Creative Cousins

"Can I have dessert?" queried my six year old nephew.

I told him he absolutely could, after he wrote or selected a poem for Tuesday Teatime.  It may be Spring Break, but there is always a time and place for stealth schooling.

The 13 year old cousins decided they wanted to compose their own poems, but weren't sure what to write about.  "Tap dancing spiders!" "Cousins being eaten by a dragon!" commanded the eldest girl cousin in that way of first-borns everywhere who are accustomed to getting younger siblings to do all manner of ridiculous or impossible task merely because the primogenitarily favored demand it.

And in the manner of second borns everywhere who are accustomed to performing all manner of ridiculous or impossible task without pausing to wonder, "Why?" and without so much as a "You aren't the boss of me," the two 13 year old cousins turned out the following in under ten minutes:

Allison's poem

Every night when I go to sleep
All the creatures come out and creep.
The spiders, they tap dance with flair;
The rats make nests upon my long hair.
The roaches play with the flies and bugs;
The mice crawl under the purple rugs.
And when the rooster crows in the morn,
The animals scatter as the sun is born.

Nathan's poem

Once there was the day
 my thoughts ran away.
  My cousins were
   eaten by a dragon.
    With golden scales
     like large hay bales,
      and teeth like fire and
       sharp as barbed wire.
Once there was a day
 when my thoughts ran away.
  My cousins were
   eaten by a dragon.
    So I set a trap in the
     depths of my mind to
      trap the gleaming evil.
       But alas, I had not the
        time, and came the golden
         dragon prime.  I tried to save
          but no chance he gave, and
           and ate them up in no time.
Once there was a day
 my thoughts ran away.
  My cousins were
    eaten by a dragon.

First borns may set the agenda.  But second borns get bonus cookies for originality and execution.

Blessings,
Holly


      

Invisible Mom

I am 43.  I drive a mini-van.  I worry about the 20 extra pounds accumulated in the 50 pound, five time yoyo ride up and down the kid-bearing roller coaster.  I am invisible; I am every mom.

I found myself suddenly conspicuous last night when my 15 year old invited a group of friends over.  These are all kids he's gotten to know at church and several were on the week long missions trip with him last summer.  But still, they are not kids I know well.  And there were girls invited. (!!??)  And none of them are home schoolers.

I don't know in what nanosecond the sippy cups and arranged play dates stopped and my kid began selecting his own friends and asking them to come hang out.  Wasn't it just yesterday that no self respecting boy would sit on the "girl" side of the Sunday School room, let alone talk to one?

What is an invisible mom to do in times such as these?   If it were just a group of guys hanging out, I would have chucked them all in the basement with a bag of chips and been done with it.

As mom of one princess myself and extrapolating a decade into her future, I decided chucking into the basement with a bag of chips probably wasn't the way to go.  How to be omnipresent without seeming as if one is omnipresent?

I dispatched Mr. Wonderful to the basement to supervise the opening Nerf War and I bopped in and out a few times collecting the younger kids for bed.

After an opening warm-up war, the kids moved on to Risk, the ostensible purpose of the gathering.  I know, I know; if you have a group of kids willing to gather on a Saturday night to eat snacks and play Risk, they are probably not the rabble rousing variety needing constant, vigilant watch.  I recused myself to the front living room to read and listen to every word of their conversation without being seen.

Mr. Wonderful took up sentry at the kitchen computer.  The teens laughed and ate and played in the adjoining family room.  They seemed not to notice us a whole lot as we tried to thread the needle of being friendly and available without being an embarrassment to our offspring.

It's hard work being conspicuously invisible.  Being a parent of teens is a lot like being a good butler.  Anticipating needs, serving without drawing attention to one's self, aware of everything, revealing nothing.  Maybe invisibility is God's super power gift to the middle aged parent.  It sure is more kind to the midsection than donning a Wonder Woman suit.

Math Counts

Hi, all:

Regardless of whether or not your kid is involved in the middle school Math Counts competition, I hope you might take a moment to drop Math Counts program coordinator Chris Bright a note. Indications are that the Math Counts board is reviewing their rules for next year.

Prior to this year, homeschool teams were allowed to compete as both individuals and in the team competition. Math Counts then made a ruling banning all homeschool teams from the team portion of the competition. After great outcry and some HSLDA involvement, they partially rescinded that ruling. They grandfathered in teams in existence prior to 2010-2011 and banned only new homeschool teams. After that, pressure on the Math Counts organization greatly decreased as the older teams were happy and stopped calling and writing letters.

