Thursday 21 October 2010

The need for democratic legitimacy for representatives of home educators

Every single person in this country who claims to speak on behalf of home educating parents is doing so because they have appointed themselves to this role. This applies to me, Mike Fortune-Wood, Education Otherwise, Alison Sauer; every single one of us. Not one of us has any democratic legitimacy whatsoever. In fact, looked at from that point of view, the only person during the debate about home education last year who had any claim to being appointed in a democratic fashion was Ed Balls. This is a sobering but inescapable conclusion.

What can we do about this problem? For problem it most certainly is. While we are in a situation where nobody has been chosen democratically, the field is open for anybody to claim that he or she represents the interests of home educators. Politicians cannot deal with every one of the estimated eighty thousand or so parents of home educated children in this country. They have to deal with one or two people. Unfortunately, the people who put themselves forward in this way do not really represent anybody except themselves and their own interests. They may have manoeuvred themselves into this position simply because they are articulate, plausible and know how to approach MPs. They are not accountable. This is far from satisfactory. It is a recipe for behind the scenes deals which will then be presented to other home educating parents as a fait accompli.

A related problem is that home educating parents are powerless to affect all the various things supposedly being done on their behalf or for their benefit. They were powerless to prevent Graham Badman's recommendations and they were also powerless to prevent people like me or Fiona Nicholson putting ourselves forward and shooting our mouths off at the select committee. They are currently powerless to know, or have any influence upon, what is being done on their behalf by others who are now negotiating with MPs. Until all home educating parents have a chance to choose representatives who speak on their behalf, the anger and frustration which many in that community feel is likely to remain.

The only way around this which I can see would be if every single home educator were known to local authorities. If that were to be the case then an outside body, somebody like the Electoral reform Society, could supervise the distribution of nominations and ballots so that each local area could elect two or three people who would genuinely speak for home educating parents in that part of the country. Doing it locally like this would prevent a national organisation like Education Otherwise from dominating the process. If representatives could be democratically elected in this way, then the way would be open to forming local councils consisting of home educators, local authority officers and perhaps independent members of the wider community who could supervise anything to do with home education in each local authority area. Having independent members on such a council would prevent either the local authority or home educators from having too much control. Only those who were currently home educating their children would be eligable to stand for this council or vote. This would also remove a number of self appointed experts from any position of influence.

It will not have escaped notice that a scheme of this sort would require the compulsory registration of home educators and I am aware that many are not in favour of this. The advantage of such local councils would be that the local authority would become accountable in a way that they are not presently. Democratically elected home educators would be able to speak on behalf of other home educating parents and they would have real power in the shaping of policy and practice in their area. This would introduce a new era of openness in the way that local authorities operate with regard to home education. There are frequent complaints about so-called ultras vires practices. If every aspect of the local authority's approach to home education had been hammered out in the presence of elected and accountable members of the home educating community, this would not be possible. Every detail would be worked on openly by both local authority officers and home educating parents together. The independent members would ensure that objective witnesses were present at all discussions between the two sides.

This scheme would only work if every home educator was involved; if every home educating parent had the chance to stand for office and vote. Hence the need for compulsory registration. Home educating parents with a grievance about their local authority's actions would be able to take it to a democratic representative who could raise the matter at the next meeting of the Home Education Council. It would work just as local councillors now work on behalf of people in their ward.

Different areas have very different concerns about home education. For example, a parent in the Western Isles might have a very different set of problems about home education than a mother in a large metropolitan district. For this reason, a national council or anything run by a national organisation would not really work. The essence of this scheme is that it would be operated by local home educators for local home educators. The sticking point would be the need for compulsory registration, but I fancy that that particular point is already under active discussion with MPs. I would be surprised if this does not appear on the scene shortly whatever else happens. Until every single home educating parent has a say, via democratically elected and accountable representatives with equal power to the officers of the local authority, there will continue to be conflict over the whole question of home education.

21 comments:

  1. We've already worked out how to deal with problems like this one. Publicly-funded universities carry out ongoing independent research. Government commissions a review of the research - if deemed needful - and develops a policy statement of some sort as a result. This is then put out for consultation, via a green paper or whatever, and a white paper is then produced for scrutiny. This is then developed into a Bill for scrutiny by parliament.

    If this procedure had been followed by the previous government, we would have ended up with an evidence-based, democratically scrutinised policy. Some people might not have liked it, but that's democracy for you. The best system for governance we've found so far.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'Some people might not have liked it, but that's democracy for you.'

