Idaho
A Tale of Two Bills
On January 22, 1999, Home School Legal Defense Association received an alarming report from one of our member families. The family told us that Representative Wendy Jaquet (D-21 A), who sits on the Idaho House Education Committee, was intending to sponsor a bill which would drastically change the landscape of home schooling in Idaho.
The bill would have required all home schoolers to submit notification of intent to the local public school trustees and to be tested pursuant to the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. The board of trustees would furnish the results of the test to the parents and offer advice or assistance, if requested, to help home school children improve their test results and academic skills.
In a letter to Representative Jaquet, HSLDA attorney for Idaho, Michael Smith, informed her that we believed it would be inadvisable to introduce such legislation. The letter pointed out that home schoolers’ test scores are, on average, 30 percentile points above the national average of the 50th percentile. Citing a 1996 study commissioned by HSLDA, attorney Smith explained that in states where there is a low level of regulation (including Idaho), home schooled children score as well as children in states that had a high level of regulations, with requirements such as annual notification and standardized tests at the end of the year.
The bottom line of the letter was that home schoolers are doing well enough to be left alone by the government—if it’s not broken, don’t fix it. That message seems to have been heard by Representative Jaquet, who decided not to introduce the bill. Rep. Jaquet’s letter announcing her decision to attorney Smith indicated a desire to discuss future proposals. Close calls like this demonstrate that home schoolers must be prepared each legislative session to defend against any attempt to regulate home education.
Proposed Compulsory Attendance Increase
Senator Gary Schroeder introduced Senate Bill 1030, which would have increased the compulsory attendance age from 16 to 18. In a letter, Michael Smith asked the state senator to consider withdrawing the bill for the following reasons: Research clearly indicates that raising the compulsory attendance age does not encourage students to stay in school longer and to graduate. Older students forced to attend school against their wishes are very disruptive. Other states, which have already raised compulsory attendance to age 18, have had to build additional facilities to house those students—at tremendous expense to the taxpayers.
S.B. 1030 did have an exception for those parents who give written permission to the student’s school of last attendance for their child to drop out. However, since some home schooled students have never attended a school, at the very least, the bill needed to be amended to accommodate home school students.
Before S.B. 1030 passed the senate, amending language returned the compulsory attendance age to 16, but the written parental permission requirement to drop out before age 18 was retained.
Late breaking news! As this article goes to press, HSLDA has learned that, following testimony at a March 16 hearing on S.B. 1030, an assembly committee has voted 10 to 5 to keep the bill in committee, effectively killing the legislation for this year. These kinds of bills—expanding compulsory attendance ages—are popping up all too often in many states.
|
|
Here We Have Idaho
by
McKinley Helm & Albert J. Tompkins
“. . . Its beautiful valleys and hills. The majestic forests where nature abounds . . .”
|
|
HOME SCHOOL LEGAL DEFENSE ASSOCIATION
