tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-116521482024-03-14T06:41:03.491+00:00Dare to KnowA blog which is mainly about home educating in the UK.Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.comBlogger2029125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-23835150214628074932021-04-27T15:27:00.015+01:002021-11-29T09:25:15.017+00:00Why Robert Halfon is wrong to push for exams and standardised assessments for home educators<p>The case for exams for home educators has recently been made by Robert Halfon, Chair of the Education Committee, in the Inquiry into Home Education. (<a href="https://committees.parliament.uk/event/4097/formal-meeting/">Q97 - Q105</a>). He seems to be basing his argument on the idea that exams are the best way to ensure that an education is suitable and that there should be parity with schools. <br /><br />The fact is, home educators are well aware that they have a <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7">legal duty to provide an education</a> that is suited to the age, ability and aptitude of their children, but this is actually precisely why so many home educators are home educating - a school-based education WAS NOT SUITABLE FOR THEIR CHILDREN and in testing for a standardised school-based education, you would most likely cause the educational provision to become unsuitable. <br /><br />It may come as a bit of a surprise to people like Halfon and his fellow exam lover, Mr Gove, (both of whom, one imagines, were successful in the school system and who therefore now get to formulate education policy), but not everyone gets a huge rush from taking exams. For one thing, there is such a thing as genetic variability. Let's look at the impact of just one genetic variation amongst the many thousands of other potentially impactful variants. <br /><br />The <a href="https://advancedfunctionalmedicine.com.au/comt-gene-testing-australia/">COMT gene (catechol-O-methyl transferase) </a>regulates the <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/click-here-happiness/202001/what-is-the-comt-gene-and-how-does-it-affect-your-health">amount of dopamine in the pre-frontal cortex</a> - the part of the brain that needs to be functioning if you are going to do well in exams. A certain amount of dopamine is helpful, but too much causes overwhelm. People have fast and slow variants of the COMT gene. Those with slow variants clear dopamine and stress hormones more slowly and are therefore much more easily overwhelmed and most likely will struggle with exams, than those with faster variants. However, these with slow variants can function at a high academic level in unstressful situations. <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1601-183X.2008.00441.x"><br /><br /></a>It follows as light follows day, that forcing these families to educate these sorts of children in a school-like way with high stakes exams and other stress-inducing tests, would inevitably result in parents then dramatically failing to meet their legal duty to provide a suitable education. This would be the fault of the DfE. It is perfectly possible to imagine that children will have a future case against the Department when it becomes demonstrably clear through increased genetic research that the DfE forced them to do something that inhibited their ability to learn well. <br /><br />And just in case Mr Halfon is still worrying, let's be clear. It is not that those with a slow variant are consigned to a life of uselessness. They just think better when not stressed and in the adult world, not beleaguered by the childist restraints that reduce children to minutely controlled minions, they can find careers which better fit their genetic legacy. <br /><br />And of course, the COMT gene is but just one of a huge number of genes that influence our aptitude for learning. The ever expanding research into polygenetic origins of our behaviour seem to be pointing to the fact that the interaction of a large number of genes largely determines our educational propensities. <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/oct/24/blueprint-by-robert-plomin-review">Robert Plomin's work</a> on identical twins and adoption studies and into polygenetic scores has led him to conclude: "Let your child go with his or her genes, taking up those opportunities to which they are genetically suited". <br /><br />So what do you actually want of us Mr Halfon? To keep on endlessly trying to force square pins into round holes, or to do as the law at s7 requires, and get on with providing an education that actually does suit our young people? <br /><br /> <br /><br /><br /></p>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-60235160991390295562019-10-15T09:37:00.000+01:002019-10-15T11:27:37.375+01:00What Ofsted SHOULD be doing! <span style="font-family: inherit;">Here we go again. The press barrage that precedes some sort of action by the DfE has started up yet again. We have the BBC <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50044569?fbclid=IwAR1b3NsLjBr-DNGpGgHW8XwAWIVVlJl4gzwxKfUVgXNWJQ6KsXNWjx6TyA8">here,</a> the Telegraph <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/14/homeschooling-rise-parents-teach-children-avoid-prosecution/?fbclid=IwAR1uqsVxgqnmHNHrObFEgvAtjyt7xVx3MhfOKIrKWfMS2lNT6BC46r6lkcI">there,</a> <a href="https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/schools-failures-lead-to-a-surge-in-home-education-7hbwfbcqz">The Times,</a> <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7573275/Ofsted-finds-60-penalty-encourages-people-pull-children-education-altogether.html">The Mail, </a><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/oct/15/pupils-propelled-out-school-system-home-education-ofsted-report">The Guardian,</a> you name it, it's bash home education day all over again.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Let's just put the other side of the story for once, shall we? Taking the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50044569?fbclid=IwAR1b3NsLjBr-DNGpGgHW8XwAWIVVlJl4gzwxKfUVgXNWJQ6KsXNWjx6TyA8">BBC article: </a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #cc0000;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">"<span style="background-color: white;">Home education for many families is not a preferred choice but a last resort amid a breakdown in relationships with schools, Ofsted inspectors have warned."</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Yep, it's true: home education may not be the preferred choice for many who end up doing it, but what are we actually comparing it to? Some mythical idyllic alternative that only exists in school prospectuses and in the minds of the serially deluded or the reality of terrible schooling options where school funding means that there is no capacity for give? After a tiny bit of thinking about the terrible alternatives that actually exist, home education frequently becomes the first preference of many families.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And not being a first choice, doesn't mean that most of us can't do it.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-size: 16px;"><span style="color: #cc0000; font-family: inherit;">"There's no help, not even paper," said another.</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">As regards there being no help - simple: take the child's school funding and turn it into an EOTAS. That would help. The DfE and <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/people/amanda-spiel-man">Amanda Spielman </a>can then stop bugging other home educators who are happy to go it alone.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And of course, there is actually masses of help which is offered completely for free in the home education community. Oh the fricking irony of being so demonised when we are shoring up the system entirely without being paid.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; font-size: 1rem;"><br /><span style="color: #cc0000;">The Ofsted report says its research found parents "commonly viewed home education as the only option for them", especially when there had been a breakdown in the relationship between schools and parents,</span><br /><br />Then sort out the actual problem - which is school funding. </span><br />
<div style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-size: 1rem; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.375; margin-top: 18px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #cc0000;">And it warns the length of time for a child to be moved to home education can be very short.</span><br /><br />Not in the heads of most parents who are often thinking about this for years whilst they try to sort problems with the school and whilst their children suffer before they take the plunge.<br /><br />Instead of constantly haranguing the HE community and threatening us with more legislation in the form of a register - as mentioned in the Times article, and which is still under review, despite it not being in the Queen's Speech, Amanda and her ilk would do well to think about what they can do to help home educators. <br /><br />She should also seek to educate herself about how different forms of education can work extremely well. (At last showing, she hadn't the first idea).<br /><br />She needs to pause and reevaluate, to think about how things might have changed since schooling first started. We now live in the information age, where people have google folks...NEWSFLASH. <br /><br />And she needs to question whether it is right to put huge swathes of young people into a system which reduces their autonomy and sense of responsibility, which pits one against the other in a terrible race to the podium and which encourages a tribal mentality, when what we need right now if we are to save this increasingly interconnected world are self-initiating life-long learners who can work co-operatively and have a global vision.<br /><br />Ofsted Rating: CATCH UP OFSTED. </span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-size: 1rem; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.375; margin-top: 18px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-83154098811266983602019-06-07T10:36:00.002+01:002019-06-07T20:31:07.058+01:00Consultation - Children not in school - 2019OK, <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/children-not-in-school/">this whole thing </a> feels like a complete charade. Apparently the DfE have decided, contra numerous responses to the previous <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-call-for-evidence-why-should-i.html">consultation</a>, that registration of home educated children is needed and for reasons of window dressing, have prefaced the introduction of the legislation that will be required to support registration with a supposed <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/children-not-in-school/">"consultation".</a><br />
<br />
The whole way<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/children-not-in-school/"> this </a>pantomine is written gives the lie to this fakery - what with most of the questions apparently presupposing that a register of home educated children is a foregone conclusion and also including a lot of in-house terminology that would only make sense to the likes of social workers, which thereby easily prevents those who will actually be most affected by the implications of a register, ie: home educating families from responding to the consultation.<br />
<br />
But still, you HAVE to say something. Not responding isn't a protest vote. The DfE won't give a jot if you don't say anything and indeed will probably be rubbing their hands in glee, thinking home educators have finally been worn out by this protracted war of attrition. But we aren't worn out because we can't afford to be, and because, if anything, the situation in LAs has got worse. Fighting for the rights for families to remain as autonomous as possible has got all the more urgent.<br />
<br />
So I would urge as many people as possible to respond, if not to the entire thing, at least to some of the most obvious questions.<br />
<br />
Here are some of my answers:<br />
<br />
Question 20:<br />
<span style="color: #1c1e21;"><br /><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>20. Why do you not support the concept of a duty on each LA to maintain a register?</b></span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br style="color: #1c1e21; content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" /><span style="color: #0b5394;">Firstly, it will not serve the objective of finding and supporting families who are struggling, as only well functioning HE families will register. Truly needy families are often too chaotic and/or often rightly too afraid of the consequences to register, and deeply abusive families will never register despite any proposed penalties as they risk far greater legal penalities.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />Secondly, local authorities are so pushed for money, staff and other resources that asking them to register and then maintain a register of all the home educating and other families in their area will mean that there will be even less money and fewer staff and other resources to support families who are struggling and who do request help.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />Thirdly, despite assurances from the DfE, registration by the LA will mean that LAs will become the arbiter of which families may and which may not home educate. Indeed cases of this have already started to occur since the issuance of this consultation and the DfE have failed to police this.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />The fact that LAs will without doubt use registration as a gatekeeper to home education will mean that families will no longer be able to determine the place of education and will therefore not be able to ensure that an appropriate education is being delivered.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />This appropriation of parental duties entirely obviates the point of s7 Education Act 1996 where it states that it is down to the parent to ensure that a suitable education is provided which they obviously cannot do if they cannot even determine the place of education. The law at s7 will have to be rewritten to reflect this new reality, ie: that the state is now responsible for ensuring a suitable education is delivered. At this point, we can be sure that the state services will collapse under their abject failure of provision and as families seek due redress.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />Further, local authorities continuously offer the idea that they are a safety net for families who are struggling. In this age of decreased funding for LA services and increased demand upon these same services, this is almost universally utterly illusory and if the family sets out to seek help from the LA, sets up the poor family for years of struggle which almost never results in any satisfactory outcomes for anyone and often results in legal expenses which are crippling for all concerned. Registration and the further erosion of parental autonomy will only increase the illusion that the state can actually help and will therefore only result in more of the same chaos and failure to provide the things that young people actually need.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />The relationship between LAs and parents is bad enough as it is. Parents who are only seeking help for their loved ones are frequently labelled "professional" or "warrior" parents or "awkward trouble makers" by social service departments. These labels go down in their records for all to see, given information sharing duties within LAs and health services.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />These parents have fallen for an illusion that services will help, but it is an illusion that the state created in the first place by the gradual erosion of parental autonomy which will inevitably get worse when local authorities abuse the power to register for home education.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />On top of this, families feel utterly powerless in the face of a powerful bureaucracy which despite seemingly not being able to pay for care, are nonetheless able to fund legal representation whenever matters need to be taken to court. Most parents are not eligible for legal aid, which only maginifies their sense of powerlessness. No wonder we resist further state intrusion. We don't see the point of it, and it ends up damaging our families as inadequate, failing services hurt vulnerable young people. Far better not to make these false promises to families in the first place.<br /><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" />It would be a far better use of resources if services which are already completely not fit for purpose and which only look set to become even worse, dealt only with severe cases and money not be wasted on a useless and indeed damaging registration scheme.</span></span></span><br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #20124d;"><b><br /></b></span></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b style="color: #1c1e21;">Question 21: Should a register specify whether children are attending an educational setting (other than their own home) duruing shool hours? Add comments if you wish. </b><br />No (ticked).<br /><span style="color: #20124d;"><br /><span style="color: #0b5394;">On top of other reasons why a register of home educators would not be useful you can add the following:<br /><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br />It would be a logistical nightmare to include every educational setting that a home educated child attends during school hours. When my children were young, (I've just totted it up), we could be attending as many as 15 different educational settings per week, and often these were one off visits. Would these all need to be registered every day, every week? <br /><br />Such a process will also deter parents both attending such events and from offering their skills to other HEing families, which they do usually on an entirely voluntary basis, as the bureaucracy and effort would make the whole thing totally unmanageable.<br /><br />It is simply mad, impractical and Orwellian in the levels of state control it implies. </span></span></span></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" /><span style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"><br style="content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" /></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #20124d;"><br /></span></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>Question 22. Should the register be widened still further to also include children who are being educated</b></span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><b> un</b></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b>der s.19 arrangements? Add comments if you wish.</b><br />No (ticked)</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #20124d; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #0b5394;"><span style="background-color: white;">Surely LAs know about these children already? If not, the levels of incompetence are pretty mind boggling. </span><br /><br style="background-color: white; content: ""; display: block; margin-top: 10px;" /><span style="background-color: white;">The fact that the question is written in such a way as to not make it clear to many parents which Act s19 comes from also strongly suggests that you only want LAs who would understand this language to respond</span></span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit;"> to this consultation. It implies that the DfE are not interested in the views of families and that the register will be used for these children whatever we say. This consultation is pure window dressing. I am myself assuming that s19 children are the ones referred to in the Education Act 1996.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /><b style="background-color: white;">Question 42. Do you have any other comments about the concept of a legal duty on parents to supply information for the purposes of the proposed register?</b><span style="background-color: white;"><b><br /></b></span></span></span><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #20124d;"><b><br /></b></span><span style="color: #0b5394;">Parents are and should remain responsible for the education of their children. When the state begins to make judgements about this, it defines the nature of a suitable education, and pluralism and freedom of thought are thereby undermined. </span></span><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit;"><br /><br />The state will also, with the inevitable abuse of the register by LAs who will use it as a gatekeeping opportunity, (see answers above), become responsible for the provision of suitable education and the law at s7 Education Act 1996 should be rewritten to reflect this. There will of course be dire consequences as a result of this appropriation of parental duties as the state will not be able to live up to its newfound responsibilities. </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><b>Question 49: Which settings do you think should be included within the scope of the duty? </b></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">If you include home education groups, you will destroy the whole fabric of home education as much of it relies on the voluntary work of parents who offer their skills freely. If you require them to register, you will find that many will simply throw their hands in the air and give up as they already have a lot on their plate. This will mean that yet more children will be failed as many will not be well suited to the schooling system. </span><br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Question 53: Do you have any other comments about the concept or duties of the proprietors of settings to provide information about children who attend their setting and fall within scope of the education requirement? </b><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit;">A register is not required in order to close down places of education that are abusive to children. This should be perfectly possible using other legislation that would not destroy home education in the process. The collateral damage here could be enormous as parents will give up the unequal struggle to home educate which involves families sourcing and creating huge numbers of community resources, all of which will have to be registered. Parents will burn out and children who are educated at home will then have to be returned to schools where they are frequently failed appallingly. Schools will become even more over-crowded and filled with children who are not suited to the school system.</span><br /><br style="color: #0b5394; content: ""; display: block; font-family: inherit; margin-top: 10px;" /><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit;">As with much of this consultation, the phraseology of this question yet again suggests that registration is a foregone conclusion and this makes it extremely difficult to answer with the necessary arguments. On top of that, questions that need answering are not asked at all. All of this confirms that this whole exercise is a cynical charade.</span></span></span><br />
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b> <br />Question 56 if such a duty </b>(re support for home educators)<b> was to be created, which of the following should it encompass </b>(list of options including advice, support for exams etc.)<b>: </b> </span></div>
<div>
</div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #0b5394; font-family: inherit;"><br /><span style="color: #0b5394;">Other. Support from LAs to HEors is currently frequently negligable and as demands on LAs grow and more authorities approach bankrupsty, support will become even more so vanishingly unlikely. Home educators would be the bottom of the queue whatever the DfE say. There is no point at all offering us this carrot. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #0b5394;">Instead there should be an online portal that could offer a reliable distance learning tool that could be accessible by all families, home educated or otherwise, which would be related to the national curriculum and facilitate the taking of public exams. It should be data driven and sensitive to individual abilities, much as Kahn Academy and Duolingo are currently. Companies are marketing these to schools but this sort of resource should be immediately rolled out by the government to be available to everyone. It would not be at all expensive to offer this. It would</span><span style="color: #0b5394;"> have nothing to do with home education and everything to do with offering useful resources for every child in the UK. </span><br />
<span style="color: #20124d;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b>Question 57: What are the potential difficulties, apart from availability of resources, in ensuring that such a duty is properly discharged by a local authority?</b></span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;">The problem of lack of availability of resources is so overwhelming, it is virtually not worth answering the rest of the question, but the other issues would be that should the LA somehow manage to offer any resources to home educators in particular, they would almost inevitably become even more prescriptive in terms of the education that they would demand that parents provide. </span><span style="color: #0b5394;">This would be another reason why s7 Education Act 1996 would have to be rewritten to reflect the fact that LAs would have appropriated parental duties.</span><br />
<span style="color: #0b5394;"><br />It is also worth noting that families have virtually no effective way of preventing state intrusion or challenging ultra vires behaviour by LAs. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><b></b><br /><br />In summary, given the prejudicial skewing of the questions, you may have to wangle your answers to fit the question, but if you do this, you can get most of your points across fairly quickly. Go give it a go. It is too important to ignore.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #20124d; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-86487965827987210312019-01-26T08:57:00.003+00:002019-01-26T08:57:35.513+00:00A Suitable Education BlogAn excellent new resource for those new to home education and unschooling: <a href="https://suitable-education.uk/?fbclid=IwAR3TEAJ_0Yd16IulLw8w-JO7_nrR_viR3WhropZcdPQZKUVWgUFJNkeOsxU">A Suitable Education</a>.Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-11376295364179570112018-07-18T12:23:00.001+01:002018-07-18T14:01:46.486+01:00Soley's Bill - Report Stage and Third Reading<a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2017-2019/0098/lbill_2017-20190098_en_2.htm">Lord Soley's Bill</a> has had its Report Stage in the House of Lords yesterday (17th July 2018). Looks as if they were trying to slip it by us - not only was there no notification of it on the <a href="https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/homeeducationdutyoflocalauthorities.html">government's site</a> (which now lists the Third Reading of the Bill as being due on the 24th July 2018, an announcement made <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/07/why-should-i-go-to-picnic.html">during the HE picnics</a>), but there were<a href="http://lordsbusiness.parliament.uk/ItemOfBusiness?itemOfBusinessId=51560&sectionId=40&businessPaperDate=2018-07-17"> also no speakers and no divisions.</a><br />
<br />
Clearly the DfE don't want us to kick off about the Bill, but at the same time, the fact that the ptb have this legislation lined up at the same time as they are proposing significant alterations to <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">EHE guidance</a> - well, really this looks like too much of a coincidence. It seems as if the Bill is meant to intimidate home educators into complying with the alterations to guidance but the fact is, a lot of HEors won't be doing with either, not least because a close reading of the d<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">raft guidance</a> reveals that there isn't much to chose between the Bill and the draft guidance. Given the latitude that is handed to LAs in the guidance, coupled with the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted">Localism Act</a>, which means that LAs are allowed to do anything they like as long as it isn't actively proscribed by the law, LAs would have a licence to behave just as the Bill prescribes. The only sensible thing to do would be to object to both!<br />
<br />
Lest we forget (and we really haven't), here's the current draft of the Bill with amendments from the Committee Stage:<br />
<br />
<div class="LegContent" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 15.36px; margin: 0px; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div class="LegPrelims" style="border: 0px; font-style: inherit; font-weight: inherit; letter-spacing: 0px; margin: 0px auto; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;">
<div style="border: 0px; font-size: 0.8em; letter-spacing: 0px; line-height: normal; margin-bottom: 0.5em; outline: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">
<br /></div>
</div>
</div>
A
BILL
[AS AMENDED IN COMMITTEE]
TO
<br />
<br />
Make provision for local authorities to assess the educational development of
children receiving elective home education; and for connected purposes.