    I'm afraid that this would not be democracy at all, for reasons which I touch upon above. When people, any people, even those sympathetic to home education, carry out research on the subject, only 20% become involved. This happened with Paula Rothermel's work and also Education Otherwise's survey of its members a few years later. York Consulting found the same thing. A study based upon 20% of Education Otherwise's members will thus miss out over 95% of home educators. For this reason, any initiative must start from the perspective of including all parents. This is not currently possible.

    Even when the legislation has been passed, it will still be down to individual local authorities to implement it. Some are better than others. Without democratic representation, the thing fails in any case.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 'We've already worked out how to deal with problems like this one.'

    I am curious to know who the 'we' is who is speaking here.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The process I referred to would be democratic. What happened wasn't.

    The original research reviewed by Badman consisted of a handful of studies that only scratched the surface, leaving many research questions unanswered. Badman is self-evidently not a researcher, nor an expert in EHE. The process between consultation and legislation was extraordinarily rushed.

    It's impossible to fully consult every stakeholder in relation to every bit of legislation. And even if we did, whatever legislation resulted would not make everybody happy. The procedure we have developed for getting effective legislation in place is a perfectly good one. If governments followed it, they'd have less egg on their faces.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 'We've already worked out how to deal with problems like this one.'

    I am curious to know who the 'we' is who is speaking here.

    'We' in the UK. I was referring to the process we (in the UK) use to ensure that legislation is evidence-based with regard to its effectiveness and that there is sufficient consultation to ensure that it is likely to be adhered to.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 'The original research reviewed by Badman consisted of a handful of studies that only scratched the surface, leaving many research questions unanswered.'

    That is also the case with every previous study. Most were conducted through members of organisations such as Education Otherwise. When Ofsted tried to carry out a larger study, there were calls among home educatorss to boycott the process.

    'It's impossible to fully consult every stakeholder in relation to every bit of legislation.'

    This is true. It is not however impossible to ensure that those speaking on behalf of home educators have been democratically elected to that role and are not simply those who are slick, fast talkers. Those who are actually educating their children do not have as much freedom to go whizzing up to London to talk to MPs. This means that some of the most influential of these self elected leaders are not home educators at all. This can be a problem as well, as some have with some justification pointed out when I am expressing opinions on this subject.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If I have understood you correctly, in today's post you have argued that the only way to ensure that EHE policy reflected the views of home educators would be to have compulsory registration so that every home educating family's views could be formally represented.

    I am arguing that we (in the UK) already have a workable system of policy development that would allow independent research to be carried out, the views of home educators to be taken into account and the whole process to be scrutinised several times without the need for compulsory registration.

    I am not defending the process adopted by the previous government.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'If I have understood you correctly, in today's post you have argued that the only way to ensure that EHE policy reflected the views of home educators would be to have compulsory registration so that every home educating family's views could be formally represented.'

    The process which you outline for new legislation is correct. However, without proper and continuing representation of home educators, any new system is likely to be a source of continuous friction. The current legal system strikes many as adequate, but this does not stop individual local authorities from behaving unreasonably. That is likely to be the case with any future law. The only lasting remedy would be for elected representatives of home educators to be permanently at the heart of local authority pplicy making and present at all discussions of anything which would affect that community. Simply passing a new law or confirming the existing situation would not solve the problem. In a year or two, another government might do something else entirely. Only when home educators are actually involved and have real power at the level of local authorities are things likely to be any better.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "If that were to be the case then an outside body, somebody like the Electoral reform Society, could supervise the distribution of nominations and ballots so that each local area could elect two or three people who would genuinely speak for home educating parents in that part of the country."

    Is this sort of thing done for any other special/minor interest group in the UK? Or is this type of thing usually organised by groups that result in unions, or other democratic organisations? In theory EO is democratic as members can vote for council members but so few people show an interest in standing or voting that it doesn't really work. What you seem to be suggesting would amount to compulsory democracy, a bit like the plan put forward to make voting in national elections compulsory.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I wouldn't want my tax pounds spent on such a scheme for home educators or any other minority interest group. Where would it end? Maybe we need to organise pet owners in this way, or maybe, more importantly, parent's of disabled children, or children who are carers of elderly parents. We could spend billions on making everything so democratic and make everyone have a voice whether they want it or not and leave no money left over for the actual work of caring or educating. If people want to be heard it should be at their own expense and organised by themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  11. 'What you seem to be suggesting would amount to compulsory democracy, a bit like the plan put forward to make voting in national elections compulsory.'

    No, I'm suggesting that parents have a chance to vote, not that they should be compelled to do so. Those who did not wish to take part would not really be able to complain later though.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'In theory EO is democratic as members can vote for council members but so few people show an interest in standing or voting that it doesn't really work.'

