Johns Hopkins 2024 Homeschool Policy Summit Outcome Summary
Saved in:
| Title: | Johns Hopkins 2024 Homeschool Policy Summit Outcome Summary |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Angela R. Watson |
| Source: | Journal of School Choice. 2024 18(4):713-726. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 14 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Home Schooling, Educational Policy, Stakeholders, Conferences (Gatherings), Communities of Practice, Access to Education |
| Geographic Terms: | Maryland (Baltimore) |
| DOI: | 10.1080/15582159.2024.2422250 |
| ISSN: | 1558-2159 1558-2167 |
| Abstract: | This summary captures the current thinking on homeschool policy as expressed by a diverse group of homeschool policy stakeholders at a recent convening. Key topics discussed include the purpose of education, the regulation and support of homeschooling, and issues with access to needed resources. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1451222 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHE9CSpJGN0AvHsWtvRxixdAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDMc1r1eoILmM9MWw4gIBEICBmnP5ES70wvxG_25GuJucAsP1nxPrRN0_vRzysZO8VI6XqNHsLz-fzrDFUhtPvXuh4GlIOHUA8FZttsptoUrWp4jjBhDR6xFFlv_y4Vt02hazjcrFQ3Nm6fRdY4r2MJoSdRcdGK69_fbzN6-Gzj8oCgaKQPA3kL8ihWcHhVVBjRi8aj0cFi8TbvY1zQvobRlR7vyQo5sv866reOQ= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0181032227;[2y6a]01oct.24;2024Nov25.04:19;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0181032227-1">Johns Hopkins 2024 Homeschool Policy Summit Outcome Summary </title> <p>This summary captures the current thinking on homeschool policy as expressed by a diverse group of homeschool policy stakeholders at a recent convening. Key topics discussed include the purpose of education, the regulation and support of homeschooling, and issues with access to needed resources.</p> <p>Keywords: Education policy; Homeschooling; Policy summit</p> <p>In the fall of 2024, the Johns Hopkins Homeschool Research Lab organized an unprecedented gathering of key stakeholders and emerging homeschool policy leaders for the Homeschool Policy Summit at the Johns Hopkins campus in Baltimore, Maryland.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-2">Objectives</hd> <p>The objectives of the convening were to bring together stakeholders across diverse and often conflicting perspectives to discuss shared issues and the complex needs within homeschool policy; to identify primary concerns and points of tension; areas of consensus and insights into disagreements; and to document the current thinking on this growing and diversifying population. The final objective was to produce a mutually agreed upon summary document that could inform future policy discussions.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-3">Participants</hd> <p>Participants included representatives from national and state advocacy groups, researchers from multiple academic institutions, representatives from state and national education organizations, policy actors, funders centered on homeschool adjacent models, and equitable access advocates including access to public funding for homeschooling. We also focused on inviting multiple leaders from the Black and Latino homeschool communities. While the Black homeschool community has existed for decades, they have grown since the pandemic and their needs and experience differ in important ways. Similarly, the Latino homeschool community leadership is emerging, and that population is also growing, and while their growth is slower than that of their Black peers, they represent a larger proportion of the US population. Therefore, their distinct voices and experiences were a valued contribution to the convening. Participants were assigned to small groups based on primary affinity, although many people could have been in multiple groups. These groups were academic/research, policy, homeschool advocacy, Black homeschool leadership, Latino homeschool leadership, access, and funding, and homeschool adjacent models (like microschools and hybrid schools).</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-4">Strategy</hd> <p>Participants brought their top three to five to homeschool policy concerns. For example, these could have included key problems, barriers, and/or concerns about homeschooling or homeschool policy/regulation, opportunities or gaps in knowledge and access, microschools and other emerging model policy overlap, and the expansion of education savings accounts (ESA).</p> <p>At the opening session, participants each gave their list of top concerns. Participants used the lists to jointly create the topics for discussion at the convening. While there was an extensive list of concerns, many overlapped. The most frequent concerns expressed by participants included the distinction between support versus control of homeschooling families, student outcomes, defining terms within the quickly diversifying homeschool ecosystem, the safety of students, examining why families are choosing homeschooling and the different waves of homeschooling over past decades, delineating the differences between the historic and modern homeschooler, an overarching concern with the impact of race on all of these issues, the need or opportunity for more self-regulation within the homeschooling community, and concerns with how expanding funding available to homeschool families might change the practice.</p> <p>However, the three mutually agreed upon discussion topics (i.e., where there was the most overlapping concern of all participants) were: defining the purpose of education or schooling, concerns with homeschool regulation, and concerns with homeschool students' access to various educational options. The following sections summarize the discussion around these three main topics.</p> <p>All participants had the opportunity to comment on a draft of this summary. Participants were then provided with the final draft and asked to affirm the accuracy of the summary contents if they were willing. All participants also had the opportunity to write a brief dissenting/clarifying statement for inclusion if there were areas with which they disagreed.