Sunday 11 July 2010

A suitable education

The Department for Children, Schools and Families announced last year that the question of what constitutes a 'suitable education' was under active consideration. What is meant by this expression? Section 7 of the 1996 Education Act states that:

The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to
receive efficient full-time education suitable -
(a) to his age, ability and aptitude, and
(b) to any special educational needs he may have, either by regular
attendance at school or otherwise

What does this mean in practice? Nobody knows because there is no legal definition of either 'full-time' or 'suitable'. Although statute law has nothing to say about it, there are some hints in precedent or case law. An 'efficient' education was described in this way by Lord Alverstone in his judgement in Bevan v Shears 1911, one of the key cases for home educators. He said:

In the absence of anything in the bye-laws providing that a child of a
given age shall receive instruction in given subjects, in my view it
cannot be said that there is a standard of education by which the child
must be taught. The court has to decide whether in their opinion the
child is being taught efficiently so far as that particular child is
concerned.

The definition of an 'efficient' education was expanded in another case, that of R v Secretary of State for Education and Science, ex parte Talmud Torah Machzeikei Hadass School Trust, 1985. Mr. Justice Woolf gave it as his opinion that an 'efficient' education was one that 'achieves what it sets out to achieve.' In the course of the same judgement, he described a 'suitable' education as one which, 'primarily equips a child for life within the community of which he is a member, rather than the way of life in the country as a whole.' He went on to say that this education should not foreclose a child's options in later life.

None of this is very helpful for working out whether a home educated child is receiving an education. It is specifically stated that the local authority cannot use the standard of education in schools as a yardstick. Each child must be educated efficiently, 'so far as that particular child is
concerned'. many local authorities want a clear definition that can be used when monitoring the education provided to children at home. The idea is that certain skills and knowledge would be expected to be acquired by the child at particular ages. This could mean that the child should be able to read at eight, carry out the four arithmetical operations at eleven and so on. This would take into account any special educational needs which the child had. There is great opposition to this scheme form autonomous educators. They feel that this would harm their method of education.

It would be curious to speculate upon what a legal definition of a suitable and efficient education might look like. It would include reading and writing by a certain age and also arithmetic. It might also include the study of science and history. I shouldn't think anybody could object to a framework like this, as long as it wasn't prescriptive. If the history to be taught was set out in detail; the Tudors at this age, the Romans at that, World War II next, then I can see why people might object. If though the requirement was just to expose the child to history, whether by teaching or just by visits to castles and museums, then I don't think that this would be a problem.

In the same way, if the definition of a suitable education was that the intention would be that the child could read by twelve, I should think that most parents would find that acceptable. After all I am sure that most home educating parents hope that their children will be reading by this age. In other words, although some home educating parents would be unhappy at the idea that they were compelled to teach their child, they might be agreeable to the notion that there were certain milestones which were desirable and that these would be borne in mind. Before anybody asks the question, no I am not suggesting that if such milestones were not reached then the child should be forced to return to school.

Of course I am quite sure that many home educating parents, whether autonomous or not, are already aware of these things. I am also sure that most already expose their children to various stimulating and educational activities. It might not be a bad idea though to have this set out in a formal way, simply as a set of guidelines by which an education might be judged. Obviously, the quality of education being received by home educated children in this country varies enormously. Some are receiving a good education, while others are barely being educated at all. It would be handy to have some sort of rough and ready guide to distinguish between these two cases.

11 comments:

  1. It's not about what's legal concerning education, it's about what is proper for a child and to our civilization and survival on this planet.

    The education thus far has been proved to be a failure when it comes to teach a child it's real responsibilities about life and living on this planet.

    Many people take life as a fun ride in the sense that they put the responsibility on it's own government, and that is not enough as we now are able to see the massive destruction of the very sensitive balance in Nature.

    What is the purpose to know about great leaders killing thousands of people in the past, when ONE BILLION people are starving in the present, in this very moment!

