By ROB DRYE
RSA 189:1 Days of School. The School Board of every district shall provide
standard schools for at least 180 days in each year, at such places in the
district as will best serve the interests of education and give to all the
pupils within the district as nearly equal advantages as are practical.
- (1883 43:6, last revised 1959 133:1).
RSA 193:1 Duty of Parent: Compulsory attendance by Pupil. I. A parent of
any child at least 6 years of age and under 16 years of age shall cause
such child to attend the public school to which the child is assigned in
his resident district. Such child shall attend full time while such school
is in session unless: (exceptions for reassignment, nonpublic schools, home
education, temporary absences).
The preceding two statutes are the legal basis for compulsory school attendance
in New Hampshire. They are often referred to as "compulsory education"
statutes, but a look them reveals that education is not a necessary part
of compliance with the law.
The first statute merely says that a school district must have schools in
session. The time requirement of 180 days is entirely arbitrary and does
not require that anything in particular be completed within this period.
The silliness of this can be seen in the summer "snow makeup days"
held on, say, a Monday in June to make up for the Wednesday lost to the
snowstorm in March that required the school to be closed for the sixth day
this winter, one more than the five built into the 185 day schedule.
Of course, it is not entirely reasonable to believe that these extra days
will be especially productive, indeed no one really intends to do anything
during them - not the school board, not the teachers, and certainly not
the students. This is Timeserving with a capital T.
Even more disturbing is the pressure to disregard student and safety by
holding school during late-winter storms to avoid having to use a snow day.
Typical behaviors include canceling the back road buses or starting the
school day and then sending children home, right into the storm.
The second statute above shows that the law puts the burden on the parent
to cause the child to "attend" school. Nothing says that the child
shall learn or even be taught. As long as the seat is warm, the law is fulfilled.
Home schoolers have long known that time spent does not equal education
received. New Hampshire would benefit greatly from a repeal of both of the
above statutes. Parents would be free from compulsion to put their children
on the "6:45 to the gulag" and perhaps be able to give their children
a real education outside the classroom without having to account to bureaucrats.
Taxpayers might be able to save money with school schedules based on work
completed rather than time spent. Costs might even drop to the point where
real competition by private schools would be possible, as it was prior to
1883.
Rob Drye is a graduate of Dartmouth College, and currently manages the computer
network for Dartmouth Hitchcock Hospital. He and his wife, Margaret, home
school their six children. Their daughter, Melissa, won the N.H. State Spelling
Bee in 1994. This piece originally appeared in the June, 1994 issue of NH
Family Watch.
--Posted 1996
Copyright © 1996 NH Commentary
P.O. Box 706
Concord, NH 03302