    Education Otherwise represents around 5% of home educating families. I am also interested in the views of the other 95%. I have written before of my scepticism about the proposition that EO is truly democratic.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 'I wouldn't want my tax pounds spent on such a scheme for home educators or any other minority interest group. '

    You seem to be saying, if I understand you correctly, that you are in favour of abolishing the current system of school governers, PTAs and so on and allowing the local authority to have unfettered control over all aspects of education? I do not personally mind my Council Tax being used to fund these things, because that is how democracy works. Without input from parents and governers, the local authority could do pretty well as they please in schools, in exactly the way that some currently try to do with home educating families. I think this a bad thing and would like to see home education have the same checks and balances as schools now enjoy. I would guess that most counties have no more than a thousand or so home educated children; about the population of a secondary school. I can't see that a scheme such as that which I have outlined above would cost any more than the governers of a secondary school cost the Council Tax payer.

    ReplyDelete
  14. My husband is a member of the Perfoming Rights Society and the Electoral Reform Society organise their ballots for officers. I thought that sort of thing was quite common?

    Not sure though.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  15. 'Education Otherwise represents around 5% of home educating families. I am also interested in the views of the other 95%.'

    Careful now, Simon. None of us actually knows how many HE'ers there are. Estimates have varied wildly depending on who has what axe to grind.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  16. "No, I'm suggesting that parents have a chance to vote, not that they should be compelled to do so."

    But to do that, you seem to want to force the 80% who are against registration to register against their will. How is that democracy?

    "Education Otherwise represents around 5% of home educating families. I am also interested in the views of the other 95%. I have written before of my scepticism about the proposition that EO is truly democratic."

    Well exactly, that's why I said it doesn't really work. But part of the reason it doesn't work is lack of interest on the part of home educators. You appear to be say they have to take an interest so that democracy can work. Maybe they are voting by not taking part? If they wanted a voice wouldn't they join EO or something similar and speak out?

    "You seem to be saying, if I understand you correctly, that you are in favour of abolishing the current system of school governers, PTAs and so on and allowing the local authority to have unfettered control over all aspects of education?"

    No. They are spending my tax pounds so it stands to reason I want the spending monitored. I am not spending anyone else's tax pounds by home educating so I don't want to be registered or monitored.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Those who did not wish to take part would not really be able to complain later though."

    Well yes they could. If something were enacted (because of a majority vote) that would harm a group who had voted against it but not enacting it would harm nobody, they would have good reason to complain later. You've already mentioned the tyranny of the masses, now you appear to be supporting it. You appear to be saying, 'if the majority agree it must be right'.

    You seem to want it both ways. Every home educator had the chance to express their view when the government consulted and the vast majority were against registration. I doubt that many were unaware of the opportunity given the publicity it was given. The response rate was much higher than normal when compared to similar consultations that would have affected much higher proportions of the population.

    ReplyDelete
  18. 'I thought that sort of thing was quite common?'

    Yes, it is very common, Mrs Anon. It would be the easiest thing in the world to arrange.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 'Careful now, Simon. None of us actually knows how many HE'ers there are. Estimates have varied wildly depending on who has what axe to grind.'

    That is quite true. We do know though from York Consulting's work in 2006 that there are around 20,000 home educated children known to local authorities. If we assume at a conservative estimate that the same number again are unknown; this would give us around 40,000. Graham badman thought there could be as many as 80,000, but let us stick with the lower estimate to be on the safe side. Not all members of Education Otherwise are still home educating parents. Let us guess that there are around 2000 home educating parents belonging to it. This would give a membership involving about 5% of the total number of home educated children in the country. Of course if there really were 80,000, then the percentage would drop to around 2/3%. Does anybody know accurately what the current membership of EO is? That would enable us to have a better guess.

    ReplyDelete
  20. 'But to do that, you seem to want to force the 80% who are against registration to register against their will. How is that democracy?'

    Well you know, you still have to register to vote in this country, even if you do not want to do so. it is an offence to fail to register.

    ReplyDelete
  21. 'But part of the reason it doesn't work is lack of interest on the part of home educators. '

    Part of the reason has to do with the fact that in order to take an active part one is required to be physically present at the AGM. Parents with small children can find this tricky to do. If you hold a meeting in Somerset which begins at ten in the morning, then it would mean that people wishing to take part would have to come down and pay to stay in an hotel. It is this sort of thing which makes it hard to sustain the claim that EO is truly democratic. It is more so though than some groups which I could mention.

    ReplyDelete