Many local authorities in this country were gearing up to implement the provisions of the Children, Schools and Families Bill as soon as they became law. As we are all now aware, Schedule 1 of the bill, which contained all the stuff about compulsory registration and so on, will not now become law. Never the less, the momentum which has been building up with many local authorities seems to be unstoppable. Just as a giant oil tanker cannot stop in a few yards, but continues on its course for miles even after the engines have been thrown into reverse, so too with the local authorities. Indeed, many of them do not even appear to have been issued with the instruction to stop engines!
Several parents on the Internet lists have reported receiving communications from their local authority which require them to provide a statement of educational intent, sign agreements and generally behave as though the Children, Schools and Families Bill was in fact passed in its entirety. There are two possible explanations for this. The first is that it as I say, simply the usual bureaucratic inertia which makes it hard to change any policy. The local authorities have made their plans and are now unable to alter them at a moment's notice. There is though another possibility. This is that legal advice has been taken and it is intended to treat those who deregister their children from school as though they were not providing a suitable education unless they give good evidence to the contrary. This would be an interesting point. Of course cases such as Joy Baker's went into this as long ago as the nineteen fifties.
In the same year that Education Otherwise was founded, another court case had its beginnings; a case which was to be just as significant in its own way as that of Joy Baker's, twenty years earlier. Mr Phillips and Ms Reah were the parents of a boy with the unusual name of Oak. They lived in Leeds and chose to educate their son at home. In the course of time, the local education authority in Leeds became aware that Oak Reah was not attending school and in the Summer of 1977 they wrote to his parents asking them about the educational provision being made for their son. His parents decided that it was nobody's business but their own and refused to give any information whatsoever about Oak's education. After a time, the LEA grew impatient and issued a School Attendance Order. Eventually, the family very grudgingly provided an account of what they were doing.
As a result of such cases as these, many parents today believe that all that their local authority is required by law to ask for is an educational philosophy. Accordingly, many parents, particularly those who favour autonomous education, limit themselves to a vague document which expresses their hopes, rather than sets out their plans. A lot of local authorities are unhappy about this and judging by some of the letters being sent, it seems that some will no longer be prepared to accept such a feeble explanation.
This could prove pretty exciting for some of the families who will be the first to challenge this new approach, if that is what it is. Lord Donaldson's ruling in the case of Oak Reah leaves a good deal of leeway for both local authorities and parents to argue about what is acceptable in this respect. He certainly said that if parents refused to give any information about their children's eduction, then the local authority could be justified in assuming that no education was taking place. On the other hand, sending them an educational philosophy does, at least according to some parents, provide the necessary evidence of an education. I wonder if we are heading for another of those landmark rulings in home education? We shall have to see whether or not this is just a little over enthusiasm on the part of authorities who were getting over-excited about the new powers they were expecting or if there is a little more to it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Accordingly, many parents, particularly those who favour autonomous education, limit themselves to a vague document which expresses their hopes, rather than sets out their plans. A lot of local authorities are unhappy about this and judging by some of the letters being sent, it seems that some will no longer be prepared to accept such a feeble explanation.
ReplyDeleteTo bad the law is on ourside and LA's have NO new powers they lost! I wonder how much that hurts them? all those powers they thought they get from uncle Balls.LOL we won amazing feels sooooooooo good we took the DCSF Balls/Badman on and won we love tellong every one we meet how we beat Balls at his own game!
I've not seen anyone recommend just sending a philosophy. The usual approach I've seen recommended is a philosophy, a list of the resources a family has available and a report giving examples of how the education has happened in practice. In most of the examples I've seen the report is very similar to the plans an LA might like to see for the future year but instead they give the same information for the past year giving details of what was covered with examples of how it was done.
ReplyDeleteEducation Otherwise appears to call all of this an educational philosophy which may be the cause of the confusion. If you check their site, http://www.education-otherwise.org/edphil.htm#three, what they actually mean when they say educational philosophy is:
"The Belief Statement
The List of Resources
How you are putting your beliefs into practice (with examples) also known as The Report"
If people on some lists are misunderstanding this to mean that they should just send the 'belief statement' part, then this could cause problems. I can fully understand why a LA might not consider this to be sufficient evidence of education. I cannot see why there would be a problem with the recommended approach as it involves giving the same information LA like to ask for the year but just after rather than before the education has happened.
Interesting article on why we might want to avoid home visits with suggestions of alternative methods of providing evidence, What's Wrong With Home Visits?
ReplyDeleteDear Master Williams
ReplyDeleteThank you for your letter of 18th of March 2010 about home education which has been passed to me for reply.