<br />
<br />
Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and
consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present
Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
<br />
<br />
<b>1 Duty of local authorities to assess children receiving elective home education
</b><br />
(1)The Education Act 1996 is amended as follows.
<br />
<br />
(2)After section 436A (duty to make arrangements to identify children not
receiving education), insert —
<br />
<br />
<b>“436B Duty of local authorities to assess children receiving elective home
education
</b><br />
(1) Local authorities have a duty to assess the educational development of
children receiving elective home education in their area.
<br />
<br />
(2) Local authorities have a duty to provide advice and information to a parent of a child receiving elective home education if that parent
requests such advice or information in relation to their obligations
under this section.
<br />
<br />
(3) A parent of a child receiving elective home education must register the
child as such with their local authority.
<br />
<br />
(4) Local authorities must assess annually each child receiving elective
home education in their area (hereafter referred to as “the assessment”).
<br />
<br />
(5) The assessment set out in subsection (4) must assess the educational
development of each child.
<br />
<br />
(6) The assessment may include —
<br />
<br />
(a) a visit to the child’s home;<br />
<br />
(b) an interview with the child;
<br />
<br />
(c) seeing the child’s work; and<br />
<br />
(d) an interview with the child’s parent.
<br />
<br />
(7) A parent of a child receiving elective home education must provide information relevant to the assessment to their local authority when
requested.
<br />
<br />
(8) The Secretary of State must by regulations made by statutory
instrument specify —
<br />
<br />
(a)the arrangements for parents to register a child with their local authority under subsection (3); and
<br />
<br />
(b)the methodology of the assessment.
<br />
<br />
(9) A statutory instrument containing regulations under this section is
subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of
Parliament.
<br />
<br />
(10) In this section “elective home education” refers to education given to a
child at home following a decision by their parent to educate them
outside the school system.”
<br />
<br />
<b>2 Guidance relating to elective home education
</b><br />
(1) The Secretary of State must update the guidance for elective home education for local authorities and parents to account for section 436B of the Education
Act 1996 by the end of the period of one year, beginning with the day on which
this Act comes into force.
<br />
<br />
(2)In updating the guidance in subsection (1), the Secretary of State must have
regard to —
<br />
<br />
(a)the expectation that elective home education must include provision of
supervised instruction in reading, writing and numeracy, which takes
into account the child’s age, ability, aptitude and any special
educational needs and disabilities, and<br />
<br />
(b)the views of children and parents who elect home education.
<br />
<br />
<br />
(3) The Secretary of State may carry out a public consultation to inform the
guidance set out in subsection (1).
<br />
<br />
<b>3 Interpretation</b><br />
<br />
In this Act —
<br />
<br />
“elective home education” refers to education given to a child at home following a decision by their parent to educate them outside the school
system; and
<br />
<br />
“local authority” means —
<br />
<br />
(a)in relation to England, the council of a district, county or
London borough, the Common Council of the City of London
40and the Council of the Isles of Scilly;
<br />
<br />
(b)in relation to Wales, the council of a county or county borough. <br />
<br />
<br />
<b>4 Extent, commencement and short title
</b><br />
(1) This Act extends to England and Wales only. <br />
<br />
(2) This Act comes into force at the end of the period of two months, beginning
with the day on which this Act is passed.
<br />
<br />
(3) This Act may be cited as the Home Education (Duty of Local Authorities) Act
2018.
Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-26413471133376278352018-07-13T13:05:00.000+01:002018-07-13T13:05:36.369+01:00Arguments for MPsThese are my top arguments - the issues I feel most strongly about:<br />
<br />
If an MP were to ask me, "Why are you so concerned about the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">Draft Guidance </a>or <a href="https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/homeeducationdutyoflocalauthorities.html">Soley's Bill</a>? "(the latter due its<a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/calendar/?d=2018-07-17#cal22164"> Report Stage on the 17th July</a>, by the way), I would answer with the following:<br />
<br />
1. We <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/04/150408113309.htm">KNOW</a> that schools fail some children and that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/mar/23/selective-schools-make-no-difference-to-gcse-results-study-says">genes</a> play a large part in this. Schooling is not keeping up with neuroscience and <a href="https://www.drdouggreen.com/2014/how-we-learn-the-surprising-truth-about-when-where-and-why-it-happens-by-benedict-carey/2/">learning theory</a> and children with different learning needs are being off-rolled from schools all the time. We desperately NEED diversity of provision and we are extremely concerned that since the draft guidance/the Bill would give LAs so much power in the matter of determining the nature of a suitable education, we risk losing the form of education that has suited our children so well. Indeed we have seen this happen in France where the authorities, given the latitude, have become more and more prescriptive in terms of what they expect to see by way of an education. We should not let this happen here.<br />
<br />
2. Home education is often entirely different from schooling and young people who are failed by schooling more often than not, thrive when home educated. Indeed these very same young people often later go on to college and thrive there because they are then ready for it. <br /><br />
3. By way of an example of the flexibility and therefore suitability of provision that home education can offer: home educated children who struggle to learn to read are not overwhelmed or disheartened since the family can easily adapt and <a href="http://www.educationalhereticspress.com/titles-rethinking-learning-to-read.htm">employ other learning methods, such as conversation and other audio-visual sources</a>. Eventually, in this relaxed but enriched environment and when they are ready, children learn to read and, by doing so, do not suffer the appalling consequences of repeated humiliation and failure that they would have otherwise have experienced had they been in school.<br /><br />4. It is a repeated problem that legislators and civil servants who seek to determine the nature of a suitable education are usually the ones who themselves thrived in the schooling model, whereas those who struggled in school never get to have their say about what would have actually worked for them. We need to hear their voices. Young people with SEN deserve better, and we now have the means to offer them a whole array of new ideas. We should allow educational provision to evolve and home educators can help lead the way with this, but this will not happen if we are constrained by the LA officials who fail to understand alternative provision. Worse still, if we give LAs more power to determine the nature of a suitable education, the chances are that they will abuse this power. Home educators do not want to cede this ground.<br /><br />5. Children have rights too. They are humans and they should have human rights, such as the r<a href="https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/civil-rights/human-rights/what-rights-are-protected-under-the-human-rights-act/your-right-to-respect-for-private-and-family-life/">ight to privacy,</a> for example. Home education is integral to family life. When an LA officer insists on inspecting a child's work, it involves intruding upon family life in a way that represents a gross violation of this privacy. What's more, it all gets reported back and held on file in council offices, and given the data protection violations that are condoned in the draft guidance for LAs, these families can kiss goodbye to any pretence to privacy. This LA intrusion can also disrupt family life by causing so much anxiety, since families realise how much is at stake, how much their lives could be changed on the subjective word of an LA officer who might just be making pretty unsubstantiated judgements just because he hasn't <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/law/2011/apr/11/judges-lenient-break">eaten enough biscuits</a>. They rightfully do not trust LA officers to report things accurately, (this happens a great deal...could quote examples) and these things could end up being used as evidence in court. Families feel very vulnerable in this regard. <br /><br />6. All this damage to families for no observable gain. True abusers won't register. Children will still be off-rolled from schools because of the pressure from Ofsted which is just creating this mess in the first place. Illegal schools can be found through other means other than pestering home educators at great expense. It is the CPS that needs to get on this case and provide the help Ofsted needs and we need better EOTAS provision, eg: the <a href="http://www.redballoonlearner.org/RBAir">Red Balloon of the Air </a>. <br /><br />7. Just leave well-functioning home educators alone to get on with it.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-5628007061109397552018-07-10T14:14:00.000+01:002018-08-04T11:36:06.261+01:00Why Should I go to the Picnic? We've done a LOT already:<br />
<br />
* We've filled in and sent off the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">Call for Evidence on the Draft Guidance</a> (closed as of 2nd July).<br />
<br />
* We've signed the <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">on-line petition</a>...still open till Friday 13th, please note.<br />
<br />
* We've handed in our constituency petitions to parliament in six different sessions which can be viewed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNDxM_BWuMs&feature=youtu.be">here</a> , <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0b9w28t/house-of-commons-live-house-of-commons">here</a>, <a href="https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/7ba73d45-f34d-4679-a138-c9c3fe2f0ac7?in=18:46:00&out=18:50:00">here from 18.47 </a> , <a href="https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/3f0453f3-e04d-403b-b749-9f0bf005cceb">here from 23.20</a>, and <a href="https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/09a35fb7-1fba-4eca-bfc8-1f6aa1067970?in=19:27:12">here </a>. In Hansard, with a more extensive list: <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-04a.458.0&s=home+education+petitions+herefordshire#g458.1">here</a> , <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-09a.821.12&s=home+education+petitions#g821.13">here </a>, <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-11a.1076.7&s=Alan+Whitehead#g1076.8">here</a>,<a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-12a.1224.0&s=Home+education#g1224.1"> here</a>, <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-07-16/debates/1807175000880/HomeEducationDraftGuidanceAndConsultation?highlight=new%20forest%20west%20petition#contribution-08F5F93C-1911-448C-9634-0DDD93089505">here</a>, <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-17a.372.5&s=Home+educators#g372.6">here</a>, <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-17a.374.2&s=Home+educators#g374.3">here</a> ,<a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-18a.519.0&s=Home+education#g519.1"> here</a>, <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-18a.519.2&s=Home+education#g519.3">here</a>, <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-23a.834.4&s=Home+education#g834.5">here </a>and<a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-07-24a.985.0&s=Home+education#g985.1"> here</a><a href="http://here./">.</a> (Latter four, have not found TV links yet!)<br />
<br />
* We understand that petitions from other constituencies have been presented in other ways, ie: directly into the bag, or have been forwarded to the Department for Education for their consideration, following which we gather the DfE should table them in their name.<br />
<br />
* We've already had a response to the substance of the petition from the Secretary of State for Education, Damian Hinds <a href="https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-06-25b.602.10&s=Mary+Robinson+home+education#g604.3">as follows:</a><br />
<br />
<i>Mary Robinson Conservative, Cheadle: </i><br />
<br />
<i>"Approximately 48,000 children are being home educated in England. In light of the Government's consultation on home education which ends next Monday, can the Minister clarify what steps his Department are taking to reassure home educators that their views will be fed into the Government's consultation response?<br /><br />Damian Hinds The Secretary of State for Education<br /><br />I can give my hon. Friend that reassurance. We are having this consultation, and there has been a rise in children being home educated which of course includes some children whith particular special eduational needs how have had a particularly bad time in the school system and whose parents devote their lives to their education - I pay tribute to those parents. The rise includes other categories, but it is important that we listen carefully, and we will, to those parents in the consultation. "</i><br />
<br />
* It's possible that we can expect more by way of a formal response to the petition since we gather that <br />
<br />
<i>"substantive petitions should normally receive a response from the relevant government department and this should normally be within two months of the petition being presented."<br /><br />* </i>Quite a few home educators have met with their MPs to explain, amongst other things:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">- that home education is a necessary precondition of a healthy democracy since it provides an essential check and balance upon state powers, and yet civil servants are reinterpreting the law so as to completely change its implementation. The latitude in determining the nature of a suitable education that is being handed to LAs in guidance could even make home educating effectively impossible if LAs so choose, and all this is happening right under our noses, with next to no real scrutiny by MPs or the public. </span><br />
<br />
<b>What MORE do we need to do to stop this? </b><br />
<br />
* Well, first off, as many of us as possible should be trying to speak to our MPs directly. The Summer Recess which starts on the 24th July 2018 is not a problem in this regard - during a recess, MPs work in their local constituencies, holding surgeries, replying to correspondence and attending local events. It could be the perfect moment to get hold of your MP.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/">Research your MP.</a> What is their position on education and on other related matters. Consider which arguments they are likely to understand best. Are they a small state Tory, or a paternalistic one who may be concerned to keep costs down? Is it a Labour MP who wants to do the best by children with different needs?<br />
<br />
What should be your elevator pitch?<br />
<br />
- Should it be about better SEND provision via better EOTAS provision?<br />
<br />
- Or about how registration and monitoring won't actually solve the problems of off-rolling that it sets out to solve and won't find real abusers since real abusers won't register?<br />
<br />
- Is it how registration and monitoring and being forced to abide by the LAs conception of a suitable education will damage your family?<br />
<br />
- Is it the argument in red above or any other of the <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/whats-wrong-with-draft-home-education.html">many arguments</a> there are against the Draft Guidance and<a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/first-impressions-from-committee-stage.html"> Soley's Bill</a>?<br />
<br />
* Next - help arrange, advertise and attend your own local HE picnic to fit in with:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">WESTMINSTER AND NATIONAL EVENTS – WEDNESDAY 18th JULY</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></span><br />
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="color: blue;">The theme of the day is visibility and the major focus will be on a series of picnics to be held around the country. We invite home educators everywhere to use this day to spread understanding of home ed and to highlight our concerns about the draft guidance. <br /><br />Let’s see if we can get <a class="_58cn" data-ft="{"tn":"*N","type":104}" href="https://www.facebook.com/hashtag/homeedinsight?source=feed_text" style="cursor: pointer; font-family: inherit; text-decoration-line: none;"><span class="_5afx" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit;"><span aria-label="hashtag" class="_58cl _5afz" style="font-family: inherit; unicode-bidi: isolate;">#</span><span class="_58cm" style="font-family: inherit;">homeedinsight</span></span></a> trending on Twitter!</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="color: blue;">There will be the - local picnics </span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="color: blue;"> - the presentation of a letter to a senior politician</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<span style="color: blue;"> - the presentation of the <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">on line petition</a> direct to Stephen Bishop. <br /><br />For more information (and as long as you are a home educator who meets the Conditions of Membership, ie: that you oppose the implementation of Draft Guidance and Soley's Bill), please join <a href="https://www.facebook.com/groups/stophl11/">this Facebook Group</a>. </span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-top: 6px;">
<br /></div>
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-85900026833146746042018-06-20T16:06:00.000+01:002018-06-22T07:28:41.389+01:00Should I Sign these Petitions? The short answer to that is "Yep, you most definitely should!"<br />
<br />
Here is the <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">e-petition. </a> Please sign it now! And then share it wherever you can. It only takes a few seconds and we only have until Thursday 22.00 hours before we print it off and send it to some ptb, though the petition should keep going after that! <br />
<br />
There is an explanation with links for why you should bother <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/the-call-for-evidence-why-should-i.html">here. </a> Please do share the consultation and/or this blog post widely and get as many others to sign as you can. NB: The arguments here and below also apply to the local petitions that are doing the rounds.<br />
<br />
For a slightly longer answer as to why you should sign it, you might want to understand a little bit more about the petition.<br />
<br />
Let's review the situation. The petition says:<br />
<br />
<div class="xs-phs" style="box-sizing: border-box; font-family: "Change Calibre", "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, Tahoma, sans-serif;">
<div class="mbl" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 25px !important;">
<div class="type-break-word type-l description" style="box-sizing: border-box; word-break: break-word !important; word-wrap: break-word !important;">
<div class="rte js-description-content" style="box-sizing: border-box;">
<div style="box-sizing: border-box;">
<span style="color: blue;">On 10th April 2018, the Department for Education (DfE) published draft Guidance for Home Education for LAs and Parents for consultation:<br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><br style="box-sizing: border-box;" /><a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/" rel="nofollow" style="box-sizing: border-box; cursor: pointer;" target="_blank">https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/</a></span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">These draft Guidance documents were written following significant consultation with Local Authorities and no consultation whatsoever with the home education community, to whom it is presented as a fait accompli.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">The subsequent consultation is consequently for little more than show as an intention to implement the content has already been stated.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">These Guidance documents seek to encourage Local Authorities to breach the ECHR Article 8 and the GDPR.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">They provide no accessible means for a parent to address disproportionate, unreasonable or ultra vires behaviour by their Local Authority, where many of those authorities already act routinely in such ways.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">They are oppressive and encourage the use of draconian measures to control and fetter the civil liberties of a minority section of society.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">They are divisive and will lead to segregation of communities by treating home educating families as lesser than their peers.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">They undermine the rights of children and the duties of their parents.</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">The petitioners therefore request the DfE to withdraw the draft Guidance documents and the procedure of or results from the related Call for Evidence until:</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">1. it has put in place an accessible and workable complaints procedure and</span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="color: blue;">2. it has consulted with home educating parents, as it has with Local Authorities, as to what the contents should include.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #363135;">That really could be self-explanatory, except sometimes it isn't and in fact it has come to our attention that the </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #363135;"><span style="color: #4b4f56; white-space: pre-wrap;">Department of Education has attempted to dismiss some of the assertions in the petition, for example, issuing a denial that LAs were consulted in advance of the new draft guidance being drawn up</span>. </span></div>
<div style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #363135; margin-top: 1.5em;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Let's look at the DfE claims.
We heard from Stephen Bishop at the DfE who has responsibilities with regard to the drafting of the guidance and the consultation whose communication</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> contains the following assertion: </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"The two draft guidance documents do not constitute new policy but rather a restatement of local authorities’ existing powers."</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Hmm, OK, that isn't how we see it from this end. First off, if the draft guidance documents really are just a restatement of existing LA powers, why should there be any consultation about them at all? DfE lawyers would surely have advised that such a consultation was unnecessary as <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691383/Consultation_Principles__1_.pdf" style="font-style: normal;">per part B of the Guidance on Consultations:</a>
<i>"B. Consultations should have a purpose
Do not consult for the sake of it. Ask departmental lawyers whether you
have a legal duty to consult. " </i></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">
Given that we <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">actually are invited, in questions 29 to 45 </a>to comment on the Draft Guidance in what seems like a consultative sort of a way, this in its own right seems to suggest that there ARE changes that constitute new policy in the Draft Guidance, that these DO that matter and therefore SHOULD receive a proper and full consultation, rather than just a few comments at the tail end of the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">Call for Evidence</a> on other matters.
