These messages are from Brenda Dickinson regarding homeschooling in Florida which can also be found at HEF's website @:
http://www.flhef.org/laws.html
*******************************************
8-29-09
http://www.katspawprints.com/HOPE/Videos.html
*******************************************
|
This is from Brenda Dickinson... - Nancy
=========================
APPOINTMENT OF GEORGE LEMIEUX TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE
|
*******************************************
Dear Florida Homeschoolers:
Homeschoolers over the years have shown that they are willing to
flood administrators' and legislators' offices with protests whenever
the right to home school is threatened. However, we need to make sure
that this tactic is only used when needed, or the impact is lessened
-- kind of like the "Boy Who Cried Wolf." When mistakes are made, it
weakens the impact that our actions can have, so it is important that
we all confirm this kind of information before acting. The Home
Education Foundation has developed good relationships with most
legislators and many administrators throughout Florida, and we can
usually verify or refute these kinds of rumors. Therefore, please be
careful about responding until you can obtain verification from a
reliable source.
Recently, HSLDA (The Home School Legal Defense Association) sent out
a communication claiming that the Broward County Schools were going to
undertake random portfolio reviews of home school families. HSLDA
urged families in Broward County to contact their school
superintendent' s office to request the termination of this plan.
Unfortunately, HSLDA's communication was incorrect, because the
Broward County Schools did not have any such plan of action. As a
result, many families reacted strongly to a problem that did not exist.
While HSLDA has worked tirelessly to support home schooling in many
parts of the United States, in this case, HSLDA was mistaken. HEF
works only here in Florida, monitoring and working with our
legislature, Department of Education and other branches of government
throughout Florida to ensure the right to home education continues.
HEF feels that it is important for home schoolers in general, and
Broward County home schoolers in particular, to know that the Broward
County Schools are not trying to create an environment antagonistic to
home education. Please continue to treat the administrators in
Broward County with respect as if this error had never occurred.
HEF Board of Directors
*****************************************
Dear Homeschool Leaders...
As a follow-up to my announcement from yesterday morning, please regard the
below message from Brenda Dickinson and the Home Education Foundation (HEF).
Additionally, I was able to speak directly with Chris Klicka (HSLDA) in this
matter.
As reported yesterday morning, there will be no random notices for portfolio
reviews being sent out by the Broward School Board. Also, please keep the
individual family referenced in the below announcement in your prayers.
Sincerely,
John Kernohan
- - - - - -
Date: January 27, 2009 11:37:31 AM EST
Subject: response to HSLDA's letter to Broward homeschoolers
Update on the Broward County Portfolio Review
January 27, 2009
Some of you may have received an email from HSLDA in regard to a potential
"random" portfolio review to "blanket" hundreds of
families. On Monday, I
spoke to the Broward Home Education District contact, Mrs. Sharon Dolinsky,
and she confirmed this information is incorrect. There is only one family
with a pattern of nonattendance involved. There is no intent by the school
district to review any portfolios of parents who have legally registered in
a home education program.
The review that has been brought to HSLDA's attention is a case in which
the
parent failed to file the letter of intent to home educate in a timely
manner or withdraw her child from the public school. The parent, having
reasons to not send her child to school, was given several options as
required under by s.1003.26((1) F.S. to identify potential remedies,
including a change of classes, take-home assignments, or a homebound
program. All were rejected by the parent. Because the child had not
attended school for more than 6 weeks and had developed a pattern of
nonattendance, the school district was obligated to follow the steps
outlined in statute to enforce school attendance.
By the time the parent filed the required Notice of Intent to home educate,
a pattern of truancy had already developed and the law requires a portfolio
review to be conducted by the home education review committee pursuant to
s.1003.26(1)(f) F.S.. The home education office set up a meeting for a
portfolio review for Tuesday, Jan 27, 2009, but when the district received a
letter from HSLDA, it became a legal issue and the review was cancelled.
There is no reason for this to have become a legal issue. However, now that
it has, the FPEA and HEF can no longer assist the family to work out the
situation.
