warehouse, even in Minnesota, only make "fair share" payments: https://www.findlaw.com/state/minnesota-law/minnesota-right-to-work-laws.html https://www.findlaw.com/state/minnesota-law/minnesota-right-... > Minnesota does not have a right to work law, which means employees that are part of a unionized workforce must join the union or make "fair share" payments equivalent to the cost of union dues. https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/employees/union-dues https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/em... > Employees may choose not to become union members and pay dues, or opt to pay only that share of dues used directly for representation, such as collective bargaining and contract administration. Known as objectors, they are no longer union members, but are still protected by the contract. Unions are obligated to tell all covered employees about this option, which was created by a Supreme Court ruling and is known as the Beck right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_America_v._Beck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_Amer... > Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that, in a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative.[1] The rights identified by the Court in Communications Workers of America v. Beck have since come to be known as "Beck rights," ...
- ryandrake 3y ago
  The rise of totally unregulated and unassessed homeschooling probably scares me more than any other long term problem we have in the country. Most of the other problems we face can be fixed by an educated population, but if we lose that, we won't be able to fix anything. We're eroding our global edge in terms of having an educated population, and the constant efforts towards chipping away public school are accelerating this. The possibility of taxpayers funding this erosion is just icing on the cake. Yes, there are good examples of homeschooling. I'm not saying they aren't. How many of these "as many as 2.7 million home-schooled children" (they don't even have a way of counting them!) are ending up with a better-than-public education, and how many of them are ending up at a 2nd grade math level and believing Jesus rode dinosaurs? If you disagree, please read the article! These "schools" are totally unmonitored. Literally anything can be taught and it counts as education. And many states actively forbid oversight or even disclosure by parents.
  - zdragnar 3y ago
    The article has examples of "bad" homeschooling, but the growth trend the past few years is largely driven by the total failure of some public schools. I went to a particularly good public school growing up, and I'm not opposed to them in principle. Just pointing out that when your only public option is a school that is utterly failing (https://www.illinoispolicy.org/1-in-6-chicago-third-graders-can-read-at-level-signaling-dismal-futures/ https://www.illinoispolicy.org/1-in-6-chicago-third-graders-...) you might want a different option.
    - ryandrake 3y ago
      Oh for sure! I have no doubt that terrible public schools exist, parents who are focused on academics exist, and good homeschooling resources/groups exist. And when you get that magical combination, homeschooling might be justified. So, measure to ensure that's what's happening! Monitor and assess. Know how many kids are being pulled out, and know how adequate their alternate education is. And provide a regulatory regime to ensure it's adequate. Pulling a kid out of a bad school and providing an academically rigorous education should be fine. Pulling a kid out of a not-bad school so that unqualified high-school drop-outs can teach from the Bible that pi=3 and that the Earth is 6,000 years old should not be fine. The public should be able to differentiate between theses cases, allow one, and disallow the other.
bigfryo 3y ago
The state and the media and the establishment and their lackeys at the bottom hate home schooling with a passion. I wonder why

19 points by pretext 3y ago

throwup238 3y ago

https://archive.ph/L6wD6 https://archive.ph/L6wD6

chewmieser 3y ago

Gift article link: https://wapo.st/3tqC7tp https://wapo.st/3tqC7tp

zdragnar 3y ago

Most states don't have much or any regulation of home schooling compared to public schooling. Per the article, school choice advocates want home schooling to qualify for the same funding parents get for choosing a school. Home school advocates don't want the money out of fear that taking the money will raise the likely that they will be forced to take it, and any regulations or restrictions that come with it. One angle the article overlooked is that parents may have to pay union dues if they do take it. This is how the SEIU got access to payments make to families of disabled people in Minnesota; they pushed the government to classify home caretakers as "employees for the purpose of bargaining" and therefore were required to pay the SEIU dues. This process was repeated in Michigan, I think, and probably other states.

