Should Homeschooling be Illegal?
The California Court of Appeals recently decided a case which could have a major impact on the legality of homeschooling in California, and perhaps all over the U.S. The ruling involved the statutes that mandate - quite reasonably - that all children in California be taught only by persons with the state teaching credentials to do so.
The problem is that most homeschoolers are parents with no real training or credentials. Then that's illegal!, the court ruled, thus jeopardizing the status of most of the 166,000 homeschooled children in that state.
"California courts have held that...parents do not have a constitutional right to homeschool their children," said the ruling. "Parents have a legal duty to see to their children's schooling under the provisions of these laws." If adopted nationally, it could signal the end of homeschooling in this country
I think we all can agree that teaching is so important it shouldn't be left to amateurs and that children deserve the finest quality instruction we as a society can provide them. Additionally, this is a very important issue because it touches on an essential conflict: the proper role of the government in children's education and upbringing versus parents' rights to raise their children as they see fit.
Let's delve into this fascinating dispute a little deeper.
**********
I have cared for about 10 families who homeschooled their kids (at least for a while). Here are two that exemplify why this is such a difficult issue for me to reconcile.
The Morgans were a wonderful, loving, and talented family. Both parents were accomplished professionals, but the mom decided to drop out and homeschool their three kids until college. She seemed to be gifted at it. They would tell me of field trips, of studying at their own pace, of how interesting and fun she made everything. After school hours, they had rich social lives and, they told me, didn't miss being around their pals during the day (which was my big concern). All three kids went on to excellent colleges and, to my eye, seemed like well-adjusted, accomplished kids.
The Beckers were a very close knit, very religious family. They were quite suspicious of the outside world (myself included), full of sin and temptation and false prophets as it was. They worried mightily at the corrupting influence of the school environment on their kids. So they chose to homeschool their four children. As far as I could tell, much of their curriculum was focused on religious teachings and values. "Really," the mother once confided in me, "I have no use for science and they only really need as much arithmetic as it takes to know how to pay their bills." One of the kids did eventually go to a junior college; the others joined the family business, but all remained socially isolated and, as far as I could tell, had little interest in the world outside their parents' domain.
**********
Those two families explain why I'm so ambivalent about homeschooling. On one hand, if parents are themselves talented and choose to homeschool for the "right" reasons (e.g., to instill a love of learning, to share the family experience, to promote emotional closeness. because they feel they can do a better job of it), I've seen homeschooling succeed magnificently.
On the other hand, if it's done for the "wrong" (at least in my biased opinion) reasons (e.g., because of paranoia about exposure to the real world, to limit the child's knowledge to a few narrow precepts, to avoid outside social interactions), then I've seen homeschooling stunt the socioemotional, academic, and intellectual growth of children who, in my opinion, desperately could have used a "parentectomy" during the day to allow them to transcend their parents' narrow views and ambitions.
**********
In 2003, there were approximately 1.1 million homeschooled kids in the U.S. The reasons parent gave for homeschooling included concern about the school environment (31%), to provide religious and moral instruction (30%), dissatisfaction with the academic instruction of schools (16%), and the child has special needs (14%). What (I hope you are asking) do studies tell us about the functioning of these kids?
Surprisingly, there has been very little research but that which has been done tends to look more like the Morgans than the Beckers. For example, their average math and reading scores were in the top quarter. (These data, however, are questioned because the test was voluntary, meaning that perhaps only high functioning homeschooled kids agreed to be tested.) Those that apply to college tend to have higher SAT and ACT scores than the traditionally schooled.
*********
Excuse me, so where's the problem here? Aside from the legal question of instruction by a licensed professional (no small matter), here are the arguments of homeschooling detractors:
- The children are being denied important socialization experiences.
- The academic quality is often incomplete, excluding important subjects (like the Beckers and science).
- The parents often advocate an extreme religious or social agenda.
- It diverts much-needed money from the public schools.
- The "parallel society" of the homeschool is incompatible with the state interest in social cohesion and harmony (as the judge in the California case wrote: . "A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare.").
**********
So, was the court correct? Shouldn't all kids be taught by credentialed teachers? If we open the door for just anybody to teach our children, how can we ensure they are not exploited by incompetents and zealots, as some have surely been?
I've tried, as best I can, to lay out the complexity of this issue and my own mixed feelings, based on my history with the Morgans and the Beckers. Still - and with some misgivings - I've decided that homeschooling should not be illegal, that it is more often than not a good experience for children, and that parents should have the right to responsibly take on the education of their kids if they so choose.
I want to emphasize the word "responsibly." Each state has its own standards (some are tight, others abysmally lax) on what that must be taught. Parents need to be held accountable if their homeschooled kids can't cut it educationally.
Yes, the state has a compelling interest in its citizens' educations, but so too do parents have the right to raise their children without interference if that state interest is not in some way significantly violated. Until I see data to prove otherwise, I don't think homeschooling meets that threshold.
Tight regulations on home schooling - yes. Courses on how to teach for homeschooling parents - better still. An outright ban of homeschooling - not justified.
*********
View the ruling by the Second District Court of Appeal.
Read the statistics on homeschooling.
Review the homeschooling regulations in each state.
Read the statistics on homeschooling.
Review the homeschooling regulations in each state.
Related Topics: Technorati Tags: homeschool, school, pediatrics, health and wellness
114 Comments:
This appears to be a call for a regression to the mean. I fully agree that homeschooling permits both good and bad outcomes, but why aim for the middle, especially when it means intruding on the rights of parents and children?
I am not a licensed teacher, and neither is my spouse. We both have advanced degrees, and have experience teaching in public schools in Japan for several years. I current teach in a university, and have taught courses to teachers seeking certification, and published on issues of learning and teaching. I think I can make a reasonable case that I'm a decent teacher; why would I submit myself for examination and permission to make choices about education for my child?
Though it may have the same outcome, I have less concern over testing students. If it is determined that citizenship requires a certain degree of literacy, I don't see why students shouldn't be required to submit to annual examinations to ensure that they are making some form of progress. But the state should not exclusively determine how children must be educated.
As for loyalty and patriotism, I will raise my children to be as skeptical of these ideas as they are about a range of claims of faith. There is a place for this, but my ideal of citizenship requires substantial skepticism of authority, and I somehow doubt that is the kind of citizenship education California mandates.