Several things you need to know:
1) HEF has a good relationship with the Broward Home Education Office and
could have assisted prior to legal intervention. Even if the student was
truant, the only thing the parent would have had to do was to appear before
the Home Education Review Committee and show evidence that an effort was
being made to provide an education. The parent created this situation by
failing to comply with the simple requirements of Florida's home education
law. Even Florida's truancy statute allows parents to home-educate,
provided they abide by the law.
2) HEF does not want to protect parents who abuse the home education law,
nor do we want to prevent any parent who wants to home educate their child
from doing so. However, we must be vigilant in making sure that parents
whose children do not attend school do not use the home education law to
circumvent compulsory attendance and provide no education to their children.
3) HEF does not agree with HSLDA's letter stating that parents do not have
to comply with the portfolio review if requested by the district. HSLDA was
not involved in the passage of the home education law in Florida and does
not know the intent of the Legislature. Obviously, the Legislature meant to
pass the bill as it was written, and this particular requirement has not
been modified since 1985. The reason the portfolio review was included in
the statute was because Craig Dickinson, a defense attorney, wanted this
provision in the law. He knew that parents would not necessarily keep
records if they were not required to, and if a parent faced charges of any
kind they needed to have evidence that education was being provided. In
1985, at least 5 families had truancy charges filed against them for
teaching their children at home in a private school. Craig knew that these
records would be necessary to defend families. This is a safeguard for
parents. HEF has used this provision many times to argue against any
further regulation of home education by the Legislature. This provision
provides just enough accountability to satisfy the State's interest without
giving a Superintendent any authority to judge or penalize a family based on
a portfolio review.
Please be assured that HEF is working on your behalf, and we will continue
to build relationships with districts to inform them of the law and to help
maintain a friendly environment for you to home educate your children in
Florida.
Brenda Dickinson, President
Home Education Foundation
HEF is supported solely by individual contributions and does not provide
legal advise or representation. Our mission and purpose is to lobby for
laws and opportunities that benefit Florida home educators by building and
maintaining relationships that create a friendly and safe environment to
home educate your children. For more information visit www.flhef.org
******************************************
4-10-07
Bill Watch for April 9-13 - currently in Committee:
HB 799 The K-8 Virtual School Program is an educational choice program administered by the Department of Education (DOE). The program delivers academic instruction via on-line and distance learning technology to full-time students in kindergarten through eighth grade. Schools wishing to participate in the program may be nonprofit or for-profit entities and must be approved by the DOE.
The bill amends s. 1002.415, F.S., to state that the mission of the K-8 Virtual School Program is to provide students with technology-based educational opportunities to gain the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed. The bill requires K-8 virtual schools to serve any student who meets the profile for success in an online learning context. Priority is to be given to students who need access to virtual courses in order to meet their educational needs and goals in a home environment and to students seeking accelerated access to move at their own pace in their educational progress. The bill also requires K-8 virtual schools to enroll an eligible student who submits a timely application, unless the number of applications exceeds program capacity. In such case, all applications are required to have an equal chance of being admitted through a random selection process.
Brenda's Comment: The strike-all amendment will not include home education or private school students. The budget is too tight this year to change this program from a pilot to a regular public school choice program funded in the FEFP which was the purpose of this bill in the beginning.
HB 277 - K-12 Students revises eligibility requirements for driving privileges; revises age of compulsory school attendance from 16 years to 18 years; requires school district comprehensive programs for student progression to include use of mentors & to encourage career education curriculum for certain students.
Brenda's Comment: This bill will die in committee.
HB 1507/ SB 2862 - Tuition Rates at Community Colleges and State Universities provides that it is the intent of the Legislature to discourage undergraduate students from exceeding the number of credit hours required to complete the students' respective degree programs and that, accordingly, a student will be required to pay 75 percent more than the in-state tuition rate for any credit hours taken in excess of the hours required to complete the degree program in which the student is enrolled.
