The Answer
Comments (9)
LOL
All I can say is:\r
\r
You come up with some funny shit man! ;-)
dear god, 4chan 8-O
You manage a professional student store, lol?!!!!!!!!!
The law was/is intended to make sure people are not pulling their kids and home schooling them because the parents \"believe\" they are more qualified then a credentialed teacher..for example the Parent quoted in the article:\r
\r
\"Schwarzer runs Oak Hill Academy out of her Santa Clara County home. It is a state-registered private school with two students, she said, noting they are her own children, ages 10 and 12. She does not have a teaching credential, but she does have a law degree.\r
\r
\"I'm kind of hoping some truancy officer shows up on my doorstep,\" she said. \"I'm ready. I have damn good arguments.\"\r
\r
She opted to teach her children at home to better meet their needs.\"\r
\r
What they do not say in this artcile is when these parents homeschool and register their home as a \"school\" is that they are intitled to certain tax breaks..\r
\r
I just find it funny that people think, oh I have a degree in x....so that means I can teach..\r
\r
the quote used by the judge does have a Macarthy (sp?) tone to it...which is a little worrysome..but keep in mind that the schools get sued left and right for saying the pledge, having bday/holiday parties, etc..etc..so for a brainwashing or conformist attitude to be enforced, it would take a lot to happen.\r
\r
There is also little to no accountibility for home schooled kids...\r
\r
I know many families that think home schooling is the way to go...and how they claim they are giving better attention to their childs needs...well more often then not it is either because the families do not want (or can't) spend the money on private schools, or unwilling to drive to the next availible disctrict, where a good public school is located.