Hugley says this is the first that HB586 has been
discussed on schedule. There has been no plan to rush this
bill. It has always been planned to put this in a study
committee. This bill was designed to start discussion on
this subject.
This bill is not about whether hs is a good endeavor.
It is about safety of children. Means to safeguard children
who have parents who do not care about the well being of
their children. There is concern of the SSW that there is
no law regarding verifiable information of hs students of
this state except how many are being homeschooled. 17,481 is
the number of hs students in 1996. Dept. of Ed. cannot say
how many hs go K-12, how many come back to public
school, results of assessments, testings. She feels that
home study students become a protected class because no
information can be asked of them. When someone requested a
street address and not just a PO HSLDA said that an address
is not required by law on the attendance forms. HB586 would
simply establish a window to declare the intent to home
school option within two weeks of the beginning of a
semester. This would address a primary issue of SSW of
whether people are home studying or are truant. This would
protect hs families from undue intrusion and let people know
who is homeschooling and who is not. She does not believe
that good hs parents would want to provide cover for those
who are not obeying the law.
Another requirement is proof of high school ed. or GED.
Another important requirement affects when hs students
are placed back in the public school.
HS programs should not be allowed when child abuse, or
spouse abuse exists. This issue should be addressed when
asking for the intent form to homeschool. The goal is to
provide balance. We want to be fair to hs families but also
to the compulsory school attendance.
The Committee questioned Rep. Hugley:
Q. What is meant by lack of enforcement?
A. Declare intent in advance not asking them to do
anything that would prohibit them to do anything that is
currently under the law. She thinks this will help HS
families not to be harassed.
Q. How many children do the ssw estimate are falling
through the cracks because of the present legislature?
A. She said that information is not available because
information is not available to the ssw.
Q. Along the abuse, do we allow students convicted
and/or parents attend public school who have been abusive?
A. Yes we do. If the only mechanism is the monitoring
of the parent and there are no penalties to set up your
program or tests then we have to apply appropriate
safeguards.
Q. You mentioned protected class of society. Elaborate
on that. I want my children to be protected from things that
go on in public school. How can you use the name of
protected class the way you did?
A. She mentioned again that parents are left to their
own devices but that parents are not required to send any
information back.
Q. Same person. We are bringing more government
bureaucracy to our homes. Do you see what's happened to our
public school because of these regulations?
A. She says it's not about more regulations but the
timing of the declaration of intent. Most parents decide
where their children are going to go to school at a certain
time of the year. She sees this provision as a balance,
protecting. She believes we have good strong parents that do
quite well. She still sees the provisions needed to cover
these areas in the state of Georgia.
Q. I know you have made a number of modifications to
the bill. I know you are sincere in your concern for the
kids. I have two questions. First, a point of philosophy you
and I will disagree on. If you go back to case law, supreme
court decisions, situations between school and parents there
is a primary bond between children and parents that
determines how our system operates. Our differences come
into who is the primary caretaker and who looks after the
children and it is up to the parents to provide that
protection. I've done some research on molestation and abuse
and it says it does happen but is normally by a
non biological parent and that goes to an area we cannot get
to in this bill. But in terms of using ed. or something to
take away from the child is not the setting for this. My
primary question is the issue of timing. You point out that
one parent has abused this and I can't refute that this has
happened. What I can refute is how widely this change would
affect other children. We have some schools who have become
aggressive on expelling children. If a child misses half of
the year of school they never catch up and wind up in the
38ch% dropout rate. What concerns me is that are we
condemning that child to never get their high school diploma
and never be able to compete in society? Have you considered
this option for parents who have a delinquent child in the
system?
A. She thinks the important thing is that the
declaration be made in advance. Maybe we could sit down and
talk about this option.
Q. Under the previous law there is a requirement that
a parent would submit within 30 days of establishing program.
Why is the new measure strengthening this matter.
A. She thinks and hopes the committee will agree that
it is not unreasonable to change when the intent form should
be submitted. She thinks if this could be agreed upon we
have made progress.