jonp888 3y ago
American has laws which force you to join a Union even if you hate them, want nothing to do with them and don't want them to represent you!? No wonder so many Americans hate Unions.
- christophilus 3y ago
  It's a per-state thing, but yes; it's one of the reasons for the hatred.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  Some states are "right to work" states that allow you to not join or pay dues. They tend to be the more conservative / Republican learning states. More liberal states allow unions to form closed-shop contacts, and most government positions are the same. If you want to be a teacher, you must join the union that contacts with the school you want to teach at. If you want to get a summer job as a teenager or college kid at a Pepsi warehouse in Minnesota, you must join the union.
  - eesmith 3y ago
    I think you have you details wrong? "The Taft–Hartley Act outlawed the closed shop in the United States in 1947. The union shop was ruled illegal by the Supreme Court." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed_shop Perhaps you are thinking of how the teachers' union could collect agency fees from non-union public school teachers? As I understand it, that ended when Janus v. AFSCME was decided in 2018. "The Supreme Court ruled that such union fees in the public sector violate the First Amendment right to free speech" - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus_v._AFSCME https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus_v._AFSCME That decision only applies to the public sector, not a Pepsi warehouse in Minnesota. However, you are still not required to join the union to work in the warehouse, even in Minnesota, only make "fair share" payments: https://www.findlaw.com/state/minnesota-law/minnesota-right-to-work-laws.html https://www.findlaw.com/state/minnesota-law/minnesota-right-... > Minnesota does not have a right to work law, which means employees that are part of a unionized workforce must join the union or make "fair share" payments equivalent to the cost of union dues. https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/employees/union-dues https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/em... > Employees may choose not to become union members and pay dues, or opt to pay only that share of dues used directly for representation, such as collective bargaining and contract administration. Known as objectors, they are no longer union members, but are still protected by the contract. Unions are obligated to tell all covered employees about this option, which was created by a Supreme Court ruling and is known as the Beck right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_America_v._Beck https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_Workers_of_Amer... > Communications Workers of America v. Beck, 487 U.S. 735 (1988), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that, in a union security agreement, unions are authorized by statute to collect from non-members only those fees and dues necessary to perform its duties as a collective bargaining representative.[1] The rights identified by the Court in Communications Workers of America v. Beck have since come to be known as "Beck rights," ...
ryandrake 3y ago
The rise of totally unregulated and unassessed homeschooling probably scares me more than any other long term problem we have in the country. Most of the other problems we face can be fixed by an educated population, but if we lose that, we won't be able to fix anything. We're eroding our global edge in terms of having an educated population, and the constant efforts towards chipping away public school are accelerating this. The possibility of taxpayers funding this erosion is just icing on the cake. Yes, there are good examples of homeschooling. I'm not saying they aren't. How many of these "as many as 2.7 million home-schooled children" (they don't even have a way of counting them!) are ending up with a better-than-public education, and how many of them are ending up at a 2nd grade math level and believing Jesus rode dinosaurs? If you disagree, please read the article! These "schools" are totally unmonitored. Literally anything can be taught and it counts as education. And many states actively forbid oversight or even disclosure by parents.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  The article has examples of "bad" homeschooling, but the growth trend the past few years is largely driven by the total failure of some public schools. I went to a particularly good public school growing up, and I'm not opposed to them in principle. Just pointing out that when your only public option is a school that is utterly failing (https://www.illinoispolicy.org/1-in-6-chicago-third-graders-can-read-at-level-signaling-dismal-futures/ https://www.illinoispolicy.org/1-in-6-chicago-third-graders-...) you might want a different option.
  - ryandrake 3y ago
    Oh for sure! I have no doubt that terrible public schools exist, parents who are focused on academics exist, and good homeschooling resources/groups exist. And when you get that magical combination, homeschooling might be justified. So, measure to ensure that's what's happening! Monitor and assess. Know how many kids are being pulled out, and know how adequate their alternate education is. And provide a regulatory regime to ensure it's adequate. Pulling a kid out of a bad school and providing an academically rigorous education should be fine. Pulling a kid out of a not-bad school so that unqualified high-school drop-outs can teach from the Bible that pi=3 and that the Earth is 6,000 years old should not be fine. The public should be able to differentiate between theses cases, allow one, and disallow the other.

bigfryo 3y ago

The state and the media and the establishment and their lackeys at the bottom hate home schooling with a passion. I wonder why