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-5">Primary concerns</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0181032227-6">What is the purpose of education?</hd> <p>Several participants agreed that before they could discuss more specific questions, they needed a full understanding of the purpose of education in the homeschool context. Then there was a further desire to discuss "schooling" apart from the broader defining of education. Participants discussed the difference between education and schooling in terms of our historical understanding of education. Participants expressed that there is no single best way to educate and that our current education system is based on 100 years of path dependency where we use the pathways and definitions from generations ago simply because it is too hard to change.</p> <p>We do what we do not because we are thoughtful but because we are going through the motions.</p> <p>The Latino group pointed out that in their language the word for schooling is <emph>escuela</emph> and refers to a physical building, while education is <emph>educacion</emph> and refers to molding the mind or the individual. They see their community as multi-dimensional, including their ancestors, and the educational goal is that of creating good future ancestors. However, they are certainly also concerned with ensuring their children get the best possible education in order to have a successful life, a concern shared by others.</p> <p>Similarly, all agreed that comparing homeschooling to the traditional public school model is not an appropriate comparison. In homeschooling, there is no one uniform purpose and each family chooses their purpose. That is not true of public education where communities may influence the school's mission, but individual families have little control over what the local school does or does not teach their child.</p> <p>Most participants agreed on a basic need for literacy, numeracy, and citizenry. Although this surfaced an unresolved tension between the belief in a minimum standard of learning in homeschooling and the desire to protect families' individual rights to define their own values in education. They added to the basic goal of education the holistic development of the child to include emotional, physical, and spiritual education to produce a student who fits into the world as it is, who can contribute to society, and is a citizen in that they exercise their civic duty, responsibility, and authority. So, while there was agreement on the broad minimum and maximum goals of education, these participants left the details to the families.</p> <p>We can legislate or govern minimum thresholds. We cannot legislate 'full human' and if we try it is policy overreach.</p> <p>However, participants also acknowledged that there are tradeoffs in achieving these goals. In homeschooling, the parents are central to the decision-making process in practice, therefore the child cannot (some expressed) be at the center. Others expressed a desire for the child to be the center of the goals of homeschooling both in practice and by law. However, because the practice of homeschooling has historically been legally balanced on parental rights, discussion of legal efforts to re-center children was an area of divergence within the group. Participants acknowledged that in order to protect the right to homeschool, there was a tradeoff where the rights of the child were decentered if parents' rights were centered. Or said another way, centering children's rights would require decentering parental rights, which assumes that the parent and child are not in alignment. While this may seem like a semantic exercise, these are key concerns to homeschool law and protections. Relatedly, there was discussion that traditional public school systems may also decenter the needs of the children they serve in practice. The school system is often the largest employer in the state and has huge budgets where the needs of the system or the adults within the system may come before the needs of the children they are meant to serve. Nevertheless, despite the unresolved tension between what was legal and actual practice, all agreed that the educational needs of the child should be a central concern in homeschooling.</p> <p>For those from the Black and Latino communities, there were variations on these concerns. For many Black homeschool families, academic performance comes second to safety. While safety is always a highly ranked motivation for all homeschoolers, in this case, participants cited psychological safety from bullying and racism.</p> <p>The role of community as part of the purpose of education was universal but was more pronounced with the leaders from the Black and Latino communities. Often homeschooling is thought of as isolationist, however, these groups cited reliance on others within their communities for all things including education. They also were more explicit in acknowledging that they felt a duty to the education of the children in their larger community. They may homeschool their children, but they also expressed concern for the quality of their public schools and the education of their neighbors' children.</p> <p>The consensus overall was that there are multiple purposes for education and schooling, that those vary by community and even family, and that multiple models can and should exist. There was agreement on the need for some minimum threshold for learning and that a full education should encompass much more than the three Rs, which are no longer adequate in modern society. However, there was disagreement in how to achieve these goals.