"California courts have held that parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children"

"California courts have held that under provisions in the Education Code, parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children," Justice Croskey said.

If California didn't ban homeschooling, what, exactly did they do?

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/JohnS...

This wouldn't surprise me. Its ok though , your child will get plenty of education on wearing their pants backwards day, and selling candy bars. Ahhh to live in America. Now if we can only get the schools to pay for our kids hospital bills, and the food they eat every week, then we will have it made.

Stupid. I was told that 鈥淓verything loose rolls west.鈥?They were right. What California is doing is unconstitutional under so many rights. The State knows better then parents? I think not.

If you read the court decision rather than the diatribes that take statements out of context, you would see what they did.

First of all, this was a ruling by a court - not an action by the state of CA to ban homeschooling.

Second, the appeal claimed that the trial court should have ordered the children to public school; the trial court did not do so because it believed that parents have a constitutional right to educate their children at home; the statement above that you quoted was the appeals court saying it did not find such a constitutional right.

Nor did the court say homeschooling was illegal in CA. It said: "It is clear to us that enrollment and attendance in a public full-time day school is required by California law for minor children unless (1) the child is enrolled in a private full-time day school and actually attends that private school, (2) the child is tutored by a person holding a valid state teaching credential for the grade being taught, or (3) one of the other few statutory exemptions to compulsory public school attendance (Ed. Code, 搂 48220 et seq.) applies to the child. Because the parents in this case have not demonstrated that any of these exemptions apply to their children, we will grant the petition for extraordinary writ."

If the court had held that there WAS a constitutional right to homeschool, then a parent couldn't be prevented from homeschooling their child however they wanted to - even if their idea of "homeschooling" was 12 hours a day learning the Koran by heart.

Since they ruled - as has always been the law - that there is no such right, that means that the State can legally regulate homeschooling.

If you want to homeschool your kids in CA, there are three ways to legally do it.

1) You can be a certificated teacher yourself.
2) You can register your home as a private school. Private schools do not have to use certificated teachers, but there are inspection, registration, testing, and paperwork requirements.
3) You can enroll your child in an 'off-campus private school'. This is the most common method.

There are dozens of these in CA, ranging from ones that concentrate solely on academics - with various different areas of emphasis such as science or arts, or concentrating on prep for a specific career such as medicine, to religious schools, to some that promote certain specialist educational theories.

The school provides you, as the parent, with the texts and lesson plans, and you teach them to your child at home.

Richard

ban the kids parents from teaching the kids
hired tutor ok but not a parent of the kid in question

I don't understand. You give me two instances when the courts in CA seemingly ban home schooling then you propose a hypothetical question. IDK

The State has the right to require minimal education standards. It seems to me at first glance this ruling merely builds upon the People's longstanding interest in that.

Homeschooling is not banned, homeschooling that does not meet the minimal requirements imposed by the state on its own educational efforts is all that is addressed.

If I take into account most of the homeschooled kids I have ever come across, well, glory glory hallelujah for that!

They said that those parent who teach their children in a home school environment must be a certified teacher, that is certified by the State of California to be a teacher.

I personally agree with this as there are a number of people who like to think they can teach and their kids are really screwed up. If you are insistent that you can teach your kids then you should be able to pass the certification process in California to teach.

I believe they are trying to require parents that homeschool in California to have gone to school and have a teaching degree.

"Last week, the appellate court surprised everyone by agreeing to rehear the case. The San Francisco Chronicle reports that the judges "hinted at a re-evaluation of its entire Feb. 28 ruling by inviting written arguments from state and local education officials and teachers' unions."

This one will go to the Supremes before it's over.

well i was homeschooled for a year, and honestly if i had to do that my whole life it would seriously suck. you dont have anyone else except your mum/dad/maybe siblings, which is stupid because you need to get really good at working with many types of other people if you're going to survive/be a contributing citizen out there in the real world.

also, unless your parent/relative is a state-certified tutor, there is no way of knowing if they are even qualified to teach others (except there are standardized homeschool-kid tests for each grade level). but still, it would be nice to make sure that every kid out there has the right to a qualified teacher.
i mean, how much would you like it if your parents wanted to have you homeschooled, but then you couldnt get into a good college because you didnt get as good of an education as the kid next door?

so yes, with my interpretation, i agree with california's laws, but yes, it's confusing becuase it's open for interpretation