Examples of Local Authority Home Education Policies

...with notes if there is a contentious interpretation of case law on the nature of a suitable and efficient education:

Bedfordshire HE Policy

Derbyshire HE Policy

(recommends following the National Curriculum).

Hampshire HE Policy

Leicestershire HE Policy

Case law (Harrison & Harrison v Stevenson) also states that a suitable education – for a child capable of learning such skills – should instil in them the ability to read, write and cope with arithmetical problems. In other words, an education that does not include English and Maths cannot be considered suitable

North Yorkshire Policy

West Berkshire HE Policy

What do home educators provide?

• They make the learning process active, practical and participative.
• They take full advantage of all available resources, such as museums, libraries, parks, computers, educational DVDs and CDs.
• They have fun with the learning experience.
• They provide opportunities for physical development.
• They encourage their children to develop socially by possibly attending clubs.
• They encourage their children to read widely.
• They make learning enjoyable by using a variety of approaches.
• They give children opportunities for independent learning.
• They make sure their child has a suitable environment for learning.
• They make sure their child is safe.

Are there any compulsory subjects? There are no compulsory subjects for electively home educated children. However, you will need to provide opportunities for learning literacy and numeracy as these are key areas in a suitable education

Talmud Torah Machzikei Hadass School Trust case on Efficient and Suitable Education.

An “efficient” and “suitable” education is not defined in the Education Act 1996 but “efficient” has been broadly described in case law as an education that “achieves that which it sets out to achieve”.

A “suitable” education is one that “primarily equips a child for life within the community of which he is a member, rather than the way of life in the country as a whole, as long as it does not foreclose the child’s options in later years to adopt some other form of life if he wishes to do so”.

 Mr Justice Woolf in the case of R v Secretary of State for Education and Science, ex parte Talmud Torah Machzikei Hadass School Trust (12 April 1985)

See EO Website.