Q. This question was about the diploma and GED papers
being required by showing proof. One of the things you are
talking about is accountability. Do you have any
documentation from educators and community leaders that
there is a specific problem with 1 or 1 1/2h% of the
population that there is a problem in this area?
A. Said same things as before. Mainly that there needs
to be a balance. I'm saying to you that it is not a big
departure to the current law to have to present proof.
Q. Same person: What other community leaders have
documented complaints about this issue?
A. The most disturbing thing I heard came from a
grandfather who called talking about son/daughters-in-law
homeschooling child. She got mad at the teacher and took the
child out and declared to hs the student. He complained that
there is no proof that she has a program started. There is
no mechanism to address this. There are a lot of other
issues associated with hs in this state. The primary concern
is the students they have in school every day. We are
elected reps to bring issues to the public forum.
Q. Most of the time discussing today has been on the
issue of truancy. On the second page aren't the other things
discussed concerning performance and not truancy?
A. She has recommended that they strike section 7 and 8
concerning the testing and reports. Sec; 9 should be the
same because of the information public schools should be
able to receive.
Q. Same person: on the issue of the overall bill we
make a lot of decisions that are anecdotally based. Have you
asked Dept. of Ed. to do a study to find out the level of
truancy?
A. We do need to get away from the old adage if it's
not broke don't fix it. We need sometimes to have a vision
to do things from preventive standpoint.
Q. Same person spoke again. Should we not accept the
fact that if the performance issues are good that the other
issues are taken care of.
A. According to her the issues are two separate issues.
My point is that we do not want to argue that the
performance is not good. That still does not get us away
from the fact that if parents can declare 30 days after the
fact that we're going to bump into the truancy issue.
Q. Do we have any statistical data concerning dropouts
to find out if they are hs or public school students? Is
there data available about the abuse situation as to how
more are homeschooled. This person liked the changes that
Hugley made. She believes that Hugley is trying to change
things to meet the demands of the public. She commended her
and her involvement about not requiring degree to teach your
children. Have you heard from any of the social workers in
our areas to touch on these issues so owe would know who has
contacted you and not us. Perhaps if it is within our own
districts then we could contact them. You mentioned areas of
grandfathering in the present hs program can you let us know
what is going to be grandfathered into the current law?
A. If a parent or family already has a homeschooling
program you would go on as always. This window that we're
talking about would not affect existing home schooling
families. The only thing that would affect an existing
family is that if they send their child back to the public
school that they would have to submit their child's records.
The final section would not prohibit anybody who has already
started the program.
Q. I would like to verify something I heard that
there is no real evidence of any percentage of people who
are enrolled in a hs program who are truant. There is no
significant statistics. It is purely anecdotal. The
other one goes back to the issue on p2 #19. Perhaps there are
practices going on that are successful, a very small amount
of them, where somebody is particularly good at computer
science and somebody else is a good mathematician they will
swap off and teach the subject. I am concerned that if this
particular part of homeschooling is currently successful we
are taking away something that is currently working.
Q. This rep changed his view about homeschooling after
35 years of being in ed. and now rep and talking with
homeschoolers. One reason people want to pull out is because
of regulations and rules about curriculum etc. I think the
thing we really need is that we already have the mechanism
and that it works. Would you be willing to drop the bill and
do nothing with it.
A. No!
Q. Do we have other states who have done something
similar to this and their experience?
A. I can think of the state of Washington and that's
where we got this language from. I chose Washington because
it's pretty conservative. I don't think it's radical to ask
the time to file the intent to be changed.
Q. When a parent sends a child to private school do
they have to register their intent with the public school?
If you follow the intent we already have children in the
malls from private schools who have a day off? There are so
many aspects of this that I wonder if we can accomplish
anything by doing this.
A. She repeated a lot of the same as before concerning
the intent form.
Q. You gave example of the grandfather and the child at
the mall. Do you think the parent realized that the 30 days
were up?
A. She stated that the situation of the grandfather is
not the issue. She wants to come up with something that
clarifies the confusion that has been presented. We can
allow for special circumstances if there are some special
circumstances.
Q. same person the advance would eliminate the problems
that may arise with parents who have to take their child out
suddenly.