Our propsoals to Legislate for a light touch registration and monitoring scheme for home educating families have now been removed from the Children,Schools and Families Billl to enable some parts of the Bill to be passed into law before Parliament is dissolved.
However ,government remains committed to introducing such a scheme and to the provision of additional support for home educating families.
Yours sincerely
Jill Clark
independent Education and School Governance
She from the DCSf! bet that hurt to write that letter to Peter LOL
My view is that locally the LA seems to have become less confrontational rather than more. They have realised that issuing SAO's is a complete waste of time and money and that home educators are more likely to be "cooperative" if they think that they will benefit from the arrangements. I know that lack of funding is still a huge issue (I understand that there is some sort of consultation about the DSG just starting) but more financial support would be positively received by some. In the meantime our bit of the LA is doing its best by using other budgets in a small but positive way, and I hope that this will continue beyond the Election!
ReplyDeleteJulie says-My view is that locally the LA seems to have become less confrontational rather than more. They have realised that issuing SAO's is a complete waste of time and money
ReplyDeleteI see no evidence that HCC are less confrontational the same old letters go out that where wrote by old Meller/Jack Cawthra to any one starting home education HCC have a policy of issuing SAO if parents refuse to meet with them.
In the meantime our bit of the LA is doing its best by using other budgets in a small but positive way,
No signe of the budget money being spent in the Alton area Julie now i wonder why? is it becuase Kirk was quite clear in his letter that NO resources are to be given to any one who home educates.
Why have people in Alton who home educate not been contacted by Jan Lewis?
Peter stuck a complaint in about good old Jan Lewis that always gets them moving LOL i wonder what rubbish she will write LOL i think its been refered to her senior manger by Karina Large she is the complaints manger for HCC i let you know the outcome.
"it is intended to treat those who deregister their children from school as though they were not providing a suitable education unless they give good evidence to the contrary"
ReplyDeleteWell the courts and indeed any lawyer should be able to tell them that as things stand this would be an unlawful stance.
The legally correct stance is to ask if they wish (ie if that is their policy) for information about the education and to use such information to form a view as to whether they have concerns that a suitable education is not taking place.
This is not the assumption of guilt as in the quote above, but a simple informal enquiry.
As far as an article about home visits is concerned http://www.home-education.org.uk/legal-home-visits.htm is my preferred one. I personally would not accept one but I know that for many people this is their preferred option and I respect that. Of course many Authorities have all of their known families accepting home visits and it is difficult to explain sometimes that for many this would simply be unacceptable. Simon, in common with may LA folk, has here said that he cannot understand why people [with nothing to hide] will not accept them....
On this site too there are some good so-called educational philosophies. Generally speaking the term "educational philosophy" is misapplied to an education report as described above. (and recommended by Ian Dowty) Basically one could say any educational report would not pass muster if one could send it the next year and it still would apply. It has to have some personalisation to it and some event related features.
"HCC have a policy of issuing SAO if parents refuse to meet with them" I take it this is Hampshire County council and not Hull City Council. I had not heard that and would not expect it of the Jan Lewis I met for the first time in Birmingham last month. I thought Jan had only been in post for a few months in any case? Not really long enough for her to have completed an SAO procedure? Of course I may be wrong.....and who is Kirk?
Alison- your quote above is from Peter W of Alton who was I believe was involved in legal proceedings with his part of Hants six years ago. Fortunately I don't know of anyone else who actually got themselves into a similar situation - most of us have never had face to face contact with any of HCC staff and this has never been a problem!
ReplyDeleteYou are right that Jan Lewis is a new appointment - I can't really think why Peter is making a complaint against her (the basis of which seems to be she hasn't been in contact, when clearly he doesn't want any contact with the LA anyway!) Sigh....
The Kirk mentioned above is the Councillor on HCC who holds the portfolio for Children's Services and Education. A group of home educators from the whole county invited him to a meeting to discuss various issues at the end of last year, and Mr Williams somehow feels slighted that he wasn't involved - although it was a widely advertised and open meeting!
Jan seems a well meaning lady from what I can tell and stated that she wishes to maintain a good working relationship with EHE families in Hampshire. I wish we had more like her across the country - they are few and far between.
ReplyDeleteAlison - yes, she has come to a group meeting and was certainly friendly; we (south area) have a good relationship with our bit of the LA anyway; but the western parts of Hants (different area office) have had a harder ride. One of Jan's roles is supposed to be trying to produce a more consistent approach for all.
