Articles of Interest
Articles of Interest is another way we at CAPE-NM are trying to help provide information to you, the home schooling community. You all already made the difficult decision when you decided to home school. These articles are here to help you make more informed decisions regarding issues and items that come up from time to time. As always, we are here to support youl!
VIRTUAL CHARTER SCHOOLS: THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE HOME SCHOOL MOVEMENT
By Chris Klicka
Senior Counsel of the Home School Legal Defense Association
It seems everyone with school-aged children is talking about charter schools. Many are thinking, "This deal is too good to pass up: I can have my children educated outside of the public school system and have the government still pay the bill!" They believe it is the best of both worlds. Charter schools along with educational vouchers appear to be harmless since parents are only reacquiring their tax money.
Is it really that simple? Let's look at charter schools, especially virtual charter schools, and vouchers a little closer. Let's look at them from the perspective of freedom-- not from the perspective of what "freebies" we can receive from the government.
I am afraid the soul of the home schooling movement is at stake. How we respond to virtual charter schools and vouchers will determine the extent home schooling remains free from government controls in the future.
To accurately understand this issue, we must first define the terms.
What Are Vouchers and Charter Schools?
Government educational vouchers constitute a legislatively specified amount of government money given to parents to spend on their child's education expenses. The money often can be used for public or private education. At present, there are only a handful of state government voucher programs for education in existence. The courts have struck down most of them. No federal educational voucher program exists. . . Yet.
Supporters of government educational vouchers summarize the benefits this way. Vouchers create competition, giving private education programs an "even playing field" when competing with government funded public schools. This, they say, will improve the quality of all education programs. Besides, it is the parents' money in the first place and they are merely getting their tax dollars back.
A much more common educational program is the "charter school." "Charter schools" are a type of public schools. The school is established by a "charter" that lists the school's mission, educational program, and methods of assessment. Charter schools answer to the state or local school board for accessing the students and verifying academic progress. They are completely government funded.
Most charter schools operate as an institutional school, I.e. A "brick and mortar" school that children actually attend. Those types of charter schools do not really affect home schoolers. The "virtual charter schools," on the other hand, greatly impact the home school movement. Other names for these type of charter schools are "on-line" school or "cyber school" that operate as home school programs.
Charter schools now exist in 37 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The Center for Education Reform estimates on its website that there are over 2,000 charter schools operating with more that 500,000 enrolled in these schools.
Supporters of charter schools claim that creating competition in the educational market will result in more options and a higher quality education. The idea is that if public charter schools draw enough students away from the regular public schools, the resulting lack of funds will force public schools to come up with creative alternatives to bring students (and the funding that comes with them) back into the system. Additionally, proponents claim that the charter schools provides an innovative alternative of schooling that allows creative approaches to teaching, freed from the strict rules and regulation of the public school system. They point out that charter schools or virtual charter schools provide a protective environment-a smaller "private" school or home environment--where students can pursue their own styles of learning.
An increasing number of home schoolers are examining the possibility of enrolling full-time or part-time in "cyber schools" or home school programs operated by these public charter schools or directly by regular public schools. Charter schools operate on taxpayer dollars, so there is virtually no cost for those enrolled. Other advantages cited by home schoolers to participation in these "virtual" charter schools are the accredited high school diploma, free computer, Internet access, software, and support by certified teachers.
With government vouchers and virtual charter schools and public schools offering all of these benefits, we at the Home School Legal Defense Association often gets questions of why we would oppose such excellent educational options.
Freedom is the Answer
Freedom is the answer. Freedom, I believe, is more important than government "freebies."
Over the last 16 years, I have worked at the Home School Legal Defense Association helping to win the right of families to home school with minimal regulations. Many of these battles took place in the courts and legislatures throughout the country. I saw first-hand the tremendous sacrifice and risk parents took to follow God's leading to train their children at home. These families faced fines, jail, and even the threat of the state taking their children away. The families held on to their convictions and God honored them in an incredible way. After 15 years of litigation and legislative battles, we won the right to home school in all 50 states.
Of course, the battle to maintain this freedom continues as school officials harass home school families with illegal requirements and teacher's unions and other professional education organizations have legislation introduced to restrict home school freedoms. A survey by the American School Board Journal in February 1997, of over 1000 public school executives found that 71 percent did not believe home schoolers were regulated enough! Ninety-five percent of the superintendents and principals believed anything is better than home schooling.
The National Education Association passes a resolution each year condemning home schooling and urging for legislation to be enacted in each state to require home schools to taught by certified teachers and have their curriculum approved by the state. The prejudices against home schooling have not disappeared.
But our hard-fought freedom remains intact for now. Private home schooling, with no help from the government, is thriving. The studies all show home schoolers on the average are academically above average from the elementary level all the way through college. I document this and the general success of home schooling in my book, "Home Schooling: The Right Choice," available from HSLDA at 540-338-5600 or www.hslda.org. Home schoolers have earned the right to be left alone.
All of this success has been achieved without the government's money. We have had many victories before the Congress and the state legislatures because we are not asking for a handout, but simply to be left alone.
This liberty is at risk if home schoolers begin crawling back to the government to drink from the public trough. This is the same government that once heavily restricted or prohibited home schooling altogether. If we take the government's money or services through virtual charter schools, we will become dependent on government money. As the controls are added, we will not be able to break free.
As home schoolers "yoke" together with the public schools through virtual charter school programs and cyber schools, the public schools and the state will once again dictate to us our curriculum, teacher qualifications, and methods.
This is not idle conjecture. It is already happening.
Government Home Schooling in Alaska
It is important to remember the old and true adage: "There is no such thing as a free government service." Government money always comes with government strings. Governments will demand accountability for funding. States want to be assured that no fraud is involved and that the monies are not used for an improper purpose. The types of regulations over parents who receive funding will depend on the type of government in power. The most common concern for the government is that the children learn certain concepts and progress academically.
Our government has the responsibility to spend our money frugally. For the government to give money to home schoolers to participate with charter schools without any conditions would be irresponsible.
Virtual charter schools must be accountable to the state or local school authorities. In addition to dictating the curriculum and teaching styles, they can impose requirements on the parents far beyond that which is required by state home school laws, in order to assure that the parents are teaching the children "appropriately."
The Alaskan government program is typical of many virtual charter school home school programs springing up throughout the country.
On June 4, 1997, Alaska enacted the best home school law in the nation. Alaska's law has no teaching qualifications for parents, no regulation at any level of government, no notice to anyone of the parents' decision to conduct the home education, no registration with the state, no reporting to anyone of any information about the home education program, no testing of the children, no required subjects, and no evaluation of the program by anyone.
Despite having more freedom than any other state, a majority of home schooling families are choosing to enroll their children in a public school program known as Interior Distance Education of Alaska (I.D.E.A.). Interestingly, this statewide program of correspondence study from the Galena School District was begun in June of 1997, just at the time that the new home school law was enacted. According to the information disseminated by Galena School District, the desire of the public school officials is "to provide educational, emotional, intellectual, and financial support to those who would like to work in partnership with a public school district."
Families who enroll their children in I.D.E.A. are provided curriculum materials, use of a computer with access to the Internet and assistance from a certified teacher, among other services. However, public funds may not be used to purchase curriculum materials for teaching core subjects if the materials are distinctively religious in content. (Ironically, one of the reasons most often given by parents who have decided to teach their children at home is that they object to the atheistic content of public school curricula.)
The dangers of these types of government home school programs are clearly apparent in a letter from Carol Simpson, the Alaska Department of Education coordinator of their home school program.
This is a letter to a Christian speaker and author who was scheduled to sell books and speak at 5 IDEA meetings throughout Alaska. At that last minute, it was determined her books were "Christian" and could not be sold or promoted at the IDEA conferences. Nor could home schoolers get reimbursed if they purchased these "Christian" books for their home school program. Alaska is in the process of creating an approved list of secular home school books. Also notice from the letter how gradual the changes have been. At first, the government paid for Christian home school textbooks. Once 75% of home schoolers in Alaska became dependent on the government funds, the rules have changed.
