I've come to realize many Americans, including conservative minded ones, have ceded control of their children to their school districts. Glenn Reynolds posts about a bizarre prosecution of parents who are accused of forging a doctor's note to excuse their children from school, but this question from a reader seems posted as an afterthought:
“Why do you need a note from a doctor to keep your kids out of school?”
Why indeed? Until this is the first reaction of the average American, we have some way to go to reclaim our liberty.
While living in Texas, my wife and I decided to remove our school-aged children from the gross incompetance masquerading as a school staff (but the high school football team did win six state championships - gotta have your priorities). I wish I had a nickel every time someone asked me if we got "permission" to pull our kids from school; I'd be retired by now. Even my conservative friends asked; thus showing how pervasive the subservient mindset has become. In Texas one doesn't need permission to homeschool. That's not the case everywhere. We later moved to Utah, where permission to homeschool was required by the school superindendant. It was a mere formallity, but it still chaffed me. Why is it assumed the state has a greater interest in the welfare of my children then I do?
I'm not opposed to public schools. When we moved to Utah, I told my kids they could attend them if they wanted. They declined, though they each took some some of the specialized classes offered by the local high school, such as Advanced Placement classes, drafting, and sports (Utah is very accomodating that way). My youngest, however, never was homeschooled, we didn't give her a choice - but I don't ask permission to take her out of school, nor do I worry whether the school considers her absence "excused" or not. So what?
The primary reason my older kids declined to return to public school fulltime was because much of it is a waste of time. If you think I'm exaggerating, I challenge you to go to your kid's school with a stop-watch and time the instruction versus the time devoted to other activities such as: school announcements, waiting for the teacher working with other students, period changes, box top collections, seeing the Jazz Bear and other assemblies, etc. If you want to be a stickler, you can question the value of some of the instruction too. D.A.R.E comes to mind as well as the latest political correct fad. I won't knock recess, but that is becoming watered down in some places. I don't think my homeschooled kids feel deprived because we didn't have them make a map of a state out of their favorite cake mix.
Back to the California couple. I don't know if they are lousy parents or not, but unless the kids are in physical danger I don't care and neither should the state, but here is a clue about what concerns the state:
The district loses $32.88 each day that a child misses school, according to the Orland school district Web site. Officials have acknowledged the loss of average daily attendance money as an issue for a severely cash-strapped school district, but insist the real issue is student education.
The real issue is student education? Here is the Orland High School "California Standardized Testing Results". For language arts, less than half the students are proficient or better. For Algebra 1, Algebra 2, and Geometry, only 10% are proficient or better. Scores are better for World History, US History, and Science (up to 45% proficient or better). The School's "Accountability Report Card" shows it has failed to make "Adequate Yearly Progress" for two years. Why am I inclined to think it's the money, not the education?