If homeschooling is OK, where do we draw the line? Why then can't a child go to a school where none of the 'teachers' are credentialed or qualifid? How about a friendly neighbor who wants to start her own school for 5 neighborhood kids? Why not allow a religious school that only teaches creationsim and not evolution? I'm a big believer in public education for all and I think homeschooling is not in anyone's or our society's best interests.
What I don't understand is why there seems to be an assumption that parents won't educate their children "responsibly." If there is cause to believe they are not, we may have an issue. But we do not submit the general public to random drug searches, nor to menu approval because of the importance of these issues.
I am a big supporter of an educated public. I do not believe that we can mandate a specific model for that to be attained. Nor do I believe that public school is an adequate model. It has too many failures, mostly related to other social ills...predominantly parents who are not interested in the education of their children. If parental involvement is the single most important determiner of educational success in the classroom, why are we suddenly suspicious of homeschoolers?
Anyway, I wrote more about it on my blog for anyone interested.
If other countries can manage home schooling with a bit of control added, why can't we? In Europe, some countries have school inspectors that visit regularly, others have exams to check on progress and, in some cases, if the results aren't up to scratch two times in a row, the children are obliged to go to standard mainstream school. It's a safety net.
Parents will teach the religious and political ideas they want to whether or not the children are home schooled - let's just make sure that they get the essentials of education along with that.
Finally, I feel that home schooling special needs children should only happen in extreme situations. Keeping Down Syndrome children (for example) at home is giving them a huge handicap. They can fit in well in mainstream (with a bit of help), it helps to be in a social situation for them - the more they're stimulated the better their results - and other children benefit from their presence, learning that we're all different, tolerance, etc.
There is no clear cut, one size fits all solution...
Parents need to be held accountable if their homeschooled kids can't cut it educationally.
Can we hold public schools accountable for producing kids who can't cut it educationally?
I believe it should be the parent or parents decision to homeschool,but,I also believe that the state should regularly test the children to be sure they are learning and getting the education that they need.
Can we hold public schools accountable for producing kids who can't cut it educationally?
Sure, if they're judged under the same circumstances. Do you really think public schools would produce kids who can't cut it educationally if each teacher only had 2 or 3 students each?
I homeschool my child because he had a horrible experience with public school. He loves to learn and could read long before kindergarten. He started school and I was called everyday with complaints about his behavior. He has ADHD and no one wanted to help him. The principal told me she thought he was a sociopath! He spent the next week ill at home completely overwhelmed from his time in school. I pulled him out and I homeschool him. He is far beyond his peers and is doing fine. If I had a sampling of typical licensed teacher then I don't wish for any more.
The wonderful thing about this country is that we are free. I will homeschool my son because it is my constitutional right. My son thanks me daily for it.
I have four children and never dreamed of homeschooling until my middle son, who is 12, hit middle school. He, too, is a 504 student because of eyesight issues and ADD. I spent all of the first semester at the school, at least 2 times a week, for behavior issues as well as academic. I met with his team of teachers about 4 times in that timeframe. He still failed 2 subjects so I took him out the beginning of the 2nd semester. I am a college graduate and feel more than adequate to teach. Plus, i have the help of retired teachers who live across the street, in case I get into trouble. This has been a pleasureable experience and we intend to continue homeschooing next year. My younger two still plan on attending public school. The government does not need to overplay its role in our lives. I am a strong christian, deeply loyal to out country so all they wrote is bogus. You can't have it both ways. Homeschooling usually indicates a parents' strong desire to make sure their children are educated properly.
Doctor, You have touched all the right notes. My wife and I are licensed teachers. I, too, have known both outstanding and marginal homeschoolers. (Today I am an attorney concerned in part with the nexus of parents rights vs. the State.)
You referred to your own ambivalence, and therein lies a clue:
THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT. The state requires children to be educated. But it should not intrude itself into every private citizen's life. As the US Supreme Court is so fond of saying, there is nothing more sacred than the right of a parent to his children.
Can we hold public schools accountable for producing kids who can't cut it educationally?
Sure, if they're judged under the same circumstances. Do you really think public schools would produce kids who can't cut it educationally if each teacher only had 2 or 3 students each?
What a strange qualifier... "if they're judged under the same circumstances"? Why? Are they ever actually teaching only 2 or 3 students in a public school classroom? It doesn't matter if professional teachers *could* teach better if they had fewer students, the reality is that they're NOT teaching only 2 or 3 students.
We homeschool our children. My wife and I both went to college and have education degrees. My wife taught in the public schools until we adopted our oldest daughter. There are many reasons we homeschool. One thing we know from our experinces is that most "licensed" public school teachers do not know your child better than you and parents can tailor the education to the childs needs. I am not against public schools nor do I think everyone should homeschool, but homeschool should not be illegal just as private and public schooling should not be illegal. I don't know about California's constitution, but I have read and studied the US Constitution and Bill of Rights and I don't find government provided schools mentioned let alone mandated as the only type of education.
"The parents often advocate an extreme religious or social agenda. "
You mean, as opposed to the extreme anti-religious and liberal agenda the public schools try to fill them with? Yeah, that's quality education at work.
It seems what we are looking is a situation of money, public schools, pricipals, and teachers feel like there are not making enough money, so they want to drag homeschooled kids into their mess. I went to public school all my life and most of it was great, so I am putting down public schooling, but look at it this way a child will listen to their parents way faster than a teacher, why do you think a homeschooled child does better academically than a public schooled child because a child or children are going to do better when parents are around.
Sooner or later, a parent's child will no longer belong to them because everyone wants to tell you what is better for your child, what to do with your child, and when to do it. As previously stated I have nothing against public schools or the rules that might apply thereafter, I am just speaking what I believe and no one is going to change my mind
I am very offended when I hear that someone has the nerve to put down a homeschooling family such as the Beckers, by listing IN YOUR OPINION the right and wrong reasons to homeschool. It is one thing to disagree with the reasons why some families choose to homeschool their children but to link the words "because of paranoia about exposure to the real world" in your WRONG REASONS (IN YOUR OPINION) that it would stunt socioemotional, academic, and intellectual growth because of religious resons is ludicrous!!!
We homeschool. Neither my husband or I have college degrees, but I do consider us to be educated people. I can see why you would have issue with families like the Beckers. We have to accept that our children will grow up and live in the real world. We cannot shield them from that forever and should not try to.