This bill requires a student enrolled in a community college to pay 75 percent more than the in-state tuition rate for credit hours taken in excess of 120 percent of the credit hours required to earn an associate degree. This requirement does not apply to a maximum of 24 credit hours taken at a community college that apply to a student's baccalaureate degree.
This bill requires an undergraduate student who is enrolled in a state university to pay 75 percent more than the in-state tuition rate for credit hours taken in excess of 120 percent of the credit hours required to complete the degree program in which the student is enrolled, regardless of whether the student took those hours while enrolled at a community college, state university, or at any private postsecondary institution if the student received state funds while enrolled at the private postsecondary institution.
This bill requires a student enrolled in a baccalaureate program at a community college to pay 75 percent more than the in-state tuition rate for credit hours in excess of 120 percent of the number of credit hours required to complete the degree program in which the student is enrolled, regardless of whether the student took those hours while enrolled at a community college, state university, or at any private postsecondary institution if the student received state funds while enrolled at the private postsecondary institution.
Credit hours earned under certain circumstances will not be calculated as hours required to earn a degree. These include: college credit earned through an acceleration mechanism; credit hours earned through an internship program; credit hours required for certification, recertification, or certificate degrees; credit hours in courses from which a student withdrew due to reasons of medical or personal hardship; credit hours required to achieve a dual major; credit hours in remedial or ESOL courses; credit hours taken by active duty military personnel; and credit hours earned in military science courses.
Brenda's Comment: This bill will most likely pass.
An Amendment reduces the additional percent of tuition a student must pay on credit hours taken in excess of 120 percent of graduation requirements from 75 percent to 50 percent. This amendment applies to students enrolled in both community colleges and state universities.
S2746 / CS/H 0967 - Physical Education/Students requires Commissioner of Education to provide professional development in physical education; defines term "physical education"; requires specified periods of said education for certain students; requires DOE to review & revise Sunshine State Standards re said education. Amends 1001.11, 1003.01,455. EFFECTIVE DATE: Upon becoming law.
Brenda's Comment: This bill will most likely pass.
HB 1371 / SB 2598 - Governor's School for Science and Technology creates the Governor's School for Science and Technology (school) for students statewide in grades nine through 12 and for teacher summer programming. The school is to be managed and controlled by the Florida Virtual School (FLVS) and is to be located in Brevard County in an area where connections with the Kennedy Space Center may be readily established. The bill creates an advisory council consisting of 13 representatives to provide the FLVS with insight, expertise, and recommendations in developing and implementing the school.
Classes are to begin in the 2009-2010 academic year and students are to reside on the school's premises. Admission to the school may only be granted to qualified students pursuant to requirements and standards established in rule. The school is to offer: (a) accelerated programs in the areas of math, science, and technology to qualified students in grades nine through 12; and (b) summer programs for elementary, middle, or high school teachers.
Brenda's Comment: This bill will most likely pass.
PCS/HB 653 - Public K-12 Education revises the organizational structure of the Department of Education, requiring the establishment of a Division of Workforce Education and a Division of Finance and Operations.
The bill restores inadvertently deleted language relating to grade forgiveness policies for all incoming ninth graders and provides a new exception for a student in the middle grades who takes a high school course for high school credit.
The bill reinserts inadvertently omitted waiver options for the physical education course requirement for high school graduation for students that participate in marching band, junior varsity or varsity high school sports, or Junior ROTC and meet certain other requirements.
Department of Education Reorganization
Current law specifies that the following divisions must be established within the Department of Education (DOE): Community Colleges, Public Schools, Colleges and Universities, Vocational Rehabilitation, Blind Services, and Accountability, Research, and Measurement. The directors of such divisions are appointed by the Commissioner of Education.
PCS/HB 653 revises the organizational structure of the DOE by specifically requiring the establishment of a Division of Workforce Education and a Division of Finance and Operations. The bill provides that the director of each of the divisions set forth in statute may be designated as "Deputy Commissioner" or "Chancellor". The bill also deletes the language requiring a division of colleges and universities within the DOE as the State University System is now governed by the Board of Governors as provided in the state constitution.
