Speaking before the education committee during in defense of LB 1141 which would place heavy restrictions on homeschooling in Nebraska, Senator Schimek said a number of things we have heard before. Nothing new to those of us who have been homeschooling and have had the opportunity to discuss it with those who disagree, but it takes on a new dimension coming from a legislator as opposed to my neighbor. This is the foundation set for this bill:
There is anecdotal evidence of homeschoolers running around during school hours with little to identify truancy.
For which she cites a meter reader who emailed her to tell her about homeschoolers running around unsupervised in his community while he is reading meters.
In discussing the bill, she also noted that the original floor debate was intended to apply to unaccredited schools, not homeschools. From the discussion, there seemed to be a desire to define homeschools as something separate from “unaccredited private schools.”
In closing, she reemphasized that she thought the state did have a prerogative and responsibility to oversee the education of all children. And she asked some questions:
How do we get empirical evidence if there is no oversight?
Do we know what is going on in parochial schools?
And some more justification:
I just want to make sure there aren’t some homeschooled students out there who can’t live in the real world.
And criticizing current law, which many of the testimonies suggested were adequate for pursuing those who truly were not educating their children:
Anybody can be a monitor, unless they are illiterate.
Nevermind that the parent determines who the monitor should be. The state, with its emphasis on certification, is certainly a better judge of a person’s ability to monitor education than the parent who may take into consideration things like character and experience, right?
Tom Vickers, a proponent of the bill and author of the original bill that has become current law had an interesting thought.
The cream rises to the top no matter the container.
So that explains all the homeschool successes which were cited, including the statistical evidence.
This seriously is the basis for this bill: anecdotal evidence and fear of what might be going on in some homeschools for the simple fact that we do not have the oversight to guarantee that it is not. My question is, how do we as homeschoolers defend ourselves not from reasoned arguments, but from this fear? It is the hypothetical few, these “weird” or uneducated homeschoolers someone in discussion always brings up, that is driving this legislation as well as public debate.
Is it possible to re-frame this debate? While we as homeschoolers tend to speak about educational liberties, most respondents say,
Yeah, but if homeschooling is so superior, why couldn’t your kid pass a math test?
Which was actually asked a few times by the senators on the education committee. This question says a lot about our assumptions regarding education and testing, but how can we answer it? Especially in a debate where anecdotal evidence is allowed to stand as researched evidence?
______
For more information on LB 1141, you can click on the category LB 1141 and find everything I have written so far.
[tags]homeschool, homeschooling, LB 1141, Schimek[/tags]
Principled Discovery is a place to stop and discuss news and information related to faith, family and particularly education. Pour yourself a cup of tea and join the conversation! 
Appears these legislators graduated from the Katie Criss School for Public Analysis; see (http://principleddiscovery.com/2008/02/18/the-life-and-death-of-homeschooling-a-eulogy/)
Anyone wish to join me in Andrew Murray’s School of Prayer? Obviously, this battle will only be won in the prayer closet.
When we kicked God out of the USA in the 1960’s, i.e. school prayer situations such as this have become common place.
Cause and effect. Happened with Israel, Babylon, Greece, Rome, Great Britain etc. To think it will not occur with the USA is preposterous.
Anecdotal evidence cuts both ways. There is anecdotal evidence that some kids graduate high school unable to read. There is anecdotal evidence that some teachers molest the children in their care. There is anecdotal evidence that some public schooled kids are unable to live in the real world.
If home schoolers need to prove they are educating their children properly and are not abusing or neglecting them, should we also put a burden of proof on teachers to conclusively demonstrate that they aren’t molesting the kids in their classes?
Should every teacher (from kindergarten to grade 12) need to prove that it isn’t their fault if one of their students fails in the ‘real world’ or graduates without knowing how to read or do basic math prove that they are not to blame?
If the burden of proof doesn’t lie with the public school teacher, why should it lie with the parent teacher?