The time is now, I believe, to once again ask Math Counts to fully rescind their discriminatory ruling and allow all homeschool teams back in to team competition. Interestingly, there are some parallels in the rationale that MathCounts gave for their ruling and the rationale we saw from Senator Maloney for his IL homeschool registration efforts. Both parties brought up those who were not really home schoolers masquerading as such and causing problems. Obviously, the solution is not to punish/regulate the true home schoolers.

Even if you don't have a pony in this race, please consider writing a letter. This type of thinking is spreading--my sister reports similar rationale now being used by the Science Olympiad competition in NC to attempt to ban homeschool teams there.

My letter and Chris Bright's email address is below. I am not certain whether Chris is a man or a woman, which is why I used the first name.

Blessings,
Holly


To: chris@mathcounts.org
Subject: Homeschool MathCounts Teams
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 19:58:47 +0000

Dear Chris:

Richard S, our IL chapter coordinator, passed along to you my concern about banning new homeschool teams from MathCounts team competition. You may remember I also wrote to you about this issue this past summer/fall.
You indicated to Richard that the policy is still under review for next year.

As Richard told you, our team posed no administrative challenge or headache to him. He said MathCounts told him this was the reason for banning new homeschool teams. I told him that the original reason we were given was a concern over homeschool teams forming super teams from a wide geographic area. MathCounts allows science & math magnets and private gifted schools to compete, although these are by nature super teams pulling from a wide geographic area.

By contrast, our new team was formed purely within the spirit of MathCounts' intent--to encourage more kids to love math. Our "parent team" moved further north and our new team formed several suburbs and an hour's drive away. We knew this would make both teams less competitive, but we felt it would offer more home educated kids the chance to get involved in a club close to their neighborhood. Indeed, all of our kids live within a mile east-west radius and within an 18 block north-south radius. Our geographic pull this year was much more narrow than the local middle school team that advanced to states.

Our team won the team portion of the competition and finished second overall. Unfortunately, our team was the only ones who knew that because our scores had to be "unofficial" and hence, unannounced.

May I ask you to put yourself in the place of our students for a moment? They worked just as hard as any other team, meeting once weekly for two hours faithfully since the previous September. They applauded politely for every other announced team and individual award.

Does MathCounts really think that is a fair way to treat students based solely on how they receive their primary math education? I think it is entirely the wrong message to be sending to a group of youngsters--that no matter how well you do, you will be discriminated against because of the type of school you attend and you will be overlooked.

I urge MathCounts to rescind this practice that denigrates the efforts of home educated students and to return to the pre-2010 rule of allowing homeschool teams to compete as both individuals and as teams. It is the right thing to do.

Sincerely,
Holly R

Too Much Time on My Hands

Capitol Fax political pundit Rich Miller suggests home schoolers have time on their hands, which is why we can show up in Springfield today.

Seriously, Rich?

What Mr. Miller characterized as a simple registration requirement is not.  Even Senator Maloney is running from his own bill now, though sadly not from the registration concept.  What Senator Maloney attempted in SB 136 would give the State Board of Education broad, indeed unlimited power to craft registration requirements.  Curriculum approval by the state?  Certification required?  Why not?  Maloney noted to Cisco Cotto (890 AM), with some wistfulness, that others states have floated or implemented similar actions.  One HSLDA attorney joked that we do have a term for those government officials who think it a problem when the government doesn't know or control something:  megalomaniac.

Illinois Review rightly ridiculed Miller for his assessment of home educators.  I will leave you to guess who the anonymously quoted homeschool mom is.  :)

Blessings,
Holly

SB 136 in the TribLocal section of the Chicago Tribune

I just posted a piece on the TribLocal portion of the Chicago Tribune.  The TribLocal site bills itself as the "citizen reporter" arm of the Chicago Tribune.  Sounds so much better than "glorified blogger," yes?

You can read it here.

Blessings,
Holly

They are Hearing, but are They Listening?

As it currently stands, it looks like the IL General Assembly Education Committee will be meeting on Tuesday, 2/15 to discuss registration of home school students, but without SB 136 listed as legislation for that meeting.