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-7">Regulation</hd> <p>The regulation of homeschooling is always a key concern and volatile topic. Some participants said there would be no consensus on this topic in this discussion, however, that was surprisingly not the case. Similarly, the same participants said that there was "near universal" resistance within the homeschool community to any increases in regulation, however, that also did not hold out in these discussions. Overall, people disagreed on whether the parent or the child should be at the center of homeschooling policy, and about who should make decisions on behalf of the child, parents, or government. As it stands, the practice of homeschooling is protected under parental rights. Any change to that could, as some feared, open a pathway to regulation and intrusion. While it is unclear to what degree these fears are legitimate threats, several participants highlighted that regulation has, in the past, been weaponized against homeschool families, reporting stories of false claims made against homeschool families. Those from the Black and Latino groups further feared that people of color would be unfairly targeted for enforcement of existing or emerging laws. At the same time, at least one from the Black group also questioned what parts of their concerns were anxiety, what was a legitimate threat, and whether homeschoolers were overreacting.</p> <p>I don't trust that you are going to make laws that are in my best interest.</p> <p>Further, there was an acknowledgment that with the growth since the pandemic and the expansion of public funding and alternative models that use homeschool policy carve-outs, there would be continued and increasing scrutiny of existing homeschool policies.</p> <p>Therefore, there was a call by all participants that homeschool policy should protect families from intrusion and overstepping while still promoting the education of children. They also proposed several ideas for achieving these sometimes competing goals.</p> <p>First, some acknowledged the need for self-policing and self-regulation within the homeschool communities. They acknowledged that bad actors ruined the reputation of homeschooling for everyone. They suggested policies that foster or even reward innovation and partnerships, and that separates efforts to support the homeschool community from efforts to govern or police the community. For example, states could have a homeschool liaison tasked with supporting the state's homeschool families. However, that person or office should not also be the same entity that enforces compliance with the state's homeschool regulations.</p> <p>Similarly, participants advocated for more homeschool voice in policy. They wanted "a seat at the table and a voice in policies that impact or govern the practice." They expressed the need for more homeschool voices in governance. And they wanted diverse representation, not that of one or two organizations that did not necessarily speak for the vast majority of homeschooling families.</p> <p>How do we peel back the layers so that these discussions are not based on preconceived notions of what homeschool families need and acknowledge that homeschooler are not a monolith? That they are a diverse group with varied motivations and needs.</p> <p>One of the layers, according to participants, is recognizing the impact of geography on homeschool policy. Different communities have differing baseline tolerance for regulation according to their location. For example, multiple states claim to have the least restricted homeschool policies in the country, but what works well for residents in one state would cause an uproar in another. Policymakers need to recognize the need for different approaches depending on the locale. Participants highlighted that homeschool policy is determined by 50 states in 50 different ways; there is no one-size-fits-all policy solution.</p> <p>Finally, there was a concern about including more options in the definition of homeschooling, specifically microschools, hybrid schools and people using public funding like ESAs. There was an unresolved tension between wanting more people to have the option, more diverse people for whom money might be a major barrier, and for there to be more kinds of options, and whether that would bring overreach. Therefore, they discussed the following suggestions.</p> <p>Most participants agreed that regulation, where it exists, could center a checks and balances framework between the government and family's needs. Regulation could be modernized and reframed in the affirmative as homeschool protections. Laws could be flexible with multiple options for compliance so that families and small learning environments could pick what best suits their needs and allow the greatest independence and innovation.</p> <p>Homeschooling is different by design and laws should protect that difference. Toward this end, participants recommended that laws should not force any one-size-fits-all requirements such as a uniform curriculum or standardized testing that may not align with the education goals of diverse families. Alternatively, states could offer curriculum and testing as a free option to families who choose to use it. Regulatory options could include minimum standards for the most basic subjects (most states already do this) but not a required curriculum. Tests or other assessments could be one of many options used to demonstrate student outcomes.</p> <p>There should be an exemption for hiring, zoning, and insurance for microschools similar to those that emerged during the pandemic for the protection of learning pods. These regulations should be developed within the communities and as close to the people they govern as possible to best meet the needs and baseline tolerance for regulation within each community.</p> <p>These leaders expressed that parent-educators could use support. They indicated that many would even be open to some sort of alternative certification. Therefore, optional parent educator training, access to professional development at their local school or learning center, and even some sort of alternative certification could be offered as support to parents. However, there was a tension here between wanting to be seen as a legitimate educator and not wanting to meet the same basic requirements as certified teachers.