From across England come eerily similar stories of local authority officers behaving in what some home educating parents see as unjustifiable ways. This centres in the main around requests to see the child physically and discuss with parents and child the nature of the educational provision being provided. The rationale behind this is fairly plain. It is easy enough for a parent to write that a child visits the library, plays the violin and belongs to various clubs; this does not make it true. Some local authority officers have found that when they talk to the children themselves, some of them have no idea at all what they are supposed to be doing. Clearly, the parents have been putting down whatever they think will sound like a good education!
Local authorities do not work in a vacuum. They talk to each other regularly, not only neighbouring authorities, but ones at the other end of the country. When Mike Allpress was the lead person in this county, Essex, on elective home education, he used to organise conferences in Harlow for other authorities in the south east. Representatives came from as far away as Southampton and a common framework would be agreed. This happens all over England. Just as some home educators band together and exchange information on lists such as the Badman Review Action Group, so too do local authorities pass on concerns to each other. Most of them also belong to the main Internet groups like BRAG, HE-UK and so on. They are very well informed about developments in the world of home education.
The behaviour of local authority officers responsible for home education in various parts of the country is now showing a common theme. In the Unitary Authority of Poole, in Suffolk, Oxfordshire, Birmingham and Gateshead, the same tactic is being used. Children who have not been seen for some time because their parents refuse visits, are the target for attention. The thrust of this is that local authorities want to see the kid and talk face to face with the parents. I can see their point. We often see parents on lists and forums who ask for help in putting together educational philosophies, but who would be rather at a loss if asked outright just what they had been doing for their kids education this week!
Home education in this country has been established by precedent, rather than statute. Apart from a few oblique references in some laws which were drawn up without even considering home education as such, most of the legal basis comes from old court cases; Bevan v Shears, Phillips v Brown, Harrison & Harrison v Stevenson and so on. Having failed, at least for now, to gain any new legislation, the aim is to build up a few court cases which will tend to show that local authorities have more power than the old cases of precedent indicate. They are being quite cautious about this and as soon as a parent complains to one of the home eduction groups, they will back-pedal. However, as I have pointed out before, the great majority of home educating parents do not belong to Internet groups. The first that we will hear of such a court case is when it has been reported in the papers.
At a guess, I would say that several local authorities will find parents who are supposedly home educating but are actually not providing even the sketchiest attempt at any sort of education. These parents will have School Attendance Orders issued against them and at least a few will refuse to comply with them. The resulting prosecutions will allow the local authorities to state their views in court and as long as they choose the right parents, the magistrates will then allow the allow the prosecution to succeed. A few successes of this sort, particularly if any appeals by the parents to higher courts fail, will change the landscape of home education in this country. As I say, the present way that home education is tolerated in England is a result of court decisions. The situation can be altered in the same way. In the absence of any new legislation, this is how local authorities will be able to effect a change in the legal situation around home education. What has been noticed in places like Birmingham and Suffolk are the opening shots in this campaign.
'The behaviour of local authority officers responsible for home education in various parts of the country is now showing a common theme.'
ReplyDeleteIn what way 'responsible for home education'?
'In what way 'responsible for home education'?'
ReplyDeleteIn the way that a department called 'Elective Home Education' is responsible for that particular aspect of education in the local authority's area. This is a neutral descriptor which destinguishes such a department from those responsible for Parks and Gardens or for the maintainance of the highways.
Old Webb says-Children who have not been seen for some time because their parents refuse visits, are the target for attention. The thrust of this is that local authorities want to see the kid and talk face to face with the parents.
ReplyDeleteWe never been seen since we started home education in June 2003 and still no sign of us being a target for there attention nor have us his parents shouwn them any of the work Peter is doing!
Simon, It struck me from this post that you seem to want the LAs to change the way they deal with home educators. Is that the case?
