Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » CALIFORNIA COURT CAVES

    Filed at 6:18 am under by dcobranchi

    How else to read this?

    A state appeals court will reconsider last month’s controversial decision that said parents who home-school their children must have a teaching credential.

    The 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles granted a rehearing Tuesday, essentially voiding the 3-0 decision until it rules again. The decision will now allow home-schooling organizations that had blasted the decision to weigh in.

    I really have no opinion on this case. CA ed laws just confuse the hell out of me. My understanding was that the word “homeschooling” was legally undefined, so folks who wanted to homeschool completely separate from the g-school system filed an R-4 to register as a private school. That’s not what this case is about. This one is centered on the use of umbrella schools that provide “cover” for homeschoolers. The judges ruled that they’re illegal. So now there will be a do-over.

    2 Responses to “CALIFORNIA COURT CAVES”

    Comment by
    March 27th, 2008
    at 11:34 am

    Mary Griffith talked a little about homeschooling in CA at the Chicago conference. My understanding from her talk is that umbrella schools are illegal for homeschoolers and have always been.

    The state has looked aside in the past, but this time it didn’t.

    (she had a lot more to say as well)

    Comment by
    Stephanie O
    March 27th, 2008
    at 5:54 pm

    I’m not a lawyer, but I read the court documents when this first hit the fan, and I agree that “umbrella” schools have never been a legal way of meeting the mandatory attendance laws in CA. But the judge said much more – he said that since the legislature set out that kids can be taught at home by a credentialed tutor, clearly they didn’t intend for parents to be able to set up their own R-4 private schools in their homes. (Private school teachers do not need a credential, so I guess it’s redundant to say you can be a private school or use credentialed teachers, I guess.) He directly disagreed with parents being able to form a private school in their own homes, even though that was not how the family in the case was meeting the attendance requirements.

    Of course, elsewhere in the CA education code there is a specific reference to uncredentialed parents teaching their own kids in their homes (and that they don’t require background checks to be able to do so). So at the very least, the laws are a mess. It’s unsettling at best that the R-4 option can be so easily argued against by a judge. His reasoning didn’t sound far-fetched to me. They need to clean things up out there, but the HS groups wisely avoid legislation because the teachers union is so strong in California.