Some proposals for satisfying both local authorities and home educating parents
- 1. The local authority will provide the same facilities for GCSEs that school pupils have. Parents will not have to pay for them, nor spend ages searching for a place where their children can take them.
- 2. Every year or so, parents and children will meet with local authority staff in a neutral setting such as a private room in a library or other friendly place. They will all have a chat and talk about how home education is going and if there are any problems. particularly, there will be a discussion about what the local authority could do to help.
- 3. School laboratories, music rooms and playing fields will be made available to groups of home educated children.
- 4. Parents will give a rough idea of what they are hoping that their child will achieve or might be doing in the coming year.
- 5. Children will be able to sit in on some classes and take part in some activities without the need to be registered pupils at a school.
- 6. Parents will meet local authority staff without their children, once or twice a year for an informal chat. The local authority officers will be able to give them an idea of what children of the same age at school are doing and why.
- 7. Parents will be able to borrow any textbooks and other resources which they need from schools. This will be paid for by the 0.1 of the AWPU which was promised last year.
'The local authority officers will be able to give them an idea of what children of the same age at school are doing and why.'
ReplyDeleteThey might be able to say 'what', but I've been unable to find a coherent, accessible explanation of 'why'. If you have any useful links to the rationale behind the NC, I'd be interested to know. Especially in the light of the current consultation.
You still haven't addressed the issue of on what grounds LAs should see children or why parents have to report to them. There's no legal or constitutional mandate for either.
ReplyDelete'If you have any useful links to the rationale behind the NC,'
ReplyDeleteI am not a fan of the National Curriculum. I was thinking really in broader terms, such as a parent who did not realise that most children are reading by eight. Whether they should or, as people like the Steiner crowd believe, should not, is irrelevant. Some parents simply don't know what children the same age as their are doing in school and it might be helpful for them to have some idea.
You still haven't addressed the issue of on what grounds LAs should see children or why parents have to report to them. There's no legal or constitutional mandate for either.'
ReplyDeleteI was thinking more about a chat, rather than a report! You are right, there is no legal mandate for this, but it might actually promote a dialogue between home edcuators and their local authority; surely no bad thing.
'
'Most children are reading by eight' only because reading is a core skill taught in schools and children are expected to learn to read at five. If children didn't start school until they were seven, 'most children' might not be reading until they were ten.
ReplyDeleteWhat relevance does expected progress in school have to home education? If parents want to find out about it, there is extensive information on expected attainment levels on the DfE website.
'What relevance does expected progress in school have to home education?'
ReplyDeleteBecause this expected progress is not plucked out of thin air. It is based upon a huge amount of data which the average individual might well not be familiar with.
'Expected progress', as far as I can see, is based on the progress of the child of average ability in relation to the NC and assumes a smooth learning trajectory, which, in most children's cases, they do not follow.
ReplyDeleteI can see why a parent might be concerned if their child showed no interest in reading by 11, say, or couldn't read despite years of trying. But unless the LA was willing or able to help, there's no point having the conversation.
And I can't see how knowing about average attainment levels would help either. What if your child's learning profile is very different from the average? The only reason this is of concern to schools is that they have to teach children in classes, so a child that's way 'behind' is a problem.
No thanks. We opted out. That's why we home educated. My kids did very well without labs/school exam centres/school textbooks/LA staff poking their noses in. Plenty of IGCSE's (even in sciences) and doing well in FE. As did your own daughter.
ReplyDeleteThankfully, no one was comparing my children's rate of progress with anyone else's. Some years they'd have been 'behind' in certain subject areas and 'ahead' in others. All was well in the end, however.
The beauty of HE was that they learned according to the pace *I* judged to be appropriate for them, not some 'fool from the council' (as you affectionately refer to them) who knew nothing about them.
Webb says-Parents will meet local authority staff without their children, once or twice a year for an informal chat.
ReplyDeleteand if you dont meet with the Local authority you Webb would want the parents issued with a SAO just like Badman did?
As expected, I like 1,3,5 and 7. Number 2 I can possibly understand, although I think it would be more appropriate if there was an initial visit, then a visit at each transition; say 5,7,11 and 14. And number 4 I guess I could see the point of.
ReplyDeleteNumber 6 seems completely pointless. Why would I see someone once or twice a year when I've already seen them with my children? And why would I care about what schooled kids are doing, or even the why. To me the Why is obvious, to tick boxes and promote a society of drones. I think any questions about the child making obvious progress would be addressed within the yearly/transitional meeting and then would be the time for the LA to advise on 'normal' progress and start a discussion on whether help was needed.
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"4. Parents will give a rough idea of what they are hoping that their child will achieve or might be doing in the coming year."
When a parent responds to informal enquiries (in any way that would convince a reasonable person on the balance of probabilities that a suitable education is being provided, the level of evidence required in a court, why limit yourself to 'the one way') what is wrong with saying what has been covered over the past year, rather than plans for next year? If other people want to plan their child's learning in this way, that's fine, I wouldn't want to stop them. But why should you or anyone else want to stop my child learning the way we and they want them to learn?
Simon also wrote,
"It is based upon a huge amount of data which the average individual might well not be familiar with."
Data based on schools and school children following a curriculum. Why would this be relevant to home educated children who are likely to learn some things sooner, other things later and in a completely different order?
I like 1, 3 and 7. I'm sort of OK with 2, but my experience with my LA is that they're very NC focussed and we're not. This leads to misunderstandings. Though I do like the neutral aspect of meeting in a library.
ReplyDelete"Parents will give a rough idea of what they are hoping that their child will achieve or might be doing in the coming year."
ReplyDeleteIt is not possible to predict achievement or progress.
'Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"Parents will give a rough idea of what they are hoping that their child will achieve or might be doing in the coming year."
It is not possible to predict achievement or progress.'
That is a debatable point. However, I wasn't suggesting that it was possible to predict this. It would certainly be possible for a parent to write down what she hopes her child would be doing in the course of the coming year. I have an idea that if a child of twelve could not read or write, that most parents would hope that he would start to do so in the next year or so. This could be the basis for a plan of education for the coming year to which even the most autonomous of educators would be unable to object.
"This could be the basis for a plan of education for the coming year to which even the most autonomous of educators would be unable to object."
ReplyDeletePlans of any kind are likely result in a narrowing of choices for a child. There seems little point in making plans for the future if the parents and child have no intention of following them. You seem to be suggesting that parents should lie to the LA, Simon. I've asked before; what is wrong with saying what has been covered over the past year, rather than plans for next year? The LA would be able to see that a suitable education is taking place and our educational style need not be compromised, everyone is happy.
"Parents will give a rough idea of what they are hoping that their child will achieve or might be doing in the coming year."
ReplyDeleteI don't remember the school doing this for my children so why should Home Educators be expected to?