Conference yukon::christian_v7

	Interesting.  Do similar "risk factors" get applied
	to teachers in the public schools today ?  I rather doubt it.

    
I printed and showed this to a friend that homeschooled for 6 years.
    
    This particular segment seemed a bit odd.  Are not current public
    school teachers susceptible to such risk-factors that may have
    effect their teaching at a public school?
    
    For my friend who was home-schooling when going through a divorce,
    it was a very important time for her to be spending the day with
    kids for their benefit through that rough time.
    
    The below information is dangerously unsettling if this comes to be.
    Sounds heavy-handed and Big Brother-ish.
    
................................................................. The 12
"risk factor definitions" used in all states where PAT is found, include:
Inability of parents to cope with inappropriate child behavior (e.g., severe
biting, destructive behavior, apathy); Low-functioning parent (due to limited
ability or illness);Parents who are ill, overweight, tired, depressed, have
low-level intelligence, are substance abusers, hadicapped, or injured are all
considered candidates for the category of abusive parents; Undue stress that
adversely affects family functions. This could include grieving over a death in
the family, divorce, separation, frequent travel by a parent, prolonged
illness, or low income; Other. This can include a wide variety of conditions.
PAT's social workers can take a child away from their parents if in the
judgment of the "parent educator" the parent falls in the risk category.

>    This particular segment seemed a bit odd.  Are not current public
>    school teachers susceptible to such risk-factors that may have
>    effect their teaching at a public school?

You're making a fundamental mistake here, one that took me years to recognize,
and that I still fall into sometimes.  You're using reason to try to understand
what the government does.  :-)

Seriously, the only "reason" behind this is to take control of the kids in this
country and what they're taught.  The percentage of people who would make the
investment of time and energy to home-school their kids, and who would not then
be 1000 times better than any public school teacher is probaly miniscule anyway,
so this bill is addressing a total non-problem.  But it galls them that there
are some kids out there who they can't control.

Paul

 Hello, we're from the federal government, and we're here to help you..







Jim

From:	LEDDEV::CAMUSO       "Follow not after a multitude to do evil." 22-DEC-1993 08:12:21.77
To:	US1RMC::"[email protected]"
CC:	CAMUSO
Subj:	Opposed to S1150 "Goals 2000 - The Educate America Act"

	Dear Mr. President,

        I am a registered voter from Rindge, NH.  My wife and I are bible-
        believing Christians, and we are educating our daughter at home.
        The Bible assigns to the parents the responsibility for educating
        the children and to "bring them up in the fear and admonition of
        the Lord", meaning we must teach them the moral law of God and 
        the salvation by grace through faith in His son Jeus Christ.  We
        are also commanded to "provoke not [our] children to wrath,"
        meaning that they must not be verbally or physically abused or
        neglected.

        Because it is hostile to home-schooling and Christian-schooling, we
        are opposed to S1170 "Goals 200 - The Educate America Act" and
        hereby petition you not to sign it if it is passed by the Senate.

	Respectfully submitted,

	Anthony Camuso
	Middle Winchendon Road
	Rindge, NH 03461
	

           <<< CRONIC::PAGE2$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]HOME_SCHOOLING.NOTE;3 >>>
                              -< Home Schooling >-
================================================================================
Note 109.5            "Educate America Act" / "Goals 2000"                5 of 5
501CLB::GILLEY "Honey, I broke the code."            37 lines   3-JAN-1994 15:01
                           -< Current bill status. >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Garth & company:

    I just spoke to Doug Phillips of the National Center of Home Education
    (703-338-7600).  The NCHE is a division of Home School Legal Defense
    Association (HSLDA) (I was unaware of this).  HCHE is the political
    lobbying arm of HSLDA.

    Basically, the information in the original posting is correct.  The
    legislation has passed the house and is the 2nd item on the Senate's
    agenda when they return from recess.  A vote is likely within 2-3 weeks
    after resumption of Senate activities.

    Mr. Phillips pointed out that almost all of the bill's language appears
    to apply to public education.  The problem is that the language is so
    broad that it is only a matter of time before 'officials' start to
    violate the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens choosing to
    provide alternative education to their children.