</p> <p>Many were amenable to submitting a course of study and portfolios as long as they were used as proof of learning and not for judgment or as a basis for homeschooling permission. These members saw providing a notice of intent to homeschool as a low-touch requirement and were willing to do so if it helped protect homeschooled children. In general, many were willing to provide information and transparency but not to ask for approval or permission.</p> <p>Most participants also agreed that if parents had been convicted of violent offenses, sexual abuse, or child abuse they should either not be allowed to homeschool or that there should be considerable oversight. Many participants expressed a desire to protect children and a willingness to give up some of their personal freedoms to do so. At the same time, there was worry that homeschool families, particularly those from marginalized groups, might be unfairly targeted for offenses to curb homeschool participation.</p> <p>In summary, many participants expressed that baseline regulation could include a notice of intent to homeschool, some minimum subject requirements, and that otherwise the state should strive to do no harm or erect barriers. However others disagreed with some or all of these points and highlighted that rules would be different by state and community.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-8">Access</hd> <p>The final topic discussed was that of access, defined broadly as continued access for those already in homeschooling and paving the way and removing barriers for future homeschool families. They then listed numerous categories of access. For example, they discussed the need to increase homeschool student access to services and opportunities at their local public schools- ranging from sports to special education services and healthcare. They expressed the need in the community for access to technology including hardware, software, and internet. The group also discussed funding access to help families enter or maintain homeschooling or to participate in homeschool-adjacent models such as microschools, hybrid schools, and co-ops. There is also a need within this community for access to college preparation and ACT/SAT training, college admission counselors, financial aid, and honor societies. High school or graduation transcripts of homeschooled students not being viewed as legitimate was also an area of concern. These were all opportunities where the local public school system could build trust and support these homeschooled students and their families. It is worth noting that this could also help the public schools which often receive prorated funding when they serve homeschooled students, although these policies differ by state.</p> <p>Participants proposed a novel and promising solution. They called for an "attitude shift" and a "reimagining of public services." Could public libraries, located in many communities and already well-used and trusted by homeschool families, serve as a type of learning center? Participants discussed the possibility of families accessing public resources here instead of potentially untrusted or unwilling local schools. Libraries, they said, could house a homeschool parent liaison. Perhaps this program could serve as a new source of funding and use for libraries that have lost attendance in recent years.</p> <p>However, with this and all other access considerations, geography again should be considered. Those in rural communities may not have access to as many (or any) choices or resources when compared to those living in urban or suburban areas. Additionally, homeschool participation is often concentrated in rural areas, so location is a nontrivial consideration for all homeschool policies.</p> <p>Whatever the case, while there was universal support for increased access, participants highlighted the need for more information on resources and access available to homeschool families. For example, families need to know the steps required to seek access. Where do they go? Who do they ask? What types of resources are available? Currently, these policies vary dramatically by state and even district. Further, there is little research or information on what access is actually used that could help inform properly targeted policies.</p> <p>Finally, participants addressed the need for funding and the tension that issue brings to the discussion. People want more access and for many that means funding, but they do not want the regulation or threat of regulation that comes with that funding. On one hand, ESAs would bring more people, and likely more diverse people to homeschooling and related education models. That increases the number of people in the sector and the influence they are likely to have over the policies that govern them. On the other hand, more people may bring more scrutiny. Participants struggled with that tension as well. They wanted to have the benefits of access but without the potential drawbacks.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-9">Conclusion</hd> <p>Common homeschooling policy rhetoric often pits one group against another. However, by simply bringing together a group of diverse homeschool policy stakeholders, people with divergent points of view were able to discuss topics of great importance related to current policy and directions modernized policies might take to better meet the needs of homeschooling students and their families. This does not imply that all participants agreed at the end, but there was a willingness to discuss the issues and to listen.</p> <p>Participants co-created discussion topics of mutual importance. Despite the controversial nature of some of the topics and the diverse group included in the conversation, most of the participants were surprised at the level of agreement among participants. While digging down into the specifics of each topic would undoubtedly deliver less convergence on the finer points for policy recommendations, this summit is a good first step toward a more inclusive dialog and provides a foundation for future collaboration and cooperation.