My son graduated at 17, does this mean he would have to stay an extra year till he was 18? None of my kids went to pre-k, why should they be required to? Seems to me this is all about creating more jobs, increasing taxes and keeping kids in the public school system for as long as possible. What next, required college?

Home schooling students will be required to be taught until they are 18> I know a family that their kids completed the required courses when they were 16. Passed all the tests and were applying for colleges at 17. This would change everything and I am dead set against it. This should not see the light of day.

New York: Compulsory School Attendance from 4 to 18

Senator John D. Sabina has introduced a compulsory attendance bill which would require a child to attend school from as early as 4 years and 9 months old until 18. If passed, Senate Bill 3549 would require children to attend school three years longer than they are currently required to.

Homeschool parents would be required to file a notice of intent, the Individualized Home Instruction Plan (IHIP), quarterly reports and annual assessment when their child reached 5 years of age and until the end of the school year in which their child turns 18. In essence S.B. 3549 adds three years for reporting for homeschool parents!

Additionally, taxes will inevitably go up to pay for the cost of three more years of compulsory school attendance.

The bill has been referred to the Senate Education Committee so we would like you to contact the Committee members listed below, as well as Senator Sabina. Please contact these individuals now to urge the defeat of Senate Bill 3549!

REQUESTED ACTION:

1) Please call or email the Senate Education Committee members listed below and give them this message in your own words:

“Please oppose Senate Bill 3549. Lowering the school attendance takes away the right of parents to decide whether their children are ready for school. Raising the compulsory attendance age would only force students into the school system who don’t want to be there. This bill will cost too much and waste taxpayers’ money.”

Do not identify yourself as a homeschooler, instead you can identify yourself as a concerned parent and taxpayer.

Senate Education Committee Members

Sen. Stephen M. Saland- Chair
saland@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2411 or (845) 463-0840

Sen. Martin Malavé Dilan
dilan@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2177 or (718) 573-1726

Sen. Charles J. Fuschillo
fuschill@senate.state.ny.us (516) 546-4100

Sen. Martin J. Golden
golden@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2730 or (718) 238-6044

Sen. Shirley L. Huntley
shuntley@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3531 or (718) 322-2537

Sen. Andrew J. Lanza
lanza@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3215

Sen. Kenneth P. LaValle
lavalle@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3121or (631) 696-6900

Sen. Elizabeth O’C. Little
little@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2811 or (518) 743-0968

Sen. Carl L. Marcellino
marcelli@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2390 or (516) 922-1811

Sen. Velmanette Montgomery
montgome@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3451 or (718) 643-6140

Sen. Thomas P. Morahan
morahan@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3261 or (845) 425-1818

Sen. Suzi Oppenheimer
oppenhei@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2031 or (914) 934-5250

Sen. Joseph E. Robach
robach@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2909 or (585) 225-3650

Sen. Eric T. Schneiderman
schneide@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2041 or (212) 928-5578

Sen. José M. Serrano
serrano@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2795 or (212)-828-5829

Sen. James L. Seward
seward@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3131 or (607) 432-5524

Sen. Toby Ann Stavisky
stavisky@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-3461 or (718) 445-0004

2) Please call or email the sponsor of this bill, Senator John Sabini, and give him this message in your own words:

“Please oppose Senate Bill 3549. Lowering the school attendance takes away the right of parents to decide whether their children are ready for school. Raising the compulsory attendance age would only force students into the school system who don’t want to be there. This bill will cost too much and waste taxpayers’ money.”

Do not identify yourself as a homeschooler; instead you can identify yourself as a concerned parent and taxpayer.

Sen. John D. Sabini
sabini@senate.state.ny.us (518) 455-2529 or (718) 639-8469

Senator Sabini is also a member of the Senate Education Committee.

BACKGROUND

Senate Bill 3549 would lower the compulsory attendance age to include any child who turns 5 by December 1 of any given school year. If your child is going to be 5 on November 30, 2007 then he or she would be required to attend school when they were only 4 years and 9 months old!

This bill would also require students to attend school until the last day of the school year in which they turn 18.

Some of the problems with lowering and raising the compulsory attendance age are listed below.

> Lowering the compulsory attendance age from 6 to 5 would subject New York home educators to the requirements of the homeschool laws one year earlier. Homeschool parents would be required to submit a notice of intent, IHIP, and quarterly reports for their 5-year-old. (You do not need to share this reason with your legislators.)

> According to the 2005 NAEP test scores, children from states that have low compulsory attendance ages (5-6) did not score any higher than children from the other states, and in some subjects their average was actually lower.

> Many education experts have concluded that beginning a child’s formal education too early may actually result in burnout and poor scholastic performance later.

> Lowering the compulsory attendance age erodes the authority of parents who are in the best position to determine when their child’s formal education should begin.

> A report published February 6, 2007 by the Goldwater Institute examines Stanford 9 test scores and finds Arizona kindergarten programs initially improve learning but have no measurable impact on reading, math, or language arts test scores by fifth grade.

The data show that students in schools with all-day kindergarten programs have statistically significant higher 3rd-grade test scores, but there is no impact on 5th-grade scores. This finding is consistent with previous research. Forcing children into school early delivers short-term benefits at best.

> Raising the compulsory attendance age will not reduce the dropout rate. In fact, the two states with the highest high school completion rates, Maryland at 94.5% and North Dakota at 94.7%, compel attendance only to age 16. The state with the lowest completion rate (Oregon: 75.4%) compels attendance to age 18. (Figures are three year averages, 1996 through 1998.)

> Twenty-nine states only require attendance to age 16. Older children unwilling to learn can cause classroom disruptions and even violence, making learning harder for their classmates who truly want to learn.

>It would restrict parents’ freedom to decide if their 16-year-old is ready for college or the workforce. (Some 16-year-olds who are not academically inclined benefit more from valuable work experience than from being forced to sit in a classroom.

> Another significant impact of expanding the compulsory attendance age would be an inevitable tax increase to pay for more classroom space and teachers to accommodate the additional students compelled to attend public schools. When California raised the upper age limit of compulsory attendance, unwilling students were so disruptive that new schools had to be built just to handle them and their behavior problems, all at the expense of the taxpayer.

For more information on compulsory attendance, please see our memorandum at http://www.hslda.org/elink.asp?ID=1421 .