Saturday, January 31, 2009

Hitler Did Away With Homeschooling Will New Hampshire Follow in Hitler's Steps

Representative Judith Day (D) has proposed two very bad bills HB 367 and HB 368 she herself admitted she has not researched homeschoolers. These bills are not only bad for homeschoolers and taxpayers, they are bad for failing public schools that are having a difficult time adequately educating the students they already have.

The following piece appears at Articlesbase.


Homeschooled Children Continue Outperforming Their Public School Counterparts as Homeschooling Increases in Popularity

In America, there was a time when the idea of homeschooling raised eyebrows of concern and could result in a visit from social services. A lack of trust by the government and public in general in a parent’s ability to educate their own children made homeschooling a bit of a stigma.

Even today in some circles, there are still many “old school” thinkers that go so far as to say that homeschooling is tantamount to deliberate child abuse. As ridiculous as that sounds to most of us, overcoming such ignorance has been a problem for some parents looking into homeschooling.

Overseas, it can be much worse. Homeschooling is illegal in Germany, a law instituted under Hitler and still enforced today. German families who choose to home school must do so in secret and run the risk of arrest; or worse, having the state take their children away.

Performance of home schools versus public and private schools

It doesn’t take much effort or investigation to discover that homeschoolers excel above their public school counter parts in nearly every category. According to a study conducted by Dr. Lawrence Rudner:

• The average home schooled 8th grade student performs four grade levels above the national average.

• One in four home school students are enrolled in a grade level that is above their age level.

• In every grade and in every subject, home schooled students outperform both public and private school students.

Other studies confirm these findings, showing that home schooled students have a much higher college entry rate, score higher on SAT’s and ACT’s, have a higher rate of college graduation, and earn higher incomes in the workforce.
These numbers come despite the fact that about 25% of parents in America who choose to home school either never attended college, or attended but never received a degree. An additional 7-10% have only an Associate degree.
Why do homeschooled children perform so well?

The advantages to homeschooling are many, and are quite revealing as to why homeschooled children do so well.
One on one attention – Whenever a child needs assistance, the parent is there to give him or her full attention, whereas in public schools a teacher must divide their attention between dozens of children.

Ability to focus more time where needed – If a student excels in math, but flounders in science, then a parent can very easily devote as much time as is needed to teaching science. Public schools are regimented, with each subject receiving equal time regardless as to the performance of the student.

Homeschooled students move at their own pace – If a student excels in math then they can advance much quicker than students in a public school, where all students are required to move at the same pace.

Diminished distractions – The parents control the environment, and there is no peer pressure from other students trying to talk a homeschooled student into doing things other than school work or study.
Do parents need some kind of special training or certification?

Some states highly regulate home schools, requiring training and certification in some instances. However, studies show that there is virtually no difference in performance between homeschooled students in highly regulated states versus homeschooled students in states with little or no regulation.

The truth is that homeschooling is gaining in popularity and as such, more and more information and help materials are becoming available. The modern homeschooling parent can now effectively teach their children, regardless of the parent’s own education level, thanks to pre-developed curriculums such as those provided by Heritage Home School Academy.
Parents today can use these curriculums to guide their children. Some curriculums are so effective that parents can study ahead of their children in any subject for which they are lacking and effectively teach the same subject to their children. Furthermore, many children often “learn to learn,” reaching a point where they are able to teach themselves and follow a curriculum with little interaction required from the parent.

Each year more families choose to start homeschooling, spreading knowledge about its benefits, and erasing old stigmas along the way. For more information about homeschooling and home school curriculums, visit Heritage Home School Academy.

Friday, January 30, 2009

Michael Steele Elected RNC Chair

I am a huge fan of Michael Steele he was just elected chair of the RNC. I would have voted for him if he ran for President in 2008. In fact I would not mind seeing a Steele/Palin or Palin/Steele ticket in 2012. In fact I would not mind seeing Palin as the Libertarian candidate in 2012.

A teacher who gets it.....

but will she be blackballed by the "comrades" at the public school where she is a teacher?

Yahoo I love it when I can use my post label Teachers Who Get It.

The following piece appeared as an LTE in the Concord Monitor.


Income tax? In this economy? No thanks!
Now is the time for the state to back off

By PAMELA EAN For the Monitor
January 30, 2009 - 12:00 am

In the Jan. 18 Sunday Monitor, Jessie Osborne laid out a proposal for financing public schools and state government ("In taxing times, two proposals to raise some revenue"). That yet another Concord state representative has proposed an income tax did not surprise me. What was appalling was that this legislation shows no regard for the citizens of New Hampshire, nor for the state constitution.