Q. She rebuffed that homeschooling takes time to decide
about so there should be no problem with requesting a change
in declaring intent advance.
Q. In talking with the state dept. what areas did they
say were the real problem? Is it the prefiling?
A. The state superintendent says she thinks everything
is great with hs.
Q. same person The part you really want to hold onto is
this two week of starting of hs.
Other witnesses in support of the bill:
We heard from Melanie Hope a SSW in Laurens County who
tried to prove that there are enough cases to warrant
passing the legislation concerning the intent forms being
filled out two weeks before a semester. Melanie talked about
hs parents being allowed to take their children out of
school just because they don't like the teacher their child
has. She also said that there were 14 out of 36 last year
who were truant.
We heard from Bevelyn Gosby President of SSWAG. She
could not give any numbers on how many cases concerning
truancy or abuse that she knows about concerning hs
students.
We heard from Nathaniel Shelton who is a SSW for the
Gainesville City Schools in Hall County. He could not give
any statistics or data concerning truancy and abuse among hs
students. He gave an example of requesting an intent form
from a parent on 10/08 and didn't hear from her until
12/09/97.
Witnesses opposing the bill:
Ken Patterson. He explained the purpose of GHEA.
He asked the purpose of HB586? is it academics? no. He
talked about what they presented to the committee on 07/29.
Do writing more reports protect children at risk? No. He
talked about disagreeing with the concept that "it takes a
village to raise our children".
Q. I know we have the cream of the crop of hs here. But
you have one or two who are getting through the cracks. How
are you going to control those who do this? Do you check on
all the homeschoolers?
A. No we don't check on all the homeschoolers. It's not
our job. We have three accepted options of schooling, hs,
private, public. Let's identify the worst problem and go
after it. There are resources to deal with parents who are
not doing what they are supposed to be.
Q. Can you draw me the worst case scenario for hs?
A. Ken couldn't answer. The rep said it would be that
the children are not being taught at home.
Q. You did not mention anything regarding making intent
forms prior to anything being started. Do you have any
objection to that?
A. Ken did have an objection because parent couldn't
take student out if a situation arises.
HOUSE ED Members present [ first half ] *Rep Hugely *Rep Sherrill *Rep Earl O' Neil *Rep Porter - chairman Rep Purcell *Rep Trense *Rep Cash *Rep Snelling Rep Kaye Rep Rice *Rep Ashe *Rep Williams *Rep Coleman * only ones present during second half Several of Hugely's comments in opening statement: 1. First time HB586 has been presented to committee officially 2. Never planned to rush it through in 1997 but to be on the floor in 1998 3. HB586 - was the vehicile for discussion. 4. open for discussion and will present the HB586 by substitute MAIN REASON:" about the children with safe guards- means directly, their interest and welfare" Rep. Hugley further state that "due to the lack of accountablitity home schoolers are a protected class. There are no penalities for non compliance; no means or process for complaints [against home schoolers] ---------------------------------------------------------- REP TRENCE : " How many fall between the cracks" HUGELY: No answer because we do not have data to verify this problem -------------------------------------------------------- REP STEVE CASH: What is wrong with them being a "Protective Class"? isn't that the point of parents to protect their children? In the nutshell you want to bring more rules to home study programs? We have seen what more rules and bureacracy has done for the public school, it has lost its effectiveness. How will the changes affect the public school child who wants out? If the child misses half of a year and falls behind in studies he joins the 38% dropout rate from public schools in GA and you have eliminated the option for the parents of home schooling with this "window of accountability". ---------------------------------------------------- REP MITCHELL KAYE: The current code requires a HS dip. or GED. But it is the parent's fundamental right to teach theri child degreee or not. Why is a change needed? HUGELY: To bring accountability.... parents must submit evidence... without it we have no balance or order. example: grandfather calls school because son in law and daughter have pulled grand child out of school and have decided to home school.... parents can not agree on program for the child so no program is in place a month after the child has been withdrawn from the school. Educational neglect is taking place and there are no options of recourse for this person concerned about his grandchildren. ------------------------------------------- REP TOM RICE: If we change the DEC of INT to prior to withdrawal to account for truancy can we then throw out the need for performance changes in sec 7 & sec 8? HUGELY: Yes I would