There is currently a campaign going on in Manchester to try and reduce parent condoned truancy. The aim is discourage parents from going on holiday during term time and the the posters say things such as;
'Taking off during term time could land you with a fine. It counts as truancy. And as a parent, you are legally responsible for making sure your child is at school, or you could face a fine.'
Predictably enough, some home educating parents are angry about this and want the posters amended to remind people that only pupils registered at school are obliged to attend. I rather think that most people know this any way and that the posters are aimed at the 99.5% of parents whose children are registered pupils at a school. I had to laugh about this, because of course Graham Stuart, the home educators friend, said precisely the same thing himself last year. See;
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/153756/Get-your-child-to-school-and-win-flying-lessons
You see? I bet you guys didn't know that it is,'tantamount to child abuse not to make sure your children go to school'? And don't forget that parents should do ' their legal duty and send their children to be educated at school.' I'm sure that if these views are acceptable from Graham Stuart, they should be equally acceptable from Manchester Council!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
old webb says-You see? I bet you guys didn't know that it is,'tantamount to child abuse not to make sure your children go to school'? And don't forget that parents should do ' their legal duty and send their children to be educated at school.'
ReplyDeleteWe be taking this up with Graham Stuart later today to find out what he means! I very much hope he confrim he is only talking about pupils who are on a register at a state school.
I think Graham Stuart said he was misquoted in that one, it's been raised with him before.
ReplyDeleteAs for the Manchester thing, the concern is that it will cause a blanket assumption that children around during school hours is automatically bad and should be reported. Simon shows a touching faith in human nature with his comment that 'most' people know it's only aimed at those registered at school. I would say that for many people, 'at school' is the only known option, with the variation being those who go to the local state school, the lucky privileged ones at the grammar school and all the posh toffs at the private schools. Home is unlikely to feature in the list of alternatives.
'Most people know that it is only aimed at those registered at school.'
ReplyDeleteThat may be the case, however, there are still many many people in this country who don't know that home education is a legal option. I have spoken to people time and time again about this matter and they are genuinely shocked.
We then enter an arena where the truancy officers can harass home educators and give them a hard time. If you give your details to a truancy officer, then you will be 'doorstepped', if you are unknown to your local authority as a home educator.
To you and I it seems to be common sense that it is aimed at people who have their children enrolled at school, however, it can be problematic if the truancy officer refuses to believe that the parents are home educating their children or child.
You then have to go about proving your innocence rather than them proving your guilt. A lot of the fear does not apply to me, my family and I are known home educators to our local authority however I do understand the position of the others who are not known and don't wish to be hassled.