Part 2 Article 6 of the New Hampshire Constitution enumerates what government may tax. Income is clearly not in there. The people of our state, as well as our government leaders, must realize that the constitution places restrictions on what government may impose on its citizens.

Osborne speaks of "the tough fiscal times facing New Hampshire state government." What about the tough fiscal times facing the citizens? Some of us have lost a large part of our pensions and retirement funds. Others have had to endure pay cuts. The price of basic necessities continues to rise. The last thing we need is for government to take more of our hard-earned money away from us.

Osborne says that during this economic crisis we should be changing our state's tax structure. I do not see how taking away more of my income is going to help me survive the rough times ahead - or how creating more government bureaucracy with the imposition of this income tax will benefit anyone.

According to Osborne, these new taxes she is proposing are all in the name of education. I have been a public school teacher for the past 23 years, including 12 in New Hampshire. As an educator, I am getting sick and tired of the tax-and-spend crowd belittling our education system, and using it as an excuse to tax the citizens more.

New Hampshire citizens should celebrate the fact that our students consistently score higher than those in most states that spend more per capita than we do. I am the first to admit that there are many problems with our public education system - not just here, but throughout our nation. We used to lead the world in education. Our educational policies over the past 30 years have proven disastrous to our students, and the problems they have created will not be solved by throwing more money at them.

The focus of public education should return to academics and citizenship - nothing else and nothing less. Our highest-achieving students are not being challenged enough. At the high school level, those who wish to succeed should be in classes with others who wish to succeed. Our lower-achieving and less motivated students are being pushed along in elementary and middle school without being held accountable for the core knowledge they need to be successful in high school. This is setting them up for failure. Parents have abdicated their responsibility of being the primary educators of their children. We parents need to take back ownership of our children's education.

I am proud to be a teacher and proud to be a New Hampshirite. We enjoy more financial freedoms and less tax burden than any of the surrounding states. Those states that have chosen to overburden their people with income and sales taxes are hurting as badly, if not more, than we are. So why should we follow their lead?

The resourcefulness of our citizens and our spirit of individuality will see us through the hard times ahead. New Hampshire is not like other states. Long live the difference.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Homeschooler told.....

"You are lucky you even have the right to homeschool." Representative Rachel Burke, (D.)

Gee would she say to gun owners, "You are lucky you have a right to own a gun." Maybe to a black person, " You are lucky you even have a right to sit in a restaurant with a white person." In New Hampshire gay people are allowed to have a civil union but homeschoolers are lucky we have a right to homeschool! Give me a break! These words by this woman can be described with one word "DESPOTIC," it is usually people who are despotic in nature who use words like these not a representative. I actually have a few other choice words but my mother would say, "I raised you to be a lady!"

New Hampshire Homeschoolers wake-up and fight for homeschooling freedom or soon you may not even be allowed to homeschool.

Send your choice comments to Rep Burke.
Capitol Address
State House, 107 North Main Street
Concord, NH 03301
Phone: 603-271-2548
Phone: 603-271-2169
District Address
563 Main Street, Apartment 2
Farmington, NH 03835-1420
Phone: 603-755-3353 (Home)


Wednesday, January 28, 2009

I Recommend Homeschoolers Attend Meeting to Protect Their Rights.

Chris Hamilton has sent the following in regard to the upcoming hearings for House 367 and 368. Although I do not agree with her on numerous issues her points about the meeting should be heeded by all homeschoolers.


The following is from Chris Hamilton.

On Tuesday, February 10, 3:30 PM, Room 15, Department of Education, the Home Education Advisory Council (HEAC) will meet. It meets monthly to discuss issues related to home education. Legislation affecting home education is one of those issues, but the council does not take a stand on legislation. There are three legislators who serve on the council; only two of them have ever attended. The council chair will not know until a few days before the meeting whether any legislators will be there at all. Members of the public are welcome to attend meetings, but there is no provision for public input.

On Wednesday, February 11, 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM, the House Education Committee (HEC) will meet to hold public hearings on HB367 and HB368. The entire purpose of the hearings is to get input from the public (that's you!) about the bills. The HEC usually meets in the Legislative Office Building (LOB) in Room 207, but because such a large turnout is expected for these two bills, those hearings will be held in Representatives Hall in the State House (the building with the gold dome).

HSLDA sent out an e-lert recommending homeschoolers attend the HEAC meeting, but I would say that if you have to choose between the two meetings, go to the hearing. Your impact on this legislation will be greater, and you will get more out of it. Since many, many people are interested in testifying, there's a good possibility that one or both of the hearings will be "recessed" and "continued" on another day. If you don't get a chance to speak the first day, you may have to come back again.

Tuesday, January 27, 2009

A Lesson on Wealth Redistribution.

The following piece appeared at Net Right Nation BLOG and This piece is great to share with your college and high school aged children, I think it will help them to understand why spreading the wealth is a bad policy.


