Maine
Home School Regulations Chapter 130: Changes Proposed
Author: Hawkins, HSLDA
Summary:
Commissioner of Education J. Duke Albanese has adopted new regulations for
homeschoolers operating under Chapter 130. One of the changes is
positive; others are very negative.
These are the significant changes.
Formerly, the subjects that homeschoolers operating under Chapter 130
were required to teach were those listed in Chapter 127, where the
required subjects for public schools were listed. Every time Chapter 127
changed, it had the potential to affect Chapter 130 homeschoolers. §3.E
of Chapter 130 has now been changed to remove this link. The subjects that
Chapter 130 homeschoolers must teach are now independently listed in
Chapter 130. They are the same subjects as were previously required.
 |
| Part
of the new §5.A states that only parents or legal guardians can
submit an application for equivalent instruction. Maine law does not
demand that only a parent or legal guardian file the application. This
rule change is contrary to law.
| The
new concept of a "complete" application is introduced in §5.A.
In order to be "complete," an application must include all
material described in §3 as well as a copy of the results of the
annual assessment for the prior year.
| It
will now be harder for homeschool credits to transfer to public
school. The old rule stated that "credit may be awarded by the
receiving school upon its assessment of the value of the home
instruction educational experience." §9 has been amended to
state that, "the principal of the receiving school shall
determine the value of the private educational experience toward
meeting the standards of the system of learning results...."
Whether or not a child gets credit for a homeschool class will depend
on the degree to which the class conformed with the system of learning
results applicable to that subject for public schools.
| The
60-day "safe harbor" has been stripped. §6.A previously
required the commissioner to make a decision within 60 days of
receiving any application. An application was deemed approved unless
the commissioner denied it within 60 days. Where homeschoolers filed
an application and never received a response, they could teach their
children at home with confidence because approval was automatic if no
denial was sent after 60 days.
| In December of 2001, the commissioner demanded that one or more children not yet of compulsory attendance age submit a year-end assessment.
| On August 7, 2001, the commissioner threatened to retroactively revoke previous year' s approval of some homeschool programs.
| On June 5, 2001, Deputy Commissioner Lucarelli assured homeschoolers in writing that a necessary change to the homeschool regulations would occur BEFORE any change to public school regulations. The Commissioner did just the opposite, potentially putting homeschoolers at risk. See http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200111300.asp to understand why this is important.
| In
March of 2001, the commissioner threatened to withhold approval for
the 2001-2002 school year for some parents who did not submit an
assessment for the 1999-2000 school year. |
|
Breakthrough for Young College-Bound Home School Graduates
After months of negotiations with the U.S. Department of Education
(ED), Home School Legal Defense Association is delighted to announce a
huge step forward for homeschool graduates who want to attend college but
are under 17 years of age.
Several colleges around the country have refused to admit students who are homeschool graduates but are still technically under their state's compulsory attendance. Some institutions also stated they would admit such students only if they obtained a GED. These schools were concerned that they would lose certain federal benefits if they were to admit such students, or were to admit them without a GED.
For several months, HSLDA has been working on this problem with the General Counsel's office of the U.S. Department of Education and congressional committee staff. On April 19, the Department of Education, Office of the General Counsel, issued a formal letter resolving the issue. Federal law requires that colleges admit only students who fall into certain categories. One category is students who are "beyond the age of compulsory attendance." The ED letter explains that this category includes not only students who are beyond the age of compulsory attendance by virtue of their age, but also any student who has graduated from home education.
This means that any homeschooled graduate, regardless of age, is beyond the age of compulsory attendance under federal higher education law. The result is that institutions may enroll such students, regardless of age, without fear losing eligibility for federal benefits.
In light of this, there is no longer any legitimate reason for colleges to deny admission to homeschooled students of any age, or to demand that homeschoolers obtain a GED. We anticipate that institutions of higher education will bring their admissions policies into line with federal policy.
The letter does, however, preclude colleges from accepting "homeschooling" students that state considers truant (for example, high school dropouts who claim to be homeschooling to avoid college regulation).
The Department of Education also states in its letter that a homeschooled student may "self certify." In this context, certification relates to the process that is used to document or prove that the student has a diploma, or has truly graduated from homeschooling. "Self-certification" means that the student himself-without the endorsement or verification of any school official or other third party-can "certify" that he has completed the homeschool program, and this is sufficient to establish the student's credibility and protect the institution's eligibility. In other words, once a student verifies to an admissions officer that he has graduated from home education, the admissions officer should not require any form of third party corroboration.
Because this is a very recent development, it may take a little while for word to get out to all admissions officers. Nonetheless, we expect college admission to go much more smoothly for students across the country who are home education graduates but are still within compulsory attendance age.
Governor
King's Laptop Initiative
Americorps (the federal domestic version of the peace corps) members
are working as computer trainers for Project GOALS, a statewide
project that provides free internet and basic computer training for
teachers, librarians, library patrons, and parents of
K-12 students. Project GOALS is currently conducting free
trainings at various locations around the state. The Project was
begun 3 years ago by Governor King, who wanted Americorps to help educate
Maine's people on computer technology. The project is
related to the Governor's laptop initiative.
Homeschoolers should use extreme caution when participating in this
project. A better source of training in the use of the internet
might be the computer experts within your own support group, rather than
seeking the help of the government. Support groups may want to consider
enlisting the help of a homeschool dad or teen in offering a one
day training session for free or a very modest fee.