</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">And yes, a pretty cursory glance at the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance </a>will tell you that this is indeed the case: there are very significant differences in interpretation of the law between the current guidance (EHEGLA) and the draft guidance documents and these proposed changes would have a huge impact on the way LAs implement the law and about how HEors experience the impact of the law. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Members of the EHE community have undertaken <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1d0LhhP6ofc_GNJH9OVEgi0EjxMiNxVhO/view">a close analysis </a>of the differences. They've produced spreadsheets galore comparing the past and present documents and have thrashed out the differences in long but nonetheless productive discussions which reveal, amongst many other</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> examples of differences between past and present guidance, that: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">1. There are significant changes with regard to how a suitable education is defined. At least one paragraph of the new guidance even looks as if it could be used to impose a de facto ban on home education altogether. By way of but one comparison between the two guidances on this point:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">What EHELGA says about Article 2 Protocol 1. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">2.2 Article 2 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that: "No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">From Draft Guidance on the same subject;</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> “</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">9.4 d. the first sentence of ECHR Article 2 of Protocol 1 quoted above confers the fundamental right to an effective education, and relevant case law (16) confers very broad discretion on the state in regulating that law.;”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The above paragraph references at (16) a case from Germany which rules out the right of parents to educate their children in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions, and in calling it “relevant case law” it in effect could rule out home education altogether, since local authorities could interpret this to mean that a “suitable education” takes no regard for parental religious or philosophical convictions, and sets any standard they so chose by which to adjudge home education provision. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">If that isn’t a change of policy in guidance, we don’t know what is.</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is all quite aside from the fact that the case referred to is not relevant case law, since that case is German and relied upon other local German law to support it and there is no equivalent in English law. </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">2. The <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance </a>repeatedly encourages LAs to use legislation, ie: 436A Education Act 1996 with regard to HEing families when current guidance (EHEGLA) at s2.6 states that 436A does not apply when a child is known to be EHE. This is a significant change of emphasis between the two sets of guidance and will result in very different approaches by the LA towards EHEors, since where LAs now at 2.7 of the EHEGLA only have to act if there is an appearance that a suitable education is not being provided, LAs are in new guidance effectively being given duties to assess the provision of all HEors, whether or not there is any suggestion that a suitable education is being provided. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">3. Given the stretching of the powers of LA at 436A in the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance</a>, it could imply a concomitant extension of safeguarding powers as a result of s175 Education Act 2002 which states: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">1) A local education authority shall make arrangements for ensuring that the functions conferred on them in their capacity as a local education authority are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children. </span><span style="background-color: #eff5f5; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">
</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This again would involve a vast difference in policy interpretation and implementation between the current and draft guidance. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">4. The <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance </a>encourages the use of data sharing in a way that is not encouraged in EHEGLA and which is highly likely to be in breach of GDPR. See section 4.4 of Draft Guidance. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">There are other significant differences on top of this, but for the moment this should suffice to show that there are substantive and important differences which should require extensive consultation rather than simply a few comments which, given that the DfE say there aren't any policy changes to the guidance, will probably be ignored anyway. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">
The letter from the DfE then goes on to assert: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Nonetheless, we are giving everyone involved an opportunity to comment on the way those documents are worded before they are published</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Given that the DfE have just asserted in the same letter that there aren't any new policies in the new guidance, they must think that there is next to nothing which requires significant change in the draft guidance, so it looks as if the comments which are invited won't be taken terribly seriously by the DfE and therefore don't really constitute a formal consultation process and there will not be any resulting alteration of the guidance by the DfE.
Is it a wonder that HEors are concerned that they are not being properly consulted about the guidance in the consultation and are signing the <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">e-petition </a>in droves. (The petition hasn't done badly, given the very short time it has been running by the way!) </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The DfE letter then goes on to say: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Local authorities were not ‘extensively consulted and involved in the drafting’ of the proposed guidance. On the contrary, the two draft guidance documents were drafted from start to finish by DfE officials, drawing only on external legal advice provided by individual lawyers. Indeed, the department expressly did not show the drafts to local authority representative organisations - or any other bodies or persons outside government - before publication on 10 April.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">The quoted phrase “extensively consulted and involved in the drafting” of the proposed guidance it is not what is said in the <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">e-petition</a>, which instead states: </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">These draft Guidance documents were written following significant consultation with Local Authorities and no consultation whatsoever with the home education community, to whom it is presented as a fait accompli.”</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span></i><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">This is different to the phrase that is quoted in the DfE letter which therefore does not offer any sort of critique of the e-petition which does not assert that LAs had contributed directly to the drafting of the guidance but rather that, in the run up to the drafting, the DfE, in the form of Stephen Bishop et al. had had extensive consultations with LAs and LA representatives such as the Association of Elective Home Education Professionals (AEHEP), as <a href="http://edyourself.org/articles/LAletters.php">evidenced </a>by <a href="https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/home_education_bill_communicatio_20">numerous </a><a href="http://edyourself.org/articles/LAletters.php#57">FOI responses</a>. It is also clear from these <a href="https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/home_education_bill_communicatio_7">FOI responses</a>, that the views of these bodies are reflected in the writing of the Guidance documents. Therefore the petition wording appears incontestable. </span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">See below, by way of just a few examples of the sort of consultations the petition describes between the DfE and LAs:</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><a href="http://edyourself.org/articles/LAletters.php">DfE Westminster Council, November 2014</a></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"Ministers are agreed that the department should talk at official level to local authorities. SB has had meetings with ADCS policy committee, also talked to 1 LA in the north and visited 2 regional forums of local authorities. SB has come with no commitment about what might change and when it might change, he has come to listen to people's views..."</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">
And:
</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><a href="http://edyourself.org/articles/LAletters.php">Report for Novembe</a>r Meeting Notes from Home Educators Council Minutes.</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Minister Nick Gibb:</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"The Department for Education officials have met with the policy committee of the Association of Directors of Children’s Services; officers of Darlington Borough Council; the children’s services scrutiny committee of the City of Westminster, and two regional forums of local authority elective home education officers; one for London and the South East and the other for the West Midlands" </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">I</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">n September 2017, Jenny Dodd of the AEHEP stated that the </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">“Problem with Lord N [Lord Nash] suggesting LA’s stretch the guidance is that this needs to be communicated to EHE community.” </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #4b4f56; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Even further evidence of the degree to which LAs were consulted can be found in the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance</a> itself with numerous references as to what LAs have told the DfE as regards to their problems with the EHELGA, eg: </span><span style="background-color: #eff1f3; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: #eff1f3; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">6.19 The department is aware that some local authorities have been reluctant to prosecute for non-compliance with a school attendance order, for reasons connected with costs, and the behaviour of some parents who deliberately withhold information about home education provision but are then able to easily satisfy the court that the home education is suitable.”</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">Or </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">"A number of problems arise from lacunae or shortcomings in the current legislation which have been drawn to the department’s attention by local authorities and by local children’s safeguarding boards - in correspondence and in meetings both with directors of</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: italic; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">children’s services and with forums of local authority officers who deal with elective home education on a day-to-day basis:"
</span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">ie: the draft guidance repeatedly refers to LAs telling the DfE about various concerns, which adds further weight to the argument that LAs have been consulting with and lobbying the DfE, which has led to the draft guidance being written on the basis of LA concerns.
</span><span style="background-color: transparent; color: #363135; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">
All in all, it looks as if the petition makes not just a number of good points, but that these points need to be shouted from the rafters if stakeholders, (ie home educators) are to be properly heard in a consultative process with government. </span></div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
Please <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">sign</a> and keep sharing, and share this explanatory post, just in case anyone is still curious. </div>
<div dir="ltr" style="color: #363135; line-height: 1.38; margin-bottom: 5pt; margin-top: 5pt;">
<span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "arial"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: 400; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;">
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-74589472998139118542018-06-16T12:59:00.001+01:002018-06-16T13:52:25.739+01:00Section 6.19 - Should we be worried? <span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">Filling in the<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/"> Call for Evidence </a>isn't a comfortable experience at the best of times. Answering 44 questions takes a lot of sitting down for starters, but that really isn't the worst of it. Although home educators have thrashed out cogent answers to the consultation and have <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/suggestions-for-how-to-complete-ehe.html">formulated template responses</a> to it, every now and again a new outrage which had previously remained buried in the small print of the<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf"> draft guidance </a> leaps out at a home educator and grabs them in a lethal mix of terror and outrage that leaves them (at least in their heads), running round their neighbourhoods with sandwich boards and for real, gulping down cups of coffee in fits of nervous exhaustion as they try to explain the barbarity of these oh-so-reasonable seeming proposals in their consultation responses. It's seriously hard and totally unpaid work.<br /><br />Here's my sandwich board moment from this morning. Filling out <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/consultation/intro/">question 34</a> on section 6 of the<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf"> Draft Guidance for LAs</a>, </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">I reread the following:<br /><br /><i>"6.19 The department is aware that some local authorities have been reluctant to prosecute for non-compliance with a school attendance order, for reasons connected with costs, and the behaviour of some parents who deliberately withhold information about home education provision but are then able to easily satisfy the court that the home education is suitable. This is an understandable concern, but local authorities must bear in mind their public responsibilities as prosecutors; in such cases they may wish to seek legal advice about the prospect of obtaining a costs order against a successful defendant on the basis that the prosecution would have been unnecessary if not for the defendants’ unreasonable conduct."</i></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;"><br />On previous readings, I had had an uncomfortable feeling about the idea t</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">hat home educators should bear the costs of an action</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;"> brought by the LA irrespective of the outcome,</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;"> but only on about the twentieth perusal of the paragraph, did it finally dawn on me that this is an outrageously controlling and iniquitous suggestion that has qualities of the</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;"> popular version of witch dunking about it, ie: that either you are proved innocent (win), in which case you drown (bear the costs of the court case), or you turn out to be a witch (lose) and are burned at the stake (forced to return a child to school AND pay the costs). Either way, better not appear witch-like (difficult) in any way, shape or form.<br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">You may be thinking that it probably isn't this bad - that LAs would only insist on parents paying court costs when families had been very intransigent, but that is to ignore the fact that LAs already routinely practice that clever twisting of reports about HE families in order to say, or at least imply, pretty much whatever they like. That little nudge here or there could so easily suggest that a family are being wilfully obstructive and should bear the costs, irrespective of the outcome.<br /><br />By way of but one recent example: a successfully HEing family didn't particularly take to the the Victorian anthroplogist of an ex headmaster who came to assess their provision, who regarded the children as if they were some sort of different species that was barely human, inter alia reporting their extremely well balanced, clearly very happy children as "Children A, B and C are happy enough". So the HEing mum rang the LA to say that she didn't mind having visits, but could someone else possibly visit them instead. This was reported as "The mother has refused visits". That alone could cost them dearly.<br /><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">And that's all quite aside from the very real possibility </span>that home educators may have utterly genuine reasons to prefer their educational provision be judged in the courts. They may know, for example, that the LA does not support different pedagogies and may therefore think that their best hope is to describe their provision to the court, but given the fact that they will almost certainly have to bear the cost, this check and balance on LA power will be denied them.<br /><br />All in all, with the almost certain prospect of having to bear court costs, home educators will be far more subject to the whims of LAs as to what they consider an appropriate education. All the LA would have to do would be to just tweak the evidence a little bit to make the parent look obstructive, and bingo, they'd be issuing SAOs like there's no tomorrow. LAs also know that once HEors caught on that this is happening, that they wouldn't risk the almost certain expense of a court case, and will therefore just roll over and do the LAs bidding, meekly conforming to whatever expectations the LA has with regards to the nature of a suitable education, with all the terrible <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Constitutional%20Significance%20of%20Guidance">consequences for freedom and democracy that this entails</a>. </span><br /><br />This really does seem like a hugely retrograde step, a return to centralised authoritarianism of pre Magna Carta proportions, though perhaps we should start getting used to this sort of thing as this initiative also seems akin to </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">the <a href="https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6231784/local-newspaper-editors-join-fight-against-labours-bid-to-muzzle-the-free-press/">proposal in May, introduced by Tom Watson MP, </a>which would have resulted in newspapers being forced to fund the action of anyone who takes a case against them, irrespective of whether the newspaper actually wins or not! <br /><br />Is this REALLY the way we want to go? Talk about degradation of democracy: curtail freedom of speech, make investigative journalism prohibitively risky and take out freedom in education whilst you're at it. After all, the plebs need controlling.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;">We have to stop this. Fill in that <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">consultation response</a>, and sign the petition<a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance?recruiter=168916674&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=share_petition&utm_term=triggered"> here. </a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14.85px;"><br /></span>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-28811150299196736532018-06-16T01:18:00.000+01:002018-06-16T01:18:49.652+01:00Is Home Education a "Disruptive Innovation"?There's a pattern to the way innovations disrupt apparently immutable markets. First they are seen as some kind of joke or in the case of home education, evidence of an embarrassing failure and a complete irrelevance. Then they are regarded as an illegal threat, before finally being accepted as the way forward. This is what happened with, for example, the on-line distribution of music and videos. The questions for this post are: <br /><br /> - is this what is happening with home education?<br /><br /> - what stage are we at now?<br /><br /> - and will home education ever be widely seen as a positive paradigm for education? <br />
<br />
There is almost certainly a <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/07/07/number-children-home-taught-doubles-six-years-amid-increased/">recent upsurge in numbers of home educators,</a> but this doesn't mean that home education has moved up into positive paradigm territory. This growth is largely driven by a confluence of failures in the schooling system: a lack of <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/07/07/number-children-home-taught-doubles-six-years-amid-increased/">school places at secondary level</a>, <a href="https://neu.org.uk/latest/school-cuts-website-shows-88-schools-still-facing-cuts">cuts to school budgets </a>which mean that there's no money for <a href="https://www.unison.org.uk/news/article/2018/02/schools-forced-cut-teachers-teaching-assistants-posts-make-ends-meet/">teachers, teaching assistants </a>and <a href="https://www.teachers.org.uk/news-events/conference-2018/sen-funding-in-crisis">SEND provision,</a> pressures <a href="https://schoolsweek.co.uk/workload-and-government-policy-forcing-teachers-out-dfe-research-finds/">from various government intiatives and Ofsted </a>which means that schools <a href="https://www.tes.com/news/admissions-watchdog-disturbed-schools-using-home-education-roll-pupils">pressure families to remove children </a>who might mess with their Ofsted assessments, more pressure from Ofsted which means that teachers spend their days filling in tick boxes rather than being left alone to devise inspirational lessons, a tedious one size fits all National Curriculum that is being imposed ever more tightly, parents pulling out school phobic children in order to <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/07/07/number-children-home-taught-doubles-six-years-amid-increased/">avoid being fined</a> by the LA for unauthorised absences, and a lot of great teachers just <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/uk-teaching-vacancies-rise-quarter-2015-classes-schools-pupils-a7930856.html">throwing in the towel </a>and walking away.<br />
<br />
And let's not forget the effect all the above has upon the young people in the system. <a href="https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/health/914215/schoolchildren-school-stress-social-media-weight-anxiety-health-self-harm-children-kids"> Two thirds of children are stressed by life </a>at secondary school and you can bet your life that <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/the-athletes-way/201402/chronic-stress-can-damage-brain-structure-and-connectivity">this sort of stress is not the sort of stress that helps you learn</a>! Seriously parents, what are we actually doing here? It seems we are forcing two thirds of young people to attend a place where they are meant to acquire a suitable education but which is actually<a href="http://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/schools-left-with-no-support-for-vulnerable-children-184652/"> completely ruinous </a>in terms of achieving that end. <br />
<br />
And lets not get in to all the stuff about unaddressed school bullying and the total unremitting boredom of having to sit in a classroom over-stuffed with other young people of varying abilities, all with different needs which must be variously addressed while you stare out the window and wish you could just float out through it and fly away.<br />
<br />
However, this growth in numbers of HEors might not just be a matter of a creaking school system. It could also be due to other more positive factors as well. Popular educationalists such as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8tCpmgCmyc">Ken Robinson</a> have been making an argument for HE in very public places and the internet has radically increased the ease with which home education can be undertaken. What with websites such <a href="https://www.khanacademy.org/">Khan Academy, </a><a href="https://www.duolingo.com/">Duolingo, </a> <a href="https://www.plos.org/">PLOS</a>, <a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/unpaywall/iplffkdpngmdjhlpjmppncnlhomiipha?hl=en">Chrome's Unpaywall</a>, virtual colleges and MOOCs, and all the truly wonderful stuff you can find on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0xKHwQH-4I">YouTube</a> and through Google, we can truly say we live in an age in which information is no longer at a premium. Home educators can also get support and advice on-line and in real life groups far more easily now than only a decade ago, when the internet was more limited and real life HE groups relatively small.<br />
<br />
Realistically though, these positive reasons for the growth in HE are probably in the minority. We can only hope that they herald better things to come, but the truth of the matter is that home education is currently moving from the "batty irrelevant" stage, to the "potentially illegal" stage, as evidenced by the fact that the DfE have instigated a<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/"> Call for Evidence </a> which introduces the prospect of new regulatory control of HE, either in the form of <a href="https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/homeeducationdutyoflocalauthorities.html">legal change </a>or a <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">harsher in interpretation of current law,</a> Some passages of the superficially anodyne <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">reinterpretation of current law </a>even introduce the prospect of LAs being able to manage an ad hoc elimination of HE altogether, if read in the wrong light, (<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">see s9.4 d on page 25)</a>, a point that hasn't been missed by home educators and about which they will be complaining loudly in their <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/suggestions-for-how-to-complete-ehe.html">consultation responses. </a><br />
<br />
One of the main nominal reasons for a crack-down on home educators, on top of the growth in numbers, has been the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/475553/Advice_letter_from_Sir_Michael_Wilshaw_Her_Majesty_s_Chief_Inspector_on_unregistered_schools.pdf">assertion</a> by Michael Wilshaw (then head of Ofsted) that there was evidence to suggest that illegal, unregistered schools are using the freedoms afforded to genuine home educators as a cover for
their activities. However, a <a href="http://www.personalisededucationnow.org.uk/2018/06/12/radicalisation-home-education-reality-myth/radicalisation-of-home-educated-children-research-march-2107-wcw-final/">report </a>undertaken by the Centre for Personalised Learning concluded that whilst Wilshaw's concerns that illegal organisations could exploit home education regulations to avoid closure were indeed potentially valid, this was not a reason to tighten regulation on home education, but rather should lead to strengthening of regulation of