On September 11, 2001, Carol Simpson wrote,
" . . .A brief note of history is in order. When IDEA started in summer of 1997, we began from the premise that homeschooling parents know their kids best and should be free to use any curricular materials that they deemed most appropriate. We bought nearly anything anyone wanted, including Bob Jones, Alpha Omega, A Beka, etc. By November of that year, the Department of Education (DOE) made a new regulation prohibiting school districts from purchasing religious curricular materials. We have since then maintained the policy that the parents can use whatever they like, although their purchases are now more restricted."
"The Attorney General of the State of Alaska advised us that we could not purchase anything that is an advocacy of a sectarian or denominational doctrine. In other words, we are prohibited from purchasing anything that advocates a particular religious viewpoint to the exclusion of others. It is often a fine line, and no doubt we often err either way. . ."
"Additionally, the state can audit a school district anytime they like and do so on a regular basis. IDEA was the first program to do what we do: operate state-wide, offer parents the freedom to choose their own curricular materials, require little reporting, encourage individuality in education, etc. IDEA was wildly successful, going from 0 students in mid-June 1997 to 1157 students 10 weeks later. Now, of course, there are many similar programs. "
"As a result, the state announced last winter that they would begin comprehensive audits of each of these type of programs. They began with two smaller programs (we are by far the largest) last spring and will audit us at some point this year. We have been warned several times by a high official in the DOE that we need to be extra-careful about the issue of buying "religious" curricula, as that is an area that they are targeting, and the rumor is that we still buy things that the state has disallowed."
The government home school coordinator then proceeded to tell the home school speaker who they had invited to speak at their 5 government home school conferences that she could not sell her books at the conferences. She explained, "I realize that your books are not "Christian books" and that any religious expression in them is incidental, not the focus of the book. However, we must be strict in our obedience to the letter and spirit of the law, honoring our governmental authorities . . . we must be careful not to give the appearance of promoting sectarian materials. As such, we cannot allow you to sell or promote these books in workshops that we are paying for . . .. Also, we want to avoid the appearance of promoting sectarian materials through your workshops as well. Please do not include references to faith or an emphasis on the inclusion of Biblical teaching in your presentations."
This letter very plainly explains the danger to home schooler's freedom posed by these government home school programs.
I have talked to some parents who tell me the various ways they circumvent this by still use the state government's money to buy Christian textbooks. The dependence on government money is encouraging people to lie!
The refusal to reimburse for any Christian curriculum is not the only problem. Additionally, students in grades 4, 8, and 11 must take the standardized tests that Alaska uses for public school students at a test site designated by public school officials, and the tests must be administered by a certified teacher approved by the Galena School District. All I.D.E.A. students are required to take any assessment mandated by the Alaska State Department of Education of public school students in grades 5, 7, and 10. As further evaluation of the student, each parent must report to Galena School District the progress of all students each semester. High school students are required to submit to a yearly interview with a representative from I.D.E.A. in order to establish a transcript.
In final analysis, the "freebies" are not so free after all. The price is actually too high. The price is a gradual but steady loss of freedom, control, and independence.
Home Schooling in Name Only
Despite all of the attractions for home schoolers, virtual charter schools are supporting home schooling in name only. Parents who enroll their children in these virtual charter schools are actually creating small public schools in their home.
As seen in the Alaska example above, most charter schools will not allow funding to be used to purchase material that is religious in content. Thus, parents that would normally incorporate their faith into their teaching curriculum will only be able to do so at an extra expense to them.
Last week, I talked to a Christian lady who is a teacher in a large 'brick and mortar"charter school program in Colorado. She said many Christian families are using the program and enrolling their children in the charter school. I asked her if the teachers could teach the Bible. She said, "No but we can teach virtues." I asked if she was allowed to teach the children about salvation and she said, "We are not supposed to." If you cannot teach the Bible and the children about Jesus, what is the point of Christian education?
In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, an educational voucher program has been operating for several years. It has been touted as one of the best examples of a successful government educational program. What many do not realize is that any Christian school that enrolls students who are using the government vouchers must comply with over 300 additional regulations. Two of the requirements even prohibit the Christian school from mandating that these children with vouchers attend chapel or Bible class!
Is this compromise worth it? If we turn our back on Jesus Christ and His command to proclaim the gospel simply for government money, how much longer will God withhold His judgment?
Home school parents originally fought to be separate from the public schools in order to have the right to choose the curriculum that they believe would be best for their child. Parents removed their children from the public school system because of the non-christian curriculum. So why would they want to go back to the same humanistic material? But this is happening with home schoolers who enroll in charter schools or public school programs for home schooling.
With little power in choosing the curriculum, parents in charter schools also face limited ability to incorporate creative teaching methods. The specific curriculum requirements often demand parents to 'stick to the schedule' dictated by the public school, rather than use creativity in complimenting their child's learning style.
HSLDA members who have participated in virtual charter schools complain of this very thing. As one California home schooler shared:
"Having been in a car accident and having been limited in my physical capabilities, I found myself not as able of getting my kids out as much as I felt they needed. Home educating independently for 3 years I was reluctant to try a charter school but I thought, "How bad could it be? I'd have access to educational materials and my children would have an opportunity to meet other home educated children." At first it was exciting, though enrolling was very institutional. Then it came time to meeting with a teacher. We sat and talked and I stated that I had been home educating independently for 3 years and was not interested in meeting weekly and that I would bring their work in monthly as they are required to turn in work at least monthly. That worked out great the first month. The next month however the teacher wanted to plan out what we'd be doing for the following month. After being independent I was not interested in being told what my kids would be learning, so we agreed we'd do the work we wanted and would write up the plans retrospectively. This was not ideal but do-able since the kids enjoyed the Monday co-op (classes) and fieldtrips."
"The next time we met, I took the kid's work but left the children behind. I never read or signed anything stating that my children had to be present. To me, turning in the work was the requirement. It soon became apparent that the teachers were required to talk to the children at these visits and assess them not only on their academics, but also on their physical appearance...looking for signs of abuse and/or neglect at their discretion. I had gotten so used to living my own life and had forgotten just how involved the government is in the lives of families enrolled in public schools."
" Make no doubt about it, a charter school is a public school...it's home schooling in technical term only. Enrolling in a charter school will give you more freedom than the traditional public schools, but still strips you of the independent responsibility of educating our own children. It is still an institution, which believes we need interference from trained government agents that we are incapable of educating our own children."
"The principal was very eager to work with me, bending the many rules. I appreciated her efforts greatly. However, I found that we were limited in what we would learn and forced to learn in the "one size fits all" methods of the schools in which I desperately avoid. It's my opinion also that charter schools try very hard to embrace all philosophies of home education; however, they are still run by "government agents" paid to spy on us, and dictate our parenting and educational skills. They still work under the framework of the "one size fits all" mind set, and some teachers forcefully dictate (assign) the work. We found ourselves so consumed in getting the work done that my children were not retaining any of the subjects. It was simply a race to get it done and turned in, stereotypical of schools. To me academic work should be savored to allow them to retain it and enjoy it."
"In a charter school we found that the kids are still categorized by age, they maintained their institutional mindset. "You're this age, in this grade, you should be doing this or that." "You're in fifth grade, oh you need to be studying American history, ancient history's next year." I found this train of thought to be very limiting. Charter schools are still public schools, which are basically training kids to do well on standardized tests. Their first priority is their precious ADA; they want their $4,000 per child. Secondly, they still program the children for taking standardized tests to get good results, typical of schools."
This home schooler shared further that when she finally tried to remove her children from the charter school program, she was contacted repeatedly by Child Welfare Services demanding that she place her children in school!
Is government money worth it? Are not these the types of controls we cast off with much sacrifice and risk in the 1980's? Are we willing forge new chains to limit our liberty?
Most home school parents want to be free to educate their children without this kind of government oversight.
Top Education Officials Have Warned Against Vouchers
Although we differ from the philosophy of many of the former Federal secretaries of education, their statements are valuable since they evidence the intent behind government funding of private education. Lamar Alexander, former Secretary of Education under George Bush explained the transformation of private education that was publicly funded when he said:" a public school would become any school that receives students who brought with them public monies . . .[i]
Former U.S. Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, had strong reservations about vouchers and government funding of private education. No doubt, his reason for opposing government funding of private education was mainly to protect the current public school system, but he has some interesting warnings for private schools:
You have to be accountable with public tax dollars . . . when it comes to taking federal tax dollars and giving those to parents and then having the absence of accountability as far as their children's education . . . If you have accountability, then you lose the private and parochial nature of those schools . . . It's bad, we think, for private schools and parochial schools. It takes away from them the private and parochial strength, which is being totally free from any federal regulations . . .[ii]
[Vouchers] threaten the very nature of private and parochial schools. It makes them less private and less parochial.[iii]
Chester Finn Jr., former Assistant Secretary of Education under Ronald Reagan, declared how government controls were inevitable: "There is no doubt in my mind that there will be some new regulations with voucher plans."[iv]
If the highest public school bureaucrats in the nation recognize the loss of freedom to government funded private education how can we deny it?