ReplyDeleteI dont think that LAs seeing children on a regular basis will prevent inadequate education, or provide safeguarding for them. I still feel that if they have concerns they have a right to ask for evidence of provision. But many schooled children are being failed and they are not produced to 'prove' they are succeeding so this will not help home educators either.
The only time it may be sensible that I could see would be if the child was not being seen by any other agency. For example, I would not want to produce my child for the LA because they already see paediatricians, Drs, dieticians, dentists, ed psychs as well as attending clubs of various kinds so their well-being is evident.
If my children were treated with alternative therapies at home, never attended clubs or groups, or was never seen by health professionals there may(and I say this loosely) be reason for them to be seen.
'Simon, It struck me from this post that you seem to want the LAs to change the way they deal with home educators. Is that the case?'
ReplyDeleteI was more describing what seems to be happening than recommending a course of action. But I don't think it a bad idea for home educated children to be seen by their local authority from time to time. You say that your own children see plenty of people, both professionals and otherwise and it was the same with my daughter. Not everybody is like that though. On one of the lists recently, a parent posted that because she was anxious to avoid visits, she tried not to have any dealings with health services either. There is certainly scope for home educated children to slip between the cracks, more so than is the case with those at school.
Old Webb says-But I don't think it a bad idea for home educated children to be seen by their local authority from time to time.
ReplyDeleteYour wrong again Webb it is not a good idea for home educated children to be seen by their Local authorithy the very people who caused the problem!
We never been seen and never will!
"I was more describing what seems to be happening than recommending a course of action. But I don't think it a bad idea for home educated children to be seen by their local authority from time to time. You say that your own children see plenty of people, both professionals and otherwise and it was the same with my daughter. Not everybody is like that though. On one of the lists recently, a parent posted that because she was anxious to avoid visits, she tried not to have any dealings with health services either. There is certainly scope for home educated children to slip between the cracks, more so than is the case with those at school. "
ReplyDeleteAh I see, thankyou for clarifying.
To answer that, I would agree that the tiny minority of children who see no-one are a worry and maybe a meeting of some sort might be useful. I dont think it is right to have a blanket rule that everyone should be seen 'just in case' but how does an LA determine this?
Schools have a school role so LA's know the children who attend. But for any child not on a school role LAs seem not to know about them unless they have been 'caught' at EHE, voluntarily register themselves or have other reasons for non school attendance.
I always struggle with this because when you register a birth your child is known, so how do they go on to lose that child. Many people have tried to explain that people move etc but then I cant help but ask; 'do they not sign a lease, or put their name on a house sale?' 'do they not register with a dr or dentist?' Do they not claim child benefit or register to vote?'
I know its quite a simplistic view of the situation. To me a database, simple and basic would be sensible but I know many have cried out about civil liberties, and the troubles caused by central databases and being'known', so I dont know what is best.
'I always struggle with this because when you register a birth your child is known, so how do they go on to lose that child. '
ReplyDeleteUnitl 1999, we were living in the London Borough of Haringey. We moved here and did not notify the council. It was three years until we ran into a truancy patrol here and Essex becme aware of the fact that here was a child not at school. Had I murdered my daughter and buried her in the garden in London, neither Essex nor Haringey would have known. This is pretty much what happened to Fred West's daughter Charmaine. She was withdrawn from school in 1971, murdered and buried under the floorboards. She was next seen twenty three years later when the house was being searched. Nobody had noticed that this child had simply vanished.
"This is pretty much what happened to Fred West's daughter Charmaine. She was withdrawn from school in 1971, murdered and buried under the floorboards. She was next seen twenty three years later when the house was being searched. Nobody had noticed that this child had simply vanished. "
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely, it seems to happen so easily and often, and its a big worry. I can totally understand where LAs are coming from with their concerns and their need to check kids are ok. I just dont see how to do this and still respect right to privacy and right to teach kids at home without the need for inspection.
'I just dont see how to do this and still respect right to privacy and right to teach kids at home without the need for inspection.'