unregulated schools.<br />
<br />
The tarring of home educators as radicalisers of their children has caused a <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/nicky-morgan-orders-review-on-home-schooling-amid-fears-children-having-minds-poisoned-by-a6779886.html">media</a> <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/sep/16/councils-seek-new-powers-to-check-on-home-schooled-children">frenzy </a>over the last few <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43718212">years. </a> It looks as if public sentiment might easily be sufficiently swayed to see home educators as deeply evil subversives who should be put away for ever and a day, and for this reason alone, it would very easy to conclude that are we are currently firmly in the "illegal" phase of a disruptive innovation process.<br />
<br />
It is a crucial stage right now which could go either way. Home education for it to retain its value, must not become fettered by government regulation and expectations as to what an education must look like. Many of HEd children have already been failed by an over-centralised view of what e<span id="goog_1576903095"></span><a href="https://www.blogger.com/"></a><span id="goog_1576903096"></span>very child must learn. Home educators, on the other hand, can personalise their educational provision to genuinely suit the child, which almost invariably proves invaluable for so many children, as <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8tCpmgCmyc">Ken has understood</a> when he says that HE has a lot to offer by way of a pedagogy.<br />
<br />
As home education, in its new tech inspired iteration, matures, the government would be wise to learn to work with us, rather than against us. We could bolster a creaking school system with new models that do offer genuine support to children who do not thrive in school. If budgets could more easily follow a child through the EOTAs system, or if <a href="http://www.redballoonlearner.org/RBAir">Red Balloon of the Air </a>and other initiatives with virtual colleges offering a real life support group were given proper funding and support, many more children would receive a suitable education. Other home educators just need to be left alone to get on with it: money would be far better spent on social work departments than in chasing a load of well-functioning but resentful HEors about all over the place, trying to tell them what to do.<br />
<br />
We need to go beyond being seen as a threat, and be welcomed as a valuable alternative instead.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-78692019041427731192018-06-12T18:13:00.004+01:002018-06-13T05:36:56.240+01:00The Call for Evidence - Why should I bother? One way or another, it is can be extremely hard for home educators to find the time and energy to respond to the Department for Education's <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">Call for Evidence</a>. For starters, the consultation is taking place at a busy time of year for many HEors, what with exam season, getting ready for college, holidays and all the normal demands of home educating in a difficult financial climate. <br />
<br />
There is also the sheer bulk of it all. The<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/"> Call for Evidence</a> has <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/consultation/intro/">44 questions</a> most of which require a considerable amount of knowledge in order to form a well argued response. HEors need to know about not only <a href="https://services.parliament.uk/bills/2017-19/homeeducationdutyoflocalauthorities.html">Lord Soley's Bill</a> and two sets of guidance, <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">one for LAs </a>and <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20parents.pdf">one for parents</a>, but also about other bits of law, such as<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/contents"> safeguarding law</a> and the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted">Localism Act 2011</a>.<br />
<br />
Then there's the fact that so much of <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">new stuff</a> is so opaque. It is very easy to skim read the new draft <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">guidance documents</a> and think "Hey ho, the law's the same, what can be so bad?" Home educators may also be tempted to think that since their educational provision has already been inspected by their LAs without any dire consequences, that it is unlikely that things could get significantly worse. <br />
<br />
The thing is, the <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Constitutional%20Significance%20of%20Guidance">problems in the draft guidance</a> aren't obvious and you really have to get stuck in to reading the small print in order to see some of the most significant differences from <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288135/guidelines_for_las_on_elective_home_educationsecondrevisev2_0.pdf">previous guidance</a> since these are hidden away in subtle rewording or in the reference section which you need to pursue with google in order to find out <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Constitutional%20Significance%20of%20Guidance">the implications of it all. </a> (See also <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Mission%20Creep">these </a><a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/problems-for-pam-home-educating-parent.html">posts </a>for some more of the problems and implications of the draft guidance).<br />
<br />
Then there's the potentially demotivating fact, as argued in this petition <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">here,</a> that the g<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">uidance documents</a> were written without the consultation of HEors, and are already so skewed in favour of LAs, that the whole exercise feels like a fait accompli. It's easy to think that whatever we say, the DfE will go ahead anyway.<br />
<br />
Worse still, there's such a short space of time in which to do it all! We have to respond to the consultation before July 2nd? Really? Given that home educators have a reputation for being a rambuctious lot, there is a reasonable chance that the DfE quite deliberately presented this consultation in such a way as to make it very awkward for us to complete. It would be easy to wave a white flag at this point.<br />
<br />
But home educators won't give up. We can apply the hive mind, research the situation and come up with <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/suggestions-for-how-to-complete-ehe.html">reasoned answers</a> and we must do this because we HAVE to draw the line somewhere. If we don't draw this line and demonstrate what the HE community are and are not prepared to take, the line will be drawn heaven only knows where. We have seen <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Mission%20Creep">mission creep</a> in action before. We will not let it happen again.<br />
<br />
On top of <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/suggestions-for-how-to-complete-ehe.html">responding</a> to the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">consultation</a>, home educators should, as per <a href="https://www.change.org/p/department-for-education-we-ask-the-house-of-commons-to-withdraw-the-2018-home-education-guidance">the petition</a>, complain that the process has been made next to impossible for many stakeholders, that there appears to be no Impact Assessment, normally a necessary requirement whenever changes to the implementation of law are proposed, all of which therefore means that the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">Call for Evidence</a> does not conform to <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/691383/Consultation_Principles__1_.pdf">government guidance on how to conduct </a>a consultation, ie: there are plenty of good reasons to kick off and we should do it.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-59547438952323023022018-06-01T18:53:00.000+01:002018-06-16T06:57:22.735+01:00Suggestions as to how to Complete the EHE Call for Evidence<span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><br /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;">This is a response guide from the admins of the Draft EHE Guidance Consultation Group.</span></span><span style="color: #1d2129; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">It's been kept quite simple, to help to address the overwhelming nature of the questions which has been putting so many people off from replying.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">****Please don't copy and paste it, it's really important to change some of the words even just slightly, because identical responses will probably be discounted.****</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">****None of the words in [square brackets] should appear in your response.****</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">In some places we've provided choices, so that you can give the short version or the longer one. If you want to answer in more detail still, please see our conversations in the above named group and David Wolfe's advice, which is in the group files.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">Any response to the consultation is valid. *Your* thoughts and opinions are being asked for, so please think about the answers we're suggesting and if you disagree then don't use them and say what you think instead.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: inherit;">Please consider allowing them to keep your response public in your answer to question 7 so that we can clearly see whether it has been taken into account for the end result.<span style="font-size: 13px;">"</span></span></span></span><b><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><br /><br />===================<br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;">Home Education - </span></b><a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/suggestions-for-how-to-complete-ehe.html" style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size: large;">Call for Evidence and Draft DFE Guidance</span></a><br />
<br />
Closes July 2nd 2018.<br />
<br />
-----------------------<br />
<br />
1. What is your name?<br />
<br />
Name<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">[Enter a name if you wish ]</span></span><br />
<br />
<br />
--------------<br />
<br />
<br />
2. What is your email address?<br />
<br />
If you enter your email address then you will automatically receive an acknowledgement email when you submit your response.<br />
<br />
<br />
Email<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">[Enter an email address if you wish]</span></span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>-----------------<br />
<br />
3. Are you responding as an individual or on behalf of an organisation?<br />
<br />
Individual<br />
Organisation<br />
<br />
---------------------<br />
<br />
4. If you are responding on behalf of an organisation, what is your organisation?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">[Leave blank]</span></span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;"><br /></span></span>
----------------<br />
<br />
<br />
5. Which of the following best describes the capacity in which you are responding to this consultation? If Other, please give details<br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br />[Choose parent or carer or ‘other’ and type ‘home educator’]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
----------------<br />
<br />
<br />
6. Which local authority area are you based in?<br />
<br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: blue;">[Name your local authority if you want to. ]</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: blue;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: blue;"><br /></span></span>
-----------------<br />
<br />
<br />
7. Would you like us to keep your responses confidential?<br />
<br />
Yes/No<br />
<br />
Information provided in response to consultations, including personal information, may be subject to publication or disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the Data Protection Act 1998 or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.<br />
<br />
If you want all, or any part, of a response to be treated as confidential, please explain why you consider it to be confidential.<br />
<br />
If a request for disclosure of the information you have provided is received, your explanation about why you consider it to be confidential will be taken into account, but no assurance can be given that confidentiality can be maintained. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on the Department.<br />
<br />
The Department for Education will process your personal data (name and address and any other identifying material) in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998, and in the majority of circumstances, this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties.Reason for confidentiality<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[Anyone can state any reason for wanting DfE to keep their response private, if they do. However, it would be helpful in order to ensure transparency in the processing of results, if you were to keep your response public.]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
---------------------<br />
<br />
8. How effective are the current voluntary registration schemes run by some local authorities? What would be the advantages and disadvantages of mandatory registration of children educated at home, with duties on both local authorities and parents in this regard?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;">[Talk about the possible effects on children of being registered.]</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br />Section 7 of the Education Act compels us to tailor the provision to the child’s age, aptitude, ability and special educational needs.<br /><br />[Does registration encourage more local authority oversight of this? Do local authority officers know our children as well as we do? Might some of them be tempted to contact us more than they need to and try to persuade us to change our provision? You can add examples of this if you know any. ]<br /><br />We think the law currently strikes the right balance between protecting those children who need it (Section 437) and ensuring that parents still have the freedom to tailor the provision to meet their child’s needs.<br /><br />[OR just - ] Registration schemes are not needed and are not effective.#</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
--------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
9. What information is needed for registration purposes, and what information is actually gathered by local authorities? Would it help the efficacy of these schemes, and the sharing of information between authorities, if there were a nationally agreed dataset or if data could be shared by national agencies, such as DWP or the NHS?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">We do not think there should be a registration scheme for home education because it is not necessary and might in some cases result in a negative impact on the education provision.<br /><br />[OR] Registration schemes are a bad idea because they’re not needed and we are just fulfilling our parental duty, which does not need to be registered.<br /><br />[OR ] No information is needed. There should not be a scheme.<br /><br />[OR further:] The implication here is that such policies are and would be appropriate and lawful both when it comes to the requirements of the Education Act and the GDPR and Article 8 ECHR requirements around data sharing. David Wolfe QC advised that the seeking or the making of a referral between agencies as contemplated, simply by virtue of the mere fact of a child being home educated would not meet those requirements.</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br />
-------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
10. Does experience of flexi-schooling and similar arrangements suggest that it would be better if the scope of registration schemes included any children who do not attend a state-funded or registered independent school full-time? If so, do you think that local authorities should be able to confirm with both state-funded and independent schools whether a named child is attending that school full-time?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Flexischoolers should not be covered by this guidance because their children are on a school roll. There should be no registration scheme for home education.</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<br />
--------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
11. Would the sanction of issuing a school attendance order for parental non-compliance with registration be effective, or is there another sanction which would be more useful?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">We do not think there should be a registration scheme for home education. </span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>-------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
12. What steps might help reduce the incidence of schools reportedly pressuring parents to remove children to educate them at home?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Improving the schools? </span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span><span style="color: blue;">Improving the Special Needs provision?<br /><br />Improving the Ofsted service to ensure the SEN code of conduct is being properly applied?<br /><br />Funding more Pupil Referral Units or other EOTAS schemes?<br /><br />Home education regulations should not be changed for the incidence of this to be reduced.<br /><br />[OR insert your own ideas, OR leave blank]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
--------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
13. Is there an argument for some provision which allows a child to return to the same school within a specified interval if suitable home education does not prove possible?<br />
<br />
Yes/No<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[Most people would say no to this, in case it forcibly keeps the child on the school roll against the parents’ wishes. ]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
14. How effective is local authority monitoring of provision made for children educated at home? Which current approaches by local authorities represent best practice?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">There is no statutory requirement for monitoring of home education provision.<br /><br />Home education provision should be decided by parents and unnecessary monitoring can undermine parental decisions.<br /><br />If the local authority has information that makes it appear that parents are not providing a suitable education, it can then ask the parents for further information. (Current Elective Home Education Guidelines section 2.8) This position strikes a good balance between the need for local authorities to take action if the education appears unsuitable and the need for parents to decide for themselves on the right definition of ‘suitable’ for their child.<br /><br /> [OR just - ] There is nothing in law about monitoring home education.</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<br />
--------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
15. If monitoring of suitability is not always effective, what changes should be made in the powers and duties of local authorities in this regard, and how could they best ensure that monitoring of suitability is proportionate?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Local authorities can best ensure that the monitoring of suitability is proportionate by sticking to the existing procedure as set out in the previous answer. Parents should decide what constitutes a suitable education for their child, not local authority officers. Local authority officers should only try to reach an opinion about this if they have information that makes it appear that parents are not providing a suitable education.<br /><br />[OR just - ] There is nothing in law about monitoring home education</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
16. Should there be specific duties on parents to comply with local authorities carrying out monitoring if such LA powers and duties were created, and what sanctions should attach to non-compliance?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">There should be no specific duties on parents to comply with local authorities’ inquiries into their provision. According to case law (Phillips v Brown 1980) they “would be sensible” to respond to inquiries as set out in the current Elective Home Education Guidelines section 2.8.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[OR just -] There should be no such specific duties on parents.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------<br />
<br />
17. Is it necessary to see the child and/or the education setting (whether that is the home or some other place), in order to assess fully the suitability of education, and if so, what level of interaction or observation is required to make this useful in assessing suitability?<br />
<span style="color: red;"><br />DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">It is not necessary to see the child and/or the education setting in order to assess fully the suitability of education. Local authorities should not attempt to assess fully the suitability of the education unless and until there is an appearance that the education is unsuitable. (Section 437 of the Education Act).</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[OR just - ] It is not necessary for them to do this.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
----------------------<br />
<br />
18. What can be done to better ensure that the child’s own views on being educated at home, and on the suitability of the education provided, are known to the local authority?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"> The child’s own views on being educated at home and on the suitability of the education provided do not need to be known to the local authority. Parents must decide how best to carry out their Section 7 duty until and unless there is an appearance that they are failing to do so, as set out in Section 2.8 of the current home education guidelines and in Section 437 of the Education Act.<br /><br /> [OR just] The child’s own views do not need to be known to the local authority if there are no concerns about the education.</span><br />
<br />
----------------------<br />
<br />
19. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using settings which are not registered independent or state schools, to supplement home education? How can authorities reliably obtain information on the education provided to individual children whose education ‘otherwise than at school’ includes attendance at such settings as well as, or instead of, education at home?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"> If there is no information which might lead to a Section 437 ‘appearance’ that the education is unsuitable, authorities should not seek to obtain such information. Parents must decide how best to carry out their Section 7 duty until and unless there is an appearance that they are failing to do so, as set out in Section 2.8 of the current home education guidelines and in Section 437 of the Education Act.<br /><br /> [OR just - ] Local authorities do not need that information if there are no concerns about the provision.</span><br />
<br />
-------------------------<br />
<br />
20. What are the advantages and disadvantages of using private tutors to supplement home education? How can authorities best obtain information on the education provided to individual children whose education at home includes private tuition, or whom attend tuition away from home? <br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">If there is no information which might lead to a Section 437 ‘appearance’ that the education is unsuitable, authorities should not seek to obtain such information. Parents must decide how best to carry out their Section 7 duty until and unless there is an appearance that they are failing to do so, as set out in Section 2.8 of the current home education guidelines and in Section 437 of the Education Act.<br /><br /> [OR just - ] Local authorities do not need this information if they have no concerns about the education.</span><br />
<br />
--------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
21. Are there other matters which stakeholders would wish to see taken into account in this area? If so please insert comments below.<br />
<br />
Yes /No<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;">[If you want to, you could describe experiences of interactions with over-zealous officers here and say again that they should comply with the law. ] [You could say that you prefer the current home education guidelines to the proposals in the draft guidance. ]<br /><br />[Or you could leave this box blank.]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
---------------------------<br />
<br />
22. What might be done to improve access to public examinations for children educated at home?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[Give your views here.]<br /><br />[Either nothing should be done to improve access to public examinations or something should, and what you think it should be.]<br /><br />[Be aware of the possible ramifications of accessing funding for public examinations, ie: contact with LA, LA value for money assessments, etc.]</span><br />
<br />
-------------------------<br />
<br />
23. What good practice is there currently in local authority arrangements for supporting home-educating families? Should there be a duty on local authorities to provide advice and support, and if so how should such a duty be framed?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">There should be no duty on local authorities to provide advice and support, although officers may wish to supply either on request if possible.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Adding a duty in this respect risks encouraging overzealous officers to supply advice and support that is unwanted by parents.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
------------------------<br />
<br />
24. Should there be a financial consequence for schools if a parent withdraws a child from the school roll to educate at home?<br />
<br />
Yes/No<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY<br /><br /> <span style="color: blue;">No. Parents can withdraw their children from school for many valid reasons. The discouragement of this should not be incentivised because the result might be that parents are too strongly persuaded to keep their child in school.</span></span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br />[OR]<br /><br /> Yes. Schools should be made to work harder to resolve problems with children who are on the point of being deregistered.<br /><br /> [You could add experiences to support your view.]</span><br />
<br />
----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
25. Should there be any changes to the provision in Regulation 8(2) of the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006 requiring local authority consent to the removal of a child’s name from the roll of a maintained special school if placed there under arrangements made by the local authority?<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Parents of any children should not need permission to deregister their child from school.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