I am not surprised… governing from fear seems to be method du jour in our country.
I don’t have anything to add to any of this beyond moral support and prayers… my experience is so new and so limited in the area of homeschooling.
I do have a question… that may seem silly and obvious, but I would really like to follow this better: this is a law pending in Nebraska, correct? All the senators mentioned–are the Nebraska senator? And how many Senators does Nebraska have?
Yes, Shawna, these are all Nebraska state senators in our legislature and this is a Nebraska law modeled after IA. We have 49 senators.
Wendy, you are exactly right. In fact, one of the more entertaining opponents to the bill suggested that all bank accounts of senators be monitored because of the anecdotal evidence of senators committing fraud…that it has happened in Arizona and certainly there are more that would be found if we had the oversight to find out about it.
It is frustrating, however, to try to defend against an argument that really isn’t an argument.
Thanks, Dana… much easier to follow now. And you have set me up on a new research project
Anecdotal Evidence.
A meter reader?
Is it not anecdotal that your bills, read by meter readers, come regularly on the same day each month?
Is it not anecdotal that bills, read by meter readers, are generally payment due on the same day each month?
Is it not then anecdotal that the meter reader reads certain meters in a pattern that displays design, intent or pattern?
Could it be anecdotal that this meter reader traverses the same route at the same time through these areas?
Could it be anecdotal that at these times, in these ares homeschoolers have recess, a play date/time, a homeschool co-op?
Could it all be anecdotal?
One thing for certain is that the word RECESS is a dirty word in the public school world. Why should any child be able to play?
Ken Dick, a senior research fellow for Nebraska University in Omaha made an interesting statement of principled regarding legislation and this anecdotal evidence:
“Policy should be built on the rule while we manage the exceptions.”
This law, however, is built on the exception while the rule is cast aside as irrelevant.
“…but how can we answer it? Especially in a debate where anecdotal evidence is allowed to stand as researched evidence?”
You can’t answer it. That’s why they allow it.
One of my questions that I often ask is where were these ‘homeschooling failures’ parents educated? It usually gets very quiet as the vast majority were ‘educated’ in the public schools.
Following up,it seems to me that anecdotes don’t suffice for the potentials of breaking the status quo of generational educational failure. Our homeschool communities tend to be close knit and very supportive of each other, our families and any others trying to find a better way for their kids.
Do parents want their kids to be dumb? I don’t think so. When homeschooling parents reach out for help, they get it. In a productive way with no governmental strings attached.
Can those legislators/schooly people beat that? I don’t think so. Better yet, why wouldn’t they appreciate what we have and do? How absolutely ridiculous is it to go against parents who care enough to show up at the state Capitol. They should have just thrown their hands up and apologized profusely.
I believe it was the homeschooled aid to Senator Fulton who pointed out a known, documented, “falling through the cracks” situation in Nebraska’s education system: high school drop outs. And there are about as many dropouts every year as there are homeschooling families in Nebraska.
What has the public system done to help these individuals? Our public schools are very good and our graduation rate is actually quite high. This isn’t a critique of public schools, but are we seriously implying that whatever anecdotal evidence exists about poor performing homeschoolers seriously can point to a problem bigger than those in the education system which are proven by more than second-hand stories?
Haven’t figured out that trackback thing yet, so here’s a link to my thoughts, which I posted on my blog:
http://refincher.wordpress.com/2008/02/27/in-loco-parentis/
It’s interesting that this comes on the heels of Banita Jacks, because it is essentially the the same argument: if the state cannot monitor homeschoolers, how can situations like the Jacks’ case be prevented?
I have to wonder, rather than seeking a basis for upending the staus quo, why Sen.Schmiek did not simply refer her e-mailing meter reader to the local truant officer or suggest that he speak to the parents if he thought something was amiss. The meter reader’s problem isn’t that the current system doesn’t work; it is simply that the proper *local* channels were avoided. There are dogs running loose all over my neighborhood, but I haven’t written my senator about it; if I have a concern, I should talk to the dog’s owner or call the animal control officer.