ReplyDeletePerhaps by involving home educators themselves in the process? Some parents might be happy to invite other parents into their home, whereas they would not want a local authority officer. There might be scope here for a system where a group of home educating parents were paid to visit and write reports on those parnets who did not want to see LA personnel. This might satisfy everybody.
Yes, to me this seems like a good idea and fairly reasonable too. It would be a good compromise, especailly if accompanied by clear unambiguous(sp?) guidelines.
ReplyDeleteI dont think the general population of HEers will like it, but as I have said before I think compromise is needed somewhere.
"This is pretty much what happened to Fred West's daughter Charmaine. She was withdrawn from school in 1971, murdered and buried under the floorboards. She was next seen twenty three years later when the house was being searched. Nobody had noticed that this child had simply vanished. "
ReplyDeleteThis is a falacious and stupid arguement. Awful things do happen. However, these awful cases are EXTREMELY rare and anomolous, and should never be used to justify the enslavement of a whole nation. Why not just make a 'dept of cellar inspectors' at every LA? Give them forced power of entry, just in case you've got someone locked down there...
We have already assertained many times that child welfare/protection is not a the duty of an LEA. STATE education is what the E stands for. We know that there are no 'welfare' concerns regarding HE, so why do you keep on with this missing/murdered/unseen 'kid' rubbish.
These LEAs are raising their game right now, because they are attempting to justify their department and wages. They know they are for the chop and want to appear necessary 'to save the children'. We need to resist them because it will not go on for much longer.
"I always struggle with this because when you register a birth your child is known, so how do they go on to lose that child."
ReplyDeleteYou speak as if a child only exists if the state knows about them! Surely, when a child is born, she is 'known' to her mother, her father, her siblings/family/neighbours?
Do you ever wonder why the state wants to really keep tabs on everyone? Do you think it is out of benevolence? That the state is there 'to look after us all'?
"There might be scope here for a system where a group of home educating parents were paid to visit and write reports on those parnets who did not want to see LA personnel. This might satisfy everybody. "
ReplyDeleteGosh, you could do that, couldn't you Simon? Wonder how much stolen money you would be paid for that then?
Simon says
ReplyDeleteSome local authority officers have found that when they talk to the children themselves, some of them have no idea at all what they are supposed to be doing. Clearly, the parents have been putting down whatever they think will sound like a good education!
Your blogs contain too many assumptions to make them credible.
Some local authorities.....how many ? Which ?
Some children..............how many ?
The parents................how many ?
You just make it up.
'Children who have not been seen for some time because their parents refuse visits, are the target for attention.'
ReplyDeleteNope. That's not at all what's been happening in Oxfordshire. One brief post on BRAG is not sufficient cause for you to write this nonsense.
There might be scope here for a system where a group of home educating parents were paid to visit and write reports on those parnets who did not want to see LA personnel. This might satisfy everybody. "
ReplyDelete'Gosh, you could do that, couldn't you Simon? Wonder how much stolen money you would be paid for that then?'
Well, except that I already have a job and am not a home educating parent. Apart from that it might work!
'Do you ever wonder why the state wants to really keep tabs on everyone? Do you think it is out of benevolence? '
ReplyDeleteI certainly assume that local authority officers are concerned for the children, yes. What do you think think the explanation is? Is this a conspiracy theory?
Simon, your views here seem at odds with your views about internet security and parents worrying too much about stranger danger. Aren't you worrying too much about the extremely small number of cases that have tenuous or non-existent links to HE, all of which were known to social services via other routes? Fred West, for instance, was a known sex offender and paedophile before he even had children or 'advanced' to murder.
ReplyDelete'Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete'Children who have not been seen for some time because their parents refuse visits, are the target for attention.'
Nope. That's not at all what's been happening in Oxfordshire. One brief post on BRAG is not sufficient cause for you to write this nonsense.'