Do I believe in evolution? No. Will I teach my children about it? Yes. I think that it's a much better service to them to teach them all theories, and then the reasons why we believe as we do. It is a disservice to our children to simply leave out entire subjects because we do not agree with them. If a child has never heard of something, how are they equipped to know if it is right or wrong? How can they weigh the pros and cons and understand the consequences of their actions if they are not taught? I want my children to be able to partcipate in healthy debate and develop sound decision-making skills.
I do not want my children to ever smoke, drink or use drugs. If I don't teach them that those things go against our beliefs, how are they to know that? In a case like the Beckers, it seems that parents with the best of intentions have crippled their children educationally and limited their future choices under the misconstrued idea of protecting them.
Yes, my children will probably tackle some topics later than their public school peers, but I do not feel there is anything wrong with that. Do I think I can do a better job than the public schools can? I absolutely do, without any doubt in my mind. I can teach each of my children on their level, allow them to excel where they may and work dilligently on their weaknesses to improve them and grow. Our school day is not riddled with issues of bullying, school violence, drama and fear.
Homeschooling no longer has to be a solo activity where children suffer from lack of interaction. These days there are SO many activites available from field trips and playgroups to co-ops and dual enrollment in local colleges.
It should scare everyone in this country to think of the possibility of losing the right to choose how our children are educated. I fail to see how people who feel that homeschooling should be illegal do not understand what a slippery slope we begin to slide down when we try to take away that right.
I am greatly impressed with Amber's well thought out comment. Your children are certainly blessed to have such an insightful loving teacher.
I teach in both a public shool and for a home school group. Having no children of my own, I initally made the decision to do both for economic reasons. Absolutely there are major differences between the two, and seeing the direction our public schools have been going in lately, I have decided that home schooling or private school are the only options for my own children.
Furthermore, I completely disagee with the State of California's ruling. Many intelligent and patient people decide to study other subjects besides teaching. Some people are good teachers and others aren't, regardless of certification. Our children are an extension of ouselves, not government property. We are intellingent and educated and know what is best for our own child.
the reality is that they're NOT teaching only 2 or 3 students.
My point entirely - if a home schooled child isn't even up to minimum educational standards with a privileged situation (being in such a small "class") then they should be back in school.
The concern about homeschooling does not derive from the folks who are writing such thoughtful responses to this blog and who are dertainoly doing a good job of educating their children. But, basically, their attitude is: I do a good job. Leave us all alone!
The concern is about those homeschoolers who are not nearly so thoughtful, those who all would agree are doing a substandard job. Don't we as a society have a duty to protect children from a lousy education - be it in school or in the home?
The homeschcolers advocating a hands-off society are geing unrealistic and irresponsible.
The concern is about those homeschoolers who are not nearly so thoughtful, those who all would agree are doing a substandard job.
No, I am perfectly willing to accept that not everyone is a better teacher than the average licensed teacher. I might even accept that the majority of parents are not particularly good as teachers. The question is whether the harm caused by well-intentioned but incapable parent-teachers is severe enough to (a) encroach on people's natural rights as parents to raise their children as they see fit, and (b) deny to society the benefits of children who might be raised by particularly capable parent-teachers.
For me, there would have to be incontrovertible evidence of substantial harm to society before I would be willing to accept that it is in the polity's interest to support such measures.
Plato made a grand argument for subverting the family for the good of the state, pulling children from their homes and families to raise them according to their aptitudes. There is a good argument that this might lead to an overall benefit to the body politic and to the community, but at the cost of individuality, independence, and freedom.
Those values are precisely the ones at stake here. The case may not be as extreme as child-snatching, but it is a question of the rights of individuals and those of the state, and I think in the case of requiring only licensed teachers be permitted to teach students throws that balance way out of whack.
So after home schooling is deamed illegal by the govt where do we go. In no way are Govt schools better. After we have govt mandated health care- will I be practicing illegal medicine for wrapping a sprained ankle on my child? I mean am I really qualified to do so? The govt should be in charge of wrapping the ankle right? What a bunch of crud--I bet the California schools havent said the pledge for years, yet the judge sais govt schools are to build natioanalism and pride. If anything govt schools tear pride and nationalism down-- along with religion.
My daughter is only 8 months old right now so the decision to home school or not is still a bit down the road. However after witnessing the public school system where I currently live verses in my hometown, I have decided to at least move back before she is of school age. Why? Because the schools are virtually prisons down here. Heaven forbid if a kid gets a hole in the knee of their jeans. That's cause for detention or being sent home. Some things I understand are for the safety and well being for the whole, but some things just get taken too far. As far as the actual education goes, I happen to know of a recent high school graduate of the public school system here in Florida and she still refers to astronauts as "spacemen". She believes that things like trees and the enviroment aren't important to her future. And what really gets under my skin is the fact that she's so hateful toward the Jewish religion. And I'm not even Jewish. Maybe it's the fault of her parents. Maybe the school system. In her case it is a bit hard to tell. I just know I don't want my daughter growing up learning how to not care about the world as a whole.
I home school and am proud of it. I have always home schooled my children and it is what we choose to do. With so many people yelling about choice these days, no matter what agenda it pertains to, why do people think that the choice of homeschooling should be taken away? Are they afraid of what can be accomplished when children are allowed to learn without borders?
What people fail to remember is that the public school system has only been around for a relatively short time, around a hundred years or less. Parents home schooled their children before that, some privileged children had private tutors, which isn't much different than homeschooling today. Many public school students have to have tutors. All of my aunts and most of my cousins are public school teachers. They all support our homeschooling endeavors and encourage me to continue. Please don't think I believe everyone should home school, those that should not regrettably are the ones that people often think of when homeschooling is mentioned.
Ivy league colleges seek out homeschooling graduates. Many homeschoolers pay for testing every year for their children, this is money that comes out of their own pocket. We seek the best for our children. No matter how well intentioned public school teachers are, they are not able to teach each child to their individual learning style.
Please think on this... were these people not qualified in their fields: Martha Washington, Albert Einstein, Blaise Pascal, Dwight L. Moody, Woodrow Wilson, Winston Churchill, Mark Twain, Hans Christian Anderson, Abraham Lincoln, Abigail Adams, Clara Barton, John Quincy Adams, Will Rogers, Sally Ride, George Washington, Orville Wright, Wilbur Wright, Leonardo Da Vinci, Booker T. Washington, General MacArthur, Agatha Christie, Daniel Webster, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Stonewall Jackson, Alexander Graham Bell, Teddy Roosevelt, C.S. Lewis, Jonathan Edwards, George Washington Carver, Florence Nightingale, Patrick Henry, Pierre Curie, Pearl S. Buck, John Paul Jones. They were all homeschooled along with many other famous people.