Dana, you were so much more diplomatic than me.
I love this simple basic point that Rebecca made:
There are dogs running loose all over my neighborhood, but I haven’t written my senator about it; if I have a concern, I should talk to the dog’s owner or call the animal control officer.
Keep it local.
Keep it local…
Ooh…this is so true. And an interesting comment from the representative from NSEA. There were two bills discussed before this one which both essentially would make it easier to gain certification in Nebraska.
Jay Sears shared his thoughts on the bills, stating that NSEA generally suppported the principles behind the bills, but in favor of limited government he saw no need for legislation. It could be taken care of by changing Department of Education procedures.
He struck a slightly different tone when it came to the homeschool bill…but not much. Again, he was in support of the principle of the bill, but…
And I’d have to say that coming from a branch of the NEA, I was pleasantly surprised. He obviously was not a big proponent of statewide testing being used in the manner it would be used in this bill, suggesting that all students receive plans for remediation when they fail rather than firing teachers and closing schools. Including homeschools.
By the way, HSLDA is reporting record attendance with 1,300 signed in. I got there 20 minutes early and the overflow room was already full. The room I went to was eventually full, and apparently they filled 2 more besides.
Michael Donnelly’s testimony was quite good, as was Dr. Brian Ray’s. You can tell they are a tad more use to this than NCHEA. I found it ironic that after questions about the state constitution were raised, the first person to actually address what the constitution actually says was someone from out of state. You would think a legislator introducing legislation before the education committee committee would know the language.
I hope they are right about the bill dying in committee, but five members of the committee have already indicated support of the bill. I don’t see how some version of this won’t be seen in the near future.
And everyone should take a moment to read Rebecca’s post, now that I’ve read it.
One thing I found quite interesting: Several testifying addressed the concept of liberty and who should be responsible for the education of children. The senators (Avery and Burling especially if I remember correctly) kept bringing it back to, “Ok, I understand, but how does testing interfere with that? Why wouldn’t a child be able to pass a math test.”
I felt there was a serious communication issue. We were speaking on a philosophic level that had practical implications. They were asking practical questions which indicated a wholly different philosophic basis.
I imagine it would be rather like listening to those involved in the Boston Tea Party explain what they did and why, discussing taxation and tyranny, and then continually asking, “Ok, but why won’t you drink tea?”
If you don’t understand the basis, the application makes no sense.
Maybe when all the children in public schools are passing the math test, we can talk about it.
Something Nebraskans should consider…Nebraska’s property taxes are astronomical. I moved here recently and was shocked at how high the property taxes are! Iowa’s taxes are considerably cheaper. If Nebraska adopts the same (or even more!) restrictive homeschooling regulations that Iowa has, what will then make Nebraska a more attractive place to live? In my mind, it won’t be. Maybe the legislature needs to consider that. No difference to me as I won’t be staying here. For me, the introduction of this bill was the icing on the cake. Nebraska is NOT a good place to raise my children. Between the high taxes, the hostility towards home schooling, and the ever increasing crime…nope. Not for us.
Amy, NE’s taxes are among the highest in the nation. And given that the most likely amendment to this bill will have the state (taxpayer) pay for the oversight, they can only go up from here.
The possibility of people moving out of Nebraska under a restrictive law was actually brought out during the testimony. Apparently, the legislature is also working on ways to make NE more attractive to people. This probably wouldn’t score highly…people opposed to homeschooling hardly care, and those that do would avoid a restrictive state if they had the choice.
What is happening here in California is like Nazi
Germany…they are trying to create children who are “loyal to the state and nation”…I am using the judge’s direct quote. He also quoted, “It would be an unreasonable burden on the state to have to supervise each and every home in which a child was being educated.” So what’s next? Why not set up a system to make sure we are feeding our kid’s all 5 food groups? Or to make sure we are feeding them dinner?