The bill provides the Commissioner of Education with authority to organize and name the structural units of the DOE and with flexibility to do so in a manner that meets legislative intent and promotes efficiency and accountability.
Waiver of physical education requirement for high school graduation
In 2006, the Florida Legislature in HB 7087, Ch. 2006-74, Laws of Florida, revised the high school graduation requirements for all incoming ninth graders. Included in this revision was a change to the physical education requirement for high school graduation. The new requirements no longer allow for a waiver of physical education requirements for participating in marching band, junior varsity or varsity high school sports, or Junior ROTC.
The bill reinserts these waiver options for students that participate in these activities and meet certain other requirements. For the waiver for participating in JV or Varsity sports, the student must also pass a competency test on personal fitness with a score of "C" or better, and for the waiver for participating in marching band the student must pass that class with or a physical activity class that requires participating in marching band with a grade of "C" or better.
CS/HB 289 - Textbook Affordability prohibits all employees of community colleges or state universities from receiving any form of compensation for requiring a certain textbook. Exceptions are provided for sample copies, instructional copies, educational materials, or royalties for the instructor's work; Requires community colleges and state universities to notify students of the required textbooks 45 days prior to the first day of class or when the instructor or academic department identifies the required or
recommended book; Requires the Board of Governors and the State Board of Education to adopt policies, procedures, and guidelines by March 1, 2008 to further efforts to minimize the cost of textbooks. These policies, procedures, and guidelines must include: sufficient time for bookstores to confirm availability, especially with regard to used books; confirmation, as part of the adoption process, that all required bundled materials will be
used; confirmation, as part of the adoption process, that the new edition differs substantially from the earlier editions; and, ways to provide required textbooks to students who could not otherwise afford them.
SB 2200 - High School Athletics by Llorente; Requires Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA) to facilitate 1-year drug testing program to randomly test certain students for anabolic steroid use; requires participation in program as prerequisite for membership in FHSAA; provides penalties for positive findings; provides for challenge & appeal; provides for repeal of program. Effective Date: July 1, 2007.
SB 2202 - Pub. Rec. & Meetings/Drug Tests by Llorente; Exempts from public
records requirements records relating to drug tests & to challenge & appeal proceedings under FHSAA drug testing program; exempts from public meetings requirements portions of meeting at which records relating to drug tests or to challenge or appeal proceedings will be discussed; provides for future review & repeal; provides statement of public necessity.
Effective Date: on the same date that Committee Substitute for HB 461 or similar legislation takes effect, if such legislation is adopted in the same legislative session or an extension thereof and becomes law.
SB 660 (CS/HB 561) Human Papillomavirus (HPV)/Schools requires public & private middle schools in state to provide to certain students & their parents or guardians information re HPV, its vaccine, & cervical cancer; prohibits certain students from admission into school without providing evidence of vaccination for HPV; requires DOE, in consultation with DOH, to prescribe content of information re connection between HPV & cervical cancer & availability of vaccine preventing HPV, etc. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2008.
S1212 / CS/H 0465 - Corporate Income Tax Credit Scholarship Program provides legislative findings; revises program purposes; provides definition; provides that specified students who have been in DJJ education programs or who are placed in foster care are eligible for participation in scholarship program; revises income criteria for continuation of scholarship for students placed in foster care. Amends 220.187.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2007.
S2382 Corporate Income Tax Trust Fund/DOR (No companion bill) creates said trust fund within DOR; provides purposes; provides for future review & termination or re-creation of trust fund; specifies uses of funds transferred from said trust fund to General Revenue Fund. Creates 220.7015. EFFECTIVE DATE: Contingent.
S2380 - Education/Failing Schools (No companion bill) expresses intent of Legislature to create program to enhance failing schools; clarifies that tax credit program applies to students in families having limited financial resources; prescribes obligations of school districts to inform parents about failing schools; authorizes students at such schools to attend high-performing school in same district; establishes eligibility for nonpublic school participation, etc. Amends FS. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2007.