There is a reason that homeschooling has gained so much popularity in the last twenty years. It's not because moms are too lazy to take their children to school, it's because the mother's heart is her children's schoolroom where learning is a way of life and takes place everyday and instills a love of learning that is fostered every day.
I look forward to seeing the great feats home schooled children will accomplish in the near future. Watch out because one day, maybe very soon, they may be the lawmakers.
Let me start out with my situation and the experiences that I have had. I am a nine year homeschool student age sixteen living somewhere in America. I went back to public school during my sophomore year in high school. I am currently on summer vacation after having just completed my junior year in school. So I have experience with both systems and the ways they work. Some of the things that I have to say first are going to deal with previous comments made. There is a lot of talk about the right's of people to do things in there own home. This is now becoming more evident than ever with the recent anti-socialist trends that are resurfacing all over the country. Even through this seeming paranoia of doing anything group oriented I have to agree that there is a line that must be drawn on whether or not a parent has a right to school there own child. I must also agree that the restrictions on schools as far as religion and freedom of speech are hindering the parents abilities to make the children into the adults that they want, as opposed to the adults that the school system makes of them. I've personally experienced this with kids that I used to know and there moral values going into school. Naturally they will change as time passes but such dramatic shifts are more evident to the parental units when homeschooled. I hate parental controls as much as the next person but I must say that I would be a morally weaker person without such strong enforcement from my parents.
Onto something else though, concerning the slackers in homeschools around the nation that have lawmakers shivering in their boots; There are a few key flaws with this argument. First if a parent is going to homeschool there child in the first place this requires a relative degree of money that cannot be obtained without a well paying job, USUALLY needing a college degree. Therefore in almost all homeschool enviroments there is an individual with a college degree "under there belt" who is capable of teaching there child anywhere from 1st through 12th grade material. So there's almost no way the knowledge they are teaching to there children they haven't already learned themselves. And also with the dreaded "No child left behind" program instilled into the public school systems, it's essentially impossible to fail public school if you have an IQ over ninety and show up for class every day. You don't have to try to pass, you just have to try not to fail and are usually quite capable of pulling off at least a B average. It's a despicable comment on public school but also a harsh fact. And the slackers at home will be slackers at public school as well, only it's easier there. Knowledge still comes down to williness to obtain it, and it doesn't matter where it's learned. This is what I think about the homeschool situation in America.
To Happyhomeschooling:
Not that it really matters either way, but Einstein was NOT home schooled. Maybe you should check the others on your list.
I was homeschooled from 4th grade when my parents decided they wanted better for there kids. I think there are a bunch of socialist out there trying to say that they are afraid of people that want to think for themselves.
This comes down to a couple major points in my eyes.
#1 Relgion in which they have to battle with the THEORY of evolution and the FACTS of creation. Because they don't even want a higher power to answer to besides themselves.
#2 There socialist, well really a communistic view of how society should work.
Maybe they are afriad of people that think for themselves and use common sence ( which is strongly discouraged in our schools ) in such a way to promote freedom and love for our country and what it was founded for ( they don't want you to know this either ) FREEDOM.
So they could carry on their lives as they see fit.
Maybe these socialist would be happy with everything government run? Sounds like a hilter government to me.
I am more than able to keep pace with my peers, even the college grads. And I found my self much more preparred for the " real life "if you will than all the kids I knew and played with in town.
I know I cannot force my view on anyone, so please don't force your views on me. I know this is not how it is however in the socialist's world.
I could go on for hours but I will leave you with this one thought.Thomas Edison, Yes a homeschooler. So remember to thank a homeschooler next time you turn on your lights.
That's all I think most of the non-free thinkers can take at once.
I still say GOD Bless America. Land of the FREE and home of the Brave.
The list seems pretty arbitrary. Free public schooling has only recently become the norm even in the US, and especially for girls. So, examples from the nineteenth century and earlier are probably not particularly compelling.
And many of the people on this list (including Einstein) studied extensively at home, but most still attended schools. In many cases this was because they didn't do particularly well in school, either because they didn't do well with authority (Einstein, Churchill, and others) or they had an impediment of some sort (Wilson) that necessitated enrichment learning at home.
But to be clear, of that list, I believe Einstein, Wilson, Churchill, Twain, Anderson, JQ Adams, Rogers, Ride, the Wright Bros., MacArthur, Webster (a famous Phillips Exeter alum), FDR (a famous Groton Alum), Jackson, Bell, Lewis,
A number of these folks were not "home schooled"--they worked. Moody was sent off to do child labor, I believe, and Twain, John Paul Jones, and Anderson all became apprentices at around 11 years of age. And, of course, two of these people were born into slavery.
So, most of these people had some form of formal schooling, and I suspect many who didn't would have opted for it if they had had the opportunity. I'm a proponent of homeschooling, but that list doesn't do much to support it.
Oops, I seem to have left off part of a sentence (I blame it on several years of homeschooling!):
But to be clear, of that list, I believe Einstein, Wilson, Churchill, Twain, Anderson, JQ Adams, Rogers, Ride, the Wright Bros., MacArthur, Webster (a famous Phillips Exeter alum), FDR (a famous Groton Alum), Jackson, Bell, and Lewis all attended formal schools for some or all of their pre-university education.
Interestingly, Einstein actually attended a Catholic school from 6-9years, so maybe that's where we should send all of our kids.
In response to some of you who feel that Home Schoolers are not participating on a level playing field (as in Home Schooling children do better on tests because the parent is only teaching to 2 or 3),that comment shows both bias and ignorance. Not only is that one parent teaching 2 or 3, but she/he is teaching at 2 or 3 different grade levels (along with the subject matter research and preparation) of each course each school day. Is the public school teacher doing that? Also, the article implied it's unfair (to public schools)to compare the public school teacher with 15-20 children with parents home schooling 2 or 3. Please do your research-I am related to home schoolers with 5 children and know many more with 3-9 children. The mothers are extremely well-organized and well-read, the children participate in a variety of team sports, music lessons, Co-ops/Group Schools, Church groups, volunteer, are Civil War Re-enactors and Youth Historical interpretors, hold part-time jobs, etc. I'm also related to public school teachers and know they would not be able to simultaneously teach several grade levels of any subject to more than two children because they are not trained to. Despite what the NEA and your local school board say, public school teachers do not walk on water, nor do they have a monopoly on knowledge and education. My six-year-old is reading on a third grade level, loves to spell and learn new words for fun, writes and draws daily on her own, and would be totally bored sitting in a desk in public school. When the high school student cashier at the local McDonald's recently could not count back 89 cents in change (a First-Second grade skill), I was thankful we're Home Schooling.