The Experience of Other Nations
Other nations have experienced the effects of government funding. Private education has almost completely disappeared.
For example, in Australia, over 10 years, private school and Christian schools took more and ore government funds. The regulations gradually increased until the difference between public schools and private schools is non-existent. Home schooling in Australia is the last bastion of educational freedom.
In South Africa, in 1996 their new National Education Act was passed that officially transformed all publicly funded private schools into public schools.
In Alberta, Canada home schoolers enjoyed more liberty than almost all of the other provinces. Then several years ago, legislation was passed giving home schoolers $500 per child in government funds. The very next year, one of the most regulatory legislative bills was passed, implementing restrictions on home schoolers. When asked why, the Minister of Education stated that if they were giving money to home schoolers they had to know who they are and have certain standards. These regulations apply to all home schoolers-not only those who receive the government funding.
Many European countries have experienced similar scenarios.
Charter Schools Increase Government Spending on Education
Charter school proponents claim that the resulting competition between educational providers will drive education costs down, while increasing the quality of education offered.
Charter schools do not charge tuition, but are funded according to their enrollment. Charter school students may be eligible for state and federal funding. There are over 5.5 million children who do not attend public schools in this country. If these children suddenly began using money from the state's treasury for their schooling, taxes would have to be raised to generate the additional revenue. It is highly unlikely that public schools would reduce their budgets in order to provide funds for private schools. Today, non-public school parents are being double taxed-they pay tuition for both public school children and their own children. With vouchers these parents would be triple taxed. In addition to footing the bill for their own children's tuition, they would pay for the public school students and the students participating in charter schools.
Alaska's I.D.E.A. program serves as a good example of the increase in government spending. According to Eddy Jeans, Finance Director at the Alaska Department of Education, Galena School District received $15,020,053 in state funds for fiscal year 2000. Of this amount, $14,093,136, or $4,104 per pupil, was received for the 3,434 students in I.D.E.A. The balance of the funds in the amount of $926,917 was intended for the 226 students who receive classroom instruction as regular on-site students.
Each student enrolled in I.D.E.A. receives an allotment averaging $1,600 per year to cover curriculum and related expenses. Considering the $4,104 per pupil received from the state, Galena School District enjoys a gross profit of over $2,500 per pupil in I.D.E.A. for a total of $8,585,000 for fiscal year 2000. What amount of this profit is reduced by I.D.E.A. administrative expenses is unknown, but there is no question that this is a moneymaking enterprise for Galena School District.
In Texas, a two-year pilot virtual charter school is being established. The money -- potentially $2.5 million -- would flow to a secular home school program founded in 1999 by William J. Bennett, K12 Education Co. (K12 is also operating virtual charter school programs in Pennsylvania and Colorado). It would receive the tax dollars as a subcontractor to Houston Gateway Academy, a charter school. The home school component of Gateway Academy, called Texas Virtual Charter School, will serve students in kindergarten, first and second grades. By September 26, 2001, the virtual charter school has so far enrolled about 300 in central and southeast Texas, including Houston and Austin. The virtual charter school could receive $5,000 for each home-schooled student. Yet surveys show the average cost for a home school program is only about $450. This sounds like a major waste of our tax dollars.
Let's Choose Freedom
Government schools are failing everywhere. They are not providing students with the moral training necessary in any society, and students continue to fall short of academic standards. Why would home school parents wish to support this system by accepting funding to participate in it?
In spite of the enticements offered by charter schools, parents should realize that charter school programs are simply creating little public schools in our homes. The teaching may take place in a private home, but the government is pulling the strings.
The soul of home schooling has its foundation built on the incredible sacrifices of many parents who risked all in order to win the right to be free from suffocating government control and to be free to teach their children according to God's ways and in obedience to His commands. God honors those who honor Him and who trust in His sovereign love and power.
We do not need the government's "free" money. The price is too high.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i]. Friesen, Lynda, "Vouchers: Free Ride or Hidden Trap?" Home School Court Report, July/August 1992, p.4.
[ii]. Riley, Richard, U.S. Secretary of Education during a September 20, 1995 radio interview, The Diane Rehm Show, National Public Radio
[iii]. Riley, Richard, U.S. Secretary of Education, "Third Annual State of American Education Address," Maplewood-Richmond Heights Senior High School; St. Louis, Missouri; February 28, 1996.
[iv]. Miller, John J., "Opting Out," The New Republic, November 30, 1992, p.13.
ICHE & CHOIS Analysis
The Siren Call:
The Dangerous Lure of the Idaho Distance Education Academy
Home schoolers across Idaho have been courted during this spring (2004) by the Idaho Distance Education Academy (I-DEA). Offering substantial financial incentives, the academy's program is designed to lure the traditional home schooling family into the "public school fold." In the opinion of the boards of both the Idaho Coalition of Home Educators (ICHE) and Christian Homeschoolers of Idaho State (CHOIS), the risks inherent in this program outweigh the financial benefits offered by this public school program. The primary risks that are of concern to these organizations are:
-- Loss of flexibility in tailoring each child's education to the academic strengths and weaknesses of that child;
-- Loss of parental autonomy and control over the child's education;
-- Loss or waiver of certain rights of the family to be free from governmental scrutiny;
-- Marginalization or elimination of spiritual component or worldview from curriculum options;
-- Increased regulation of home education arising from strings attached to public funding; and
-- The remarkably small price being offered to home educators to induce them to relinquish control of their children's education.
The program itself is offered by the White Pine School District located in Deary, Idaho. To view the Idaho program's own website, see www.idaho-dea.org. Although the program is for the moment short on details, reliable information is available. The program is a spinoff of the Interior Distance Education of Alaska program which has operated in Alaska since 1997. The Alaskan program has, in turn, been cloned in several other states. Because personnel from the Alaska program are advising those setting up the Idaho program, we can look to the Alaska program as a reliable indicator of what we can expect to see here in Idaho as the details of this program are fleshed out.
Program Summary
The premise of the program is simple: a public school district offers cash incentives to home schooling families to induce them to register with the district. The district receives a substantial sum of government funds each year (estimated at $4,000 to $4,400 under this program) for each such "enrolled" student and uses a portion of those funds to create a program of governmental management. Because the district can administer the program for far less money than the state is required to pay, the district can then keep the bulk of those funds to supplement the other funds it collects for its regularly-enrolled students.
To draw the home schoolers into this arrangement, cash incentives are offered. The incentives range from $600 per year for each kindergarten student enrolled to $1,600 per year for each 9th through 12th grade student enrolled. However, the families will not simply receive the money without controls. The funds will come only in the form of reimbursement for approved out-of-pocket expenses of the family for materials and training that are absolutely devoid of any faith-based components.
Effectively, the participation of home schoolers in this government program is bought and paid for with tax dollars. In exchange, the district gets two important commodities: they get to keep the difference between the total funds taken in and the sum of the funds paid by the district to their staff and to the parents to entice their participation, and they get credit for the academic achievement of the home schoolers that participate. In a state where the home schoolers on average score above the 80th percentile on standardized tests, adding those home educated students to this small district's data will result in a substantial jump in the average scores that can be claimed by the district. For the school district, this is a win-win situation. The district gets additional funds to spend on its two "brick and mortar" schools and their traditional students. They also get the bragging rights of raised standardized test scores.
In addition to the financial incentives, the district also promises families that enroll their children several additional perquisites that make the program look and feel more like a standard public schooling arrangement. These include:
(1) Certified teaching staff assistance;
(2) Curriculum standards;
(3) Individual Learning Plan and High School Planning Consultation;
(4) Online correspondence courses;
(5) Standardized testing;
(6) Technical support consultants; and
(7) Workshops for parents and students.