    Life on this planet is no more about being social, hip and cool, it's about taking a choice and to be responsible for the next generation to come !!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This young girl has been provided with a proper education: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Sb6RmRMbBY&feature=related

    ReplyDelete
  3. "What does this mean in practice? Nobody knows because there is no legal definition of either 'full-time' or 'suitable'. "

    Saying nobody 'knows' implies that somewhere there is some Platonic ideal for education which we have to seek out and define. It isn't about 'knowing' what constitutes a suitable education in the abstract - it's about working out what constitutes a suitable education for the individual child at any given time.

    A suitable education emerges from an interaction between the needs, wishes and ability to learn of the individual, and the needs, wishes and ability to provide an education of parents and the wider community.

    Trying to define this in law is impossible and counterproductive - which is why no one has ever attempted to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Last time you posted on this subject, you wrote:

    "I have known home educated children of fourteen who could only write in big, scrawly capital letters."

    What were the outcomes for these children?

    ReplyDelete
  5. "Nancy said...
    Last time you posted on this subject, you wrote:

    "I have known home educated children of fourteen who could only write in big, scrawly capital letters."

    What were the outcomes for these children? "

    Good question! One is a part-time bouncer and barman. He is currently unemployed, but his last job was as a bouncer in a brothel. This is not what his mother would have wished for him. He has tried to get more conventional work, but is unable to fill out a form properly. He went to one interview and was asked to carry out a simple test. His handwriting was such that he could not complete it in the given time.

    Another such young person is working for the parks department of the local authority. The problem is that when going for jobs or college places, it is not uncommon for some sort of written paper to be involved. This is a problem for those who are unable to write fluently. A little different for those with dyslexia, people may make allowances, but if this problem has just been caused by lack of education, employers raise their eyebrows.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Anonymous said...
    This young girl has been provided with a proper education: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Sb6RmRMbBY&feature=related "

    I'm not sure that education has much to do with this. The daughter of a well known evironmentalist becomes herself an environmentalist. This is rather like the son of a carpenter following in his father's footsteps and also becoming a carpenter.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Working for the parks dept sounds OK. Bouncing in a brothel isn't ideal. But presumably there were other problems with this boy's education apart from his handwriting. I'm assuming that he wasn't studying for an OU degree and writing his assignments on the computer, for instance, as many HE children do. I ask because my son has problems with handwriting. No-one knows why; he's not dyslexic and has no other SENs, but he was offered a scribe for his GCSE's. Handwriting alone need not be a problem.

    Can you give me some more details about this boy? Was he HE throughout, or was he taken out of school? If the latter, at what age and for what reasons?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Old Simon says-The Department for Children, Schools and Families announced last year that the question of what constitutes a 'suitable education' was under active consideration.

    but now that the tory's have taken over this has all been put in the westmister trash bin along with Badman silly report!

    bad luck Simon Labour LOST the last election and they is to be no box ticking by council staff over home education.

    your a loser Webb like your daughter,

    you not said Webb if LA staff asked if you been abusing your daughet when you invited them into your house to check on you and her. did you wait in anther room why they checked her out?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Can you give me some more details about this boy? Was he HE throughout, or was he taken out of school? If the latter, at what age and for what reasons?"

    The one who is currently unemployed never attended school. His mother simply did not insist on his practicing handwriting and so he never acquired the skill. He was also very lazy. I doubt he would have been a brilliant academic success even if he had attended school, but I think he would at least have learned to write!

    ReplyDelete
  10. "I doubt he would have been a brilliant academic success even if he had attended school, but I think he would at least have learned to write!"

    Has it occurred to him that he could learn to write now?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "I doubt he would have been a brilliant academic success even if he had attended school, but I think he would at least have learned to write!"

    Why would you think this when plenty of children leave school with very poor writing abilities? I know because I've seen lots of their application forms!

    ReplyDelete