26. Are there any other comments you wish to make relating to the effectiveness of current arrangements for elective home education and potential changes?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[You can use this box to describe your worry about the proposed changes, which are to effectively move the educational provision assessment from Section 437 (ie: only where there seem to be problems with provision), to Section 436A, so that everyone’s provision is assessed regardless of whether there seem to be problems with it.]<br /><br /> [You could talk about how regular monitoring, home visits, meetings with officials and pre-set suitability criteria would negatively affect or damage your child or your ability to carry out your duty to provide a suitable education. ]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------<br />
<br />
27. What data are currently available on the numbers of children being educated at home in your local authority area?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">I do not know. [Or include the data if you do know it.]</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
28. Do you have any comments on any of the contents of the call for evidence document in relation to equality issues?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[You can state any problems you know of in this respect here, eg: ]<br /><br />It may be difficult for young people/ those with disabilities who may be subject to proposed changes to reply to the Call for Evidence, for reason of…</span><br />
--------------------------<br />
<br />
<b>DRAFT REVISED DFE GUIDANCE ON HOME EDUCATION: FOR LOCAL AUTHORITIES<br /><br />This section invites comments on different sections of the draft revised guidance document about the current framework for home education, which DfE proposes to publish for local authority use. Copies of the draft document can be downloaded from the Overview page.</b><br />
<br />
---------------------<br />
<br />
29. Comments on Section 1: What is elective home education?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Flexi-schooling describes an arrangement between the parent and school where children are registered at the school in the usual way but attend school only part time. This does not encompass college students or anyone else not on the roll of a registered school.<br /><br /> Flexi-schooling should therefore not be included in this consultation.</span><br />
<br />
------------------------------<br />
<br />
30. Comments on Section 2: Reasons for elective home education - why do parents choose to provide it?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"> DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"> The reasons for home education are not relevant in law and therefore should not be listed in this guidance.<br /><br /> Listing them risks encouraging overzealous officers to use the reason for home educating to form prejudices in terms of their approach to families.<br /><br /> [OR just - ] Don’t give reasons/ don’t list any reasons [etc].</span><br />
<br />
-------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
31. Comments on Section 3: The starting point for local authorities<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;">3.4 "However, few people would argue today that parents should be able to exercise their right to home educate children with absolutely no independent oversight, despite their having the legal responsibility set out above." - This is conjecture and as such does not belong in this guidance.<br /><br />[OR] I disagree with this assumption and it should be removed.<br /><br />"The job of each local authority is therefore to find an appropriate balance between parental autonomy and its overall responsibilities for education of children in its area."<br /><br /> - This is not true. Their job is to carry out their duties in law.<br /><br />3.6 Registration schemes should not be encouraged as they go beyond the law and can lead to problems such as unnecessary provision assessments and lack of clarity for officers and parents about regulations and the law.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[OR just - ] We do not want any registration schemes.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
--------------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
32. Comments on Section 4: How do local authorities know that a child is being educated at home?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;">Section 436A gives local authorities the duty to make arrangements to identify children not receiving education. Home educated children do receive education, therefore should not be the particular targets of this section of the law.<br /><br />"Until a local authority is satisfied that a home-educated child is receiving a suitable full-time education, then a child being educated at home is potentially in scope of this duty."<br /><br /> This is not an accurate interpretation of the wording in section 436A. It implies that the provision of every home educated child must be assessed by their local authority, whereas the statute does not do this and nor does case law. It is enough for officers to ask parents whether the education is suitable. If the parents say yes and there is no information that would lead to the informal inquiries set out in section 2.8 of the current guidance, the section 436A duty can then be discharged. </span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br />Home educators have been advised by David Wolfe QC that the measures suggested in section 4.4 specifically to seek out home educators do not meet the requirements set out in the GDPR and Article 8 of the Human Rights Act.<br /><br />[OR just]<br /><br /> This is not what Section 436A means. Local authorities should stick to the law. Further, we have received legal advice that sharing information about us between statutory agencies as described in s4.4 would be unlawful. </span><br />
<br />
----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
33. Comments on Section 5: Local authorities’ responsibilities for children who are, or appear to be, educated at home<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">5.1 again misinterprets section 436A, which makes no mention of home education. The underlining of 'routine basis' implies that there is also a statutory duty to monitor the quality of home education provision at all, which there is not.<br /><br />5.2 again extends the interpretation of 436A beyond the statutory wording, which says nothing about maintaining oversight of home educated children.<br /><br />5.4 recommends annual contact with home educating parents (we assume this is what the draft guidance means, not 'home educated parents' as it says) but this would constitute routine monitoring which might be helpful in some cases, but in others could interfere with the parents' ability to comply with their section 7 duty to cause their child to receive suitable education.<br /><br />One example of such a problem would be if the officer challenged the parents' definition of 'suitable' based on their different opinions of the child's needs. In that case, where the provision would be found suitable in court, the parents' section 7 duty would be unnecessarily and damagingly undermined to the detriment of the child.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[OR just - ] We don’t want or need annual contact with the local authority.</span><br />
<br />
------------------------<br />
<br />
34. Comments on Section 6: What should local authorities do when it is not clear that home education is suitable?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;">6.1 Local authorities should not be trying to grade the quality of provision. This will lead to all kinds of problems for which there is no justification in statute. They are only required to make a binary decision about whether there is an appearance that it is not suitable. This is set out under section 437 of the Education Act and in the case of informal inquiries, the current guidance section 2.8.<br /><br />6.2 They should only be attempting to assess the provision if they have information which makes it appear to be not suitable (current guidelines 2.8).<br /><br />6.4 The informal inquiries should take place before section 437 of the Education Act but not under section 436A. Section 2.8 of the current guidance sets out the position correctly. If the law makes the parent responsible for ensuring the receipt of suitable education but does not define 'suitable education' in individually specific terms, it implicitly assumes parents are capable of defining what is suitable for their individual child. If it appears for some reason that a parent is not fulfilling their duty, then the assumption may be questioned.<br /><br />6.7 Flexischooling should not be included in these guidelines as the children are on the roll of a registered school.<br /><br />6.10 That is by no means the only reasonable conclusion. The family might be away on a long holiday, for example, and not receiving their post.<br /><br />6.12 Section 437 requires only satisfaction from the parent. It does not mention seeking information from other sources and the guidance should not imply that this should happen.<br /><br />6.20 The guidance should not make such implications.<br /><br />[OR just -] Keep the wording in section 2.8 of the current guidelines. Leave flexischoolers out of it because they are on a school roll.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-----------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
35. Comments on Section 7: Safeguarding: the interface with home education<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;"> 7.2 "However, it must be acknowledged that a child being educated at home is not necessarily being seen on a regular basis by professionals such as teachers and this increases the chances that any parents who are using home education to avoid independent oversight may be more successful by doing so."<br /><br />This is pure conjecture which risks damaging the prospect of good relationships between local authorities and families. Please do not include it in the guidance.<br /><br />The rest of section 7 of the draft guidance then degenerates further into a system of nightmarish threats and menaces which have no place in guidance about home education.<br /><br />The mere mention of Care Orders in this guidance risks encouraging some overzealous officers to threaten and even issue them inappropriately, which could in itself cause significant harm to families. Also, it is by no means properly established that a suspicion of educational neglect on its own might breach the 'significant harm' threshold in the Children Act.<br /><br /> [OR just] Home educated children are at no higher risk of being abused so their families should not be unfairly targeted by Safeguarding measures in the way Section 7 does.<br /><br />[OR just] Section 7 of the draft guidance needs to be rewritten in line with part 2 of the current guidelines, with updates only where necessary.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
36. Comments on Section 8: Home-educated children with special educational needs (SEN)<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">The annual EHCP review should not be a general assessment of the whole education provision but only of the child's progress towards the outcomes specified in the plan.<br /><br />[OR just - ] The Special Educational Needs Code of Practice should be followed and normal home education regulations apply to home educated children with SEN.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
---------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
37. Comments on Section 9: What do the s.7 requirements mean?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;"> DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Re: Article 2 Protocol 1, ECHR:<br /><br /> [Explain that if our philosophy is home education, the State shall respect it. If our philosophy is unschooling or autonomous education, the State shall respect it. ] From 9.3 “There is no definition of an ‘efficient’ or ‘suitable’ education in English statute law”.<br /><br />[Explain that there is. It is that an education must be suited to the age, ability and aptitude of the child and see also the case law as referenced in 9.4. ]<br /><br /> 9.3. “ This means that the wishes of parents are relevant. However, it does not mean that parents are the sole arbiters of what constitutes a suitable education….A court will reach a view of suitability based on the particular circumstances of each child and the education provided.”<br /><br /> [Explain why you think your views are not only relevant but paramount, as you know your child better than the LA and the courts and are therefore able to provide an education that better suits a child’s age, ability and aptitude.]<br /><br /> [Explain that it is essential that LAs and courts do not abuse this power to rule out a form of suitable education and that their judgement must be exercised with proportionality and reasonableness in order that they pay due regard to Article 2 Protocol 1 ECHR and in order to preserve freedom of education in this country from the control of the state and the judiciary. ]<br /><br /> [Explain that home educators are discussing Judicial Reviews should procedures lack reasonableness and proportionality. ]<br /><br />“9.4 b. notwithstanding (a), the home education provision need not follow specific examples such as the National Curriculum, or the requirement in academy funding agreements for a ‘broad and balanced’ curriculum, nor the independent school standards prescribed by the Secretary of State [In regulations made under s.94 of the Education and Skills Act 2008 ]. Conversely, however, if the home education does successfully deliver one or more of those examples then that would constitute strong evidence that it was ‘suitable’ in terms of s.7;”<br /><br /> [Explain that b. is contradictory, misleading and will incite over-zealous officers to pursue School Attendance Orders inappropriately]<br /><br /> [Explain that in the view of most home educators, a suitable education is that which actually suits an individual child. “Suitable” should therefore not be defined in a generic way by the state, but by the family themselves who are able to tailor the education to genuinely suit the child. ]<br /><br />Further the list of what does not need to be included for an education to be suitable that is found at 3.13 in the current Elective Home Education Guidelines for local authorities should be included in any new guidance,<br /><br />ie: Home educating parents are not required to:<br /><br />teach the National Curriculum<br />provide a broad and balanced education<br />have a timetable<br />have premises equipped to any particular standard<br />set hours during which education will take place<br />have any specific qualifications<br />make detailed plans in advance<br />observe school hours, days or terms<br />give formal lessons<br />mark work done by their child<br />formally assess progress or set development objectives<br />reproduce school type peer group socialisation<br />match school-based, age-specific standards.<br /><br /> c. Sections 13 and 175 both talk about background, general duties. [Explain these sections do not confer extra powers on local authorities in respect of home education outside their normal duties. The guidance should be making this abundantly clear because as it is currently phrased, over-zealous officers will use this section as an excuse to be excessively rigorous. ]<br /><br /> “d. the first sentence of ECHR Article 2 of Protocol 1 quoted above confers the fundamental right to an effective education, and relevant case law (ref to German case law) confers very broad discretion on the state in regulating that law. “<br /><br /> German case law is not relevant here in UK’ as it derives from the Basic Law in Germany which had as a primary purpose, the need to prevent ‘parallel societies’, which do not create a dictator.<br /><br />The Basic law and the Constitution of Baden Wurttemberg position is very different to the legal position in England, given that they make school compulsory save for in exceptional circumstances.<br /><br />“d. a local authority may specify minimum requirements as to effectiveness in such matters as literacy and numeracy, in deciding whether education is suitable;”<br /><br /> [Explain that this is very poorly worded and may well mean that parents could not provide an education that is genuinely suited to the child since it allows for LAs to set an arbitrary level of state determined suitability that may have nothing whatsoever to do with whether the education is suited to the ability and aptitudes of the individual child.]<br /><br /> Also explain that giving LAs localised control of “suitability” would introduce a complete postcode lottery of state control.<br /><br />[OR just - ] The law trusts parents to comply with their Section 7 duty until it has information to make it appear that this might not be happening. This trust is important and must not be undermined without good reason.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
-------------------------<br />
<br />
38. Comments on Section 10: Further information<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Local authorities should not be encouraged to go beyond the law in trying to influence parents’ decisions because it confers unnecessary liability on them and can undermine the necessary trust between parents and children, and between parents and the local authority.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"> Flexi-schooled children are on the roll of a registered school and so should not be included in this guidance.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"> Attendance at unregistered settings is a matter for parents unless local authorities have safeguarding concerns or information that makes it appear that parents are not providing a suitable education, as set out in the current guidelines section 2.8 (which wording must be retained in any new guidance) or the law is being broken in some way.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[Add to the list of resources local authorities could provide if you want to.]</span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[OR just - ] Local authorities should trust parents unless they have good reason not to.</span><br />
<br />
<br />
--------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>DRAFT REVISED DfE GUIDANCE ON HOME EDUCATION: for PARENTS<br /><br />This section invites comments on different sections of the draft revised guidance document about the current framework for home education, which DfE proposes to publish for parents. Copies of the draft document can be downloaded from the Overview page.</b><br />
<br />
---------------------<br />
<br />
39. Comments on Section 1: What is elective home education (EHE)?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Introduction: Introduces mission creep. It is not the for the government to decide the nature of a suitable education for children. It introduces a new concept of “world class” to the definition of education. An education does not have to be “world class”. It has to be suited to the ability and aptitude of a child. Home education can also work well when it is not a positive choice.<br /><br />Section 1. Flexi-schooled children are on the roll of a registered school so should not be included in this guidance.<br /><br /> [Or just - ] Exclude/leave out flexi-schooling.</span><br />
<br />
-----------------<br />
<br />
40. Comments on Section 2: What is the legal position of parents who wish to home educate children?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">There is a general definition of suitability: A suitable education is that which is suited to the age, ability and aptitude of a child. Any other attempt at imposing a definition that rests outside the locus of the child will reduce the efficacy of that learning process as all children are different and have different learning needs.<br /><br />Local authorities should not use minimum expectations for things such as literacy and numeracy in assessing suitability. Reasonable expectations for this vary widely between different children. Age should not be the determining factor in this equation, aptitude coupled with ability being the key determinants in successful learning.<br /><br /> The list of what home educators need not demonstrate in order to be providing a suitable education at 2.11 should be included in the LA guidance as well. There should not be two different sets of guidance with differing standards applying.<br /><br />Social needs also vary widely between different children and should not be assessed by education officers.<br /><br /> Local authorities should only attempt to assess home education provision if they have information that makes it appear unsuitable (Current guidelines 2.8).<br /><br />The suggestions as to how home educators can most easily demonstrate the delivery of a suitable education at 2.12 reveals that the guidance is prejudicing LAs to introduce judgements about suitability that are not required in primary and case law. A broad curriculum and assessment of progress are not required in primary legislation and therefore this should not be allowed in guidance on interpretation of the law. It will prejudice LAs against certain kinds of home educators who realise that a suitable education for their children may involve early specialisation or avoidance of assessment of progress.</span><br />
<br />
-------------------<br />
<br />
41. Comments on Section 3: So what do I need to think about before deciding to educate my child at home?<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<span style="color: red;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;">The detailed curriculum does not need to be planned in advance. It can be adapted as the education progresses, according to the child’s changing needs.</span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
-------------------<br />
<br />
<br />
42. Comments on Section 4: If I choose to educate my child at home, what must I do before I start?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">If this guidance is to attempt to entice home educators to inform the local authority of their home educating in order to facilitate access to advice and support, the advice and support on offer should be useful enough to warrant this.</span><br />
<br />
----------------------------<br />
<br />
43. Comments on Section 5: What are the responsibilities of your local authority?<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">Parents should be advised that any information they supply to the local authority may be used to contribute to an appearance that the education is unsuitable under Section 437. </span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /> They should only be asked to provide detailed information about the provision if the local authority has information that makes it appear that the education is unsuitable. (Current guidelines for local authorities section 2.8)<br /><br /> Parents would be sensible to inquire about the information held on them by the local authority. A paragraph on how to make a Subject Access Request should be supplied.<br /><br /> Section 5 is far too threatening for guidance about an activity undertaken by parents to benefit their children.</span><br />
<br />
----------------------<br />
<br />
44. Comments on Section 6: Further information<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;"> Flexi-schooled children are on the roll of a registered school and so should not be included in this guidance.<br /><br /> All criticisms of the Guidance for Parents should also apply to the Guidance for Local Authorities as the two must be consistent. It is arguable that two sets of guidance should be needed at all.</span><br />
<br />
-------------------------<br />
<br />
45. Do you think that anything in the revised guidance documents could have a disproportionate impact, positive or negative, on those with 'relevant protected characteristics' (including disability, gender, race and religion or belief) - and if so, how?<br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">DO NOT COPY EXACTLY</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: blue;">[Explain how the guidance will impact on you and your children (protected characteristics include age as well as disability, gender, race, religion or belief) in a way that you feel will differ from others without these protected characteristics.]<br /><br /> [Explain that whether or not home education counts as a protected characteristic, your experience of being outside the norm has resulted in prejudice against you and your family. Have you been falsely reported to Social Services, for example?]<br /><br /> [It is arguable that certain forms of home education such as unschooling or autonomous education could come under a protected characteristic of “religion or belief”. Do you think that you will be discriminated against on the basis of unschooling or AE or any other form of HE? ]<br /><br /> [Explain how you see this discrimination will impact you and your family.]</span>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-47896031130732428662018-05-23T06:29:00.000+01:002018-05-23T07:18:37.939+01:00The Guardian on Flexischooling from 2009The <a href="https://amp.theguardian.com/education/2009/jun/23/home-schooling-early-years-education">Guardian</a> from 2009, but this is the current debate in home educating circles right now.Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-2052530645319407902018-05-21T15:42:00.000+01:002018-06-10T13:26:56.153+01:00EHE Guidelines for LAs 2007 and 2016, and CME Guidance EHELGA 2007 can be found <a href="http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/6890/3/7373-DCSF-Elective%20Home%20Education.pdf">here</a>.<br />
<br />
EHELGA 2013 can be found<a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288135/guidelines_for_las_on_elective_home_educationsecondrevisev2_0.pdf"> here.</a><br />
<br />
============<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">Section 436A Guidance: </a><br />
<br />
1. Children Missing <a href="http://edyourself.org/CME07.pdf">Education Guidance 2007</a> and <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080914032832/http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk//////////////////////resources/IG00202/">also here</a>.<br />
<br />
2. Children Missing<a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130405145312/https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/STATUTORY-LA-GUIDE"> Education 2009</a><br />
<br />
3. Children Missing <a href="http://edyourself.org/cme2015.pdf">Education Guidance 2013</a><br />
<br />
4. Children Missing <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/550416/Children_Missing_Education_-_statutory_guidance.pdf">Education Guidance 2016</a><br />
<br />
==========<br />
<br />
Brief summary of history of HEors exemption from s436A (CME)<br />
<br />
2007 CME (1), exempts home educators from 436A twice. (in s2 and in section dealing with home ed)<br />
<br />
2009 CME (2) exempts home educators in section on home education. <br />
<br />
2013 CME (3) removes exemption of home educators, and removes all discussion of how the duty is to be enacted regarding home educators. Instead this version links to <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288135/guidelines_for_las_on_elective_home_educationsecondrevisev2_0.pdf">EHE Guidelines 2013</a> which says (confusingly):<br />
<br />
<i>2.6 Local authorities have a statutory duty under section 436A of the Education Act 1996,
inserted by the Education and Inspections Act 2006, to make arrangements to enable them
to establish the identities, so far as it is possible to do so, of children in their area who are
not receiving a suitable education. The duty applies in relation to children of compulsory
school age who are not on a school roll, and who are not receiving a suitable education
otherwise than being at school (for example, at home, privately, or in alternative provision).