S162 / H 0663 - Schools/Human Sexuality requires school districts to communicate with parents & others concerning school curriculum re teaching of human
sexuality to secondary school students; requires that information describe available procedures that parents may use to review curriculum & methods by which parents may provide comments & offer input to school district. Amends 1003.42. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2007.
SB 2904 / HB 1509 School Safety/Weapons prohibits possession of common
pocketknives on school property or other specified locations; provides exemption from criminal liability for possession of specified weapons for persons who voluntarily surrender weapon in certain circumstances; provides exemption from zero tolerance policy for possession of specified weapons for persons who voluntarily surrender weapon in certain circumstances, etc. Amends 790.115, 1006.13, 435.04, 921.0022.
EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2007.
Brenda's Comment: This bill has a long way to go to get passed.
On Calendar for second reading in House
CS/HB 461 High School Athletics by Llorente ; Requires Florida High School Athletic Association (FHSAA) to facilitate 1-year drug testing program to randomly test certain students for anabolic steroid use; requires participation in program as prerequisite for membership in FHSAA; provides penalties for positive findings; provides for challenge & appeal; provides for repeal of program. Effective Date: July 1, 2007.
CS/HB 463 Pub. Rec. & Meetings/Drug Tests by Llorente Exempts from public
records requirements records relating to drug tests & to challenge & appeal proceedings under FHSAA drug testing program; exempts from public meetings requirements portions of meeting at which records relating to drug tests or to challenge or appeal proceedings will be discussed; provides for future review & repeal; provides statement of public necessity.
Effective Date: on the same date that Committee Substitute for
HB 461 or similar legislation takes effect, if such legislation is adopted in the same legislative session or an extension thereof and becomes law.
***********************************************
3-19-07
Update on HB 799
I had a conversation with Rep. Weatherford on Saturday regarding HB 799. We discussed all the issues pertaining to his bill.
Based on the limited revenue available this year and the opposition to scholarship (vouchers) by the Democrats and the media, he is considering returning to the original language rather than expanding the K-8 Virtual School to include home education and private school students.
A Bit of Background
Here is a good example of what a lobbyist does. Rep. Weatherford called me, because I am the face of home education at the Capitol. He knew I would understand all sides of the issue. He knew I would know who opposes and who supports his bill and why. He wanted to know my opinion.
As your lobbyist, having these kinds of relationships helps me represent you better. Having a lobbyist helps you to better voice your concerns and understand when it is best to do so. As we all know, it is rare for the originally filed version of any bill to pass. Some ideas are cut, changed or expanded. Knowing the right time to act involves knowing what is happening at the moment. You might call in support of a bill on Monday and an amendment is filed Monday evening for a Tuesday committee meeting which will make the bill completely unacceptable. Then, you have asked for support on a bill which you now oppose. Some bills never have a chance to pass, and if they are never put on a committee agenda, it is counterproductive to use our influence to oppose or support them. Being on top of these things helps me to know which bills are of concern and which ones are not.
In my last communication with you, I recommended no action on HB 799 for a variety of reasons, but I only explained the philosophical position. I stated that HEF supports parental rights. We, as home educators, have seen even "real" home educators, for one reason or another, decide to put their child back into public school, charter school, or private school. They may later return to home education. Parents today are challenged financially, emotionally and physically and need to be able to weigh what is best for their family. So, HEF believes that it is the parents' constitutional right to direct the education of their children. HEF has worked hard to provide parents with as many opportunities as possible to meet the needs of their children.
Prior to my update last week, I had already talked with committee staff and asked whether the expansion of the K-8 Virtual School would be wise at this time. I was told that Rep. Weatherford wanted to get the K-8 Virtual School into the FEFP, so that as many students as choose to enroll could do so.
Current enrollment is capped by the amount of money the Legislature appropriates each year. He wants to make it possible for as many public school students as possible to enroll in the K-8 Virtual Schools. That concept is easy to sell to school districts faced with meeting the Constitutional class-size requirement by the year 2010. One school district even spoke in favor of HB 799 at the committee meeting on March 13.
