首页
登录
职称英语
Parents of the approximately 200, 000 home-schooled children in California are
Parents of the approximately 200, 000 home-schooled children in California are
游客
2025-01-01
39
管理
问题
Parents of the approximately 200, 000 home-schooled children in California are reeling from the possibility that they may have to shutter their classrooms--and go back to school themselves--if they want to continue teaching their own kids. On Feb. 28, Judge H. Walter Croskey of the Second District Court of Appeals in Los Angeles ruled that children ages six to 18 may be taught only by credentialed teachers in public or private schools--or at home by Mom and Dad, but only if they have a teaching degree. Citing state law that goes back to the early 1950s, Croskey declared that "California courts have held that under provisions in the Education Code, parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children." Furthermore, the judge wrote, if instructors teach without credentials they will be subject to criminal action.
This news raised a furor among home schooling advocates, including government officials. "Every California child deserves a quality education and parents should have the right to decide what’s best for their children, "Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said in a statement today. "Parents should not be penalized for acting in the best interests of their children’s education. This outrageous ruling must be overturned by the courts and if the courts don’t protect parents’ rights then, as elected officials, we will. " "It’s kind of scary, " says Julie Beth Lamb, an Oakdale, California,parent who,with no teaching credentials,has taught her four children for 15 years. "If that ruling is held up,this would make us one of the most restrictive states in the nation." The debacle originated with a suit over child abuse. One of the eight children of Philip and Mary Long,a Los Angeles couple,had filed a complaint of abuse and neglect with the L. A. Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS). The agency determined that the Long children were being home schooled,taught by their uncredentialed mother while officially enrolled in independent study at Sunland Christian School. The DCFS then turned to the courts to mandate that the children attend public school so that teachers might spot evidence of abuse (a charge the parents deny). A juvenile court,however,determined that the Longs had a constitutional right to home school their children. The DCFS appealed and the case landed in Croskey’s appellate court.
For years,the state of California has allowed parents to home school as long as they file papers to create a private school and hire a tutor with credentials or ii their child participates in an independent study program through a credentialed school. In evaluating the Long case,however,Judge Croskey found that state law forbade any home schooling that was not taught by a credentialed teacher and that what California had been allowing was,in his judicial opinion,illegal In 1953,another appellate court ruled against home-schooling parents who didn’t want to adhere to California’s compulsory education laws,which require kids between six and 18 to attend a credentialed school. The current case is most likely to be appealed to California’s Supreme Court.
"We weren’t trying to change the law on home schooling ,"says Leslie Heimov of the Children’s Law Center,which represents the Long children involved in the case. "The law is accurate--it hasn’t changed since the 1950s. "She says the Center does not even have an opinion on home schooling. They just wanted to do what was best for the children represented in the case.
The fact that this sweeping ruling has sprung from such an individualized case is what has most outraged home schooling advocates. "Public schools are not a solution to the problem o{ child abuse,"says Leslie Buchanan,president of the Home School Association of California. Jack O’Connell ,California State Superintendent of Public Instruction--the equivalent of a department of education--now faces the potential crisis of dealing with tens of thousands of truants. Does he know what will happen next? "I honestly don’t know,’O’Connell says,adding that his department is reviewing the case. "There is some angst in the field." [br] What has caused the home schooling advocates’ strong response to the ruling?
选项
A、A suit about a Los Angeles couple over child abuse.
B、Evidence of child abuse spotted by public school teachers.
C、Public schools as unsatisfactory solutions to problems of child abuse.
D、A far-reaching ruling originating only from a single case.
答案
D
解析
细节题。文章最后一段指出The fact that this sweeping ruling has sprung from such an individualized case is what has most outraged home schooling advocates.表明这一影响广泛的裁决引起家庭教育倡导者极大愤慨的原因在于该裁决仅仅由于一桩虐待儿童诉讼案件引发,进而出台限制儿童接收家庭教育的法律规定,难免有小题大做之疑。文章继而阐明,即使此规定能够使儿童重返公立学校,虐待儿童问题也未必能够得以解决。因此,[D]为答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3893688.html
相关试题推荐
Parentsoftheapproximately200,000home-schooledchildreninCaliforniaare
Parentsoftheapproximately200,000home-schooledchildreninCaliforniaare
Parentsoftheapproximately200,000home-schooledchildreninCaliforniaare
Researchersinmanycountrieshaveobservedthatmiddleclasschildrenasagr
Researchersinmanycountrieshaveobservedthatmiddleclasschildrenasagr
Inbringingupchildren,everyparentwatcheseagerlythechild’sacquisition
Inbringingupchildren,everyparentwatcheseagerlythechild’sacquisition
Inbringingupchildren,everyparentwatcheseagerlythechild’sacquisition
Inbringingupchildren,everyparentwatcheseagerlythechild’sacquisition
Inbringingupchildren,everyparentwatcheseagerlythechild’sacquisition
随机试题
OnNovember16thanumberofwell-knownmusicianswereonhandtohelpmark
[originaltext]TheGoldenGateBridgejoinsthebeautifulcityofSanFranci
Therearemanywaysofdealingwithoffendersthatdonotinvolvethepayment
下列关于质量保证金说法正确的是( )。A.承包没有完成缺陷责任的,发包人有权扣
关于出血坏死性胰腺炎哪项是错误的A.起病急骤常伴休克和多种并发症 B.血清淀粉
混合淋巴细胞反应可用于A.体外评价T淋巴细胞的功能B.测定外周血T淋巴细胞的数目
按假药论处的药品是A.不注明或者更改生产批号的药品 B.超过有效期的药品 C
(2018年真题)司法独立是司法改革的重要目标。下列关于司法独立说法不正确的是:
房地产委托代理合同签订以后,紧接着要进行的工作是()。A:委托人提交有关资料
PM2.5是指直径( )。A.<2.5μm的颗粒物 B.>2.5~<10μm
最新回复
(
0
)