<span style="color: #cc0000;">The guidance issued makes it clear that the duty does not apply to children who are being
educated at home.</span></i><br />
<br />
==================<br />
<br />
<br />
2005 <a href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20080611163909/http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk///resources-and-practice/CM00024/">Letter to Directors</a> of Children's Services re CME<br />
<br />
A history of Children Missing Education Guidance <a href="http://edyourself.org/articles/cme.php">is here.</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div id="cme2007" style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, Tahoma, sans-serif; font-size: 13.6px;">
<h3 style="font-size: 1.25em; margin-bottom: 8px; margin-top: 8px; padding: 0px;">
</h3>
</div>
Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-33110514125353878032018-05-20T17:32:00.000+01:002018-06-13T06:00:00.228+01:00Does s436A Test for Suitability or Not? This, on top of <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/search/label/Pam%27s%20Problems">Pam's Problems</a> is the question that is taxing Home Educators right now.<br />
<br />
It is transparently obvious that if home educators are asked, under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A,</a> to prove that their educational provision is suitable, there would be a gross inequity under that section, since schooling parents would only have to prove that they are sending their child to school in order to satisfy <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">s436A</a> and the question of whether that schooling provision is actually suited to the ability and aptitude of the child can go hang. Forget the fact that the school might be in special measures and that the pupil spends his time either staring out the window or sitting outside the head's office. That education, because it happens in school, is apparently under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A</a> "suited to his age, ability and aptitude"!<br />
<br />
Given the way <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A</a> is actually worded, ie: that local authorities have a<br />
<br />
<i><span style="color: #20124d;">436A Duty to make arrangements to identify children <b>not receiving education
</b><br /><br />(1) A local education authority must make arrangements to enable them to establish (so far as it is possible to do so) the identities of children in their area who are of compulsory school age but—<br /><br />(a) are not registered pupils at a school, and
<br /><br />(b) are <b>not receiving suitable education </b>otherwise than at a school</span></i><br />
<br />
this on the face of it seems a literal, if completely unjust, interpretation of the section. Naturally Home Educators are pretty darn cross about this inequity and are kicking off about it big time.<br />
<br />
But that isn't the only problem with testing for suitability at <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A</a>, because the fact of the matter is that there is a test for suitability of educational provision for home educators at s<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">437 </a>as well.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #1d2129;">The question must be: how can you have two different places in the same Act <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/contents"> (The Education Act 1996) </a>which create two different routes by which a power of determination of suitability can be made, ie: one completely undefined process at <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A</a> and then another totally different, well defined system in section <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437</a> which involves checks and balances in the form of the courts? </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #1d2129;">The <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft LA Guidance</a> where LAs are encourged to use <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A </a>to test for suitability, page 14:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #073763;"><i>6.4 The department’s advice is that in all cases where it is not clear as to whether home
education is suitable (including situations where there is no information available at all),
the authority should attempt to resolve those doubts through informal contact and
enquiries. An authority’s s.436A duty (and that under s.437, see below) forms sufficient
basis for informal enquiries. Furthermore, s.436A creates a duty to adopt a system for
making such enquiries.</i></span><br /><br /><span style="color: #1d2129;">would make no sense were it not for the fact that<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4"> 436A </a>is being touted by the DfE as a way of avoiding t</span></span><span style="background-color: white;"><span style="color: #1d2129;">he right of appeal by parents to the courts through the normal judicial process since <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">s436A </a>gives no protection to parents against a decision by an unaccountable local authority, where</span> <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437 </a><span style="color: #1d2129;">actually does give such protection through the courts. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #1d2129;">For this, see paragraph 6.19 (p17) of the</span><a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf" style="color: #1d2129;"> Draft Guidance for LA</a><span style="color: #1d2129;">s: </span><br /><br /><i><span style="color: #20124d;">"6.19. The department is aware that some local authorities have been reluctant to
prosecute for non-compliance with a school attendance order, for reasons connected
with costs, and the behaviour of some parents who deliberately withhold information
about home education provision but are then able to easily satisfy the court that the
home education is suitable."</span></i><br /><span style="color: #1d2129;"><br />This is particularly important in this kind of case where a determination of unsuitability of educational provision by the parents could lead to a criminal prosecution. It fails the most basic test of natural justice where an LA is given powers of determination over suitability of educational provision with absolutely no immediate check or balance upon their powers. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: #1d2129;">That's of course putting aside all other worries parents have of the LA having far more resources than they do when it comes to going to the courts. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129;"><br /></span></span>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-17447684300447229912018-05-20T11:52:00.002+01:002018-06-12T17:25:58.811+01:00Problems for Pam (A Home Educating Parent)....or in other words, the issues that arise from the government's re-interpretation of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A</a> and other areas of mission creep that may be found in the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft EHE Guidance</a>, upon which the DfE is <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">consulting</a> at the moment.<br />
<br />
In a <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-problem-with-436a.html">previous post</a>, we discussed how mission creep in the interpretation of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A </a>makes it seem as if home educating families are to be inspected for the suitability of their educational provision under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A, </a>ie: whether or not there is any reason to think that there is a problem with their provision. <br />
<br />
But, why the fuss, you may ask? Given that home educators are often already inspected for their provision<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437"> under section 437</a>, why are they kicking off about something that happens anyway?<br />
<br />
Well for starters, the re-interpretation of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A </a>will give rise to situations such as the following:<br />
<br />
Pam's story:<br />
<br style="text-align: start;" />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<span style="text-align: start;"><span style="background-color: white;">Even though Pam and her family are known to their LA, (having de-registered the children from school and having represented other HEors at LA meetings), since Pam appears capable of providing a suitable education, she has never once been checked by the LA for the suitability of her educational provision. </span><br style="background-color: white;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #333333;" /><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333;">Now under the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance's strong interpretation</a> at para 6.4 (page 14) of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A,</a> where it states: <br /><br /><i>"An authority’s s.436A duty (and that under s.437, see below) forms sufficient
basis for informal enquiries. Furthermore, s.436A creates a duty to adopt a system for
making such enquiries."</i><br /><br />the LA will now take it that they have a duty to check Pam's educational provision for suitability and that Ofsted may be on their backs if they don't do this. </span><br /><br /> But that's not the end of it. Where Pam, up till now, only had to convince a Local Authority to a standard that would convince a reasonable person (ie: as if in the courts) that she is providing a suitable education and it would have been perfectly possible to do this in writing or on the most cursory of contact with the LA, now Pam must dance to the any old tune that the LA decides upon. Depending on which side of the bed the LA officer gets out of in the morning, and whether or not Ofsted is on his/her back, he/she might decide that "informal inquiries" must mean that they must inspect Pam's children every few weeks, and that they must be studying quantum physics 12 hours a day, given that Pam's children look as if they have the aptitude and ability for it and that this would therefore be a suitable education for them. <br /><br />You might think this all a bit unlikely, given that LAs have never previously insisted that anyone do quantum physics before breakfast simply on the basis that the young person has the ability to do it, but there are a number of reasons to be worried that LAs will suddenly start imposing more demands regarding suitability upon HEors, and this is quite apart from the</span><a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-problem-with-436a.html"> mission creep at 436A</a> and the example from other parts of the world of how things can so easily go downhill in this regard,<a href="http://www.cise.fr/cise/lassociat/blog/lettre-ouverte-madame-la-ministre-de-leducation-nationale-27-juin-2016"> eg: in France</a>, where a <a href="http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/amendements/3679/CSEGALITE/852.asp">re-writing of HE law</a> allows for all manner of <a href="https://hslda.org/content/hs/international/france/201607150.asp">capricious assessments of suitability </a>. Quite apart from all this, the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance </a> also prompts for LAs to impose a minimum standard for suitability of education which is completely new, eg:<br />
<span style="text-align: start;"><br /><i>"a local authority
may specify minimum requirements as to effectiveness in such matters as literacy
and numeracy, in deciding whether education is suitable;"</i><br /><br />Who knows what those minimum standards may be. Many unschooled young people don't learn to read until much later than the average schooled child and yet go on to do exceptionally well in public exams, quite a few of them scoring 100% in their English coursework, for example. But all this could go out the window if the LA decide that the minimum requirement is that everyone is reading "War and Peace" aged 10 just because they have the ability to do it.<br /><br />There is also the fact that under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A,</a> there are no checks and balances upon an LA in terms of deciding upon the nature of a suitable education, where under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437</a>, there is such a check and balance, since if LAs wish to pursue a parent to show that they are failing in their <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7">s7 duties </a> under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437, </a>an LA must follow the procedure of issuing a School Attendance Order which then, if challenged by the family, would involve the check and balance of a court procedure. Under<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4"> 436A however,</a> an LA can set their own terms pretty freely, and for example, repeatedly check up upon, chivy, harass and generally brow-beat Pam into doing whatever the LA says, without even bothering to resort to using<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437"> 437</a>. Pam therefore ends up either teaching her children quantum physics before breakfast or sending them back to school in order to get the LA off her back.<br /><br />There is also the fact that parental determinations of educational suitability are breezily dismissed in the<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf"> draft guidance </a></span>under <a href="https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/human-rights/what-are-human-rights/human-rights-act/article-2-first-protocol-right-education">Article 2 Protocol 1 of ECHR</a>. Article 2, Protocol 1 states that:<br />
<span style="text-align: start;"><br /><i>"No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."</i><br /><br />but the<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf"> draft guidance says</a> (page 25):<br /><br /><i>"d. the first sentence of ECHR Article 2 of Protocol 1 quoted above confers the fundamental right to an effective education, and relevant case law (16) confers very broad discretion on the state in regulating that law. For example, a local authority may specify minimum requirements as to effectiveness in such matters as literacy and numeracy, in deciding whether education is suitable. </i><br /><br /> The (16) in the above paragraph <a href="https://hslda.org/content/hs/international/Germany/KONRAD_Decision.pdf">refers to a family in Germany </a> who were not allowed to HE according to their religious convictions. From this, we must infer that the DfE is encouraging LAs believe they have similar latitude with regard to how they define suitability of educational provision, even though the legal framework that supported the German ruling is completely different to the one in the UK. This, in itself, should be sufficient reason to respond to the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">consultation. </a><br /><br />The <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance</a> also explicitly gives LAs a lot of latitude with deciding how to define suitability which when you consider the powers LAs now have as a result of the<a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted"> Localism Act 2011</a> could mean that LAs could specify almost anything they like by way of minimum requirements of an education.<br /><br />From the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/5959/1896534.pdf">guidance on the Localism Act: </a>(page 7):<br /><br /><i>"Local authorities’ powers and responsibilities are defined by legislation. In
simple terms, they can only do what the law says they can. Sometimes
councils are wary of doing something new - even if they think it might be a
good idea - because they are not sure whether they are allowed to in law, and
are concerned about the possibility of being challenged in the courts.
The Government has turned this assumption upside down. <b>Instead of being
able to act only where the law says they can, local authorities will be freed to
do anything - provided they do not break other laws." </b></i><br /><br />Read that together with the following:<br /><i><br />"9.5 The department (the DfE) does not, however, believe that it is in the interests of home educated children, parents or local authorities for there to be detailed centralised guidance on what constitutes suitability. This issue should be viewed on a spectrum, and although there will be clear conclusions to be drawn at either end of that spectrum, in between each case must rest on a balance of relevant factors depending on the circumstances of each child." </i></span><br />
<div>
<span style="text-align: start;"><i><br /></i></span></div>
and whilst it would be possible to read this as actually a deep respect for the spirit of<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7"> s7, </a>ie: that an education must be suited to the age, ability and aptitude of a child, there could nonetheless be a real and deep differences of opinion between LA and an HEing family here, given that no-one can ever be sure whether an education is genuinely suited to a person's ability and aptitude, (forget the issue of age, as the qualities of ability and aptitude subsume that consideration when it comes to determining suitability). There is even a problem in the tension between "ability" and "aptitude" since these are not the same things and depending on which one you chose to use as an assessment tool, may result in a differences in the type of education that is deemed suitable. So for example, whilst Pam's children clearly have the ability to understand quantum physics, they may have next to no interest (a component of aptitude) for doing it. The LA may insist Pam educate her children according to their clear ability, whereas Pam may prefer to offer an education suited to their aptitude!<br />
<span style="text-align: start;"><br />Under the new draft guidance, Pam may well not be able to insist upon her version of suitability until far further down the line, at 437, when she may have already been routinely harassed and bullied by her LA.<br /><br /> All in all, after reading the small print, and giving it due thought, it becomes increasingly obvious why home educators should reply to the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">Call for Evidence</a> with strong arguments as to how this is <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/the-big-problem-in-draft-ehe-guidance.html">constitutionally disastrous</a>. The proposals are deeply undemocratic, dangerous and have the potential to lead to the de facto piecemeal end of home education in this country. <br /><br />This is, of course, putting aside all arguments about practicality. None of the proposals will actually work to help children who really ARE in need. It will cost LAs a huge amount of money to pursue a lot of difficult but otherwise successfully home educating HEors who don't want to be pursued, money which would be far better spent on Social Work departments who cannot cope with their current workload, all the while loading these departments with a load of false positives which which will result from a reinterpretation of 436A.<br /><br />Current interpretation of law could suffice and were applied in a reasonable and proportionate manner. Let's help the DfE understand this point in our <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">Call for Evidence responses. </a><br /><br />For a helpful summary of the implications of a the draft guidance's interpretation of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">436A </a>v. the use of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437</a> , coupled with the <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/20/contents/enacted">Localism Act</a> and an ambiguous discussion of the nature of a suitable education (page 24 in t<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">he draft guidance</a>) and parental rights, please see this table:</span><br />
<br />
<span style="text-align: start;"><br /></span>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<span style="text-align: start;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SW13ouVl7iA/Wx9pg_MGZHI/AAAAAAAATw8/mz1f-18Ucb8Qf7Mxck8WW6vvmTtMskxFQCLcBGAs/s1600/Screenshot%2B2018-06-12%2Bat%2B7.33.03%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="643" data-original-width="435" height="640" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-SW13ouVl7iA/Wx9pg_MGZHI/AAAAAAAATw8/mz1f-18Ucb8Qf7Mxck8WW6vvmTtMskxFQCLcBGAs/s640/Screenshot%2B2018-06-12%2Bat%2B7.33.03%2BAM.png" width="432" /></a></span></div>
<span style="text-align: start;"><br /></span>
<br />
<br style="color: #333333;" />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #333333;"><span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></span></span>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-60246218548312674912018-05-17T07:52:00.000+01:002018-06-13T06:36:27.543+01:00Mission Creep at 436AThe problem with the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">s436A </a>is that it can be interpreted in a number of different ways. We suspect this is no accident since it has allowed the DfE to mastermind mission creep that introduces deep inequity under the law. Let's look at the various interpretations of 436A again:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #20124d;"><span style="color: black;"><a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">s436A</a> in the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (inserted in to the Education Act 1996):</span><br /><br /><i>Duty to make arrangements to identify children not receiving education
<br /><br />(1) A local education authority must make arrangements to enable them to establish (so far as it is possible to do so) the identities of children in their area who are of compulsory school age but —
<br /><br />(a) are not registered pupils at a school, <br /><br />and
(b) are not receiving suitable education otherwise than at a school.
</i></span><br />
<span style="color: #20124d;"><i><br /></i></span>
<span style="color: #20124d;"><i><br /></i></span>
-------------------<br />
<br />
Right, so what we need to know is how is <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">s436A</a> actually applied? <br />
<br />
<b>Scenario 1.</b> The local authority makes arrangements to try to find out where Child A is. They check the school registers they hold for every school. Child A is either on these or not. If Child A isn't apparently on any school register in the area, the LA makes enquiries with the parent of Child A to find out where their child is being educated. If the parent replies "Child A is home educated", the LA has fulfilled its duty at 436A.<br />
<br />
This is pretty much the situation that applied under <a href="http://edyourself.org/CME07.pdf">previous 436A Guidance in 2007</a>:<br />
<br />
<i>"1.2.6. The duty does not apply to children who are being educated at home. Monitoring arrangements already exist for children being educated at home. Parents have a duty to ensure that their children receive a suitable full-time education either by regular attendance at school or otherwise (under section 7 of the Education Act 1996) and they may choose, as is their right, to provide this by educating their children at home."</i><br />
<br />
which, although this has disappeared from subsequent 436A guidance, is still referenced in the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288135/guidelines_for_las_on_elective_home_educationsecondrevisev2_0.pdf">Home Education Guidance for LAs</a> that is currently in use:<br />
<br />
<i>"2.6 Local authorities have a statutory duty under section 436A of the Education Act 1996,
inserted by the Education and Inspections Act 2006, to make arrangements to enable them
to establish the identities, so far as it is possible to do so, of children in their area who are
not receiving a suitable education. The duty applies in relation to children of compulsory
school age who are not on a school roll, and who are not receiving a suitable education
otherwise than being at school (for example, at home, privately, or in alternative provision).
The guidance issued makes it clear that the duty does not apply to children who are being
educated at home."</i><br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Scenario 2</b><br />
However, this all looks set to change, as the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft EHE Guidance for LAs</a> that is currently up for consultation makes no reference to the non-applicability of 436A to home educated children.<br />
<br />
But how could that be? Given that schooled children are exempted from further investigation under 436A once it transpires that they are on a school register, how can this also not be applied to home educated children once it transpires that they are home educated, given that they too are in receipt of an education? <br />
<br />
It seems it all comes down to a single word in part b) of 436A and that word is "suitable". In other words, according to 436A, whilst those within the school system need only be provided with an education, those outside it must be provided with a "suitable" education, which presumably means that home educated children must be subjected to a higher standard of test than schooling children.<br />
<br />
The craftily ambiguous writing of the section gives scope for the government to interpret 436A in two vastly different ways, one interpretation resulting in equitable treatment of schooling and home educating families, and the other applying a far higher standard to home educators than to schooling families, since only home educating families will be required to prove that their educational provision is suitable. This seems deeply iniquitous given that the reality is that the educational provision in schools is for many children highly unsuitable. By some twisted logic, it seems that simply by virtue of the fact that a child attends school, schooling parents are exempted from their duty at<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7"> s7 </a>to provide a suitable education.<br />
<br />
For the full implications of this version of 436A and how it differs from the current situation, please see this post about <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/problems-for-pam-home-educating-parent.html">Pam's Problems.</a><br />
<br />
<br />
Mission Creep.<br />
<br />
So how did the home educating community, given that they are a bunch of rambuctious free thinkers who normally make it their business to be on top of the legal situation and to kick off at the slightest hint of problem, how has it come about that they let the government get away with this shift? Well, it all happened so slowly, so cleverly! <br />
<br />
First we had the introduction of s436A back in 2006 in the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">Education and Inspections Act. </a> There was a lot of pure outrage at that point, but we allowed ourselves to be mollified by the reassurance from government in the<a href="http://edyourself.org/CME07.pdf"> 2007 guidance at s1.2.6</a> whereby they stated that the duty did not apply to home educated children. That was a sap. We shouldn't have let ourselves be gulled by it. When the reassurance that 436A did not apply to HE children disappeared from subsequent 436A guidance, we let ourselves be comforted by the fact that reference to the now missing bit of guidance in the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288135/guidelines_for_las_on_elective_home_educationsecondrevisev2_0.pdf">EHE guidance</a> but now it is being written out of the new <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">EHE guidance</a> which is currently up for consultation. Home educators are finally waking up to the enormity of the problem. It is like suddenly spotting that that mole that you have barely noticed before has turned into a cancerous tumour that could be your undoing, as it had quietly mutated when you weren't looking. <br /><br />And it isn't just 436A, there is other stuff quietly mutating too: other areas of mission creep in the draft guidance, particularly around the nature of suitability of educational provision, that could be used against home educators to completely change the nature of home education in this country. Please see <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/problems-for-pam-home-educating-parent.html">this post </a>for a discussion of mission creep on the issue of suitability and there's more on the <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/does-s436a-test-for-suitability-or-not.html">subject of 436A here</a>.<br /><br />By way of some consolation, at least home educators are now fully alert to the way mission creep works. We understand that government introduces changes by burying of the bad news whenever they can, doing it bit by bit, and offering false consolation along the way so that there is a temptation to be mollified whilst the danger grows or else we simply become exhausted through the sheer relentlessness of it, the on-going gradual erosion of freedom in education. Very clever. But we WON'T LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN. Lessons have been learned and lines will be drawn.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-91426144562972954302018-05-13T10:56:00.000+01:002018-05-22T08:07:09.725+01:00The Big Problems in the Draft EHE Guidance: Registration and Monitoring by the Back Door and its Constitutional Significance.Right now, unbeknownst to most of us, the future of education in England is in jeopardy. By rights, we should all be worried, yet only a few people are aware of this threat, which isn't altogether surprising given that this menace only becomes manifest after one's wrapped one's brain round a complex interplay of various tiny bits of education law as interpreted in an obscure bit of <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft guidance</a> that only appears to affect a tiny minority of educators.<br />
<br />
But it does matter. It matters because if we don't get this right, the local education officer rather than the family will, on account of <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">a potentially strong interpretation</a> of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">s436A Education Act 1996 </a>(inserted from 2006 Education and Inspections Act) ie: the duty to find children missing a suitable education, be given the duty, via data trawls, chats to neighbours, relatives etc to find AND to assess the suitability of educational provision of every child in the land and will therefore be the one who in effect decides the limits of a suitable education.<br />
<br />
