February 14, 1986
Subject:
Education; Qualified Non-Public Schools; Legality of Satellite Schools
Requested By:
Charles C. McConnell, Superintendent Haywood County Schools
Question:
Are parents who educate their child in a home school, which has not met the requirements of Article 39, Chapter 115C of the General Statutes but has been created as a satellite by another recognized home school, in compliance with the Compulsory Attendance Law?
Conclusion:
No.
The parents of five children, one of whom has reached school age, are instructing their schoolage child in their home. This school has not been recognized by the Governor’s Office through its Office of Non-Public Schools as meeting the requirements of Article 39, Chapter 115C of the General Statutes. Instead, this home school has been "validated" by the operator of a home school some fifteen miles distant which has been recognized by the Office of Non-Public Schools. In effect, the operator of the recognized home school considers the unrecognized home school as a satellite. You are responsible for enforcement of the Compulsory Attendance Law, G.S. § 115C378, in Haywood County and have asked whether the parents educating their school-age child in the "satellite" home school are in compliance with the Compulsory Attendance Law.
The legality of home schools was established by the North Carolina Supreme Court in DELCONTE v. NORTH CAROLINA, 313 N.C. 384, 329 S.E.2d 636 (1985). The Court there held that, under the current statutory scheme in North Carolina, there are four ways in which a child may attend school and thereby comply with our compulsory attendance laws. Id. at 390, 329 S.E.2d at . In all four types of schools, however, the General Assembly has outlined various requirements for attendance, record keeping, standardized testing, and for "reasonable fire, health and safety inspections by State, county and municipal authorities as required by law." E.g., G.S. § 115C-548; § 115C-549. Indeed, the DELCONTE Court specifically stated that our legislature has traditionally required all schools to meet "certain objective statutory standards" in order to quality as a "school." The General Assembly "has historically enacted and continues to enact various objective statutory criteria, or standards, which various kinds of schools must meet in order for students attending them to comport with the school attendance statutes." Id. at 397, 329 S.E.2d at .
Despite DELCONTE’S holding that "the evident purpose of these recent statutes is to loosen, rather than tighten, the standards for non-public education in North Carolina," and that "the legislature obviously intended [the statutes] to make it easier, not harder, for children to be educated in non-public school settings," this office is of the opinion that the legislature did not so
loosen the statutory scheme as to permit one qualified non-public school to set up another.
Nowhere in the statutes is the suggestion that the legislature intended to permit home schools to
colonize. To the contrary, the statutes authorizing home schools still impose various
requirements upon "each" school, and provide that "each" school shall make and maintain
records, operate on a regular schedule, and "be subject to reasonable fire, health and safety
inspections." It is apparent from the statutory requirements that the State of North Carolina, even
while permitting home instruction, retains a strong and abiding interest in insuring that the
quality of education for its children meets at least minimum academic standards, and that the
physical plant which houses a school meets at least minimum safety standards. Obviously, were
home schools permitted to colonize, or create satellites, the ability of the State effectively to
inspect, supervise and control any aspects of the school would be severely impeded. Eventually,
the tasks of inspection and control would become administratively impossible. It is inconceivable
that the legislature intended to render a nullity the State’s legitimate concern for its schools by
attenuating the very regulations adopted to embody that concern. Accordingly, this office can
find no authority, express or implied, for one home school to create another, separate, school.
Parents who establish a school in their home to educate their school-age children must have their
home school recognized by the Office of Non-public Schools and meet the requirements of
Article 39, Chapter 115C in order to meet the requirements of the Compulsory Attendance Law.
Unless and until the parents in question meet these requirements it is our opinion that they are in
violation of the Compulsory Attendance Law.
LACY H. THORNBURG
ATTORNEY GENERAL
Edwin M. Speas, Jr.
Special Deputy Attorney General
Laura Crumpler
Assistant Attorney General