Please do not get sidetracked and lose sight of the original intent of both the post and my comment.
Yes, a few elememts of Einstein's education did come from home education. I merely typed the names from a well circulated list. Silly me didn't take the time to research and verify each and every name before posting them. See homeschoolers can trust others, as I did when I used that list. I am curious now and will look into the names I listed.
My post was not just about the names ... there was much more that I wrote in my comment. It was one paragraph out of six. Please don't miss the forest for the trees.
Another bit of misconception (i.e. misinformation) regarding Home Schooling-no accountability and the fear that the children are suffering. People, people, when you will you learn to do some research? Most states require some form of testing (Stanford, California Achievement Test, etc) with results reported to local School Boards or portfolios of student coursework examined by a licensed teacher/Administrator,and some require attendance logs. It is a misperception and outright lie (being perpetrated in some case by School Boards and teachers seeking to abolish Home Schooling) that Home Schooled children are not being held "equally" accountable. The tests, by recognized testing sources, consistently show Home Schoolers generally score higher and that makes public schools look bad and they don't like it. Public Schools here are paid per child per day, so of course they want your child in school. Wake up America! Public school teachers are underpaid, but School Boards have huge operating budgets-how much are your Administrators and Principals making off of your children today?
Home Schooling should be illegal because it is an abusive practice in that it denies the child his right to free public education.
Schools are communities and if a child does not live in this community he will not learn how to live in society. Read the book "Everything I need to know I learned in Kindergarten"
Aside from the social aspect of schools and education, not all parents have the qualifications to educate their child.They don't have the skills necessary to know if their child has special needs of any manner.The parents don't know how well a child is progressing from what they are spitting back at them. Education is more than book learning. And their is more to teaching than just spitting out facts and having them thrown back at you.
As a retired teacher, I am totally against home schooling.It will be the destruction of free public education as we know it.
Do the schools need to come into the 21st Century, the answer is yes. But they do work.
Ask yourself who taught you to read?
Would we allow parents to perform surgery on their children at home? Of course not, we want a skilled surgeon to operate in an accredited hospital.
I apologize for the incorrect spelling of there.It is late and my brain is slowing. I didn't catch it.
To the poster who made comments about "socialists" - your grammar, spelling and fuzzy logic are not good publicity for homeschooling...
Could you tell me what you actually mean by the word "socialist"?
To Anonymous, I have no idea why you sent this message to me. I did not mention the word socialist once in my article. Perhaps you should learn to read!
Perhaps leaving this message is needless, because almost every side of this argument has been fought for, defended, thrown down and tossed aside. But, nevertheless, here I am!
I guess my story is fairly unique. I was public school and private school educated from K-4. I spent third and fourth grade learning very little other than talking in the middle of class will get your name on the board. Meanwhile, my little brother was doing 4th grade level work at home (helping me with my homework) and yet his teacher - instead of allowing him to move up, do extra work, etc. - had him coloring pictures the majority of the day, since he'd already finished his day's work.
I guess you can see why my parents - both highly intelligent and very educated people - decided to pull us out and homeschool. Were we unsocialized? No. In some ways, I feel we were more socialized than the average public schooler. How often do kids get to go to Washington D.C. for a week learning about our nation's history (note the patriotism)?
My brother is now well on his way to getting his Masters in Electrical Engineering. My other brother is just beginning the long road to dentistry. My little sister just graduated high school at 16 and is currently thinking about a career in photography.
I have always loved to write and at 17 began a specialized writing course. I have published two novels which have sold a combined 14,000 copies.
And this is where my story gets unique. I just recently got married to a man who graduated with a dual license in both elementary and special education.
Will I homeschool my future kids? Honestly, I don't know. Were there things I missed about public school? I'm not going to lie and say no - homeschool dances aren't usually pulled off so well. :) Am I thankful my parents homeschooled me? Absolutely yes.
To homeschool or to not homeschool is not really the question here, in my opinion. Rather, how much control do parents have the right to have over their kids? If our government feels they can more intuitively govern the individual needs of our kids than their own parents, something is wrong. Are there homeschooling parents who should not homeschool? Of course. Are there teachers in the public school who should not teach? Of course.
But in a country where freedom is sung about and occupation, religion and accommodations are ours for the choosing, I guess I don't see how cutting parental rights on education is constitutional either. If my government can tell me I cannot homeschool my child, can they also enforce where he/she does receive their education? What class, what teacher, what subjects? Can they say we need more businessman and "encourage" my child to go to business school?
Where does it end?
If our school system is sooo great, why do we keep dropping worldwide in the field of education. Aren't we somewhere around 17th or so now; about 25 years ago, we had dropped to something like 7th or somewhere around that figure.
At school they hear all about sex and how not to get pregnant; they are exposed to drugs; lazy teachers (that's what I said); a lot of extra curriculum that really isn't necessary; and they do not stress reading, writing and arithmetic - the basics that you need in order to make it in this world. Religion is a no-no - no freedom of religion here. I'd rather see a well rounded, home schooled child, than one that is pregnant and can't read nor spell.
So is it only the issue of homeschooling a few students? What about private/parochial/academy schools--these aren't "public". What about the Amish who school their children ONLY to 8th grade-- are we going to require them to attend public schools AND do it through 12th grade? This question is one of the silliest I've seen in a while.
I'm in favor of disconnecting California from the rest of the U.S. and let it float out sea.
I turned to homeschooling my children because the public school system was so terrible. The resources for academically gifted were practically non-existent.
That, however, was not the main reason to homeschool. I homeschooled for socialization reasons. My children have wonderful manners, are well-read and can hold a conversation with anyone from the elderly to kindergarteners, plumbers to professors. They have many friends and interests. They are compassionate and environmentally responsible. They all play at least two musical instruments, dance, enjoy theater, and excel in sports.