I argued <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Children%20Missing%20Education">before</a> that this needn't be a problem. What does it matter if a local authority officer rules out a particular form of education when there are so many other variants from which to choose? Well, after thinking about it in the cold light of directly being threatened with such a situation, I've changed my mind. It actually does matter. It matters A LOT. It matters precisely because the LA officer may rule out the only form of education that actually does fulfil the parent's duty to cause a child to receive a suitable education, as required of parents in <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7">Section 7 of the Education Act 1996</a>.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7">Section 7</a> requires a parent to make sure that their educational provision is suited to the ability and aptitude of the child. The provision of a suitable education that is genuinely suited to a child's ability and aptitude requires really knowing and understanding the abilities and aptitudes of that particular child. And here's the thing - drum roll, big news: it is parents who actually really know their children. The local authority officer, on the other hand, only sees a child at the very most three times a year and he never gets to see those moments when mum and dad had to drag a screaming, school phobic child out from under the bed, and force them out the house, bloodied hands grasping at the door frame. He doesn't get to see what happens when a parent tried to force an emotionally shattered child to do their maths homework. He also doesn't get to see how well the child learns when pottering in the garden, when speaking with their friends or when searching for YouTube videos that answer the particular question the child has of a moment, yet the parent can see all of this.<br />
<br />
Understanding what sort of educational provision would genuinely suit a child may therefore be far harder for an LA officer to understand than for family. They simply don't have the background information on which to base this assessment.<br />
<br />
It may be made even harder for LA officers because they come armed with a bundle of preconceptions about what they should be looking for in terms of educational provision. The words at the top of <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">the relevant bit of guidance </a> which stipulate that the government want:<br />
<br />
<i>"to ensure all young people receive world-class education which allows them to realise their full potential, regardless of background, in a safe environment"</i><br />
<br />
will be ringing in their ears. From the same <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">Guidance at section 9,</a> they will also be remembering:<br />
<br />
<i>"... home education provision need not follow specific examples such as the National Curriculum, or the requirement in academy funding agreements for a ‘broad and balanced’ curriculum, nor the independent school standards prescribed by the Secretary of State. Conversely, however, if the home education does successfully deliver one or more of those examples then that would constitute strong evidence that it was ‘suitable’ in terms of s.7".</i><br />
<br />
From this and from the fact that they may well be schoolteachers themselves and therefore thoroughly entrenched in the schooling paradigm, they may conclude that we should forget pottering about in the garden, every child needs to be pushed, pushed, pushed to the absolute maximum of their potential. Forget about aptitude - prioritise ability. If the child seems bright, ignore the fact that they have zero interest in the subject, (a constituent of aptitude), and sit them down with their Kumon maths until they've mastered the outer reaches of algebraic topology. So what if this means discounting the legislative requirement to also attend to the aptitude of the child, since after all, if you do that, you would ignore the capacity that clearly exists in their native smarts.<br />
<br />
And yet home educators of long experience <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7EGbhRj97C4TS1SU0lhRm1NTXRyTF9YOEQyMkFpVzU3S0Vv/view">know that a lot of pottering really CAN be one of the most successful forms of education around</a>, and this because it facilitates the key relationship between ability and aptitude, ie: that ability is circumscribed by aptitude.<br />
<br />
Aptitude is the gatekeeper to ability and the child is the master of aptitude. Key components of aptitude are interest and motivation and a child knows what he is genuinely interested in learning. When he is interested in something and has a capacity to satisfy that interest, he will be learning and learning well. Motivation is key to effective learning and thereby to mastery and purpose as Daniel Pink has <a href="https://www.thersa.org/discover/videos/rsa-animate/2010/04/rsa-animate---drive">long been arguing</a>.<br />
<br />
At 6 mins 35 into that animation, Pink says:<br />
<br />
<i>"You probably want to do something interesting. Let me get outta your way."</i><br />
<br />
and this is precisely what a lot of experienced home educators have done and <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7EGbhRj97C4TS1SU0lhRm1NTXRyTF9YOEQyMkFpVzU3S0Vv/view">they have seen it work!</a> These young people, now grown up and thriving, weren't forced to perform to their obvious abilities in the standard schooling sense. They often spent a lot of time trampolining, seeing their friends, talking with family, playing computer games, dancing, rock climbing, caring for animals, playing guitars, drums, flutes, cellos, and reading and drawing a lot, yet they all ended up doing whatever they wanted to do in life, often displaying a lot of creativity in achieving these ends. A lot of the time, their parents took a step back and let the natural curiosity of the young person direct the educational provision that was offered.<br />
<br />
Given that it tallies aptitude with ability, facilitating the pursuit of interests and thereby learning now to learn really does look like the most suitable education around and yet it looks so vastly different to the normal schooling paradigm that it could easily lead to an accusation of educational neglect, but it really isn't and young people <a href="http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.249812">have a lot to teach us </a>in this department.<br />
<br />
Yet all this could so easily be whisked away on the whim of an LA officer with preconceptions of what an education should look like, thereby removing a family's agency when it comes to determining the nature of a suitable education.<br />
<br />
Even if parents provide an education that is nominally within state determined parameters, the responsibility of parents to decide upon the form and content of education would have been removed from them and this applies to every parent in the land. Every parent in the land now no longer has the duty to determine the nature of suitable education. They are merely minions of the state in that they must provide a state approved form of education.<br />
<br />
This is hugely significant not only in that it may deprive home educators of a form of education that is actually genuinely suited to their child, but for loads of other reasons too.<br />
<br />
There are constitutional reasons why this is a terrible move. OK, the government seems relatively benign now, but families not having a clear right to determine the nature of a suitable education deeply inscribed in the bedrock of our democracy as should be the case according to the spirit of <a href="https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_2_Protocol_1_ENG.pdf">Article 2 Protocol 1 of the ECHR</a>:<br />
<br />
<i>“No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions” </i><br />
<br />
leaves us open to state indoctrination in a way that should not be countenanced in a mature democracy.<br />
<br />
Then there is the problem of who is held to account for a failure to provide a suitable education. Should the parent provide a state-mandated education, and yet this fails the child, the child should rightfully no longer feel aggrieved at his parent, since the ultimate responsibility for this determination no longer rests with the parent. Indeed, it may have been that the genuinely suitable education was not available to the parent to provide, given that the state would have prevented him from providing it. The state must therefore rightfully take the blame, and should expect to be held liable for educational failure of all sorts.<br />
<br />
The other situation of still holding the parent accountable seems unconscionably unjust. Most bits of satisfactory law hold people to account only when they reliably have agency in the matter, yet in this situation, parents would have no reliable agency at all. Not only are they unable to able to freely determine the nature of a suitable education on account of having this determination removed from them by the state, but they are also incapable of reliably making a child learn, since they, along with everyone else on the planet, cannot open up the head of a child and pour knowledge into it as one would water in to a bucket. The child has the agency here - they must initiate the learning process and no-one else can do this for them. The parent therefore would be in a position of double jeopardy, and in lieu of the child being held responsible for a failure of education, the argument that the state be held responsible since at least they could influence one side of this situation becomes even more transparent.<br />
<br />
There are other problems with enacting <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/section/4">Children Missing Education </a>more aggressively. Some of these are explained <a href="https://daretoknowblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/ian-dowty-on-lancashire-las-ehe-policy.html">here</a> and can be broadly summarised as causing a problem with how LAs would enact another bit of legislation, ie: <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437 </a>. If they have already aggressively checked a family for a suitable education as allowed for in <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">Draft Guidance</a>, how can an LA then go about using the measured processes suggested in <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/437">s437</a>? These measured processes are vital in that they have preserved educational freedoms in this country for so long. They assume that the state has no business making a judgement on the suitability of education until way down the line when it is clear that the parent is not observing their duty in this regard.<br />
<br />
But that isn't the end of it - there are yet more problems with an aggressive broad spectrum state check of educational suitability.<br />
<br />
There's the problem that if you do data trawls as is suggested in the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">Draft Guidance, (page 9),</a> genuinely abusive, neglectful or otherwise troubled families, knowing about data sharing, will not use services at all, thereby rendering those children even more vulnerable. Better to have one statutory service provider knowing and helping and respecting client confidentiality than a whole team of people out there who know nothing of the family at all.<br />
<br />
And yet further: in assuming that an aggressive check for suitability under CME applies to all children, LAs will therefore have immediate right to check the safeguarding situation with regard to the families of everyone in the country, since <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2002/32/section/175">s175 of the Education Act 2002</a> says this:<br />
<br />
<i>"A local education authority shall make arrangements for ensuring that the functions conferred on them in their capacity as a local education authority are exercised with a view to safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children."</i><br />
Further, since the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">Guidance </a>makes it clear that educational neglect could constitute "significant harm" (page 18), of the threshold that could initiate action under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1989/41/section/47">s47 of the Children Act 1989,</a><br />
<br />
<i>7.6 A failure to provide suitable education is capable of satisfying the threshold requirement contained in s.31 of the Children Act 1989 that the child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm.</i><br />
<br />
it seems that the duty to find children missing a suitable education must therefore become a safeguarding duty which involves a massive surveillance of the home educating population.<br />
<br />
Whilst everyone must surely wish for every child in the country to be safe, this initiative is entirely disproportionate as well as wasteful in terms of trying to solve the problem of abuse and must surely represent evidence of mission creep and encroachment upon privacy of families who have done absolutely wrong. Their right to a private life under <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/7">Article 8 of the HCR</a> can go hang.<br />
<br />
We have to get balance in this. We cannot give the state carte blanche to walk in to our houses and inspect our intimate lives (for home education is completely enmeshed in private family life) on the off chance that we might be abusing our children one way or the other. There has to be a balance here for want of losing all rights and effectively living in a police state.<br />
<br />
What's more, the country doesn't have the money to waste like this. Social work departments <a href="https://www.inyourarea.co.uk/news/under-pressure-social-workers-dealing-with-more-children-in-reading/">are creaking under </a>the strain, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/may/13/teacher-burnout-shortages-recruitment-problems-budget-cuts">schools are </a>cracking up, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/03/andrew-lansley-bowel-cancer-nhs-money-screening">NHS is chronically underfunded</a>. Statutory services can't cope with the at risk children they do know about. We don't have the money to be chasing law abiding citizens around. Spend it where it is really needed.<br />
<br />
The way to solve this problem is obvious: use CME as it has been used until recently and as it was <a href="http://sometimesitspeaceful.blogspot.co.uk/2018/05/sections-436a-and-437.html">originally intended</a>. Assume that when someone says that they are home educating, they are doing so unless there is good reason to believe that this is not so. This should be clearly stated in guidance and not left up to the LAs to invent stuff as they go along, <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">see page 12 of the Draft Guidance</a> as this could lead to all manner of abuses of power, what with LAs having access to legal resources and parents often having next to none.Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-74283691149752816662018-04-28T14:03:00.000+01:002018-04-29T13:33:24.172+01:00First Impressions of the Committee Stage of Lord Soley's Bill. 27th April 2018<br />
Lord Soley's Home Education (Duty of Local Authorities) Bill went through Committee Stage in the House of Lords yesterday. The proceedings as they are recorded in Hansard are <a href="https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2018-04-27/debates/2FD5CFFD-B071-413A-B319-251C64ECB2E4/HomeEducation(DutyOfLocalAuthorities)Bill(HL)">here</a>. They may also be viewed on Parliamentary TV <a href="https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/0f79939c-017c-4fab-a3ec-0ac9296742c5?in=10:05:00&out=12:58:00">here:</a><br />
<br />
It's a complicated business working out who said what in relation to which bit. It seems you to have to read the <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2017-2019/0011/lbill_2017-20190011_en_1.htm">Bill </a>as it was originally introduced alongside the <a href="https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2017-2019/0011/18011-I(Rev).pdf">list of amendments</a> and then need to remember which amendments were passed, but in the end, it is likely to be academic as Lord Agnew, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the DfE had this to say (key messages in <b>bold)</b>:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">"We are interested in it [the Bill] and welcome the debate it has engendered in this House and elsewhere, <b>but the position remains that the Government are not formally supporting it. </b>I made a commitment to consult on drafts of revised departmental guidance, and that consultation started on 10 April. In answer to the noble Lord, Lord Watson, the guidance looks at specific issues such as the role of safeguarding by local authorities and whether that extends to this area.
<br /><br />T<b>he consultation is open until 2 July and we hope for responses from a wide spectrum of families, local authorities and others. This will give us a much firmer basis for considering whether any changes are needed. In the meantime, I shall listen to today’s proceedings with interest and note the point</b></span><b><span style="color: #660000;">. It is of course open to the noble Lord, Lord Soley, not to progress his Bill further until the Government’s consultation has concluded."</span></b><br />
<br />
<br />
The following are some of the key messages that we imagine that Lord Agnew will have heard:<br />
<br />
<b>On exclusions and off-rolling:</b><br />
<br />
From Lord Lucas:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">There seems to be evidence that some schools are making it a practice to tip children into home education.
That is not, in itself, a wrong thing. In the circumstances of an individual child, family and school, home education may be the best alternative. Some children who have been suffering in school will flourish in home education. You just do not know, without going into the details, whether this is malpractice or good practice. In too many places in this country, the alternative to home education is exclusion, and the pathway from exclusion is into desolation. We ought to provide, but do not, a strong system of alternative education for children who are persistently excluded.</span><br />
<br />
Lord Adonis replied:<br />
<span style="color: #660000;"><br /></span><span style="color: #660000;"><span style="color: #660000;">
Does the noble Lord think that, rather than parents being obliged to home educate their children because of the danger of exclusion, a better solution would be to be much more restrictive about exclusions in the first place and not to allow them except in extremis? In that way, we would not have this huge extension of home education that is taking place at the moment, which is a covert form of excluding pupils from school.<br />
<br />
</span></span><br />
Lord Adonis clearly sees the need to take action on the above and proposed meetings with Lords and Academies in order to try to sort the issue of exclusion by making it less easy to do.<br />
<span style="color: #660000;"><br style="color: black;" /><span style="color: black;">*************</span></span><br />
<br />
<b>On Suitability of Educational Provision:</b><br />
<br />
Lord Adonis recognised the difficulty of being prescriptive about the suitability of educational provison: <br />
<br />
He said:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;"><span style="color: #660000;">"it is quite difficult for the state to start making judgments about the philosophical preferences of parents when it comes to home education. The point I seek to make to the Committee is that while there are some forms of home education of which I personally strongly disapprove, I do not believe that is the big social issue facing the country. The major issue is home education that means no education, not home education that means better education. It is about getting at the fundamental problem of home education that means no education and throwing children on to the scrapheap that we have to deal with."</span></span><br />
<br />
Lord Lucas explains why assessment is such a problem:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">"There is not any sensible way to assess this in a light-touch way by some sort of standard assessment. Assessments are designed to evaluate what is happening in school, where there are a lot of children and statistics are in your favour; the oddities even out and you get some sort of pattern emerging that tells you how the school is doing as a whole. Even then, there are problems, as we have with Progress 8 at the moment, where the system means that the outliers have far too much influence on the average. If you draw Progress 8 out as a bell graph, however, you can see where the weight of a school is and can make a reasonable judgment on the quality of education being provided there. You cannot do that when looking at an individual child, not simply and not just by putting them through a SATs test. You need far more information. If a parent gets to a point where they are arguing with a local authority about a school attendance order and getting the independent advice needed to establish where their child is and what they have achieved, that could cost a couple of thousand quid. This is an immense resource to apply just to check where a child is. It is entirely pointless and destructive to emphasise assessment carried out by those sorts of means. "</span><br />
<br />
Lord Addington also stressed the problems of anyone assessing for ability and aptitude, particularly in relation to special needs.<br />
<br />
Lord Lucas said that the "supervised instruction" should not be included in the Bill because it is not how many HE children learn.<br />
<br />
<br />
****************<br />
<br />
<b>On how funding could be managed:</b><br />
<br />
Lord Lucas:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">"I urge the Government to consider the idea that a budget should be given to local authorities to provide educational assistance to home-educated children. The Government are saving so much by these children coming out of school: £5,000 per year per child. The Government should not pocket the whole of that. There is no reason to. The Government should recognise that they have a continuing duty actively to support these children.
</span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">Having that fund and local authorities having that duty would produce a supportive attitude and a real reason for parents to engage with the local authority. It means that, rather than being hidden from sight, the vast majority of these children will be seen because they will be engaging in an activity sponsored by the local authority. They will be seen by independent professionals in doing that. There will be very good visibility and the whole problem of how we know that these children are being properly educated becomes easy to solve. It is solved as a side effect of educating them. That surely must be the best way to approach this.
Supportive means actively supporting their education, not just directing what it should be. </span><br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">There is a wide range of good practice out there that we could borrow from and, with good funding, produce something that results in a very large proportion of home-educating parents actively wishing to register. Most of them are not state phobic. Most of them just think the state has done a very bad job for them, and they do not trust some of the individuals involved. If we get to a position where the state is providing a range of helpful services, and there is a decent budget behind that, we would solve most of the problems covered in the Bill."</span><br />
<br />
Baroness Morgan did her best to put the kibosh on that idea however.<br />
<br />
***************<br />
<br />
<b>On an HE Register:</b> <br />
<br />
Most Lords think the idea of a register a good one though Lucas recognises that:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;"><span style="color: #660000;">"We should not just pick on home education—or, rather, those parents who choose to declare themselves at home educators—because the people who will register are probably not the ones who are causing us trouble. The ones who might cause us trouble are the ones who are not registered, or the ones that schools have chosen to abandon and their parents are really not capable of picking up. I do not think registration just for home education answers the case. I hope the Minister, in all that he is thinking through, when he comes to registration will look at the wider question of how local authorities are supposed to have proper information on which children they are supposed to be paying attention to."</span></span><br />
<br /><br />UPDATE: On the matter of registration, just <a href="https://goo.gl/JgHHGH">before 11.45</a> in the Committee Stage of his Bill, Lord Soley said:<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #660000;">"I am of the view that it would be better if we had a system where, when a child becomes of school age, they have to be registered at a school of some type.... It is a matter for thought and discussion in government as to whether we consider that further down the line. <b>It is part of the discussion with government."</b></span><br />
<br />
Given that Lord Soley claims this is part of a discussion with government, it seems worth the effort to try to work out what he actually means here. What would registering every school age child at school actually involve?<br />
<br />
Would every family have to register themselves and if so, how would this be policed to make sure everyone had done it?<br />
<br />
Given the difficulty of policing a parental registration scheme, the plan to register all children must presumably therefore involve local authorities finding the location of every child in the land in a massive data sharing exercise, presumably cross referencing health and benefits records, and the LA then placing each child on a register of a school.<br />
<br />
However this way of going about things would almost inevitably result in a muddle of epic proportions as all those parents who didn't want their child registered at their local primary for one reason or another would have to deregister in a flurry.<br />
<br />
However it was implemented, such a scheme would result in schooling being the norm, and, assuming that home education remained a legal option, would make home education the anomaly. This, on the face of it, would subvert the essence of parental responsibilities encapsulated in<a href="https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/56/section/7"> s7 Education Act 1996</a> and make the state the de facto parent, since the state would be determining where a child will be educated without the input of the family. The spirit of the state taking over parental responsibilities would continue apace.<br />
<span style="color: #660000;"><br /><span style="color: #660000;">***********</span><br /><span style="color: #660000;"><b></b></span></span><br />
<br />
<b>On Radicalisation and Illegal Schools:</b><br />
<br />
There was a general consensus that the Bill could not cope with dealing with these matters but that they did need to be dealt with by government.<br />
<br />
***********Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-78101170719313682102018-04-19T19:13:00.000+01:002018-04-21T12:27:37.515+01:00What's wrong with the Draft Home Education Guidance for Local Authorities? Part 1Hmm. Where to start!<br />
<br />
There's a <b>lot</b> that could be said about the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">Draft HE Guidance for LAs </a> upon which the government are <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/">currently consulting</a> (finishing on July 2nd 2018). Home educators are hurrying to get it together to say it all, and it is a big task because the consultation is not only about the Draft Guidance for LAs, but is also about another Guidance, <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20parents.pdf">this one for parents,</a> and not only that, but there is also a<a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationcall%20for%20evidence%20%20consultation.pdf"> call for evidence </a>on other questions which would involve the introduction of a whole new swathe of legislation.<br />
<br />
And this consultation isn't the end of it! We <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/integrated-communities-strategy-green-paper">have </a>at least <a href="https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/education-committee/inquiries/parliament-2017/special-educational-needs-and-disability-inquiry-17-19/">four</a>, yes <a href="https://www.policyforum.labour.org.uk/consultation2018">get</a> that <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-absence-and-exclusions-team/exclusions-review-call-for-evidence/">FOUR</a> other consultations which also relate to many of the issues raised in the Home Education Consultation and which would be usefully completed by home educators as well as disgruntled schooling families.<br />
<br />
Home educators could feel justifiably aggrieved about the monumental amount of work they have to do in order to preserve their way of life and that's before they have even sat down to speak to their children of a morning! If one were of a cynical persuasion, one might conclude that this confluence of consultations was deliberately engineered to render considered objection nigh impossible, but home educators are a resilient and ingenious bunch and can turn this sort of experience into a sparklingly stellar home education project. Plenty of HE young people ended up with a rigorous education in political theory, lobbying, history, law and argument the last time around with<a href="http://daretoknowblog.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=badman"> the Badman </a>experience and this is almost certainly happening all over again.<br />
<br />
As a priority, HEors are starting off by scrutinizing <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">the LA Guidance</a> as this seems most likely to be implemented and could be in place in as little as five months. Sadly, the new proposed guidance bares little resemblance to the <a href="https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288135/guidelines_for_las_on_elective_home_educationsecondrevisev2_0.pdf">current EHE guidance</a> and there is a lot to worry about. It will be necessary to break this subject down into a number of different posts, which will be linked to here when written.<br />
<br />
Let's start with one of the first concerns here: <br />
<br />
There are a number of assertions in the guidance that appear to be just pulled out of the air for the purposes of muddying the waters and making home educators look suspect. For example:<br />
<br />
<span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E234" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E234" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">2.2:</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E235" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E235" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;"> ‘</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E236" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E236" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">When the impetus </span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E236" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">(to home educate)</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E236" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;"> is a negative </span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E238" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E238" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">one, that</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E240" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E240" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;"> may well have implications for the quality of home education which can be provided – although it should not be assumed that this is inevitably the case’</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E241" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E241" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">.