not object to omitting sec 7 & 8 HUGELY: This bill uses " Preventative Vision" to - eliminate confusion; show performance; good attendance; and that records are being kept. as far as the state is concerned there is no evidence given to back the claims made of the home schoolers progress or lack thereof. ------------------------------------ REP ANN PURCELL: Q: Can you provide each of us with specific complaints you have received from folks in our varoius districts.? The committe needs to know how many compliants are in their districts. Q: can you summarize the grandfathering clause? HUGELY: It will allow the current families to continue doing as they are now, filing an annual report prior to Sept 1, however the new families will have to file during the "window" at the beginning of each semester only and then annually thereafter. Of course we can deal with the exceptions. This only affects NEW PROGRAMS ------------------------------ REP SNELLING: 1. Can you verify the % of truant parents with evidence? or is this information only anecdotal? Will you be willing to remove line 19 - practices? HUGELY we can come togethr and utilze right reason to find balance in this bill. ------------------------------------------------- [cameras on in room several reporters focused on him while he spoke:] REP BROOKS COLEMEN: I have made a 180 degree turnaround on the issues of home education. I am a former educator and a man of history. Home School was the form used when this country began. It is the backbone of public education. Parents today are pulling out of the public school because of the rules and regulations which limit the progress of the student and limit the teachers. Unless we can show that a problem exist I say -don't fix what ain't broke. Q: My question to you then is this: will you consider droppng the bill entirely? HUGELY: thank you for that speech too while the cameras were on and my answer is simply NO- I can not drop the bill- too many children are a stake. ---------------------------------------------- REP TOM SHERILL: What other states have you checked into for their codes/laws? Which one did you base this on? HUGELY: The wording come from the state of Washington, not some crazy liberal state. We looked at one that seemed to be more conservative than most. --------------------------------------------------------- REP TRENCE: Are all states required to register? Does this really address the issue? Can we really solve this problem [truancy/abuse] by isolating a group with such small number anyway? HUGELY: If only one child experiences abuse or a family hides behind a home study program to avoid procecution we must enact the changes. --------------------------------------------------------- REP MITCHELL KAY: Are you firmly set on the "window of time"? HUGELY: This can be discussed to allow for the exception cases you may know of. You must realize we need a greater understanding of the issue and the occurance to prevent it from happening. I am not trying to prevent families from choosing a home study program. I just want them to think about it before they choose. To keep the program from being a "way out of trouble". ---------------------------------------- REP BROOKS COLEMAN: So you are open to the time element of the window? I agree their does need to be a time frame for accountability. [ note- cameras off] HUGELY: Yes we can discuss this with right reason to find a balance. ---------------------------------------------- REP KATHY ASHE: Do you really think the *prior status* will do anythink to verify the home study program? Some of this sounds like issues for Welfare reform not the schools. Abuse is a broad issue reaching all aspects of the families. Would this prior clause provide for- advance abuse- ploting to keep it secret since it has alreasdy been stated that abuse is cyclical and happens with close members of the family or friends. Do you really see home study programs as an *out for these abusers*. How do we verify if someone is a previous abuser who has straightened out and started a new life. Will they not be allowed to home school? REP HUGELY: Yes this is a big issue but even if only one or two problem exist that is one or two too many. We can not allow the children to remain in the educational setting of an abuser. ------------------------------------------------------ REP JEFF WILLIAMS: I must return to a comment you made about wanting to protect the familiy out during the day in the mall from being harassed. If this is happening then we have a much bigger problem. Is the state sending police to the residence of home study programs to "see who they are" without compelling or reasonable cause? We do not want to become a police state. HUGELY: No I'm not saying - that some of the mall security have asked that questions of famiies in the mall during the school hours. If you are concerned about how people are treated take up the cause of young people gettting checked or hassled in the mall because they ae walking around without a bag. But that is another issue not for here. Currently the state has no recourse or way to track home schoolers