Two of my children are now in high school, one is going to Cornell Medical School and the other deep in medical school applications.
I still stand by my belief that no matter what, it should ALWAYS be the parent's choice, not the government's, regarding the education of our own children.
ANONYMOUS, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET A RISE OUT OF ME. CHILDREN ARE ENTITLED TO A FREE PUBLIC EDUCATION, IF THEIR PARENT WISH TO PAY FOR PRIVATE THOSE SCHOOLS SERVE THE SAME PURPOSE AS PUBLIC. THE CHILDREN ARE ATTENDING A "SCHOOL".
AS FOR THE AMISH, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN COMMUNES AND SOCIETY.
DO NOT EMAIL ME AGAIN,I HAVE A LIFE TO LEAD OTHER THAN ANSWERING EMAILS!
Something that always bothered me about homeschooling was the fact that a lot of women use it as a way to play “teacher” instead of actually teaching their children.
I went to public school, and while it was tough at times, I have always had my own convictions about the world and kept my creativity as well as my strength of character. I see now that school was far too easy for me, and that the main thing that I concentrated on was the delicate growth of my social understanding and ability to interact with others. When I was younger, I remember staying home sick from school one day. My mother decided that this would be a great opportunity to “homeschool” me. It was terrible! I hated her constant drilling and the fact that it was obviously her trying to play school for her own amusement (and she didn’t even give me breaks or lunches the way the school did, so I couldn’t even be free to do as I wanted. Moreso, she decided that school should go even longer than the normal school day as well.. I was so horrified from this experience that I NEVER missed a day of public school after that, no matter how sick I was. I would rather suffer being sick and be around my friends than have to suffer at home with my horrible controlling mother.
Which makes me wonder; why does this have to be an all or nothing sort of situation. If your kids learn things in school, why can’t you also follow up or supplement their learning at home? Why are you somehow removed from being able to influence their beliefs and morals if they go to school? After all, it’s not like you can’t see your children after they get off of school, or take them to church or whatnot after they get off of school.
Plus, we also have private schools that have religious and social teachings that many conservative parents would approve of, all taught by credentialed teachers.
Here’s what I think should be done, at the very least, to make things better for homeschoolers.
First of all, I think that all of the parents who decide that they want to “play teacher” should have to follow the state standards (which are quite loosely based) as well as pass the CBEST (or equivalent) test. If you have to take tests like this to substitute teach, why not for home school as well? It basically shows whether you can pass the minimum of required knowledge for teaching, so it should be mandatory for home schooling. Additionally, I think that all home schooling parents should take a few classes either online or through the local community college to prepare them for teaching and what it’s going to be like. Also, as a helpful resource, they should be given lists of helpful materials and groups for social learning as well.
If parents really have the best interests in education, they should be willing to do at least this much to ensure that they aren’t just “playing school” with their children’s futures.
Additionally, I am tired of people throwing the word “freedom” around. It’s one thing to have rights and responsibilities, and quite another to just support “doing whatever you want”. That’s really not freedom at all; that’s anarchy an chaos. The idea of “freedom” being to do what you want, when you want, is a consumerist, self-centered and closed-minded way of thinking. Basically, you’re saying “screw everyone else, I want what I want now!” It’s the screaming of a petulant child, and it completely ignores the fundamental needs of a human being, considering that we are social creatures and need each other to survive and thrive. You don’t expect that just because you pay taxes to help maintain the roads that you can drive on the wrong side of the street or on the sidewalk in the name of “freedom”, so why should you be allowed to imprison your children in ignorance and closed-mindedness with little to no educational knowledge of your own. Ignorance begets ignorance, and I’ve heard of situations in which supposed “homeschooled” children were being forced to work at jobs, often in violation of child labor laws.
And, to take this a step further, why shouldn’t I be allowed to get a college degree by “homeschooling” myself? After all, I can do all the reading and papers and whatnot that you’d do at a normal school. Why should I be forced to pay outrageous amounts of money to go to college when I can do most of my degree at home? And yet, people seem to think that when you get a college education, that it’s somehow important to go to schools, yet K-12 is supposedly considered somehow less important?
In the end, there is no one solution to the debate about values, morals and beliefs. However, I think that it’s really a situation that should be regulated better, simply because if you’re as “qualified” as you say you are, you should be willing to prove yourself for the sake of your children. If, on the other hand, you simply want to play dollies and place your children in an environment where you’re basically extending your days of playing with dolls and pretending to play teacher, then you are endangering their livelihood, and that should never be allowed.
Hello,
I live in the state of Penna.
Here we have to answer to the school dist. every year. They make sure that the requirements are met that the state has set out.
I know that there are some states that dont require anything. So I would say, have requirements for the family's that homeschool. It is a good thing to have someone to answer to. I've homeschooled my son since he was in 6th grade. There were many reasons why I started to do this. It has turned out to be one of the best experiences for us, as a family.
My son has gotten a wonderful education since he's been schooling at home. In elem. school I felt that the quality of what he was given to learn was very poor. To many wasted hours in school doing pretty much nothing. He is now in 12th grade and taking classes at the local college. And doing extreamly well. My husband and I never went to college. Nor do we have a teaching licence. But my son has gotten more at home than he would have ever gotten at home. Also the other home school families that we have met, and we have met many are pretty much the same as us. They care very much about their children's education, and they go out of their way to make sure they get every opportunity to excel in whatever their child needs for their future. My son has made life long friends from the activities that I've taken him to. Bowling, being in a bell choir, a co-op, 4-H, and there are so many more things.
Infact, last spring he went with his bell choir to Germany to ring for schools, nursing homes, and churches, and our army base there.
It was a wonderful expirence.
No one has to just sit and look at the four walls, when schooling at home. There is so much to do, that you find yourself having to say "no" to things, or you'd never get your work done.
I recomend it, for those that are fed up with the public school system. How dare they say that people cant teach their children.
We teach them to use the potty. We teach them to eat with a fork, and so many other things. What makes you think we cant teach them, math, science, language, history, etc.? Einstein was homeschooled. And most of our early presidents. So what's the problem??
Thanks for letting me speak my mind.
Which makes me wonder; why does this have to be an all or nothing sort of situation.
In an ideal world, I would be able to pick and choose to the benefit of my children. I know California and other states have experimented with this, allowing homeschooled children to attend part-day and part-week at public schools. The problem is simple enough: I think that a substantial amount of time at school is not beneficial to children's development, and that some of that work may be detrimental. (E.g., it seems that some proportion of public school teachers actually believe that the hogwash passed off as "intelligent design" has a significant place in the classroom.)