</span><br />
Where, oh where, did that come from, one wonders? Most HE parents, let's face it, could frame the reason why they want to HE in the negative. A family might say "We home educate because we believe that a child should be able to pursue their own interests to the full." The same family could also say entirely truthfully: "I home educate because the National Curriculum is way too restrictive and doesn't offer a suitable education to my children." It's doubtful that there's a single home educating family who couldn't frame their reasons for home educating in a negative way, one way or another, and actually some of the best home educators I have ever met, home educated because schools had failed their children in the most terrible way, so it is hard to know where this statement in the guidance came from.<br />
<br />
The fact is that there is no reason for the LA to occupy themselves with the reasons for deregistration except in situations where families have, one way or another, been coerced into deregistering, either by the school's direct persuasion, or by the school failing to resolve a problem for the pupil. <br />
<br />
An early idea that is being explored in HE groups in order to help solve the problem of off-rolling or otherwise coerced deregistration: it is being proposed that soon after de-registration, the LA could ask in a respectful letter to the family if the deregistration was coerced in any way, shape or form. If the family were indeed coerced into deregistering and wanted the LA's help, the LA should respond with the help the family request, whether that be mediating with the school, locating another school, providing EOTAs or supporting the family with HE, if they so desire it. <br />
<br />
There are plenty of potential problems that must be avoided in this scenario. Over-zealous LAs would no doubt use every opportunity to step in and start bossing the family around, making them do things they don't want to do. In order to avoid this, the letter would have to be extremely tightly worded and the compulsory template of it would need to be included in the guidance for use by all LAs. LAs would also need to be instructed in guidance that they are there to assist the family, and not to force them to do things they do not want to do.<br />
<br />
The letter must infallibly enshrine the principle that the state is the servant of the family here. This is not about the LA determining whether a suitable education is being provided. It is about LA ascertaining if the family want their help. If the family refuse that help, then the LA would have no cause to act and would make no assumptions about educational provision on that basis. If the family does want help, the LA should provide only the help they seek.<br />
<br />
But back to the Guidance: sadly there are other unsupported assertions in the guidance which also cast a pall over the concept of home education, even before the guidance really gets going.<br />
<br />
Take section <span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E243" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E243" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">3.4:
‘</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E244" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E244" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">However, few people would argue today that parents should be able to exercise their right to home educate children with absolutely no independent oversight, despite their having the legal responsibility set out above’</span><span class="qowt-font6-PalatinoLinotype" id="E245" is="qowt-word-run" qowt-eid="E245" style="background-color: white; display: inline; font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif "important"; font-size: 12pt; text-align: justify; white-space: pre-wrap;">.
</span><br />
Really? Hang on, is there any actual supporting evidence for this assertion? Even if there is actual documented evidence that there there are only a few who argue that independent oversight is wrong, it doesn't mean that the few are mistaken simply because there are only a few of them. What we have here is a painful demonstration of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum">"consensus fallacy" or the "argumentum ad populum"</a>. The writers of this document need to understand that they will need better arguments than this in order to work out right from wrong.<br />
<br />
Sadly, however, this sort of thing - unsubstantiated assertions based on what appears to be prejudice, set the tone for the document, more on which to follow!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: "palatino linotype" , "book antiqua" , serif;"><span style="background-color: white; white-space: pre-wrap;">
</span></span></div>
Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-47553895686800211302018-04-15T09:57:00.000+01:002018-04-15T09:57:35.728+01:00A Letter to the TimesSays it all really:<br /><br /><span style="color: blue;">Friday 13th April.<br /><br />Sir, the government has needlessly placed itself in a quandary by proposing compulsory registration and monitoring of home educated children with the threat of prosecution for non-compliance.<br /><br />On the one hand, the government states that "responsibility for children's education rests with their parents" and on the other that its aspiration is "to ensure all young people receive a world-class education". It fails to recognise that the number of home educated children is increasing because a good education in the state system can no longer be assured, yet it recognises that most parents "are educating their children well."<br /><br />Children of parents who rightfully decide that the state's offering is unsuitable face a level of scrutiny not afforded to their peers. The problem is that home education is just that - education in a private home. Control of home education is indivisible from the control of family life.<br /><br />The problem for the parent and child is intrusion and loss of family privacy. The problem for the government is that if it wishes to quality-assure education, it must then take on the legal liability for that education and expect to be sued when interventions fail. Either the parent or the state must be responsible - there is no half-way house with this. </span><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: blue;"><br /></span>
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-41825348672946707652018-04-14T17:07:00.000+01:002018-04-14T17:12:23.373+01:00Guidance or Guidelines?Well, that just goes to show you should take screenshots whenever you can!<br />
<br />
Not long ago, when the consultation was first announced, there was an interesting conflict between the <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-guidance?utm_source=d4e08a5c-9a33-4f5a-b8f2-b5f23e90f315&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate">title </a>on the front page, and the title on the <a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20LAs.pdf">draft </a><a href="https://consult.education.gov.uk/school-frameworks/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-a/supporting_documents/Elective%20home%20educationGuide%20for%20parents.pdf">documents</a>. Whilst the title on the front page insisted the consultation was about "Guidance", the draft documents themselves were entitled "Guidelines". There could be a big difference! One seems statutory, the other seems advisory!<br />
<br />
Now however, the draft documents are billed as Guidance, which at least makes the whole thing consistent, but a little frightening that an error of this magnitude needs to be corrected after the consultation has actually started.<br />
<br />
Keep a look out for other little tweaks in the documentation folks. You never know what might turn up when we aren't looking!<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-83686533711086507082018-04-14T08:59:00.001+01:002018-04-14T17:13:15.165+01:00The Draft Home Education Guidance: What's being said in FB groups:<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;"><span style="color: #1d2129;">From a discussion in a Facebook Group, on the matter of the Draft EHE Guidelines:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: #444444;">The assumption that parents cannot be trusted is based upon statistical outliers and false thinking that arises from the availability heuristic. Since the press reports stories of terrible parents with such glee, we falsely end up thinking that these sorts of parents are two a penny and that all parents should be held in constant state of suspicion. </span></span><span style="color: #444444;"><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">We have to take a step back from this and get a grip on reality.</span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">These terrible parents are statistical outliers. Most parents do a good enough job...certainly FAR better than anything the state manages, and yet the story that the state fails a huge percentage of "looked after" children is just a non-story and doesn't therefore get the same attention. </span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">The fact is, parents are the ones who have a genuine vested interest in caring for their offspring and who rightfully should be the people who ensure the safety and welfare of their children. When the state takes this over, it messes it up - repeatedly. </span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">If registration and monitoring goes through, it would change the assumption that parents (and therefore the people) are in charge here, and puts the state firmly in the position of the parent. It alters the important assumption expressed in S7, that parents are the ones with the duty to ensure their children are in receipt of a suitable education. With registration and monitoring, it will become the duty of the state as they become the ultimate arbiter of a suitable education. </span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Not only that, but because home education is built in to the fabric of family life in a way that is not obvious to much of the rest of the population, it will be that the state will have given itself the right to pry into the most intimate aspects of family life in a way that is honestly the last signing over of any hope of privacy for a family. The state will have taken over completely. </span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">The state is meant to be the servant of the people, not the other way round. Despite the fact that this guidelines consultation appears to be affecting only a tiny, tiny minority of families, it actually has HUGE constitutional significance because it represents who is actually controlling who in this country and it won't be the people! </span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">And all for what...</span><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><br style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px;" /><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">Nothing. Those bad parents we know about were known to the authorities, and those even MORE evil parents who are SO rare that all of us could name them in a heartbeat, who have eventually been found to have kept their children in shored up basements for years and years, will not register anyhow. So the proposed solution is totally useless, whilst at the same time results in the complete destruction of privacy, and the complete take over of the whole of family life by the state</span></span><span style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif; font-size: 13px;">.</span>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-3954527245940652052018-04-11T10:45:00.001+01:002018-04-14T17:13:57.466+01:00The Consultation on the Draft Guidance for LAs re Home Education <span style="font-family: inherit;">As of 10th April 2018, the Department for Education has issued the<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/home-education-call-for-evidence-and-revised-dfe-guidance?utm_source=d4e08a5c-9a33-4f5a-b8f2-b5f23e90f315&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate"> Consultation </a>on the new EHE Guidance for Local Authorities.</span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /> <br />
It doesn't look good and home educators are on red alert over this to the point where they already appear to have crashed the consultation website. No amount of crashes will save the DfE from knowing how we feel, however.</span><br />
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="8k2m1" data-offset-key="d5173-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="d5173-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/--D12Idy6Ic0/Ws3Y82X2PKI/AAAAAAAATQU/dalQAX9mia4MNkjppQSJ-4SkpPUlpIXswCLcBGAs/s1600/Screenshot%2B2018-04-11%2Bat%2B10.38.53%2BAM.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="768" data-original-width="1366" height="222" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/--D12Idy6Ic0/Ws3Y82X2PKI/AAAAAAAATQU/dalQAX9mia4MNkjppQSJ-4SkpPUlpIXswCLcBGAs/s400/Screenshot%2B2018-04-11%2Bat%2B10.38.53%2BAM.png" width="400" /></a><span data-offset-key="d5173-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"></span></div>
<span data-offset-key="d5173-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;">
</span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="8k2m1" data-offset-key="bm3m3-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="bm3m3-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<span data-offset-key="bm3m3-0-0" style="font-family: inherit;"><br data-text="true" /></span></div>
</div>
<div class="" data-block="true" data-editor="8k2m1" data-offset-key="8n5q0-0-0" style="background-color: white; color: #1d2129; font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; white-space: pre-wrap;">
<div class="_1mf _1mj" data-offset-key="8n5q0-0-0" style="direction: ltr; font-family: inherit; position: relative;">
<br /></div>
</div>
Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-52512374325801900442018-04-09T17:33:00.000+01:002018-04-11T10:51:41.042+01:00Reply to the Comment in Labour Consultation on Education Policy<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">There was a reply to my contribution to the Labour Consultation on Education Policy, which can be found through <a href="https://www.policyforum.labour.org.uk/commissions/education/education-policy">here</a> if you sign in:<br /><br />Here is my answer to that comment:<br /><br />================<br /><br />Thank you for your comment. For a summary of what I would like to say in response, it is possibly easiest just to watch <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okpg-lVWLbE&feature=youtu.be">this video on the 6 problems with our School System.</a><br /><br />For more in response:<br /><br />Whilst you accept that many children are failed by the current schooling system, you do not think that an impersonal learning system is the main source of the problem. However</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">, your suggestions for solving the problem of pupil failure, ie: to get rid of standardised testing, league tables and a rigid micro-managed curriculum would be effective precisely because it would free up schools to offer more personalised learning! You also suggest that we need more teachers and teaching assistants which again would mean that schools could offer students more personalised learning. This suggests that despite what you think you believe, on some level you do recognise that the current problem for many learners is that schooling is far too depersonalised and I therefore agree with all of your suggestions above.</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /><br />Your explicit argument against personalisation of learning is that:</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">"Learning is essentially a social process that occurs in collaboration with others"</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /><br />However I think you may be mistaking the objective existence of shared knowledge for the process of creating knowledge. Yes there is such a thing as "shared knowledge" in the sense that a number of individual brains can appear to contain the same set of information (although of course, they almost certainly don't when it comes down to the detail). However this appearance of shared knowledge has nothing to do with the process of actually growing knowledge, which is what we should be concerned with if the question we wish to address is "how can we make education more suitable and efficient". The process of acquiring knowledge is only ever done by the individual learner when his brain fires up and addresses the electrical input from the senses with theories that he has already developed in order to create new information which only ever actually exists in his brain.<br /><br />This distinction is important for educational theory because we must accept that knowledge is not imparted through a process of "sharing" it or by a process of seepage from one brain to another. Or to use another analogy, it is not possible to pour information in to the head of another as one would pour water in to a bucket. A failure to appreciate this fact is the key error in current schooling theory, and is the reason that so many children are failed. Under the model of "shared knowledge" there is an assumption that if a teacher teaches, a pupil will learn, thereby failing to consider the fact that the pupil must be the actor here. <br /><br />The reality is that for any knowledge to grow, the learner must cause activity to occur in his brain, and this is most likely to happen when the dopamine reward structure is active. This is what causes properly effective learning since the reward system causes the attention to focus on the subject under study. Learners learn best addressing subjects that interest and inspire them and provide them with that dopamine reward and this is why we need education to be personalised as we cannot reliably say that all children will be interested by the same things.<br /><br />Regarding your concerns about "collaboration, co-operation, compromise and negotiation", home educators can testify to the fact that a personalised education doesn't mean that young people will not learn about these things. Learning happens in individual brains yes, but it happens in the context of a social world and learners will want to understand how best to work with this social world. So for example, learners working on the subjects that interest them will most likely find others with similar interests, or may get new angles on their own subject by interacting with others who specialise in different subjects. Many home education groups develop great skills in collaboration, co-operation, compromise and negotiation and do this all the more effectively for having a flat hierarchy and a mutually co-operative approach which means that learners throughout the group learn to take responsibility for group management, co-operation, negotiation, etc. In the world outside education, many successful companies recognise the value of mixing different specialisms at the water cooler and design their buildings to facilitate such cross fertilization. Schools could afford to prepare their students for this sort of world. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br />Personalised education also doesn't necessarily mean "that </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;">everyone is doing something different." There may be some superficial differences in the knowledge base, but there will be underlying similarities which are far more significant as these key features underpin all knowledge. Students who are able to pursue the questions they are interested to pursue have a much greater chance of learning how to think well. Since they care about their subject, they will want to the best they can in all areas. They will not only be learning how to read, write, listen well, construct an argument and tolerate difference, but they will also be learning about how to seek the truth of the matter, how to evaluate different truth claims to see which is the best argument, (an argument that is hard to vary because every detail plays a functional role) and how to</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"> change their thinking for the better argument. They will learn about how they learn (all the more so if they can get quick feedback that websites can provide). They will learn to recognise when they are tired, hungry, dehydrated and/or their attention is waning and they need a break. They will learn to recognise the times when their attention and performance is optimal and how to achieve this. </span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br />You go on to say "Technology must be an addition to human contact, not a substitute for human contact; learning is primarily an interactive social process; current research in developmental psychology is really clear about this."<br /><br />I am by no means suggesting that there shouldn't be human contact in the schooling environment. I am simply saying that we could make this contact voluntary and therefore just so much more relevant and useful to the learner because the learner could be asking the questions and seeking the help that they need from either tech or the teacher.</span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br />One idea: have a big room with work spaces that can easily be made open or separate and with teachers of various different specialisms available to all the students, so that a student could interact with others, or close the space off and focus quietly on their own space, and could call in the teacher as and when they are stuck. Teachers could also make themselves available to teach lessons that suit a number of pupils as requested. </span><span style="background-color: white; font-family: "open sans" , sans-serif; font-size: 14px;"><br /><br />I referenced Duolingo and Brainscape because they are useful systems for information retention, but you cite them dismiss the idea that websites can be used to help develop deep level thinking which is not something that I explicitly claimed that these ones could do (though I think it a matter of debate as both COULD be used that way if used creatively and are anyway very much based<a href="http://making.duolingo.com/how-we-learn-how-you-learn"> upon strong learning theory evidence</a>). However it is patently untrue that other websites cannot develop deep level thinking. Plenty of other websites such as two others I also mentioned, eg: Khan Academy and Brilliant.org, are very useful for this and other websites offer a discursive, social model of learning as well. Look at what we are doing here, after all! Why are we bothering to have an on-line consultation on education if not to develop deep level ideas about the subject? I can also honestly tell you that I have in the past learnt more from one single website than I ever learnt at school and university! This website provided evidence, arguments and ideas that challenged my entire way of thinking, and also, through a discussion forum, offered feedback and critique to the point where I was able to change my entire view on many fundamental ideas. It was deep level thinking and a profound experience which no amount of "academic research" can possibly dismiss! Much of this sort of research must be taken with a pinch of salt, by the way, and reminds many home educators of the 15th century technopanic about the printing press.<br /><br />For further evidence of the efficacy of tech, my home educated son learned most of his writing skills by being mentored by on-line writers in a gaming site that had strict moderation rules about how to present an argument eg: no errors of thinking, no logical fallacies of any sort, and certainly no spelling or grammatical errors. When he eventually went to sixth form college, his English AS teacher told me at the parent's evening that after just listening to his conversations with another home educated friend of his, she knew she had nothing to teach him and this was because of the rigor of his on-line education as well as the interactions he had had with fellow home educators.<br /><br />And this isn't something that is peculiar to my family. We know a lot of home educated children who have learnt a lot on line, one way or another.<br /><br />But I am not saying that tech is the only way to go. Where tech doesn't work for a child and he prefers and benefits from human interaction, there would still be teachers available offering either personalised or class based lessons. However, for more children than you possibly realise, human interaction with a teacher is often a matter of total torture. There's the anxiety and shame of knowing that a real human who is in charge of your destiny has just marked your paper with a load of red ink, or the embarrassment of getting something wrong in front of the teacher and the whole class, or the worry about appearing like a know-it-all when answering a teacher's question...all these sorts of experiences are frequently far more painful than is regularly acknowledged by the teaching profession and yet this anxiety prevents effective learning by hijacking the brain and removing the higher levels of cerebral function in order that the body be prepared for flight or fight. For many children it is far less stressful to be working with an impersonal website than to be confronted by the all powerful teacher who is able to condemn, control, and bore a child for years on end. <br /><br />The other advantage of tech is that the feedback from a website is just so much quicker and more efficient than it is possible to get from a teacher who has to take the books away and mark a whole class and give it back days later when the actual lesson is no longer of any interest.<br /><br />You may think this is all way to out there and too risky to be tried. But the precautionary principle is not an option here because the status quo is not working for so many children! Even those children who are getting by in the current system could well do even better if we were to go down this route. We will most likely not get everything right immediately, and refinements will have to be made, but we don't have anything to lose.<br /><br />Children have been imprisoned in a rigid school that is not of their choice for way too long. We don't do this to adults! Adults have choices about how they live their lives. We are not preparing our children for adult life by removing their autonomy and not helping them learn how to use it well. Labour has a real chance here to do something about it and it could look to home educators, amongst others, to help them develop systems that actually really work for young people!</span>Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.com0