    Two main areas of concern are parents as teachers and equivalency
    clauses.  Most are familiar with the absurd attempts of the government
    to teach parents how to be parents and teachers.  The equivalency
    clause surprised me.  In the states with schooling laws requiring
    equivalency, many school boards are using the text as a pretext for
    requiring home educators to comply with outcome based education
    curriculum (they need to be equivalent).

    There are several cases pending.  In Massachusetts, HSLDA has a case
    before the state supreme court regarding home visits.  Mr. Phillips
    believes that HSLDA did an outstanding job at positioning and arguing
    the case - he expects a positive ruling.  In New York, HSLDA has a case
    regarding the equivalency requirements - he strongly believes that the
    state is going to get blown out of the water.

    Charlie

    CALL YOUR SENATORS!  Join HSLDA (no, I don't get a finder's fee, but it
    sounds like war has been declared).

	February 18, 1994


	Providence Farm


	10039 Old State Road


	Chardon, Ohio  44024





Honorable Representative Sharrod Brown


1407 Longworth 


House Office Building


Washington, D.C.   20515








Dear Congressman Brown,





I was pleased to speak with your assistant Larry Calahan, this afternoon 


regarding House Bill #6, the "Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 


1994."  I do not have a copy of the bill to read and so I'm relying on the 


summary of others in addressing this letter to you.  If I err in my comments, 


please forgive my ignorance of the current language of the bill.





I have four school age children, three educated at home.  One is attending the 


local Chardon High School, and one is graduating this year from being 


schooled at home and has been accepted with significant scholarships at 


Hiram College and Westminister College.  I am deeply disturbed that the 


current bill calls for the certification of all teachers (public, private, and 


parents who home educate). 





While many agree that our public schools need help, our private and home 


schooling systems are doing very well under difficult financial circumstances 


and will only suffer more under more government regulation should this bill 


pass unmodified.  It is my understanding that a previously offered amendment 


by Dick Armey, excluding private schools and home schools from this 


requirement was rejected by the House.  I urge you to facilitate the inclusion 


of this "Home School/Private School Freedom Amendment" in the final bill if 


you intend to vote for House Bill #6.





I have one other general observation regarding the concept of outcome-based 


education.  I support the idea of governmental measuring of results 


(outcomes) of public schools if that measurement focuses on specific, bodies 


of knowledge learned, and avoids the measuring of attitudes, values, and 


behaviors.   It is my experience that if you leave the definition of outcomes to 


an educational bureaucracy, this is exactly what you will get.  It is what we 


currently have in process in the state of Ohio.  We do not need bureaucratic 


definitions and measurements of citizenship, tolerance, ecological 


stewardship, ability to get along with others, etc.  Who was it said 


"Government governs best, which governs least?"   





If outcomes are to be developed please instruct the Department of Education 


that they are to keep their goals contained to the objective identification of 


bodies of knowledge or classical academic skills (reading and composition) 


and stay out of the realm of current political and social debate as regards 


outcomes.  We don't need governmental imposed thought; we need informed 


citizens who make up their own minds about issues.





To provide further  insight into the nature of my concerns and some update on 


the situation in Ohio, I've attached a copy of some testimony that I gave this 


fall before the Ohio State School Board regarding their work on outcome-


based education.





Thank you for listening and I hope that your concern for the students of Ohio 


will be enlightened and influenced by the thoughts of parents who are not a 


part of the state's educational system as well as professionals in the field of 


education.





with my regards,











David Reeves


concerned parent and increasingly taxed citizen.





cc: Larry Calahan

    If anyone gets DCF, you'll know by now that Congress is trying to slip
    HR6 by again on the last day of the session.  Call your congressperson.
    
    Mike

    Is the HR6 bill online in here?
    
    thanks,
    Mike

    This is somewhat related.  A recent HSLDA bulletin said the Clinton's 
    would sign the U.N. Rights of a Child bill this week and send it to the 
    Senate for approval.  Please contact your senators and tell them you do
    not support:
    
    - the UN Treaty
    - the UN should not decide family policy in the US
    - Education should remain a state and local issue, not federal or
      international
    - We must maintain our freedom to have private education free from
      federal or international control.
    
    thanks,
    Mike