Perhaps they've figured out that there is a vociferous, voting and wait-for-it...informed citizenry in IL who finds this bill repugnant.  Maybe they're out to find a more palatable way to force home schoolers to submit to state intrusion.  Could they believe that if they just find the right way to phrase it, surely we will agree to their enlightened, assuredly benign reach into our homes?  Doubtful.

In a way, you almost have to feel sorry for Senator Maloney.  He appears to have stepped squarely in a big pile of dog doo here.  It would be like someone suggesting basic literacy--say, reading on a second grade level-- as a precondition to voting rights.  On the surface, that's not a bad idea.  However, only someone without any clue to our nation's history and the painful, discriminatory past of poll tax, literacy tests and the like used as unfair and blatant attempts to disenfranchise blacks would ever insensitively suggest it.

So it is with Senator Maloney and SB 136, I think.  Or at least, in my more charitable moments, I hope it is merely ignorance of the decades long struggle to legally affirm home school rights and freedoms that leads him to such an ill-conceived bill.  In my more realistic moments, I note that the IL Education Association was his largest campaign contributor in 2008, followed by money from both the IFT and the Chicago Teachers Union.  View his campaign contributors here.

Home educators are right to distrust any bill that rests power in the State Board of Education to prescribe any requirements, even registration ones, on home schools.

Any home educator worth their salt knows of the NEA's resolution of 2007-8 (B-75) which asserts their belief that "home schooling programs based on parental choice cannot provide the student with a comprehensive education experience."  State BOEs are filled with former institutional setting teachers and superintendents (7 of the 9 here in IL).  We know that the stated position of the NEA is that "When homeschooling occurs...instruction should be by persons who are licensed by the appropriate state education licensure agency, and a curriculum approved by the state Dept. of Ed should be used."

Can Senator Maloney really wonder why home educators view skeptically any power given to the State BOE to establish registration requirements?  Registration requirements are the gateway drug to curriculum requirements and licensure requirements.

Maloney's Democratic counterparts on the Education Committee have been, for the most part, silent about his bill.  Maybe they should contemplate that the IL Federation of Teachers 2003 Resolution #4 states that "IFT supports MANDATORY {emphasis mine} state and/or federal funded preschool education for ALL three and four year old children in the state of IL."  With at least one State BOE member proudly listing her affiliation with the IFT on her official biography page, home educators might rightly question what the State BOE position on say, a 12 year old who learns at home might be?

The IFT lists as key issues it continues to oppose as "attempts to weaken/reduce present student attendance requirements for the purpose of computing state aid" as well as "any effort to weaken the separation of church and state."  Now, these may be worthy goals for public education, but wouldn't these goals each potentially be undermined by the very presence of home schools?  Is it really a stretch to think that the State BOE, when dreaming up registration requirements under the broad umbrella of power SB 136 gives them, might have deeply ingrained in them a sympathy for Article 2 of the IFT Constitution?  Article 2, Sec 1 lists their purpose as giving "mutual aid and support to IL teachers."  Section 2 lists their purpose as promoting "the organization of teachers" and section 9 dedicates their purpose to "preserve and promote the welfare of the public school system."

By our very existence, home educators are a threat to the entrenched powers of institutional schooling.  The trend in our country is toward professionalism of the teacher and toward national standards.  Again, maybe not bad ideas for those within that system, but  the fact that any reasonable parent with a library card can successfully educate their kid is a scary idea to the institutions.  Scores of studies seem to indicate their fears are well-founded.  Homeschooled kids have higher achievement as measured by ACT scores and higher freshman college GPAs than their traditionally schooled counterparts.

What if this legislation evolves into home educators merely needing to give their names, address and kids' names?  Surely no reasonable person could disagree with that, right?  Let me leave you with the words from the IFT website section entitled "Rome wasn't built in a day":

Aim for consensus rather than "victory."  Be willing to settle for making progress toward your goal, getting the bill passed, and fine-tuning it in future sessions.

If Senator Maloney wants to introduce a bill asking the State BOE to emulate home educators' success in raising above average academic kids, ones who are less likely to be on welfare and more likely to be entrepreneurs than their public school counterparts, all at a fraction of the $11,000 IL spends per child on "free" public education, then we have much to dialogue about.

Otherwise?  The State has no business extending any control over a successful education venture to bring it to the level of mediocrity shown by the public system.