In the end, I want my kids to have time to play, and not spend their entire day studying; kids need to play in order to become whole people. I don't want to force them to waste 7+ hours of their day on something that isn't as beneficial as what they could be doing at home.
First of all, I think that all of the parents who decide that they want to “play teacher” should have to follow the state standards (which are quite loosely based) as well as pass the CBEST (or equivalent) test.
I am not your mother :). I don't play teacher, I teach, and have done so professionally for about 20 years now. I am not, however, licensed--nor have I taken the CBEST. I teach in a university, which requires none of that sort of nonsense, because universities generally recognize that there are a range of different ways of knowing and ways of teaching.
The irony, then, is that you think I should get the permission of the state to teach my own kids, when I don't require that permission to teach adults.
I understand not everyone is cut out to teach, either at home or in schools. My concern is that I frankly do not want to waste my time taking the CBEST and otherwise wading through bureaucratic nonsense in order to educate my own child.
The kind of freedom I am advocating is not some modernist, consumerist freedom, it is precisely the sort of freedom this country was founded on: a freedom from government interference in the exercise of my basic liberties.
I am not a wild-eyed libertarian: I am fine with government regulation when it makes sense, as with drivers' licenses and licensing gun ownership. But telling me I need a license to teach my own kid? This is an intrusion that goes too far, and does not--at least today--have any basis in empirical evidence of social harm.
Hello Alex,
I live in Penna. And we dont need a licence to homeschool. But we do have to show our portfolio to the school district. I dont see a problem with this, as I have been doing it for 6 years, so far.
It doesn't bother me to show them how well my son is doing.
Maybe if I lived in another state, I might feel differently. But this has been my expirence.
This is the worst sort of socialism, "it takes a village to raise a child" blather. For everyone's information, California law does NOT require a private school teacher to have a teaching credential issued by the state. It does require the teacher to have a college degree. However, the basic issue is parents' rights. What's next Kalifornia? So the author of this article doesn't want parents to teach their own children their purported "extreme" values and beliefs? It figures. Maybe the children should be forced into the useless public schools and taught how to put condoms on bananas at age five. Perhaps they could be indoctrinated on their rights to birth control, then abortion, without parental consent. Oh yeah, those are wonderful "values" to pass on to children. Thank God I sent my daughter to private schools her entire life. If I had the time I would have home-schooled her, but private schools were my choice as a parent. The teachers did not have California teaching credentials but they did a wonderful job, nonetheless. I shudder at the thought of another panel of judges sitting on the bench and ruling our parental rights down the drain.
There's always going to be pros and cons for almost every issue that can be debated and none will outweigh the other as they will be based on a number of educated guesses and opinions on what is considered righteous and what is also considered false based on one’s beliefs/argument. There's always a good and bad to follow the balance and vice versa. Therefore, it's easy to straddle the fence per say on certain issues like this as there isn't as someone posted earlier, a "one size fits all" solution.
Although based on what I wrote above, I’m willing to bet that the people who are in control of this country’s well-being all have advanced degrees from some prestigious college in which their prior education was received by a schooling system other than public education system and/or home schooling and that’s not saying much given our current economic status. Not to mention how institutionalized the world has become it’s surprising to know they haven’t adopted this already. Who’s to say all because a teacher has credentials that it qualifies them to teach, teach what and to what extent? What justifies and/or differentiates a “qualified/accredited” teacher as opposed to a parent “teaching” by what standards/principles and beliefs are we holding them to? A teacher by definition (and this varies) is “one whose occupation is to instruct” and most of those teachings are objectified by books of which already talk about the subject matter so you could even include personified objects as being teachers. I’d like to believe from personal experiences that I’ve learned more from my mistakes than I have any grade at any school.
Homeschooled students' standardized test scored speak for themselves: it is a superior form of eduction.
I was homeschooled from 3rd to 8th grade. I was in no way sheltered from the social aspects that a public school brings, and received an incredible education with the guidance of my parents.
When I returned to public for highschool...I was ahead of my class. I had a hard time with how "behind" or "uneducated" most of the class seemed to be.
With regard to public school, I have seen teachers give better grades than the work warranted, and even mark problems correct that were not. I have VERY little faith in our public school systems. I feel that tenure only further hurts the education of our children.
The homeschooled children that I know personally are well-rounded and incredibly intelligent individuals. Homeschooling can open doors that would be otherwise closed to the normal publically schooled child.
But then again, each is entitled to their own opinion...
Given the gross failure of California public schools, the rampant teen pregnancy and std rate, the atrocious use of illegal drugs, and the influx of illegal immigrants drawing on teacher resources, I am suprised to read any intelligent educator decry home schooling.
The 10% of idiot parents who won't teach their children adequately are offset by the 10% of professional teachers who don't teach their students adequately. I am sure everyone can remember having a lame teacher or two. Did you have a class period you used for homework? Mine was American History and the teacher never caught me doing my algebra in her class.
Is it better to have an idiot with no vested interest teach a child or have an idiot who is completely invested in the child.
Maybe California should be more concerned with issues that fall naturally in the realm of government--like transportation, energy, safety, and security. Maybe the Cali government should get out of social engineering--they are not very good at it.
Homeschooled kids outperform state-educated kids. That alone should end this ridiculous discussion.
Steve:
That was an incredible post. Thank You!
Hello,
Its not just a discussion. Its a dark cloud that might pass over all the states in this country.
That's why its so important to stop it in Calif. The land of fruits and nuts..(Sorry) I have a brother in Calif.
But the judge that seems to be having a say in this, and may change our rights to school our own children, needs to be stopped as soon as possible.
I'm all for homeschooling, but I can't believe those of you are serious who argue public education is NOT the responsibility of our government, only parents.
You msy view the "good old days" as when children's education was not mandatory, when there were no public schools to go to, where there were no child labor laws, where illiteracy was widespread, where only the rich got any education at all, and parental rights included children as their property to do with as they pleased. It's called the early 19th century.
You do no favor to your cause by arguing such nonsense.
That's a bit of a red herring. I see no one arguing that homeschooling should be the only schooling available. The argument is simply that parents should have a choice in how their children are educated.