While these additional "benefits" may sound enticing, home educators should bear in mind that the academic excellence that home education has historically produced has been obtained without these programs. Indeed, the notion that home educators might benefit from adopting the practices of the public school system should be examined critically in light of the results produced in recent years by that system.
Are these rewards worth the risk for home schooling families? The boards of ICHE and CHOIS think not. Here are the reasons for their conclusions.
Loss of Flexibility
One of the hallmarks of traditional home schooling is the flexibility available to the families. Each student can be advanced at the student's own pace. That pace may vary from subject to subject. A student gifted in math, but struggling in reading, can be accelerated in math while being remediated in reading. Parents can assess each student's unique interests in order to teach to the day-to-day curiosity of the student. Teaching subjects that are currently of interest to the student yields maximal learning.
When a parent registers a student for the I-DEA program, that flexibility will be the first casualty. The public schools are all subject to assessment testing that will shortly dictate the subjects, and ultimately the curriculum, offered to each student. Curiosity-driven learning will, of necessity, yield to "by the book" learning.
This test-driven curriculum will also keep students from accelerating as home schooled students so often do. A gifted student in math may be capable of excelling in higher mathematics. But the grade level assessment tests are not designed to carefully measure those accelerated skills. Consequently, the program will tend to force the student to remain unchallenged so that maximal scores on the grade level mathematics materials are obtained.
More critically, as a student enrolled in a public school program, it will be necessary to spend excessive hours in instruction. The Idaho Administrative Code at section 08.02.01.250 requires certain minimum hours of instruction each year for public school students. Those requirements range from 450 hours per year for kindergarten students to 990 hours per year for 9th through 12th grade students. Assuming 200 school days per year, each parent will be required to ensure that each home school student under this program receives up to 5 hours of instruction per day. The failure to provide that amount of instruction may expose the parent and the child to prosecution under Idaho's habitual truancy statute, section 33-206 of the Idaho Code. It may ultimately turn out that a parent of multiple students will actually be required to provide separate instruction to each student in a manner that does not allow simultaneous instruction to satisfy these requirements. At some point, there will simply not be enough hours in the day for a parent to satisfy these standards with integrity. Home schooling parents, on the other hand are exempt from any specific hourly requirements. In fact, on average in this country, home schooling parents spend only three to four hours per day in formalized instruction.
Parents who grow weary of this massive hourly requirement will be tempted not to be entirely forthright in their time records. Beyond the personal compromise this will involve is the possibility of the harmful lessons that the children are taught as they observe this behavior by their parents.
Loss of Parental Control & Parental Rights
Idaho home educators have been blessed with freedoms that are among the best in the nation. In the absence of substantial and credible evidence of educational neglect or failure, parents are free to pursue the education of their children in the manner that to them seems best. As home schooling families enroll in the I-DEA program, they will lose much of that freedom.
First, the school district will begin to accumulate a file on each student. The file will include not only academic information, but other personal and medical information, as well. That file will be retained by the district even when the student is no longer registered with the district.
Second, the very act of enrolling the student in the district entails a waiver of certain rights enjoyed by parents and their children in the home school setting. The home will lose some of its sacrosanctity as the district begins to monitor the education being provided to the child there.
Third, it may prove difficult to withdraw children once they are logged into this program. The district will have a vested financial interest in discouraging any student from leaving the program. Those who have attended the seminars put on by the program have been told that, if they remove their children from the program before November, they will be required to repay all of the funds spent on that child under the program.
Fourth, if a child turns out to be a delayed reader, there is a risk that the child may be labeled as "learning disabled." This is a label that is difficult to ever overcome. It is also a label that potentially enables the district to collect even more money. This in turn raises the possibility that the district will make it even more difficult to withdraw that student when the parent later decides to continue the child's education without the district's assistance.
Finally, there exists a potential that social workers may have a greater right to enter the home to evaluate the children and their education. In at least a theoretical sense, each home under this program becomes a satellite operation of the White Pine School District. Just as social workers have fairly unfettered access to students in a traditional public school, they may gain additional access to enrolled home schoolers, circumventing the constitutional protections of the home from unreasonable search and seizure.
A brief analysis of the creeping regulation of families enrolled in Alaska's distance education program may be viewed at the Home School Legal Defense Association's website at http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200201240.asp.
God is Marginalized
For people of faith, the constitutional free exercise of religion will be compromised by participation in the I-DEA program.
The program is up front in acknowledging that the funds provided to the parents by the program cannot be used to purchase curriculum that includes any religious component. That said, the program's promoters are quick to point out that parents, at their own expense, may acquire and use such materials as a complement to the nonreligious materials provided under the program. Such parents will be required to teach such subjects twice. They will, in the process, create confused children who will be unable to understand why the duplication and inconsistency is necessary. In short, the program will send the wrong message to the children of parents for whom the spiritual motivation is central. And in time the likelihood of teaching two curricula will become more and more remote.
How much is enough money to justify the skewing of our children's curriculum to exclude the normal and natural references to God and traditional notions of right and wrong?
The "Accountability" Juggernaut
Every expenditure of government funds requires some measure of accountability. We expect such. And as taxpayers, if accountability is lacking in any governmental program, we will be the first to demand it.
In Idaho for years, home schoolers have fought valiantly to defeat proposals to register and test our students. Those battles have repeatedly been won in significant part because we do not take anything from the government. Our legislators have respected our willingness to bear the cost of teaching our children without taking public funds.
With enrollment in the I-DEA program, that strength goes out the window. Suddenly, home schoolers are the recipients and beneficiaries of public funds. Legislators will be quick to impose additional oversight. That is precisely the pattern that has been imposed in Alaska. The IDEA program there initially included significant freedom and flexibility. Gradually those freedoms have been curtailed as calls for "accountability" have gained traction. The same will occur in Idaho. And sadly, those calls will encompass not only those families enrolled in this program, but all traditional home schoolers, as well. The lines that have historically separated public school students from home schoolers will be sufficiently blurred to make it significantly more difficult to maintain our precious home schooling freedoms.
Less than Minimum Wage
While "free" money is always tempting, consider the cost in this case.
Under this program, the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act will require the parents of each enrolled student to spend 450 to 990 hours per year in instructional activities. In exchange for those hours, the parents will receive between $600 and $1,600 per year. That works out to an effective compensation rate of just $1.33 to 1.62 per hour, less than one-third of the federal minimum wage. Stated differently, the government has bought the right to influence or control what, when, and how you teach your children for just $1.62 per hour or less. Surely you can do better than that.
Participation in this program will also create a dependency within a family's budget. Once a family comes to expect and rely on these government funds, it will become more difficult to suffer the financial consequences of withdrawing from the program.
Consider that the average home school family spends just $450 per year teaching each child. Where is the wisdom or ethics of spending up to $1,600 of taxpayer funds to teach that same child from government-controlled materials? Why is it that we are willing to spend more profligately simply because the money is not "our own?" Is this not poor stewardship? Does it not send the wrong message to our children? Since we feel so strongly about the education of our children that we make major lifestyle decisions so that we can control that process, why would we then turn around and sell that right for a bowl of lentils? In the final analysis, are we willing to place the decisions of the school district above our own wisdom in guiding the education of our children?
Conclusions
Ultimately, home educators in Idaho are invited to voluntarily place themselves under the same public school system that has produced such mediocre academic results for its own students. Assurances are given that families will retain their freedoms to do things almost the same way they have always done them. And the bait on the hook is "free money," the commodity that always seems to be in short supply.
We understand that there are families whose financial situation is strained, even desperate. As one views the available educational choices, this program may seem like the best option. But remember that others have home schooled with great success with no more than a library card.
The boards of both ICHE and CHOIS strongly encourage their members and all home schoolers to carefully consider this issue. Think about the tremendous freedoms that we currently enjoy here in Idaho in teaching our children at home without any government interference or oversight. It is unavoidable that the acceptance of government funds will result in a loss of freedom, initially for those families enrolling their children, but ultimately for all traditional home schoolers. That loss of freedom will be accompanied by a loss of flexibility as the government turns up the regulations on the participating families.
Like the sailors who learned too late the dangers of yielding to the sirens' song, Idaho home educators must study this issue carefully to avoid inadvertently imperiling not only their own family and freedoms, but those of all home schoolers in the state, as well.