My New Spread the Wealth Grading Policy
Written by Mike S. Adams

Good afternoon students! I’m writing you this email to announce that I’m making some changes in the grading policies I announced two weeks ago when I sent an email with an attached course syllabus. As you know, we now have a new president and I thought it would be nice to align our class policies with some of the policies he will be implementing over the next four years. These will be changes you can believe in and, I hope, changes that will inspire hope, which is our most important American value.

Previously, I announced that I would use a ten-point grading scale, which means that 90% of 100 is an “A,” 80% is a “B,” 70% is a “C,” and 60% is enough for a passing grade of “D.” I also announced that I will refrain from using a “plus/minus” system – even though the faculty handbook gives me that option.

The new policy I am announcing today is that those who score above 90 on the first exam will have points deducted and given to students at the bottom of the grade distribution. For example, if a student gets a 99, I will then deduct nine points and give them to the person with the lowest grade. If a person scores 95 I will then deduct five points and give them to the person with the second lowest grade. If someone scores 93 I will then deduct three points and give them to the next lowest person. And so on.

My point, rather obviously, is that any points above 90 are really not needed since you have an “A” regardless of whether you score 90 or 99. Nor am I convinced that you need to “save” those points for a rainy day. Those who are failing, however, need the points – not unlike the failing banks and automakers that need money to avoid the danger of bankruptcy.

After our second examination, I intend to take a more complex approach to the practice of grade redistribution. I will not be looking at your second test scores but, instead, at the average of your first two test scores. In the process, I may well decide to start taking some points from students in the “B” range. For example, if someone has an average of 85 after two tests I may take a few points and give them away to someone who is failing or who is in danger of failing. I think this is fair because the person with an 85 average is probably unlikely to climb up to an “A” or fall down to a “C.” I may be wrong in some individual cases but, of course, my principal concern is not the individual.

By the end of the semester I will abandon any formal guidelines and just redistribute points in a way that seems just, or fair, to me. I will not rely upon any standards other than my very strong and passionate feelings concerning social justice. In the process, I will not merely seek to eliminate inequality. I will also seek to eliminate the possibility of failure.

I know some are concerned that my system may impact their lives in a very profound way. Grade redistribution will undoubtedly cause some grade point average redistribution. And this, in turn, will mean that some people will not get into the law school or medical school of their choice. Or maybe some day you will be represented by a lawyer – or operated on by a doctor – who is not of the highest quality.

These are all, of course, legitimate long-term concerns. But I believe we need to remain focused on the short term. I think my new system will immediately help the self-esteem of those failing or in danger of failing. It should also help the self-esteem of those who are not in danger of failing. After all, it just feels good to give – even if the giving is compelled and not really “giving” in the literal sense.

Finally, I want to note that this idea was also inspired by a former presidential candidate named George McGovern. In a debate with the late William F. Buckley, McGovern said that people who earn more money should pay more taxes. Buckley replied that the rich do pay more in taxes – and more as a percentage of their income. McGovern looked confused.

But I don’t think there’s anything confusing about our pending social responsibilities. Whether we are talking about income or grades it does not matter how much or what percentage we are giving. The question is and should always be “Can we give more?”

Monday, January 26, 2009

For Homeschooling Multi-Tasking is a Must

The other day I was doing research on the NECAP scores for a letter to the editor, I was writing a letter about a homeschool bill. Anastasia was reading over my shoulder and asked what I was doing. I explained to Anastasia about the NECAP scores and what they mean. I explained how some of the Newport public school kids can not read or read at grade level. Anastasia said (remember she is four) "That is sad Mom, I will teach them how to read. First you teach them the alphabet, than you teach them what the letters say, than you teach them how to put the letters together to make words."

I could really relate to the author's point in the story below about multi-tasking. Many times I will be cooking dinner while teaching Anastasia the states and their capitals or working on her spelling. Jim and I will test Anastasia on the states and capitals in the car with the I know game. Jim may say, "I know the capital of Texas is Concord!" Anastasia will reply back "No, Silly it is Austin.", etc., etc., etc.

The following piece appeared in


Veteran Homeschooler Speaks Out

Homeschool Mom gives the lowdown on homeschooling.
kid with chalkboard

"The Winter 2009 Education Next" publication says that more people than ever are homeschooling. Word has it they aren't just religious conservative nut jobs either. Other types of nut jobs are doing it too.

As a veteran of four years in the homeschool trenches, I thought I would just give those of you who are interested in pursuing this line of education the top five criteria for a homeschooling mom.

1. Ditch Design Trends: If you don't value a clean, well-appointed home and your decorating tastes include books, toys, papers, pencils and small people, you're a good candidate.