However, after listening to the numerous appropriation committee discussions pertaining to the decrease in revenue, I felt it would be difficult to sell an expansion the K-8 Virtual School to include home education and private school students.
In evaluating bills, I also look at the bill sponsor to determine if he/she has enough influence to get a bill passed. I consider what is important to leadership in both Chambers and if leadership is willing to push a bill through or block a bill for us. I know that Rep. Weatherford's bill is supported by leadership.
I also factored in the fact that Rep. Weatherford was home schooled through the 8th grade and is one of us. He wanted to do something good for home educators. Also, he will most likely be the Speaker in 2010. I felt that it would not be prudent for home educators to come out in opposition to his bill.
Knowing these things, I felt that HB 799 will have a difficult time passing in its present form during this Session. So, I decided to take a wait and see position. After having presented his bill in committee, Rep.
Weatherford is now being confronted with some of these issues. He has to evaluate what he can get passed and what will have to wait. Often change has to be made in small steps rather than all at once.
I was in a meeting with a very powerful lobbyist earlier this week on another issue. In that meeting, I brought up an idea that I believe is essential if private vendors are to continue doing business with the State.
In a follow-up meeting, he said he completely agreed with my recommendation, but their association has determined that it would take 3 to 5 years to get all the legislative changes they believe are needed to solve this huge problem. That is the way change often comes. It is like the old joke. How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time.
Lobbying is a process that requires an understanding the system, a sense of what the legislative body as a whole will embrace at that time, knowledge of your issue and the factors and laws that will be effected, skills to craft your arguments in just the right way to address specific views as well as the climate of the day and timing is crucial. Good lobbyists can read these signs. You have to be here to know the people, issues, and climate of the day in order to be effective. That is why HEF believes that having a lobbyist in Tallahassee is essential to preserve and protect your freedom to home-educate in Florida.
***********************************************
3-11-07
Dear Leaders,
This is long, but I asked several people to help me cut it down. All
of them said it was important information, so please persevere and
read it all.
Many of you may have received an alert or had a friend forward the
HSLDA alert to you this week regarding HB 799 (SB 2822) -- K-8
Virtual School Programs. To eliminate confusion at the outset, the
Florida Virtual School s. 1002.37 F.S. and the K-8 Virtual School
Program s.1002.415 F.S. are different. The K-8 Virtual School Program
is for Kindergarten through 8th grade public school students. Two
different state-approved private vendors, The Connection Academy and
The Florida Virtual School Academy (formerly the K-8 Academy founded
by Bill Bennett) provide students with a computer and curriculum for
which the private schools receive about $5200 per year. The K-8
Virtual Schools are considered public schools and students are fully
enrolled in this program and have to take the FCAT. The Florida
Virtual School http://www.flvs.net is an online public school, serves
grades 7-12, offers courses on a course by course basis and serves
home education, private school and public school students free of
charge. HB 799/SB 2822 will not affect the FLVS.
HEF is aware of HB 799 and SB 2822, has been in touch with committee
staff and will be working with the bill sponsors on this issue. HB
799 will be heard in Education Innovation and Career Preparation on
Tuesday. The bill is one of the Speaker's "100 Ideas" and is a
leadership bill. HEF looks at bills very carefully before deciding
to oppose a bill, especially if it is a leadership bill. We may need
to have these same people help us when something is proposed that
will adversely affect home educators. We need to be very careful and
contemplative about our position and actions. HEF likes to take a
more friendly approach to legislation than starting with the phone
blitz. I know there will be some changes to this bill as it goes
through the process, so opposing it now is NOT the right time, even
if we do oppose it later.
Also, after carefully thinking through this bill and the arguments in
the HSLDA alert, I want to give you some more food for thought.
HSLDA states in their alert that they are opposed to virtual schools
for the following reasons:
"Much freedom is lost as the homeschool movement slowly becomes
secularized. If your child is enrolled in one of these virtual
schools, the following occurs: (1) your children become public school
students; (2) your homeschool must use a secular public school
curriculum; (3) you must be supervised by a certified teacher from
the public school; (4) your children must be tested with the state
assessment; and (5) your house is open to home visits by school
officials and possibly social workers.