Contact info for the IL Education Committee members is in the next blog post below.  Please take a moment to thank Sen. Schmidt and Sen. McCarter for their opposition to SB 136 and to let the other Senators know you disapprove of this needless intrusion by the state on parental rights.

Links to the campaign contributors of the other Education Committee members listed below.

Blessings,
Holly

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/James_Meeks

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Kimberly_Lightford

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Gary_Forby

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Susan_Garrett

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Iris_Martinez

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/John_G._Mulroe

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/David_Luechtefeld

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Kyle_McCarter

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Suzi_Schmidt

SB 136

SB 136 has been referred to the Education Committee meeting on 2/15.  Please contact the following committee members and register your strong opposition by both phone and email.

Committee Chairman, Sen. James T. Meeks (D-Chicago)
Springfield: 217-782-8066
District: 708-862-1515
http://www.senatedem.ilga.gov/index.php/contact-us/12-sen-contact/26-senator-james-t-meeks


Sen. Kimberly A. Lightford (D-Westchester) 
Springfield: 217-782-8505
District: 708-343-7444 
http://www.senatedem.ilga.gov/index.php/contact-us/12-sen-contact/22-senator-kimberly-a-lightford


Sen. Gary Forby (D-Benton)
Springfield: 217-782-5509
District: 618-439-2504 
http://www.senatedem.ilga.gov/index.php/contact-us/12-sen-contact/9-senator-gary-forby


Sen. Susan Garrett (D-Highwood)
Springfield: 217-782-3650
District: 847-433-2002
http://www.senatedem.ilga.gov/index.php/contact-us/12-sen-contact/11-senator-susan-garrett



Sen. Iris Y. Martinez (D-Chicago)
Springfield: 217-782-8191
District: 773-463-0720
http://www.senatedem.ilga.gov/index.php/contact-us/12-sen-contact/25-senator-iris-y-martinez



Sen. John G. Mulroe (D-Chicago)
Springfield: 217-782-1035
District: 773-763-3810
http://www.senatedem.ilga.gov/index.php/contact-us/12-sen-contact/6-senator-john-g-mulroe

Sen. David Luechtefeld (R-Okawville)
Springfield: 217-782-8137
District: 618-243-9014
http://www.luechtefeld.senategop.org/index.php?option=com_contact&view=contact&id=1&Itemid=3

Sen. Kyle McCarter (R-Decatur)
Springfield: 217-782-5755
District: 217-428-4068
mccarter51@att.net

Sen. Suzi Schmidt (R-Lake Villa)
Springfield: 217-782-7353
District: 847-752-7004
suzi@suzischmidt.com

Sen. Christine Johnson (R- Sycamore) *Will be sworn in on Feb. 14th
Springfield: 217-782-1977
District: 815-895-6318
could not find contact info for Sen. Johnson


Copy of the letter I sent to each committe member (with shameless academic bragging redacted for public consumption):

Dear Senator McCarter: 

SB 136 requiring home schoolers to register with the State Board of Education according to whatever requirements the SBOE establishes will be heard by the Education Committee on 2/15. This vague bill undermines parental rights and sets home educators on a slippery slope toward unnecessary government intrusion into their lives.  

I am an active voter and an IL home educating mother of 5. All my kids who are of school age perform well above grade level. My oldest, though only a 9th grader, currently has a XX% average at North Central College in Math 152 (Calc 2) and scored a XX on the ACT at age 13; my middle two sons routinely score at the XXth percentile or above on nationally normed standardized tests and my pre-K girl can read at the XX grade level. Somehow, I manage to educate them appropriately without any state intrusion or help and cannot imagine that anything the SBOE could dream up would do anything but hinder me in this endeavor.  

I am asking you to call on Senator Maloney to withdraw this bill and to publicly note your opposition to it. I do not think I can voice my opposition in any clearer terms than your colleague State Senator Suzi Schmidt already has: 

In its current form the bill would mandate all non-public school students (including home-schooled students) to register with the State Board of Education each year, which appears unnecessary, excessive, and provides no solution to a given problem in the public or private education systems. Additionally there is no available information regarding how this mandate might improve education for students, the number of families it will affect, or the anticipated additional cost to taxpayers it will create. Because the proposed legislation seemingly provides no added value to education and is unnecessary to student achievement, I do not support this bill. 

Thank you.