For additional articles on government-assisted home schooling go to: http://www.consideringhomeschooling.com/GovernmentHomeschooling.aspx
VIRTUAL CHARTER SCHOOLS: THE BATTLE FOR THE SOUL OF THE HOME SCHOOL MOVEMENT
By Chris Klicka
Senior Counsel of the Home School Legal Defense Association
It seems everyone with school-aged children is talking about charter schools. Many are thinking, "This deal is too good to pass up: I can have my children educated outside of the public school system and have the government still pay the bill!" They believe it is the best of both worlds. Charter schools along with educational vouchers appear to be harmless since parents are only reacquiring their tax money.
Is it really that simple? Let's look at charter schools, especially virtual charter schools, and vouchers a little closer. Let's look at them from the perspective of freedom-- not from the perspective of what "freebies" we can receive from the government.
I am afraid the soul of the home schooling movement is at stake. How we respond to virtual charter schools and vouchers will determine the extent home schooling remains free from government controls in the future.
To accurately understand this issue, we must first define the terms.
What Are Vouchers and Charter Schools?
Government educational vouchers constitute a legislatively specified amount of government money given to parents to spend on their child's education expenses. The money often can be used for public or private education. At present, there are only a handful of state government voucher programs for education in existence. The courts have struck down most of them. No federal educational voucher program exists. . . Yet.
Supporters of government educational vouchers summarize the benefits this way. Vouchers create competition, giving private education programs an "even playing field" when competing with government funded public schools. This, they say, will improve the quality of all education programs. Besides, it is the parents' money in the first place and they are merely getting their tax dollars back.
A much more common educational program is the "charter school." "Charter schools" are a type of public schools. The school is established by a "charter" that lists the school's mission, educational program, and methods of assessment. Charter schools answer to the state or local school board for accessing the students and verifying academic progress. They are completely government funded.
Most charter schools operate as an institutional school, I.e. A "brick and mortar" school that children actually attend. Those types of charter schools do not really affect home schoolers. The "virtual charter schools," on the other hand, greatly impact the home school movement. Other names for these type of charter schools are "on-line" school or "cyber school" that operate as home school programs.
Charter schools now exist in 37 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. The Center for Education Reform estimates on its website that there are over 2,000 charter schools operating with more that 500,000 enrolled in these schools.
Supporters of charter schools claim that creating competition in the educational market will result in more options and a higher quality education. The idea is that if public charter schools draw enough students away from the regular public schools, the resulting lack of funds will force public schools to come up with creative alternatives to bring students (and the funding that comes with them) back into the system. Additionally, proponents claim that the charter schools provides an innovative alternative of schooling that allows creative approaches to teaching, freed from the strict rules and regulation of the public school system. They point out that charter schools or virtual charter schools provide a protective environment-a smaller "private" school or home environment--where students can pursue their own styles of learning.
An increasing number of home schoolers are examining the possibility of enrolling full-time or part-time in "cyber schools" or home school programs operated by these public charter schools or directly by regular public schools. Charter schools operate on taxpayer dollars, so there is virtually no cost for those enrolled. Other advantages cited by home schoolers to participation in these "virtual" charter schools are the accredited high school diploma, free computer, Internet access, software, and support by certified teachers.
With government vouchers and virtual charter schools and public schools offering all of these benefits, we at the Home School Legal Defense Association often gets questions of why we would oppose such excellent educational options.
Freedom is the Answer
Freedom is the answer. Freedom, I believe, is more important than government "freebies."
Over the last 16 years, I have worked at the Home School Legal Defense Association helping to win the right of families to home school with minimal regulations. Many of these battles took place in the courts and legislatures throughout the country. I saw first-hand the tremendous sacrifice and risk parents took to follow God's leading to train their children at home. These families faced fines, jail, and even the threat of the state taking their children away. The families held on to their convictions and God honored them in an incredible way. After 15 years of litigation and legislative battles, we won the right to home school in all 50 states.
Of course, the battle to maintain this freedom continues as school officials harass home school families with illegal requirements and teacher's unions and other professional education organizations have legislation introduced to restrict home school freedoms. A survey by the American School Board Journal in February 1997, of over 1000 public school executives found that 71 percent did not believe home schoolers were regulated enough! Ninety-five percent of the superintendents and principals believed anything is better than home schooling.
The National Education Association passes a resolution each year condemning home schooling and urging for legislation to be enacted in each state to require home schools to taught by certified teachers and have their curriculum approved by the state. The prejudices against home schooling have not disappeared.
But our hard-fought freedom remains intact for now. Private home schooling, with no help from the government, is thriving. The studies all show home schoolers on the average are academically above average from the elementary level all the way through college. I document this and the general success of home schooling in my book, "Home Schooling: The Right Choice," available from HSLDA at 540-338-5600 or www.hslda.org. Home schoolers have earned the right to be left alone.
All of this success has been achieved without the government's money. We have had many victories before the Congress and the state legislatures because we are not asking for a handout, but simply to be left alone.
This liberty is at risk if home schoolers begin crawling back to the government to drink from the public trough. This is the same government that once heavily restricted or prohibited home schooling altogether. If we take the government's money or services through virtual charter schools, we will become dependent on government money. As the controls are added, we will not be able to break free.
As home schoolers "yoke" together with the public schools through virtual charter school programs and cyber schools, the public schools and the state will once again dictate to us our curriculum, teacher qualifications, and methods.
This is not idle conjecture. It is already happening.
Government Home Schooling in Alaska
It is important to remember the old and true adage: "There is no such thing as a free government service." Government money always comes with government strings. Governments will demand accountability for funding. States want to be assured that no fraud is involved and that the monies are not used for an improper purpose. The types of regulations over parents who receive funding will depend on the type of government in power. The most common concern for the government is that the children learn certain concepts and progress academically.
Our government has the responsibility to spend our money frugally. For the government to give money to home schoolers to participate with charter schools without any conditions would be irresponsible.
Virtual charter schools must be accountable to the state or local school authorities. In addition to dictating the curriculum and teaching styles, they can impose requirements on the parents far beyond that which is required by state home school laws, in order to assure that the parents are teaching the children "appropriately."
The Alaskan government program is typical of many virtual charter school home school programs springing up throughout the country.
On June 4, 1997, Alaska enacted the best home school law in the nation. Alaska's law has no teaching qualifications for parents, no regulation at any level of government, no notice to anyone of the parents' decision to conduct the home education, no registration with the state, no reporting to anyone of any information about the home education program, no testing of the children, no required subjects, and no evaluation of the program by anyone.
Despite having more freedom than any other state, a majority of home schooling families are choosing to enroll their children in a public school program known as Interior Distance Education of Alaska (I.D.E.A.). Interestingly, this statewide program of correspondence study from the Galena School District was begun in June of 1997, just at the time that the new home school law was enacted. According to the information disseminated by Galena School District, the desire of the public school officials is "to provide educational, emotional, intellectual, and financial support to those who would like to work in partnership with a public school district."
Families who enroll their children in I.D.E.A. are provided curriculum materials, use of a computer with access to the Internet and assistance from a certified teacher, among other services. However, public funds may not be used to purchase curriculum materials for teaching core subjects if the materials are distinctively religious in content. (Ironically, one of the reasons most often given by parents who have decided to teach their children at home is that they object to the atheistic content of public school curricula.)
The dangers of these types of government home school programs are clearly apparent in a letter from Carol Simpson, the Alaska Department of Education coordinator of their home school program.
This is a letter to a Christian speaker and author who was scheduled to sell books and speak at 5 IDEA meetings throughout Alaska. At that last minute, it was determined her books were "Christian" and could not be sold or promoted at the IDEA conferences. Nor could home schoolers get reimbursed if they purchased these "Christian" books for their home school program. Alaska is in the process of creating an approved list of secular home school books. Also notice from the letter how gradual the changes have been. At first, the government paid for Christian home school textbooks. Once 75% of home schoolers in Alaska became dependent on the government funds, the rules have changed.
On September 11, 2001, Carol Simpson wrote,
" . . .A brief note of history is in order. When IDEA started in summer of 1997, we began from the premise that homeschooling parents know their kids best and should be free to use any curricular materials that they deemed most appropriate. We bought nearly anything anyone wanted, including Bob Jones, Alpha Omega, A Beka, etc. By November of that year, the Department of Education (DOE) made a new regulation prohibiting school districts from purchasing religious curricular materials. We have since then maintained the policy that the parents can use whatever they like, although their purchases are now more restricted."