These programs pose a danger, particularly because early statistics
show that 80% of those who first enroll in a virtual school were
previously homeschoolers."
Every family registered with the county is NOT a "true" home educator.
While the HSLDA reasons may be valid, there is another side to this
issue. Florida has many parents who use the home education program
for a variety of reasons; many of which are not good. They may be
trying to escape truancy charges, their child may refuse to go to
school, the child or parent had a disagreement with the teacher or
administration, school safety, illness and the list goes on. You, as
leaders, have heard them all. HEF does not consider those
parents "true" home educators, although they may become one.
Many home education leaders have complained to me about these
families and asked what can be done to make sure they are
not "abusing" the home education law. HSLDA members are screened and
only families who take their commitment to home educate seriously and
conform to the HSLDA requirements are accepted into membership. HEF
has to deal with all the families in Florida, whether they are
committed to home education or not. HEF has to look at what is good
for the home education movement as a whole.
HEF has been proactive in creating choices for parents.
Since 1993, HEF has worked hard to provide parents with as many
options as possible. In the early 90's we saw a lot of families put
their children back into public school at 9th grade because they
could not teach chemistry, physics or algebra. In 1993, HEF began
working on inclusion for home education students into the college
dual enrollment program because we could see a way for home education
students to validate their home education and earn college credit for
foreign language, chemistry, etc.
In 1996 Bob Muni, one of the HEF Board members, approached me about
joining him in trying to create a virtual school in Florida.
Immediately, I could see how parents could feel comfortable about
keeping their children home through high school if chemistry and
algebra were provided to them free and they could teach the other
courses they felt comfortable teaching.
HEF has never been afraid to create choices for parents. God did not
give HEF or the state your children. He gave them to you, their
parents. HEF has always worked hard to protect parental choice; it
would be inconsistent for us to limit parental choice because we fear
the choice that a parent may make. HSLDA and many home educators
opposed HEF in 1994 when we began working toward home education
student inclusion into the extracurricular activities of public and
private schools. Had the Craig Dickinson Act s. 1006.15 F.S. not
been passed in 1996, Tim Tebow would not be the quarterback for the
University of Florida. The Tebow's had to decide what was best for
their child. They were very committed to home education and would
have kept Tim at home, but he would not have been able to develop his
God-given talent in football. HEF worked to make it possible for Tim
and others to do both, home school and participate in competitive
athletics.
HEF can understand the arguments of HSLDA and there may be some home
education fallout. However, HEF believes that the "true" home
educator will not register with a K-8 virtual school because they do
not want any entanglement with the state. All of the opportunities
that HEF has helped to create in the past kept home education free
from government regulation, unless the parent chooses to participate
in the program and then there are certain additional regulations.
Nothing in the dual enrollment, extracurricular activities, Bright
Futures Scholarships or the Florida Virtual School programs infringes
upon the rights of home educators who choose not to participate in
these programs.
HEF does not try to control parental choice.
Secondly, parents are free to drop out of home education at any time
and enroll in the public school and many committed home education
parents do make that choice for a variety of reasons. HEF does not
try to limit parental choice, but will help educate families that if
the HB 799 passes, parents who choose to enroll their child for the
free curriculum will no longer be home educators. They will be
enrolling in a public school and their child will have to pass the
FCAT test.
K-8 Virtual School enrollment makes the student a public school
student.
Thirdly, parents who would withdraw their child from a home education
program to enroll in the K-8 Virtual School would most likely put
their child back into public school sooner or later. Leaders see
these parents all the time. They only plan to home educate for one
year or possibly two; they want you to tell them where to pick up
their curriculum and where they can drop off their child. Most of
these parents have the public school mentality and want someone else
to do the work for them. How many times has the school district home
education contact said to you, "Oh, it isn't the home educators like
you we are worried about. It is those that don't do anything to
educate their child."?