Not sure where BRAG comes into it. This is the document prepared by Alison sauer. She specifically mentions Oxford. I have heard from somebody else there who has been suddenly asked for a visit recently.
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnx0aGVob21lb2ZlZHVjYXRpb258Z3g6M2QzODc2MDdhMjQzZWY5ZQ&pli=1
"Not sure where BRAG comes into it. This is the document prepared by Alison sauer. She specifically mentions Oxford."
ReplyDeleteYet Alison published her document after you wrote your blog article so clearly, unless you had an advance copy of it, this wasn't a source of information about Oxford for you.
"Some local authority officers have found that when they talk to the children themselves, some of them have no idea at all what they are supposed to be doing. Clearly, the parents have been putting down whatever they think will sound like a good education!"
ReplyDeleteWhen children are asked what they did at school today, a common answer is, 'I dunno'. Does this mean that their teacher is not providing a suitable education? Or do some children just not like discussing their education with strangers?
If a child fails their GCSE History but the rest of their class passes, does this mean their teacher did not provide an education to that child? Has the teacher just pretended to teach that particular child whilst managing to teach the rest? Or do some children just have poor memories?
"To answer that, I would agree that the tiny minority of children who see no-one are a worry and maybe a meeting of some sort might be useful. I dont think it is right to have a blanket rule that everyone should be seen 'just in case' but how does an LA determine this?"
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think home educators should be singled out for this kind of special treatment? Under 5's are not required to be seen by officials, so do you think they should also be compelled to checked? And how does a short meeting prove anything? Why not go all the way and require medical examinations to check for bruising or sexual abuse? Where do you draw the line?
Also, have you given any thought to the dangers of false-positives? The medical professions of several countries have looked at the idea of screening all families for abuse. They have all reached the conclusion that this approach would cause more harm than good. Why do you think lesser trained LA officials will do a better and safer job than medically trained professionals?
'I have heard from somebody else there who has been suddenly asked for a visit recently.'
ReplyDeleteYes, every now and then, in any county, someone will be asked if they'd like a visit. But you are claiming that means there is a concerted movement among LA's to change direction, which is not proven.
In any case, in the one situation such as you describe above, which Oxon home educators know about, the LA has just backed down completely.
You need better informants.
"Some local authority officers have found that when they talk to the children themselves, some of them have no idea at all what they are supposed to be doing. Clearly, the parents have been putting down whatever they think will sound like a good education!"
ReplyDeleteThat sort of MISUNDERSTANDING happens all the time with children For eg. I told the LA visitor about the pottery my children had been doing and even showed them the pots. The next time the LA visit he asks about the pottery and my child says 'I haven't done any pottery'. True, because the classes they's been doing had finidhed by then. But it made me look like a liar.
Kids, eh?
Webb - yet another article built upon lies and distortions.
ReplyDeleteYou know nothing about home education other than your delusional imagination.
If there was such a campaign it would have to said to be is faltering fast as L.A. apologies are made.
"'In what way 'responsible for home education'?'
ReplyDeleteIn the way that a department called 'Elective Home Education' is responsible for that particular aspect of education in the local authority's area. This is a neutral descriptor which destinguishes such a department from those responsible for Parks and Gardens or for the maintainance of the highways. "
Parks and Gardens maintain publicly-owned parks and gardens for the benefit and enjoyment of the public. Highway maintenance maintains roads so that the public can travel by road as safely as smoothly as possible. What is the responsibility of the Elective Home Education department?
I think I have a rather unique relationship with our local EWO, in that she is also a family friend. She is openly supportive of HE, and even in a formal capacity she does not ask to see the childrens work - she says she never does as she is not a trained teacher so has no idea what she should be looking for. If I didn't know her so well, I wouldn't bother with an annual visit - because with admissions like this is appears to be a waste of both our times.
ReplyDeleteHowever, the LEA itself are pretty awful. They continually have one of my children missing on their database, and each and every year I have to remind them of his existence.