Here are some points to ponder when considering whether or not
laptops should be made available in the future to homeschoolers in
Maine:
|
ACCEPTING LAPTOPS INVITES GREATER STATE CONTROL If homeschoolers accept laptops, it will create an atmosphere in which homeschools are more likely to be viewed as an extension of the state. It makes it look like a homeschool is a state program, rather than an extension of the parents and the home. We all know the state has a right to control its own programs. Therefore anything that makes homeschooling seem more like a state program invites greater state control. |
|
WHEN STATE CONTROL INCREASES, CHILDREN SUFFER If state control increases, parent control decreases. If parent control decreases, children will suffer. The state is a miserable failure as a parent. Parents are the best parents, so they should control their children's education. Accepting laptops will tend to undermine parent control. |
| WE FEEL IN DEBT TO THOSE WHO GIVE US GIFTS We all understand that accepting a gift creates a certain social indebtedness. Accepting a gift affects our hearts and minds in very subtle ways. It makes us feel we owe something back to the one who gave us the gift. It tends to make us "like" the person and not want to oppose them. Accepting a gift from the state may predispose a parent to want to please the state. This creates an immediate conflict of interest, however, since our ONLY motivation must be to teach our children according to what is best for them. If part of a parent's heart wants to do the best for his children, but part of his heart wants to please the state, children will suffer. It is often necessary to oppose the state. Think of last year when the Commissioner's staff tried to make a 5 year old submit an assessment; threatened to withhold a future approval for a prior year's omission; threatened to retroactively revoke approval. Anything that makes a parent feel in debt to the state may dampen his willingness to oppose the state when it tries to assert greater control over our children. |
| IT'S HARD TO GIVE UP A BENEFIT
If the use of the laptops is initially given "no strings attached", it is only a matter of time before conditions and requirements are attached (don't put Christian software on it, don't use it for Christian activities, etc.) Because it is hard to give up something you are already enjoying, some parents may be tempted to compromise what is best for their children to keep the laptop. |
| GOODBYE PRIVACY The laptop will most likely remain the property of the state, so the state will have the right to demand it back anytime, and can then analyze the hard drive. When returned to them for maintenance or repair, the state can analyze the hard drive. Every silly thing your children have ever typed into the laptop (even if you THINK it was erased) could then be turned over to a social worker. Goodbye privacy, hello DHS investigation. |
| YOU DON'T NEED IT Homeschoolers are doing extremely well academically already. We don't need laptops. Gaining a machine but losing parental control over education is a poor trade. |
Class for Attorneys Identifies Religious Families as Likely Child
Abusers
On March 5, 2002, Home School Legal Defense Association Senior Counsel
Christopher Klicka attended a Virginia Continuing Legal Education (CLE)
class for becoming a "guardian ad litem." Such classes are held
so that practicing attorneys can stay up-to-date on changes to the law.
For seven hours, various lawyers, judicial officials and social workers
lectured on many aspects of child abuse and the role of guardian ad litem.
A guardian ad litem is an advocate appointed by a judge during a neglect
proceeding to represent the child's rights.
During a lecture entitled, "Developmental Needs of Children: Characteristics of Abusive and Neglectful Families and of Children Who are Victims," Kathleen Nussbaum, a licensed clinical social worker, explained that children can form developmental deficits if they "spend two or more hours a day alone at home without an adult" or they "watch more than three hours of television a day." She also quoted a study that found children are harmed if they "put emphasis on selfish values " or "have a lot of close friends who often get into trouble."
However, the lecture took a turn for the worse when the social worker discussed the three family types that she believed typically showed the characteristics of abusive and neglectful families. The first type was obviously problematic, which she entitled "Inadequate Family Type." These families are characterized by "chaotic environment with loose or non-existent boundaries and often overt alcohol or drug problems."
The second family type Ms. Nussbaum described in an incredibly offensive way. She called it the "Religious and Authoritarian Family Type." Referencing the printed material used in CLE classes for guardian ad litems all across the state of Virginia, Ms. Nussbaum defined a religious and authoritarian family type: "A strong focus on male leadership, with strong church involvement. Parents are frequently elders or ministers in their church, and they use their religious authority, as well as Scripture, to maintain control." Such a broad and erroneous definition probably describes 85% of the home school families in America.
This shows us one reason social workers tend to target home school families. From HSLDA's perspective, it seems that home school families per capita are subject to an inordinate number of social worker investigations. Undoubtedly a large percentage of home school families considers themselves "religious" and have strong church involvement. Christian home schooling families typically recognize fathers as the head of the house, and study Scripture on a regular basis as they bring their children up in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord." To many social workers this amounts to an "authoritarian" and oppressive family structure dangerous for children.
Ms. Nussbaum's third type of suspect family is a "Rigid and Controlling Family Type" which is characterized by "rigid, non-permeable, external boundaries." This questionable CLE definition also states that these parents have extremely high expectations of their children.
According to Mr. Klicka, "It is a shame that social workers do not
understand that Christian families provide the most solid foundation for
children and a loving environment." He went on to say that he was
"glad that he attended this seminar, because it only confirmed what
he has believed for some time now about the training of social workers and
guardian ad litems."
Red Cross Thanks Homeschoolers
Read the letter sent by the American Red Cross to HSLDA President Michael Smith, thanking homeschoolers for donating to the Afghan
Children's Fund.
Read more about it on HSLDA'a website at: http://www.hslda.org/elink.asp?ID=355