The parents that choose the K-8 Virtual School would be accountable
to the state. This would be one way that you as leaders can direct
these families to a transition program where they can receive the
assistance they need to get started, have the external accountability
to stay focused and let them test the waters and build their
confidence to later become home educators.
Some parents may choose home education as a result of having their
child in the K-8 Virtual School.
HEF looks at this a little differently than HSLDA. I believe that
these virtual schools can make believers out of public school
parents. I have seen parents of special needs children who left the
public school system on a McKay Scholarship give up thousands of
dollars of government dollars to enroll in a home education program
because they saw the benefit to their child. They would have never
decided to home educate without first seeing the results. We may
lose some families to the public school options, but we may gain
others who will be true believers in the benefits of home education.
And finally, there are cases where parents want to home educate, but
for financial or a multitude of other reasons may not be able to do
so. You can read about Connections Academy at
http://www.connectionsacademy.com and The Florida Virtual Academy at
http://www.flva.net Here are some points covered in the FLVA FAQ.
What kinds of students might a virtual program serve?
. Children looking for a challenging curriculum emphasizing
both knowledge and skills
. Children who are struggling academically
. Children who are academically gifted
. Children who attend unsafe or overcrowded schools
. Homebound students
. Students who are engaged in other productive endeavors (the
arts, athletics, or community service, for example) that make it
difficult for them to attend class during regular school hours
. Children who are self-directed learners
. Children who love computers and multimedia applications
. Children who move frequently due to changing family
circumstances (e.g., military families)
Will this program intrude into my home?
There are no home visits as part of the program, unless you ask your
teacher to come to your home (completely optional), and there are no
cameras or any other intrusions into your home. This school has been
created to help your child obtain a first-class education and serve
your family's needs. If you ever feel that it is not right for your
family or your child, you may disenroll your child at any time.
Is this homeschooling?
The Florida Virtual Academy is a public school program. It is not
homeschooling. FLVA provides another high-quality education option
for your family. FLVA will be the right option for many, but
certainly not all, families. Because it is a public school program,
parents who enroll their students in FLVA can disenroll at any time
if they are not satisfied with the program. We believe that families
should be able to choose the program they feel is most appropriate
for their child's education-and that they should be able to choose
public schools, private schools, homeschooling, or virtual schools.
FLVA seeks to be one more option to help you obtain the best possible
education for your children.
HEF is NOT opposing HB 799 (K-8 Virtual School Program) and ask you
not to for the following reasons:
1. We believe that parents should make decisions for their own
family and children.
2. Your call may easily be discredited and you may appear to be
selfishly trying to control the choice of other parents since this
bill will not directly affect home education under s. 1002.41 F.S.
This bill does NOT require home education parents to enroll in the K-
8 Virtual school nor do we see that ever happening in Florida.
3. Since the sponsors of these bills are strong supporters of home
education and will quickly fight against any laws that would restrict
our rights, it is not politically expedient to oppose their bill. If
I could argue that this bill would have a direct impact on our rights
as home educators, I would be camping out in their offices until they
agreed to withdraw their bill.
4. Money is very tight this year and it will be interesting to see
if the program receives extra funding. Currently, the dollars that
would be spent on a public school child can be used in a K-8 Virtual
School. Including private school and home education students in the
K-8 Virtual School would take money away from public schools and the
state will be paying for students who they are not currently paying
for. I think it will be a hard sell for the bill sponsors.
5. Some parents who have their child registered in a home education
program may want to enroll their child in the K-8 Virtual School. If
they call legislators in support of the bill and you call in to
oppose it, legislators are going to think we are divided and will not
listen to either opinion. They will do what they want to do.
Presenting a divided front does not do home educators any good. It
is better to work this out with diplomacy.
HEF will watch this bill and if it appears that changes to this bill
will jeopardize the freedom of home educators we will let you know
and alert you when it is the appropriate time for action. If you
have a strong opinion about this, please feel free to email me
through the HEF website www.flhef.org. Go to hefquestions and send me
your opinion.
Brenda Dickinson
President of The Home Education Foundation