</p> <p>Many participants agreed on the importance of minimum educational goals but also agreed that the full education of the child should include much more than the three Rs in this modern society. They agreed that children should be a key concern in homeschool policy but there was considerable disagreement as to how best to accomplish that goal. They agreed that regulations, where they exist, should first do no harm and identified multiple ways that communities could support homeschooling by improving access.</p> <p>While homeschool policy is unique in many ways, the dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Education who observed the opening session noted that many of the comments and concerns expressed here- concerns of equity, access, safety, and the goals of education- were reflected across all sectors of education and were not unique to homeschooling. This broader perspective may provide an important shift in thinking about homeschool policy not as some isolated issue, but as part of the larger American educational landscape, sharing the same challenges. While many retreat to homeschooling as a refuge, ultimately, they find many of the same societal problems there, too.</p> <p>Similarly, the director of the Institute for Education Policy, who was also in attendance at the opening session, noted the tension between people who wanted improved access and funding but not accountability. People wanted to be seen as legitimate but did not necessarily want transparency. People wanted complete autonomy but also publicly funded access. Clearly, there were competing interests and tradeoffs to consider.</p> <p>Nevertheless, participants bravely challenged the preconceived notions about one another, and about homeschooling policy, and sat down around a table as equals to talk. Many of those who attended this summit expressed how surprised they were by the discussions and the level of agreement achieved in such a diverse group. Several expressed that some of the interactions they experienced were some of the most meaningful of their lives.</p> <p>The Hopkins team, in addition to generating this document, hoped to build a cohort of diverse and engaged stakeholders and to foster relationships among attendees. Care was taken to keep the group small so that all voices could be heard, to make sure that each small group had at least one or two other members so that people felt safe to express themselves, and despite the short timeline for the event, time was dedicated to meals and social opportunities so that everyone could get to know one another, build trust, and ultimately carry that relationship over into discussions of difficult topics. We share this here because it appears to be a strategy that worked, and we believe that it was instrumental to the success of the summit and our ability to generate this summary document.</p> <p>Ultimately, the hope is that the summary of this gathering will offer considerations to help guide future policy thought and discussions in supporting evidenced-based policies that best serve all children and families.</p> <p>The following participants affirm the contents of this summary as being reflective of the events and discussions at the 2024 Johns Hopkins Homeschool Policy Summit while recognizing there may be disagreement on points of substance. Signing here does not necessarily indicate agreement with all content in this document.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-10">Participants</hd> <p>Kris Allen, Middle Resolution Policy Foundation</p> <p>Timberly Baker, Arkansas State University</p> <p>Christy Batts, North Carolina State University</p> <p>Yalonda Chandler, Black Homeschoolers of Birmingham</p> <p>Zakkiyya Chase, Empowered Home Educators</p> <p>Sam Duell, Yes. Every Kid.</p> <p>Gisela Hernandez-Quinones, Latinos Homeschooling</p> <p>Nasiyah Isra-Ul, Foundation for Economic Education</p> <p>John Kristof, EdChoice</p> <p>Carmen Longoria-Green, Coalition for Responsible Home Education</p> <p>Jeremy Newman, Texas Home School Coalition</p> <p>Brenda Rosa-Garcia, The Homeschool Clinic</p> <p>Alyssa Santoyo Catlin, homeschool leader</p> <p>Michelle Shaw, Eastside Academic Studies</p> <p>Roger Smith, Homeschool Louisiana</p> <p>John Thompson, Kennesaw State University</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-11">Johns Hopkins attendees</hd> <p>Angela Watson, Director, JHU Homeschool Research Lab</p> <p>Genevieve Smith, Research Fellow, JHU Homeschool Research Lab</p> <p>Alanna Bjorklund Young, Director of Research, Institute for Education Policy</p> <p>Amy Fuller, Research Fellow, Institute for Education Policy</p> <p>Karuna Sinha, Graduate Assistant, Institute for Education Policy</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-12">Additional participant comments</hd> <p>Two participants chose to write additional comments, included below, regarding is summary.</p> <p>Participants from the Black and Latino groups, others in the room, and homeschoolers more generally are not exaggerating the possibility that increased government interference could lead to a loss of freedom or control over their own lives. Just look at the literature and you can see the legitimacy of their concerns. The documented adultification of Black children in schools, the number and placement of police in schools who primarily serve children of color, the racial disproportionality in child protective service cases, and the history of Native American boarding schools tell me that people who are concerned about government interference are being perfectly reasonable. Their concerns do not appear to be simply academic or historical, but sincere and relevant.</p> <p>Sam Duell, Yes. Every Kid.</p> <p>The Coalition for Responsible Home Education (CRHE) is the only organization in the country founded and run by homeschool alumni (i.e., adults who were homeschooled as children) that exists to advocate for the safety and wellbeing of homeschooled students. We write separately to highlight consensus reached on two policy proposals long advocated by CRHE: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) individuals who have been convicted of crimes against children should not be allowed to homeschool, and (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) individuals who are currently the subject of an open social-services investigation should not be allowed to withdraw their children from school to homeschool those children during that investigation.