and shows no interest. WILLIAMS: do we have a right to track them so closely? HUGELY: We must track them educationally to ensure no neglect is taking place. WILLIAMS: If someone sees it, don't concerned citizens call? HUGELY: Yes and that is why I am here now becasue of those calls of concerned citizens for child trapped in the home study program by parents not being tracked or accountable. I am not here becuase of the parents who are concerned or caring as the ones in this room . -------------------------- REP TRENCE: Again let me ask for clarifcation... if a child is not happy in their current educational setting can they get out under the proposed changes" HUGELY: yes during the window and with the exceptions. CONCLUDED HUGELY's presentation and questions. Chairman Proter introduced the witness for the bill. Melanie Holt: [Summary of Holt's comments] In the 96-97 school year, she had 36 home school students, 14 of those were truancy cases bound for JV court in 9 of those cases it did not happen because the parents declared an intent to home school. * Need to ask date of birth. " How do I know the law is not being violated when the parent stops sending it in to me. Am I to assume the child has turned 16. In 97-98 34 Dec of Int. forms submitted -totaling 49 students. I asked of my familes and the following replied: 4 people had bachelors; 6 had some college 7 have a high school dip. 4 have GED 12 refused to answer my questions *Need to have telephone number - if the form is wrong then I could just call them and it would be so much easier then mailing it back an forth. I have many parent that do not fill out the form correctly. It adds to my wok load to have to mail things to them. * I am concerned about parents who work full 8 hour days and then claim to home school their children. This is not normal or right. The children might not be getting enough attention. She also gave home schooling data on 4 other states, NY, TN, AL, SC, [she did not mention the exemption clauses in each state.]
Rep. Hugley presented her bill and answered questions from the Committee. In her opening comments, she stated that this bill is a vehicle for beginning discussion, that it's not an attempt to restrict homeschooling, that it's not about parental rights, and that she has tried to be open to suggestions regarding the bill.
Rep. Hugley stated that the issues addressed in the bill had been brought to her attention by the School Social Workers Association of Georgia, who complained that the current home study provisions lack accountability, that they are being used by homeschoolers to avoid prosecution for truancy, and that there is "no verifiable data" about homeschoolers in Georgia. She stated that homeschool families have become a "protected class", and that there was no means of oversight, and school social workers feel powerless to deal with homeschoolers.
The proposed HB586, according to Rep. Hugley, will bring a "measure of balance" to the relationship between homeschoolers and school social workes.
According to Rep. Hugley, the single most important provision of the bill is the one preventing parents from choosing to homeschool except during the two week period immediately preceeding the start of a semester. According to Rep. Hugley, this would eliminate the "confusion" that results when a child stops coming to school (and is therefore identified to the school social workers as truant), but a declaration of intent is not filed until some time later (within the 30 day grace period). Apparently, during this period, a school social worker may begin truancy proceedings, but then find that the parents are "protected" because they have declared that they are homeschooling. Rep. Hugley also indicated that the school social workers felt that many homeschoolers were not really educating their children at home, and this change to the law would prevent "subversion of the compulsory attendance law."
The Members of the committee asked many excellent questions, only a few of which are summarized below:
Q: What is the enforcement mechanism in this bill?
A: Same as under current law.
Q: How many children are falling through the cracks?
A: We don't know.
[comment: this and similar questions regarding "data" on the "problem"
asked of Rep. Hugley and of the school social worker witnesses went largely
unanswered.]
Q: Why are school social workers concerned?
A: Because their cases are dropped when the parents declare to homeschool.
Q: Are there any abused children attending public schools?
A: Yes, but we get lots of information about them. We can't depend on the
honor of the homeschooling parents. There are no penalties for their
failure to adhere to the law. We need to apply appropriate safeguards.
Q: Does this bill eliminate the option for parents to homeschool a child
who has been expelled or who becomes truant for other, perhaps justifiable,
reasons?
A; Maybe we can come up with a set of exceptions.
Q: The current law accomodates people moving into a district during a
semester, of finding themselves in situations beyond their control where
homeschooling really is their only option.