"The Attorney General of the State of Alaska advised us that we could not purchase anything that is an advocacy of a sectarian or denominational doctrine. In other words, we are prohibited from purchasing anything that advocates a particular religious viewpoint to the exclusion of others. It is often a fine line, and no doubt we often err either way. . ."
"Additionally, the state can audit a school district anytime they like and do so on a regular basis. IDEA was the first program to do what we do: operate state-wide, offer parents the freedom to choose their own curricular materials, require little reporting, encourage individuality in education, etc. IDEA was wildly successful, going from 0 students in mid-June 1997 to 1157 students 10 weeks later. Now, of course, there are many similar programs. "
"As a result, the state announced last winter that they would begin comprehensive audits of each of these type of programs. They began with two smaller programs (we are by far the largest) last spring and will audit us at some point this year. We have been warned several times by a high official in the DOE that we need to be extra-careful about the issue of buying "religious" curricula, as that is an area that they are targeting, and the rumor is that we still buy things that the state has disallowed."
The government home school coordinator then proceeded to tell the home school speaker who they had invited to speak at their 5 government home school conferences that she could not sell her books at the conferences. She explained, "I realize that your books are not "Christian books" and that any religious expression in them is incidental, not the focus of the book. However, we must be strict in our obedience to the letter and spirit of the law, honoring our governmental authorities . . . we must be careful not to give the appearance of promoting sectarian materials. As such, we cannot allow you to sell or promote these books in workshops that we are paying for . . .. Also, we want to avoid the appearance of promoting sectarian materials through your workshops as well. Please do not include references to faith or an emphasis on the inclusion of Biblical teaching in your presentations."
This letter very plainly explains the danger to home schooler's freedom posed by these government home school programs.
I have talked to some parents who tell me the various ways they circumvent this by still use the state government's money to buy Christian textbooks. The dependence on government money is encouraging people to lie!
The refusal to reimburse for any Christian curriculum is not the only problem. Additionally, students in grades 4, 8, and 11 must take the standardized tests that Alaska uses for public school students at a test site designated by public school officials, and the tests must be administered by a certified teacher approved by the Galena School District. All I.D.E.A. students are required to take any assessment mandated by the Alaska State Department of Education of public school students in grades 5, 7, and 10. As further evaluation of the student, each parent must report to Galena School District the progress of all students each semester. High school students are required to submit to a yearly interview with a representative from I.D.E.A. in order to establish a transcript.
In final analysis, the "freebies" are not so free after all. The price is actually too high. The price is a gradual but steady loss of freedom, control, and independence.
Home Schooling in Name Only
Despite all of the attractions for home schoolers, virtual charter schools are supporting home schooling in name only. Parents who enroll their children in these virtual charter schools are actually creating small public schools in their home.
As seen in the Alaska example above, most charter schools will not allow funding to be used to purchase material that is religious in content. Thus, parents that would normally incorporate their faith into their teaching curriculum will only be able to do so at an extra expense to them.
Last week, I talked to a Christian lady who is a teacher in a large 'brick and mortar"charter school program in Colorado. She said many Christian families are using the program and enrolling their children in the charter school. I asked her if the teachers could teach the Bible. She said, "No but we can teach virtues." I asked if she was allowed to teach the children about salvation and she said, "We are not supposed to." If you cannot teach the Bible and the children about Jesus, what is the point of Christian education?
In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, an educational voucher program has been operating for several years. It has been touted as one of the best examples of a successful government educational program. What many do not realize is that any Christian school that enrolls students who are using the government vouchers must comply with over 300 additional regulations. Two of the requirements even prohibit the Christian school from mandating that these children with vouchers attend chapel or Bible class!
Is this compromise worth it? If we turn our back on Jesus Christ and His command to proclaim the gospel simply for government money, how much longer will God withhold His judgment?
Home school parents originally fought to be separate from the public schools in order to have the right to choose the curriculum that they believe would be best for their child. Parents removed their children from the public school system because of the non-christian curriculum. So why would they want to go back to the same humanistic material? But this is happening with home schoolers who enroll in charter schools or public school programs for home schooling.
With little power in choosing the curriculum, parents in charter schools also face limited ability to incorporate creative teaching methods. The specific curriculum requirements often demand parents to 'stick to the schedule' dictated by the public school, rather than use creativity in complimenting their child's learning style.
HSLDA members who have participated in virtual charter schools complain of this very thing. As one California home schooler shared:
"Having been in a car accident and having been limited in my physical capabilities, I found myself not as able of getting my kids out as much as I felt they needed. Home educating independently for 3 years I was reluctant to try a charter school but I thought, "How bad could it be? I'd have access to educational materials and my children would have an opportunity to meet other home educated children." At first it was exciting, though enrolling was very institutional. Then it came time to meeting with a teacher. We sat and talked and I stated that I had been home educating independently for 3 years and was not interested in meeting weekly and that I would bring their work in monthly as they are required to turn in work at least monthly. That worked out great the first month. The next month however the teacher wanted to plan out what we'd be doing for the following month. After being independent I was not interested in being told what my kids would be learning, so we agreed we'd do the work we wanted and would write up the plans retrospectively. This was not ideal but do-able since the kids enjoyed the Monday co-op (classes) and fieldtrips."
"The next time we met, I took the kid's work but left the children behind. I never read or signed anything stating that my children had to be present. To me, turning in the work was the requirement. It soon became apparent that the teachers were required to talk to the children at these visits and assess them not only on their academics, but also on their physical appearance...looking for signs of abuse and/or neglect at their discretion. I had gotten so used to living my own life and had forgotten just how involved the government is in the lives of families enrolled in public schools."
" Make no doubt about it, a charter school is a public school...it's home schooling in technical term only. Enrolling in a charter school will give you more freedom than the traditional public schools, but still strips you of the independent responsibility of educating our own children. It is still an institution, which believes we need interference from trained government agents that we are incapable of educating our own children."
"The principal was very eager to work with me, bending the many rules. I appreciated her efforts greatly. However, I found that we were limited in what we would learn and forced to learn in the "one size fits all" methods of the schools in which I desperately avoid. It's my opinion also that charter schools try very hard to embrace all philosophies of home education; however, they are still run by "government agents" paid to spy on us, and dictate our parenting and educational skills. They still work under the framework of the "one size fits all" mind set, and some teachers forcefully dictate (assign) the work. We found ourselves so consumed in getting the work done that my children were not retaining any of the subjects. It was simply a race to get it done and turned in, stereotypical of schools. To me academic work should be savored to allow them to retain it and enjoy it."
"In a charter school we found that the kids are still categorized by age, they maintained their institutional mindset. "You're this age, in this grade, you should be doing this or that." "You're in fifth grade, oh you need to be studying American history, ancient history's next year." I found this train of thought to be very limiting. Charter schools are still public schools, which are basically training kids to do well on standardized tests. Their first priority is their precious ADA; they want their $4,000 per child. Secondly, they still program the children for taking standardized tests to get good results, typical of schools."
This home schooler shared further that when she finally tried to remove her children from the charter school program, she was contacted repeatedly by Child Welfare Services demanding that she place her children in school!
Is government money worth it? Are not these the types of controls we cast off with much sacrifice and risk in the 1980's? Are we willing forge new chains to limit our liberty?
Most home school parents want to be free to educate their children without this kind of government oversight.
Top Education Officials Have Warned Against Vouchers
Although we differ from the philosophy of many of the former Federal secretaries of education, their statements are valuable since they evidence the intent behind government funding of private education. Lamar Alexander, former Secretary of Education under George Bush explained the transformation of private education that was publicly funded when he said:" a public school would become any school that receives students who brought with them public monies . . .[i]
Former U.S. Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, had strong reservations about vouchers and government funding of private education. No doubt, his reason for opposing government funding of private education was mainly to protect the current public school system, but he has some interesting warnings for private schools:
You have to be accountable with public tax dollars . . . when it comes to taking federal tax dollars and giving those to parents and then having the absence of accountability as far as their children's education . . . If you have accountability, then you lose the private and parochial nature of those schools . . . It's bad, we think, for private schools and parochial schools. It takes away from them the private and parochial strength, which is being totally free from any federal regulations . . .[ii]
[Vouchers] threaten the very nature of private and parochial schools. It makes them less private and less parochial.[iii]
Chester Finn Jr., former Assistant Secretary of Education under Ronald Reagan, declared how government controls were inevitable: "There is no doubt in my mind that there will be some new regulations with voucher plans."[iv]
If the highest public school bureaucrats in the nation recognize the loss of freedom to government funded private education how can we deny it?