</p> <p>In consultation with policy, education, and legal experts, CRHE has proposed the Make Homeschool Safe Act – model legislation that would ensure baseline protections for homeschooled students.[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref3">1</reflink>] These protections are missing in nearly all states. These policy proposals are informed by the Homeschooling's Invisible Children project – a project spearheaded by CRHE that collects data on cases of extreme, sometimes fatal, abuse of homeschooled children by their caregivers.[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref4">2</reflink>] In 2024 alone, CRHE has documented 5 deaths of homeschooled children at the hands of their caregivers.</p> <p>These deaths often follow a common fact pattern. The child is enrolled in public or private school, and a social-services investigation is opened due to concerns reported by individuals coming into contact with the child. The caregiver responds to the investigation by withdrawing the child to purportedly homeschool – but in actuality, the homeschooling is a tool used by the abusive caregiver to hide the child from other adults, as borne out by the child's later death at the hands of that caregiver.</p> <p>Many of the attendees at this conference were homeschool alumni and homeschooling mothers; in combination, these attendees represented decades of experiences in homeschooling circles. Perhaps the most meaningful aspects of the conference were the deeply personal conversations between the homeschool alumni, such as myself, and the homeschooling mothers about their respective experiences in homeschooling communities. Many attendees described witnessing the abuse or neglect of homeschooled children and how that abuse or neglect was exacerbated by lax homeschooling laws. These lived experiences led to consensus among many attendees that two proposals in CRHE's Make Homeschool Safe Act – that those convicted of crimes against children should not be able to homeschool and children should not be withdrawn from school to be homeschooled during open social-services investigations – should be enacted.</p> <p>Conversations about homeschool policy have long happened without the input of those with real-world experiences about homeschooling, and particularly without the input of those who <emph>were</emph> homeschooled. Nothing can replace the knowledge and awareness that homeschool alumni uniquely have of the critical lapses in protections that homeschooled students face. We at CRHE advocate for protections for homeschooled students because we are now the advocates that we did not have as children. At the beginning of the conference, some expressed that the attendees would not reach consensus on any topic. But the conference proved that wrong. When a room is filled, not with individuals representing pre-determined (and usually, rabidly anti-government) policy positions decided on decades ago, but with people who intimately know the experiences – the good, the bad, and the ugly – of actual homeschooled children, consensus is possible. It is possible because there are gaping holes in the laws of every state that allow people to use homeschooling as a front to hide abuse and neglect of children, and those of us who have lived in the homeschooling world know that reality intimately well.</p> <p>We thank Johns Hopkins for hosting these conversations, and it is CRHE's hope that future policy conversations will continue to build on the positive steps taken during the conference. A future in which all homeschooled children have critically needed legal protections is possible.</p> <p>Carmen Longoria-Green, Coalition for Responsible Home Education.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-13">Author's Note</hd> <p>During the sessions I was careful not to interject my thoughts and opinions as I saw my role as merely that of a facilitator. However, now I would like to take the opportunity to summarize some of my key thoughts.</p> <p>From my perspective, I found several of the ideas brought forth at this event very promising. The idea of offering some sort of optional alternative certification for home educators seems like a low-cost high-value opportunity. We have all sorts of alternative certification programs for public school teachers. Under this option, homeschool parent educators could get the training and support they say they want. Many of these educators have put other career opportunities aside and external validation might be meaningful to them. It could also potentially transfer to professional experience once they are no longer educating their own students.</p> <p>Similarly, the idea of leveraging underused and publicly funded libraries as learning centers where homeschool families could access additional publicly funded resources seemed like a win-win. This is yet another opportunity to more fully integrate the homeschool community into society and further abate concerns about families and children falling through the cracks. I also thought the call to flip modern homeschool regulation to the affirmative, framed as a protection to homeschooling, instead of a weapon to be used against homeschooling, was a positive suggestion. Finally, the calls by homeschool parents and alumni for a seat at the table and a voice in the discussions are so obvious that if this is not happening (in some places I know it already is, but I am sure it is not in many more) then governing bodies should consider enacting this policy.