ReplyDeleteJulie said-Alison- your quote above is from Peter W of Alton who was I believe was involved in legal proceedings with his part of Hants six years ago. Fortunately I don't know of anyone else who actually got themselves into a similar situation
ReplyDeleteJulie Legal proceedings which where stoped when it was pointed out to HCC by our county Councillor Dr Tony Ludlow that they was no legal need for a meeting! indeed Dr Ludlow was very unhappy about the way HCC had treated Peter! i found out much later that it was all started by the ex head of Peter school who told lies about us and Peter to the LEA the head was cross becuase we had chosen home education she belived all children must go to school and hated home education! she said you go to school even if you dont learn anything!
Julieie said I can't really think why Peter is making a complaint against her (the basis of which seems to be she hasn't been in contact, when clearly he doesn't want any contact with the LA anyway!) Sigh....
Jan Lewis role is to help ALL home educators not just a few? Jan should write to all home educators that HCC know of to say how she can help them or should she only get in contact with those that home educate the Julie way? A complant has been made about Jan Lewis in writing by Peter. you may not like it Julie but Peter has every right to complain something HCC said Peter could could do at any time so he has!Jan has a duty to help ALL home educators where are you Jan hiding in the office?
Julie says-The Kirk mentioned above is the Councillor on HCC who holds the portfolio for Children's Services and Education. A group of home educators from the whole county invited him to a meeting to discuss various issues at the end of last year, and Mr Williams somehow feels slighted that he wasn't involved - although it was a widely advertised and open meeting!
Kirk put in writing that NO resources should be givne to home educators i got the letter! Kirk also agreed with the answers HCC sent to the Badman review including the forced home visits and seeing child on its own!Kirk also belives in SAO being served on Parents who refuse a meeeting with an LEA officer
It was not widely adverstised my guess is only those that are doing home education the right way where asked to go!
Oh groan... not sure I can go through all this again.....but - the meeting with Kirk was suggested and arranged by an "unknown to the LA" and "non school at home" local home educator, who advertised it on all the local group lists she knew about in Hampshire. So there was good range of families there - many of whom were and are unknown to the LA and many of whom have educational styles that would be described as autonomous.
ReplyDeleteJulie you not answered that Peter has every right to complain about Jan Lewis Jan has a duty to help ALL home educators not just a few? yes or no Julie?
ReplyDeleteA complaint in writing has been sent to HCC about Jan Lewis and has been accepted under the appropriate procedures by the Complaints manger for HCC.Peter will get to the bottom of why Jan only helps some home educators. Peter knows how to complain something HCC taught him!LOL indeed Dr Ludlow said how good we had got at making a complaint in writing!
It was HCC who kept writing to Peter and wanting to tell him how he should be home educated!
Kirk was very clear in letter no resources for home educators and he fully supports the Badman ideas! you ask him Julie? ask him if he belives in forced home visits!
We will hold Jan Lewis to account for her actions.Where are you Jan on hoilday?
Giving up on this conversation - I am quite sure that if you would like Jan Lewis to send in an inspector, she would be only too happy to oblige...but as you have made it quite clear that you don't want any interference from the LA, I expect she decided that she would use her time dealing with families who do want contact!
ReplyDeleteJulie says-I am quite sure that if you would like Jan Lewis to send in an inspector, she would be only too happy to oblige
ReplyDeleteWho said anything about an inspector? is that what Jan job is to send inspectors round? i thought you said she was they to help home educators?
Peter will get to the bottom of what her role is and the complaint has been accepted by the senior complants manger of HCC Karina Large about Jan Lewis.
Of course, home educators are once again being judged to a higher standard than schools. There is plenty of evidence that education is not taking place in a significant number of schools, given the frequent gnashing of teeth and wailing about how many school-leavers can't add up or read, and yet it keeps happening.
ReplyDeleteStill waiting for my first knock on the door, although I'm hopeful that my LA is one of the better ones that would write a letter first.
Dave H -Still waiting for my first knock on the door, although I'm hopeful that my LA is one of the better ones that would write a letter first.
ReplyDeleteLA's have no legal right of entry to your house just because you home educate.The children's bill with the bit about home education was droped so you do not need to worry. you are quite with in your legal rights to refuse entry to your house and also to make a complaint to your council should any one attempt to gain assess to your house with out your agreement.you can complain online to most councils.
I know they have no legal right of entry on those grounds, and they would be politely told to go away. It was just an acknowledgement that I think they're one of the better-behaved ones, given that I've met both the head of EHE and the local inspector even though they don't know where I live (or haven't tried to find out, it can't be that hard).
ReplyDeletecome and live in Hampshire if you want to see a badly behaved LA!
ReplyDeleteThe boy with the unusual name of Oak moved to Holland and grew up to be a heroin addict. I knew him when he was in his late twenties. His home schooling involved a lot of crazy stuf like white magic and so forth. I can not distract myself from the thought that his home schooling messed him up, big time. Al the stories I've heard from him...
ReplyDelete