Frankly, if I had access to a public school that did a particularly good job (and I am lucky that in my area, that may be a possibility), I would use them.
The problem is simple enough: I think that a substantial amount of time at school is not beneficial to children's development, and that some of that work may be detrimental. (E.g., it seems that some proportion of public school teachers actually believe that the hogwash passed off as "intelligent design" has a significant place in the classroom.)
I’ve noticed, however, that many home school proponents are avid ID believers, and like the idea of abstinence only or nonexistent sex education (as though omitting this information will keep them from ever doing it). Most of the assaults on our public education systems seem to be based on the same people who try to home school their children to get them away from “evil and blasphemous” teaching. I think that people have the right to learn about things in the appropriate places. If religious people don’t want their faith put under a microscope and tested, then they cannot expect that they can just make stuff up or read out of their holy book and have it accepted without question or source checking, while everything else must be questioned, tested, and questioned again. Religion is a personal matter, and when people have it questioned or brought up, they feel personally attacked. This is why churches have classes and sessions for after school and work. This is why there is Sunday School, and religious alternative private schools for children whose parents believe that putting faith-based curriculum into the classroom is a good move. But as for public schools, where people of all sorts of races, creeds, and backgrounds must go, religion should be left to be part of a social studies class or at most, a comparative religion course. But there really isn’t any science in religion, and religion that tries to pass itself off as “science” that should simply be absorbed and believed without question, is actually quite blasphemous, especially in regards to ID.
Schooling needs to come into the 21’st century, but it’s more complicated than just saying a few bad apple teachers are ruining the system. First of all, there is a huge wave of retiring teachers, secondly, there is a large amount of people being given emergency credentials straight out of college, and a lot of them should NOT be teaching (I should know, I did an education minor and a good number of the people in my classes were hoping to go into teaching because they wanted an “easy” job that they didn’t have to try too hard at. Then, let’s look at cutbacks on schools, “No Child left behind” (which tries to just sweep children through school without paying attention to their needs), and the main fact that most teachers have little to no training on how to deal with the diverse groups of people in their classes, and they aren’t very well equipped to deal with the sheer overcrowding and lack of materials given to them. Add onto that the “scripted” teaching programs that make teachers read a script to their students, and you’ve got a big problem, but it’s not the school itself that is at fault; it’s the bureaucracy of politicians who like to sound good on paper and for the polls but make or support bad legislation due to lobbying interests coupled with the overbearing belief that people have that somehow schools should be able to do a great job without any money, support, training, or supplies. Yeah, right! If we had the same attitude towards roads, our highways would be made of mud and gravel!
Plus, home schooling basically assumes that one person will stay home and do the teaching. But who will that be? Not all people have the luxury to keep one person out of the workforce, and it’s almost bad enough an economy that soon you’ll need at least three incomes to make any meaningful amount of money.
In the end, I want my kids to have time to play, and not spend their entire day studying; kids need to play in order to become whole people. I don't want to force them to waste 7+ hours of their day on something that isn't as beneficial as what they could be doing at home.
“Play” can mean all sorts of things, though. Many of the learning-based stations and activities at school can be similar to “play”, only structure and content is involved. Play does not always mean frivolity and outside of school. If you look at places like the Exploratorium and similar complexes, they show all sorts of science or natural phenomena in a fun and interesting manner. Many classrooms nowadays are integrating “centers” into basic learning and teaching, so that students are constantly moving from one thing to the next without getting bored. This is important, because in a classroom, no one should be sitting and doing nothing. Having your mind engaged is a very important sort of “play” and I think that schools need to be redefined less as an egg crate model (where the students just sit in their spots and are “filled” with knowledge), and more as a community model, where there is structure as well as feedback and interaction between students and the material.
I am not your mother :). I don't play teacher, I teach, and have done so professionally for about 20 years now. I am not, however, licensed--nor have I taken the CBEST. I teach in a university, which requires none of that sort of nonsense, because universities generally recognize that there are a range of different ways of knowing and ways of teaching.
I forgot to mention that my mother had actually majored in child development while she was in junior college, and supposedly knew how to do some ‘teaching”. However, my experience with it was so bad, that I would go to school with horribly high temperatures or while feeling sick to my stomach and just “suffer it out” because I was so terrified of being forced to go through that sort of ordeal again.
The annoying thing about university was that I found that it was sometimes even WORSE than my K-12 experience. Many of them just sort of rambled at the front of the class and then wanted us to read the book (usually one that they had written) and answer the questions in the back of the book. Even if we got into debates in class, most of that sort of stuff didn’t factor into your final grade. Instead, we were given scan-trons and multiple-choice tests full of information that seemed suspiciously similar to my high school testing. My few good experiences in college were few and far between, and certainly not worth the obscene amount of money that went towards my tuition fees. At the end of my college experience, I felt like I was simply paying a huge amount of money to be bored in class and listen to professors (or TA’s) reiterate the readings verbatim and in exchange for “doing the time” I was given a BA. And, of course, nothing I actually learned in college helped me to get a job, nor was I able to do any unpaid internships since I was spending all my time that I wasn’t wasting in class working at a job to pay the rent and meager food supply. I got some good student jobs through the university, but the second I stopped being a student, those jobs were no longer an option, and I was thrown out into the big scary world. I am completely ambivalent about going back to school because as far as I’m concerned, a MA would simply be another obscene amount of money being dumped into a degree name so that I can get slightly better paying jobs that the degree program will do nothing to prepare or network me into getting. And I know that I’m not alone. The OP talks about success as “going to college” but really, what success is that? In our world, a BA hardly gets you past hamburger flipping, and there are little to no support networks in colleges to help young people succeed unless they’re on their parent’s dime and being covered by full-ride scholarships.
I understand not everyone is cut out to teach, either at home or in schools. My concern is that I frankly do not want to waste my time taking the CBEST and otherwise wading through bureaucratic nonsense in order to educate my own child.
I passed the CBEST test with my measly BA degree, and as far as I’m concerned, spending 3 hours on a test is a worthwhile time commitment in the interest of keeping children from being homeschooled by unworthy parents.
The kind of freedom I am advocating is not some modernist, consumerist freedom, it is precisely the sort of freedom this country was founded on: a freedom from government interference in the exercise of my basic liberties.
Where in your basic liberties, does it say that you are allowed to teach your children whatever you want at home and possibly hold them back from excelling or having THEIR own ability to achieve “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”? You speak of the