A: This bill creates balance. Maybe we need some exceptions to cover
those situations.
Q: Do you have any documented evidence that there's a problem with
homeschooling truancy?
A: I don't want legitimate homeschooling parents to be harassed because of
uncertainty [about the status of their children]
Q: The first provision of the revised HB586 covers truancy. What about
the "performance-oriented" changes in the rest of the bill?
A: Because we don't get information anyway, I'm willing to strike these
provisions.
Q: What about section 9 [dealing with homeschooled children entering the
public school system].
A: We need this information.
Q: Does the change to (c)(3) mean that parents can't share their teaching
with other parents' children?
A: That is the provision in the current law.
Q: Have other states done something similar?
A: Yes, this bill is patterned after the Washington [state].
Q: Doesn't this "lock in" a child to the public school system until the
end of the semester?
A: Yes
Q: You've said that there are no verifiable data regarding homeschoolers.
Does this bill do anything to make the numbers more verifiable?
A: You need to take that up with the superintendents.
Three school social workers spoke in support of this bill. Melanie Holt is a school social worker from Laurens County. Ms. Holt expressed considerable concern for her inability to verify data on the declaration of intent, to verify the credentials of homeschooling parents, or to verify that testing was being conducted as required. She claimed that 14 of 36 homeschooling families in her county were probably truants. Nathaniel Shelton is a school social worker in the Gainesville City district, and chairman of SSWAG's legislative committee. He claimed to have had ten cases in the past year in which truancy was being abetted by parents using the home study law. Bevelyn Gosby is president of SSWAG, and spoke with great conviction about the need to prevent the abuse of even one child.
The Bill's OpponentsKen Patterson, Director of Georgia Home Education Association, stated that homeschoolers in Georgia were opposed to the proposed changes in the homeschooling provisions of the compulsory attendance law. He introduced Dewitte Black, a lawyer from the Home School Legal Defense Association, and Leon McGinnis, Chairman of the Home Education Information Resource.
Mr. Black briefly reviewed the status of homeschool related legislation in the US, and the available data on the performance of homeschoolers. He pointed out that this bill did not originate with those having responsibility for education in Georgia. He also identified the provisions in the current code which empower the State to take action against parents who abet truancy, or who neglect the education of their children. He addressed the provision regarding parents convicted of child or spouse abuse by pointing out that there has never been any connection between parents conducting home study programs and child abuse or spouse abuse.
Leon McGinnis began by observing the irony in having classroom teachers and school social workers on the opposite side of this issue from homeschool parents, since the three groups are arguably the three groups of citizens most concerned about children's welfare. He noted that homeschoolers certainly can appreciate the challenges facing the classroom teachers and the school social workers. He observed that the published positions of both SSWAG and GAE can be characterized as "homeschooler unfriendly" so it is not surprising that homeschoolers are concerned about this bill. Dr. McGinnis addressed specifically only two provisions of the bill. Mrs. Terri Bryson spoke to the provision limiting the time during which a parent could choose to homeschool, explaining how such a restriction would have been a hardship for her family. Dr. McGinnis observed that it made little sense to prohibit practices in homeschools that would enhance the educational experience of the children. Dr. McGinnis stated that the current law provides the State with adequate tools to enforce the compulsory attendance laws, and pointed to two newspaper articles to support that claim. The real issue here is one of due process. Homeschoolers are quite comfortable with the due process protections afforded families under the current law. Dr. McGinnis concluded by pointing out that the bill as proposed, and the presentations of its supporters, gave a very distorted image of homeschooling. If the same kind of distortion were applied to the public schools, the classroom teachers and school social workers would be justifiably outraged. Perhaps it is time for SSWAG and GAE to begin dealing with homeschoolers in a more respectful way, recognizing their academic accomplishments, and the fact that the vast majority of them are law-abiding, family-oriented, good citizens.
Christina Jeffries was invited by Chairman Porter to make some comments. She provided a critique of the public school system, explaining why many parents chose to leave that system, and calling for the public school system to embrace homeschooling and try to learn from it.
| About HEIR ||| Home ||| Contents ||| News ||| Opinion |