2. Not a Loner: You must hate to be alone for even five minutes and enjoy having a constant group of people around you vying for your attention and repeating your name incessantly.

3. Healthy Interest: Being curious and not squeamish is important, because even squished squirrels afford a learning opportunity with the proper gear.

4. Good Work Ethic: If you might enjoy a job that has 16-hour work days, no benefits, accolades or vacation, you have found nirvana.

5. Able to Multitask: You must be willing and able to play puzzles, factor a polynomial, make dinner and read "The Wind in the Willow" with complete characterization while folding laundry.
Do you think you have what it takes to homeschool your kids?

Sunday, January 25, 2009

Voters In This Study Agree With Me

Teachers Unions are about teachers they are not about students. Until teachers unions are out of public education I won't be satisfied sending my children to a public school. Unions are fine but they do not belong in government or public schools (aka government schools).

The following piece appeared on

RESEARCH: Voters Say Focus of Teacher's Unions are Jobs, not Education

By Rasmussen Reports - January 23, 2009

Debate ran high within Barack Obama’s transition team over whether the next secretary of Education should be a traditionalist in sync with the national teachers’ unions or a reformer who will help break the hold those unions have on Democratic Party policy. Obama's choice of Chicago School Superintendent Arne Duncan is seen as a move to bridge those competing camps.

But two-thirds of U.S. voters (66%) say the teachers’ unions – the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers – are more interested in protecting their members’ jobs than in the quality of education.

Only 23% of voters say educational quality comes first for the unions, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.

Men and women are equally critical of the teacher’s unions. Married voters are more critical than unmarrieds by 12 points. Seventy percent (70%) of voters with children at home think the unions are more interested in jobs, compared to 63% of those without children in the house.

While 78% of Republicans and 66% of unaffiliated voters say teachers’ jobs are the chief focus of the unions, only 55% of Democrats agree.

In a Labor Day survey posted on September 1, 55% of Americans had at least a somewhat favorable opinion of labor unions. Thirty-five percent (35%) viewed them negatively.
(Want a free daily e-mail update? Sign up now. If it's in the news, it's in our polls).

Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters also believe the secretary of Education should be an advocate for students rather than teachers, but 19% say teachers should be the secretary’s priority. Fifteen percent (15%) aren’t sure.

Younger voters are more likely to think the Cabinet secretary should be an advocate for teachers than older voters do. Across all other categories including race and political affiliation, two-thirds of voters say the secretary is intended to be a champion of students.

Over half of voters (55%) believe teachers are paid too little, while eight percent (8%) think they receive too much. Thirty-three percent (33%) say teachers are paid about the right amount for the jobs they do. Five percent (5%) are undecided. These numbers are consistent with earlier surveys.

Sixty-one percent (61%) of female voters say teachers are paid too little, compared to 49% of male voters. Seventy-one percent (71%) of Democrats agree versus 41% of Republicans and 49% of unaffiliated voters.

Interestingly, unmarried voters by 10 points over married voters believe teachers are underpaid. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters with children in the home share that view, along with 53% of those without children in the house.

With Obama’s nominee for Education secretary stil unannounced, the New York Times noted on Saturday, “There is mystery not only about the person he will choose, but also about the approach to overhauling the nation’s schools that his selection will reflect. … Will he side with those who want to abolish teacher tenure and otherwise curb the power of teachers’ unions? Or with those who want to rewrite the main federal law on elementary and secondary education, the No Child Left Behind Act, and who say the best strategy is to help teachers become more qualified?”

The president-elect continues to hover in record positive territory in the Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Approval Index.

In a survey in May, 64% of adults said being a teacher is one of the most important jobs in our country today, and 80% said their teachers were at least somewhat important in shaping the direction of their lives.

Just 20% of voters, however, think teachers are more important to a student’s success in school than parents. Seventy-two percent (72%) say parents are more important, with eight percent (8%) not sure.

Seventy-eight percent (78%) of conservatives and 76% of moderates put the emphasis on parents, but liberals are more closely divided. Among liberal voters, 58% say parents are more important, but 29% say teachers are.

Eighty percent (80%) of evangelical Christians, 72% of other Protestants and 74% of Catholics also emphasize the importance of parents. Support for parents is highest among those who attend church on a regular basis.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of voters also agree that social factors outside the school are very important in determining a student’s educational performance. Another 29% say these outside factors are somewhat important. Only one percent (1%) say they are not at all important.

African-Americans and Democratic voters are more likely than whites and Republicans to rate social factors outside the school as very important to a student’s performance.

In September, 81% of adults rated the performance of their children’s schools as good or excellent.

To read more education focused polls from Rasmussen Reports, click here.

By Rasmussen Reports - January 23, 2009