- In a major victory for home schoolers
that also serves as a warning to school districts statewide, Massachusetts'
highest court yesterday ruled that Lynn school officials have no right
to visit homes to see how parents teach their children.
-
- Capping a seven-year lawsuit over parents'
rights to teach children any way they choose, the ruling comes at a critical
time for home schoolers: As their numbers have quadrupled in the past decade
to an estimated 4,500 statewide, hundreds of families are struggling to
understand their rights in vaguely written laws and court rulings.
-
- Lynn will not appeal the decision and
the new school superintendent said yesterday that the district had already
begun to revamp the policy before the Supreme Judicial Court ruled. "Still,
this ruling definitely clears the air for school districts," said
Lynn Superintendent of Schools James Mazareas, who took office in August.
-
- The district originally pursued the case
because, he said, "Six or seven years ago this was uncharted territory."
-
- The case stretches back to 1991, when
Stephen and Lois Pustell filed a suit against the Lynn School Committee
because the board required home schoolers to be periodically observed by
school officials.
-
- In 1994, Michael and Virginia Brunelle,
who have five children, faced criminal charges in the same city when they
objected to home visits and refused to submit their educational plans to
Lynn officials.
-
- While the criminal charges were dropped,
the Brunelles, Pustells and their attorneys challenged the validity of
Lynn's policy first in the federal courts and then in the state courts
during the past three years.
-
- Meanwhile, both couples continued teaching
their children at home rather than sending them to school. "We're
just thrilled with the decision," said Stephen Pustell, 44, a computer
analyst who has four children. The city's job "is to know that children
are being educated, not to educate them."
-
- The court did not rule on the constitutionality
of visiting home schoolers and instead relied on a much simpler argument:
There is no state law that says school districts can require home visits.
-
- The court also re-emphasized parents'
long-standing rights to educate their children in the best way they see
fit. "It's a big victory with national significance," said Michael
Farris, a lawyer from the Virginia-based Home School Legal Defense Association
who represented the parents. "Home school laws are in constant flux.
If this decision would have gone the other way, we think there would have
been copycat school districts all over the country."
-
- While Lynn is considered the only school
district in the country to have required home visits, some school districts
statewide have had the requirement on their books, but did not enforce
it. Some districts that did not have the requirement would ask parents
for home visits.
-
- Many times parents, unsure of their rights,
agreed to allow inspectors into their homes. "This ruling will help
clarify things," said Pat Farenga, president of Holt Associates, a
Cambridge publisher that publishes a magazine about home schooling. "There
are a lot of people who don't want to report they home school because of
the vagueness" of regulations. State law does allow local boards
to monitor home schooling. Most school systems require some type of documentation
- portfolios of student work, assurances that students are being taught
the full school year, or proof of lesson plans.
-
- Yesterday, some school districts said
they welcomed the SJC decision to give them guidance. "The law is
very vague... it's been difficult," said Lois Sullivan of the Cambridge
public schools. While home visits can be part of an agreement between a
home schooler and the district, it is never required, she said, adding,
"This will help us."
-
- While flatly rejecting the inclusion
of home visits as a mandatory right of a school board's oversight, the
SJC left the door open for home visits in cases where a child may be failing
educationally, or if other families send their children to a neighbor for
schooling.
-
- But the SJC said there is no valid reason
to consider home visits essential today to meet the state goal of ensuring
all children are being properly educated. "Teaching methods may be
less formalized, but in the home setting may be more effective..."
Justice John Greaney wrote.
-
- While not directly endorsing home schooling,
the court said officials need to trust that parents who choose home school
over public school are capable of educating their children - although it
may be in a different way than a public school.
-
- "We doubt that parents like the
[Brunelles and Pustells], who are so committed to home education that they
are willing to forgo the public schools and devote substantial time and
energy to their children, will let the children's progress suffer for lack
of adequate instructional space," he wrote.
-
- This story ran on page B01 of the Boston
Globe on 12/17/98.
|