She is so disillusioned by the state of affairs within the LEA she is leaving next year. She feels that the whole Badman fiasco left the relationships some EWOs were working so hard to cultivate with Home Educators in tatters. She said that visiting HE families is humiliating, as she is asking them to provide information and be put under the microscope in return for absolutely nothing.
Her overall opinion (and she has been doing this job for 17 years now) is that there is too much paper work and box ticking, and no actual support offered. There is no way they could cope if registration became compulsory - they can't cope with the already known.
I realise that this is only one EWO out of many, and that this is only my experience of dealing with the LEA.
Their administration is shocking, they simply can't cope, and until I see proof locally that they can already implement the law as it stands, I won't support any changes that will just add to the confusion.
KD
You exist inside the surrealistic world of your delusional mind.
ReplyDeleteSuffolk are indeed likely to face the courts as the issue of compensation gets addressed.
You could well be next in-line Webb
'Suffolk are indeed likely to face the courts as the issue of compensation gets addressed.
ReplyDeleteYou could well be next in-line Webb '
Compensation for what? I shudder to think what I am likely to be sued for!
Any comment on parks and gardens?
ReplyDelete'Any comment on parks and gardens?'
ReplyDeleteGenerally, or in relation to home education? Local authorities have a responsibility to provide accurate and up-to-date information for parents about their duties and responibilities. They also have a duty in law to identify children missing from education. When they find a child who is not at school, they should make informal enquiries to the parents in order to assure themselves that the child is in fact receiving a suitable, full-time education. Sometimes, establishing this may take a little more than an informal enquiry. A parent might, for example not send enough information to clear this point up. It is sensible for a local authority to have a team of officers whose role is to work on this aspect of education.
'Generally, or in relation to home education? Local authorities have a responsibility to provide accurate and up-to-date information for parents about their duties and responibilities. They also have a duty in law to identify children missing from education. When they find a child who is not at school, they should make informal enquiries to the parents in order to assure themselves that the child is in fact receiving a suitable, full-time education.'
ReplyDeleteI take it you mean local authorities' duties and responsibilities, not parents'.
Also, the 'should make inquiries' clause is derived from statutory guidance and conflicts with the relevant sections in the 1996 Education Act and the way these are interpreted in the EHE Guidelines - which the statutory guidance tells LAs to follow in the case of EHE children. This contradiction hasn't yet been sorted out.
Prior to the statutory guidance, LAs were obliged to make inquiries only if it appears that the child isn't receiving a suitable education.
Parks and Gardens departments are not entitled to inspect the parks and gardens of private individuals to make sure they pass muster, any more than highways departments are entitled to make regular inspections of private roads and driveways. Although LAs do have powers to act if parks, gardens or roads or driveways pose a danger to life or limb.
'Parks and Gardens departments are not entitled to inspect the parks and gardens of private individuals to make sure they pass muster,'
ReplyDeleteWell, yes they are. In fact if the local authority suspect that you have some plants in your garden, ragwort for instance, they can enter the garden without obtaining a warrant. The local authority has a wide range of powers over what private individuals do in their gardens; from what plants they have, how tall their tress are, whether a fence is over two meters high and near a highways and hundreds of other things.
But they don't routinely visit every garden to check that the householder is complying with all relevant laws.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. As I said, the LA has powers to act if an individual is doing something that poses a danger to life or limb. It does not have powers to monitor individuals to check up on whether or not they are contravening regulations. To do so would not only mean that the accountability of the LA to the local community became a nonsense, it would also be a massive waste of public resources.
ReplyDeleteI visited multiple web sites but the auԁiо
ReplyDeletefeature for audio songѕ exіsting at this web pаgе iѕ tгuly fabulοus.
garcinia cambogia
pгemium 800 mg - garcinia cambogia - garcinia cambogia hca extract garcinia cambogia - garcinia cambogia - www.rozdavame.eu