The Experience of Other Nations
Other nations have experienced the effects of government funding. Private education has almost completely disappeared.
For example, in Australia, over 10 years, private school and Christian schools took more and ore government funds. The regulations gradually increased until the difference between public schools and private schools is non-existent. Home schooling in Australia is the last bastion of educational freedom.
In South Africa, in 1996 their new National Education Act was passed that officially transformed all publicly funded private schools into public schools.
In Alberta, Canada home schoolers enjoyed more liberty than almost all of the other provinces. Then several years ago, legislation was passed giving home schoolers $500 per child in government funds. The very next year, one of the most regulatory legislative bills was passed, implementing restrictions on home schoolers. When asked why, the Minister of Education stated that if they were giving money to home schoolers they had to know who they are and have certain standards. These regulations apply to all home schoolers-not only those who receive the government funding.
Many European countries have experienced similar scenarios.
Charter Schools Increase Government Spending on Education
Charter school proponents claim that the resulting competition between educational providers will drive education costs down, while increasing the quality of education offered.
Charter schools do not charge tuition, but are funded according to their enrollment. Charter school students may be eligible for state and federal funding. There are over 5.5 million children who do not attend public schools in this country. If these children suddenly began using money from the state's treasury for their schooling, taxes would have to be raised to generate the additional revenue. It is highly unlikely that public schools would reduce their budgets in order to provide funds for private schools. Today, non-public school parents are being double taxed-they pay tuition for both public school children and their own children. With vouchers these parents would be triple taxed. In addition to footing the bill for their own children's tuition, they would pay for the public school students and the students participating in charter schools.
Alaska's I.D.E.A. program serves as a good example of the increase in government spending. According to Eddy Jeans, Finance Director at the Alaska Department of Education, Galena School District received $15,020,053 in state funds for fiscal year 2000. Of this amount, $14,093,136, or $4,104 per pupil, was received for the 3,434 students in I.D.E.A. The balance of the funds in the amount of $926,917 was intended for the 226 students who receive classroom instruction as regular on-site students.
Each student enrolled in I.D.E.A. receives an allotment averaging $1,600 per year to cover curriculum and related expenses. Considering the $4,104 per pupil received from the state, Galena School District enjoys a gross profit of over $2,500 per pupil in I.D.E.A. for a total of $8,585,000 for fiscal year 2000. What amount of this profit is reduced by I.D.E.A. administrative expenses is unknown, but there is no question that this is a moneymaking enterprise for Galena School District.
In Texas, a two-year pilot virtual charter school is being established. The money -- potentially $2.5 million -- would flow to a secular home school program founded in 1999 by William J. Bennett, K12 Education Co. (K12 is also operating virtual charter school programs in Pennsylvania and Colorado). It would receive the tax dollars as a subcontractor to Houston Gateway Academy, a charter school. The home school component of Gateway Academy, called Texas Virtual Charter School, will serve students in kindergarten, first and second grades. By September 26, 2001, the virtual charter school has so far enrolled about 300 in central and southeast Texas, including Houston and Austin. The virtual charter school could receive $5,000 for each home-schooled student. Yet surveys show the average cost for a home school program is only about $450. This sounds like a major waste of our tax dollars.
Let's Choose Freedom
Government schools are failing everywhere. They are not providing students with the moral training necessary in any society, and students continue to fall short of academic standards. Why would home school parents wish to support this system by accepting funding to participate in it?
In spite of the enticements offered by charter schools, parents should realize that charter school programs are simply creating little public schools in our homes. The teaching may take place in a private home, but the government is pulling the strings.
The soul of home schooling has its foundation built on the incredible sacrifices of many parents who risked all in order to win the right to be free from suffocating government control and to be free to teach their children according to God's ways and in obedience to His commands. God honors those who honor Him and who trust in His sovereign love and power.
We do not need the government's "free" money. The price is too high.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[i]. Friesen, Lynda, "Vouchers: Free Ride or Hidden Trap?" Home School Court Report, July/August 1992, p.4.
[ii]. Riley, Richard, U.S. Secretary of Education during a September 20, 1995 radio interview, The Diane Rehm Show, National Public Radio
[iii]. Riley, Richard, U.S. Secretary of Education, "Third Annual State of American Education Address," Maplewood-Richmond Heights Senior High School; St. Louis, Missouri; February 28, 1996.
[iv]. Miller, John J., "Opting Out," The New Republic, November 30, 1992, p.13.
ICHE & CHOIS Analysis
The Siren Call:
The Dangerous Lure of the Idaho Distance Education Academy
Home schoolers across Idaho have been courted during this spring (2004) by the Idaho Distance Education Academy (I-DEA). Offering substantial financial incentives, the academy's program is designed to lure the traditional home schooling family into the "public school fold." In the opinion of the boards of both the Idaho Coalition of Home Educators (ICHE) and Christian Homeschoolers of Idaho State (CHOIS), the risks inherent in this program outweigh the financial benefits offered by this public school program. The primary risks that are of concern to these organizations are:
-- Loss of flexibility in tailoring each child's education to the academic strengths and weaknesses of that child;
-- Loss of parental autonomy and control over the child's education;
-- Loss or waiver of certain rights of the family to be free from governmental scrutiny;
-- Marginalization or elimination of spiritual component or worldview from curriculum options;
-- Increased regulation of home education arising from strings attached to public funding; and
-- The remarkably small price being offered to home educators to induce them to relinquish control of their children's education.
The program itself is offered by the White Pine School District located in Deary, Idaho. To view the Idaho program's own website, see www.idaho-dea.org. Although the program is for the moment short on details, reliable information is available. The program is a spinoff of the Interior Distance Education of Alaska program which has operated in Alaska since 1997. The Alaskan program has, in turn, been cloned in several other states. Because personnel from the Alaska program are advising those setting up the Idaho program, we can look to the Alaska program as a reliable indicator of what we can expect to see here in Idaho as the details of this program are fleshed out.
Program Summary
The premise of the program is simple: a public school district offers cash incentives to home schooling families to induce them to register with the district. The district receives a substantial sum of government funds each year (estimated at $4,000 to $4,400 under this program) for each such "enrolled" student and uses a portion of those funds to create a program of governmental management. Because the district can administer the program for far less money than the state is required to pay, the district can then keep the bulk of those funds to supplement the other funds it collects for its regularly-enrolled students.
To draw the home schoolers into this arrangement, cash incentives are offered. The incentives range from $600 per year for each kindergarten student enrolled to $1,600 per year for each 9th through 12th grade student enrolled. However, the families will not simply receive the money without controls. The funds will come only in the form of reimbursement for approved out-of-pocket expenses of the family for materials and training that are absolutely devoid of any faith-based components.
Effectively, the participation of home schoolers in this government program is bought and paid for with tax dollars. In exchange, the district gets two important commodities: they get to keep the difference between the total funds taken in and the sum of the funds paid by the district to their staff and to the parents to entice their participation, and they get credit for the academic achievement of the home schoolers that participate. In a state where the home schoolers on average score above the 80th percentile on standardized tests, adding those home educated students to this small district's data will result in a substantial jump in the average scores that can be claimed by the district. For the school district, this is a win-win situation. The district gets additional funds to spend on its two "brick and mortar" schools and their traditional students. They also get the bragging rights of raised standardized test scores.
In addition to the financial incentives, the district also promises families that enroll their children several additional perquisites that make the program look and feel more like a standard public schooling arrangement. These include:
(1) Certified teaching staff assistance;
(2) Curriculum standards;
(3) Individual Learning Plan and High School Planning Consultation;
(4) Online correspondence courses;
(5) Standardized testing;
(6) Technical support consultants; and
(7) Workshops for parents and students.
While these additional "benefits" may sound enticing, home educators should bear in mind that the academic excellence that home education has historically produced has been obtained without these programs. Indeed, the notion that home educators might benefit from adopting the practices of the public school system should be examined critically in light of the results produced in recent years by that system.