</p> <p>There was a palpable disconnect between the tired fear-based homeschool rhetoric and what these participants expressed. Once attendees saw each other as people and not enemies or adversaries, the divisions they had created in their minds began to fall away. Creating a divisive environment and encouraging fighting is an effective strategy for maintaining control but it is also exploitative and manipulative. New research evidence points to several facts. Homeschooling is growing (Watson, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref5">4</reflink>]), it is diversifying both in population (Smith &amp; Watson, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref6">2</reflink>]) and in models (Watson, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref7">3</reflink>]), and the vast majority of participants switch in and out of homeschooling (Cheng, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref8">1</reflink>] this volume) depending on the needs of the student and family. The "us versus them" oppositional strategy does not fit in this context anymore. There are no distinct groups. Someone who is an "us" this year may be a "them" the next. So, coming together to better understand each other and that we are all in this together seems like a much better strategy.</p> <p>Finally, I agree with participants that the increase in homeschool participation will bring increased scrutiny. Better that those conversations are supported with evidence than built on the well-worn stereotypes of who and what homeschooling is. This, then, highlights the needs for more rigorous and high-quality research, a need the Homeschool Research Lab is trying to meet.</p> <hd id="AN0181032227-14">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <ref id="AN0181032227-15"> <title> Notes </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Coalition for Responsible Home Education, <emph>Make Homeschool Safe Act</emph> (July 2024), https://responsiblehomeschooling.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Make-Homeschool-Safe-Act-July-2024.pdf.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Stewart, J., Bartmess, E., Brosneck, M., Coalition for Responsible Home Education, <emph>Homeschooling's Invisible Children: Report of Findings 2024</emph> (2024), https://<ulink href="http://www.hsinvisiblechildren.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/hic%5freport%5f2024.pdf">www.hsinvisiblechildren.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/hic%5freport%5f2024.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0181032227-16"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> Cheng, A. (2024). The year-by-year primary and secondary education histories of homeschooled individuals and the implications for empirical homeschooling research. Journal of School Choice, 18 (4).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, G., &amp; Watson, A. (2024). Household Pulse Survey. Johns Hopkins Homeschool Hub. https://education.jhu.edu/edpolicy/policy-research-initiatives/homeschool-hub/household-pulse-survey/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref7" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Watson, A. (2020). Parent-created "schools" in the U.S. Journal of School Choice, 14 (4), 595 – 603. https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2020.1836801</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref5" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Watson, A. (2024). Homeschool growth 2023-24. Johns Hopkins Homeschool Hub. https://education.jhu.edu/edpolicy/policy-research-initiatives/homeschool-hub/homeschool-growth-2023-2024/</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Angela R. Watson</p> <p>Reported by Author</p> </aug> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1451222 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Johns Hopkins 2024 Homeschool Policy Summit Outcome Summary – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Angela+R%2E+Watson%22">Angela R. Watson</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+School+Choice%22"><i>Journal of School Choice</i></searchLink>. 2024 18(4):713-726. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 14 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Home+Schooling%22">Home Schooling</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Policy%22">Educational Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Stakeholders%22">Stakeholders</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Conferences+%28Gatherings%29%22">Conferences (Gatherings)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communities+of+Practice%22">Communities of Practice</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Access+to+Education%22">Access to Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Maryland+%28Baltimore%29%22">Maryland (Baltimore)</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/15582159.2024.2422250 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1558-2159<br />1558-2167 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: This summary captures the current thinking on homeschool policy as expressed by a diverse group of homeschool policy stakeholders at a recent convening. Key topics discussed include the purpose of education, the regulation and support of homeschooling, and issues with access to needed resources. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1451222 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1451222 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/15582159.2024.2422250 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 14 StartPage: 713 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Home Schooling Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Policy Type: general – SubjectFull: Stakeholders Type: general – SubjectFull: Conferences (Gatherings) Type: general – SubjectFull: Communities of Practice Type: general – SubjectFull: Access to Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Maryland (Baltimore) Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Johns Hopkins 2024 Homeschool Policy Summit Outcome Summary Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Angela R. Watson IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2024 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1558-2159 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1558-2167 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 18 – Type: issue Value: 4 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of School Choice Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