Are these rewards worth the risk for home schooling families? The boards of ICHE and CHOIS think not. Here are the reasons for their conclusions.
Loss of Flexibility
One of the hallmarks of traditional home schooling is the flexibility available to the families. Each student can be advanced at the student's own pace. That pace may vary from subject to subject. A student gifted in math, but struggling in reading, can be accelerated in math while being remediated in reading. Parents can assess each student's unique interests in order to teach to the day-to-day curiosity of the student. Teaching subjects that are currently of interest to the student yields maximal learning.
When a parent registers a student for the I-DEA program, that flexibility will be the first casualty. The public schools are all subject to assessment testing that will shortly dictate the subjects, and ultimately the curriculum, offered to each student. Curiosity-driven learning will, of necessity, yield to "by the book" learning.
This test-driven curriculum will also keep students from accelerating as home schooled students so often do. A gifted student in math may be capable of excelling in higher mathematics. But the grade level assessment tests are not designed to carefully measure those accelerated skills. Consequently, the program will tend to force the student to remain unchallenged so that maximal scores on the grade level mathematics materials are obtained.
More critically, as a student enrolled in a public school program, it will be necessary to spend excessive hours in instruction. The Idaho Administrative Code at section 08.02.01.250 requires certain minimum hours of instruction each year for public school students. Those requirements range from 450 hours per year for kindergarten students to 990 hours per year for 9th through 12th grade students. Assuming 200 school days per year, each parent will be required to ensure that each home school student under this program receives up to 5 hours of instruction per day. The failure to provide that amount of instruction may expose the parent and the child to prosecution under Idaho's habitual truancy statute, section 33-206 of the Idaho Code. It may ultimately turn out that a parent of multiple students will actually be required to provide separate instruction to each student in a manner that does not allow simultaneous instruction to satisfy these requirements. At some point, there will simply not be enough hours in the day for a parent to satisfy these standards with integrity. Home schooling parents, on the other hand are exempt from any specific hourly requirements. In fact, on average in this country, home schooling parents spend only three to four hours per day in formalized instruction.
Parents who grow weary of this massive hourly requirement will be tempted not to be entirely forthright in their time records. Beyond the personal compromise this will involve is the possibility of the harmful lessons that the children are taught as they observe this behavior by their parents.
Loss of Parental Control & Parental Rights
Idaho home educators have been blessed with freedoms that are among the best in the nation. In the absence of substantial and credible evidence of educational neglect or failure, parents are free to pursue the education of their children in the manner that to them seems best. As home schooling families enroll in the I-DEA program, they will lose much of that freedom.
First, the school district will begin to accumulate a file on each student. The file will include not only academic information, but other personal and medical information, as well. That file will be retained by the district even when the student is no longer registered with the district.
Second, the very act of enrolling the student in the district entails a waiver of certain rights enjoyed by parents and their children in the home school setting. The home will lose some of its sacrosanctity as the district begins to monitor the education being provided to the child there.
Third, it may prove difficult to withdraw children once they are logged into this program. The district will have a vested financial interest in discouraging any student from leaving the program. Those who have attended the seminars put on by the program have been told that, if they remove their children from the program before November, they will be required to repay all of the funds spent on that child under the program.
Fourth, if a child turns out to be a delayed reader, there is a risk that the child may be labeled as "learning disabled." This is a label that is difficult to ever overcome. It is also a label that potentially enables the district to collect even more money. This in turn raises the possibility that the district will make it even more difficult to withdraw that student when the parent later decides to continue the child's education without the district's assistance.
Finally, there exists a potential that social workers may have a greater right to enter the home to evaluate the children and their education. In at least a theoretical sense, each home under this program becomes a satellite operation of the White Pine School District. Just as social workers have fairly unfettered access to students in a traditional public school, they may gain additional access to enrolled home schoolers, circumventing the constitutional protections of the home from unreasonable search and seizure.
A brief analysis of the creeping regulation of families enrolled in Alaska's distance education program may be viewed at the Home School Legal Defense Association's website at http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200201240.asp.
God is Marginalized
For people of faith, the constitutional free exercise of religion will be compromised by participation in the I-DEA program.
The program is up front in acknowledging that the funds provided to the parents by the program cannot be used to purchase curriculum that includes any religious component. That said, the program's promoters are quick to point out that parents, at their own expense, may acquire and use such materials as a complement to the nonreligious materials provided under the program. Such parents will be required to teach such subjects twice. They will, in the process, create confused children who will be unable to understand why the duplication and inconsistency is necessary. In short, the program will send the wrong message to the children of parents for whom the spiritual motivation is central. And in time the likelihood of teaching two curricula will become more and more remote.
How much is enough money to justify the skewing of our children's curriculum to exclude the normal and natural references to God and traditional notions of right and wrong?
The "Accountability" Juggernaut
Every expenditure of government funds requires some measure of accountability. We expect such. And as taxpayers, if accountability is lacking in any governmental program, we will be the first to demand it.
In Idaho for years, home schoolers have fought valiantly to defeat proposals to register and test our students. Those battles have repeatedly been won in significant part because we do not take anything from the government. Our legislators have respected our willingness to bear the cost of teaching our children without taking public funds.
With enrollment in the I-DEA program, that strength goes out the window. Suddenly, home schoolers are the recipients and beneficiaries of public funds. Legislators will be quick to impose additional oversight. That is precisely the pattern that has been imposed in Alaska. The IDEA program there initially included significant freedom and flexibility. Gradually those freedoms have been curtailed as calls for "accountability" have gained traction. The same will occur in Idaho. And sadly, those calls will encompass not only those families enrolled in this program, but all traditional home schoolers, as well. The lines that have historically separated public school students from home schoolers will be sufficiently blurred to make it significantly more difficult to maintain our precious home schooling freedoms.
Less than Minimum Wage
While "free" money is always tempting, consider the cost in this case.
Under this program, the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act will require the parents of each enrolled student to spend 450 to 990 hours per year in instructional activities. In exchange for those hours, the parents will receive between $600 and $1,600 per year. That works out to an effective compensation rate of just $1.33 to 1.62 per hour, less than one-third of the federal minimum wage. Stated differently, the government has bought the right to influence or control what, when, and how you teach your children for just $1.62 per hour or less. Surely you can do better than that.
Participation in this program will also create a dependency within a family's budget. Once a family comes to expect and rely on these government funds, it will become more difficult to suffer the financial consequences of withdrawing from the program.
Consider that the average home school family spends just $450 per year teaching each child. Where is the wisdom or ethics of spending up to $1,600 of taxpayer funds to teach that same child from government-controlled materials? Why is it that we are willing to spend more profligately simply because the money is not "our own?" Is this not poor stewardship? Does it not send the wrong message to our children? Since we feel so strongly about the education of our children that we make major lifestyle decisions so that we can control that process, why would we then turn around and sell that right for a bowl of lentils? In the final analysis, are we willing to place the decisions of the school district above our own wisdom in guiding the education of our children?
Conclusions
Ultimately, home educators in Idaho are invited to voluntarily place themselves under the same public school system that has produced such mediocre academic results for its own students. Assurances are given that families will retain their freedoms to do things almost the same way they have always done them. And the bait on the hook is "free money," the commodity that always seems to be in short supply.
We understand that there are families whose financial situation is strained, even desperate. As one views the available educational choices, this program may seem like the best option. But remember that others have home schooled with great success with no more than a library card.
The boards of both ICHE and CHOIS strongly encourage their members and all home schoolers to carefully consider this issue. Think about the tremendous freedoms that we currently enjoy here in Idaho in teaching our children at home without any government interference or oversight. It is unavoidable that the acceptance of government funds will result in a loss of freedom, initially for those families enrolling their children, but ultimately for all traditional home schoolers. That loss of freedom will be accompanied by a loss of flexibility as the government turns up the regulations on the participating families.
Like the sailors who learned too late the dangers of yielding to the sirens' song, Idaho home educators must study this issue carefully to avoid inadvertently imperiling not only their own family and freedoms, but those of all home schoolers in the state, as well.
For additional articles on government-assisted home schooling go to: http://www.consideringhomeschooling.com/GovernmentHomeschooling.aspx
