I have been following closely the arguments on various forums and lists against the new pupil registration regulations. These would allow schools to keep on roll for twenty days a child whom the parents had deregistered in order to home educate. There is of course no suggestion that the child will be compelled to attend school during this time; just that he will be listed on the register as Code Z, on roll but not attending. This code is currently used for children whose parents have registered their children at the school but whose kids have not actually started attending yet. Somebody on one list said something very curious. She said that this move would deprive a parent of legal responsibility for the child's education for this period and she regarded this as being a bad thing. There is a problem with this perspective.
When a parent signs over responsibility for educating her child to a third party, she is saying in effect, 'I can't cope. I need somebody else to look after my child's needs as I am not up to it'. It is rather like those parents who turn up at social services from time to time and dump their kids there, saying, 'I've had enough. I can't do this any more and I want the local authority to take over the job of looking after my kids'. Imagine if a parent did this when the child was five and then turned up seven or eight years later, saying, 'It's OK, I can cope now. Just hand the child back, I want him right now, this very day'. After all those years of taking over the mother's duties, I think that the local authority might be wise to ask a few questions and not just ring up the foster carers and tell them to bring the kid round to the office that very moment! They might reasonably ask the mother, 'What has changed, why do you now feel able to look after your own child when for the last eight years you have not been able to? Why did you give us the job in the first place?'
The situation with a parent who offloads the job of her child's education onto the council is in much the same. She has surrendered her duty to educate her child and asked the local authority to undertake it on her behalf. This is usually because she is too busy, poor or ill-educated to do it herself. Then, typically years down the line, she changes her mind and decides that she can do it herself. I think it only reasonable that the local authority should be able to ask her if she is sure that this is what she wants. After all, she has tacitly admitted that she doesn't feel up to the job by enrolling her child at school in the first place. Why the sudden mad hurry after all that time; why does she feel it necessary to assume this duty again at once, that very day? In other words, it is not that she is being deprived of the legal responsibility for her child's education by this new regulation. She has already deprived herself of this responsibility by asking the local authority to carry out her duties, instead of doing the job herself. All that will happen under the new regulations is that the local authority might just double check that this is what she now wants and that circumstances have changed and that she can really do this. I cannot personally see anything wrong with this, although I dare say that this will be portrayed as the local authority bullying parents and trying to force them to change their mind about home edcuating their child.
I think this sort of language is far too dramatic!
ReplyDelete"When a parent signs over responsibility for educating her child to a third party, she is saying in effect, 'I can't cope. I need somebody else to look after my child's needs as I am not up to it"
I am sure that 99% of those who "choose" school do so because it is the norm and there is no great thinking about it in the first place; and certainly no thought of not being able to cope. As someone who has chosen school for some of our children, it is not a decision made always because of some sort of negative feelings, but can be chosen for positive reasons too. (I could explain why but this is a bit irrelevant to your main point.)
Having said that, I therefore think that your argument in favour of the 20 day rule (ie that withdrawing a child from school is like trying to seize back PR) is weak. I have mixed feelings about a "20 day cooling off period" but its positive points are that it does allow a "trial run" for HE without the risk of losing a school place, and it does allow time for those who deregister in a crisis but have no intention of home educating to get their issues resolved without permament repercussions for the child's stability. (Yes, I know it could be a syatem which is abused in some LAs as a window to get children back into school too!)
The whole concept of a "cooling off period" has become part of our society - be it when changing electricity suppliers or in other bigger choices. To think of it as a period when a parent can attempt to seize back PR is rather over the top in my opinion!
'This is usually because she is too busy, poor or ill-educated to do it herself.'
ReplyDeleteIf you asked a sample 100 mothers why their children went to school most would reply, I am sure, 'Because it's the law!'
It's only when a crisis hits which affects their child so profoundly that they are forced to research alternatives that most parents will even come across the idea of HE.
'I am sure that 99% of those who "choose" school do so because it is the norm and there is no great thinking about it in the first place;'
ReplyDeleteThe education of one's child is the single most important thing in which most of us will ever be involved. If it is true that 99% of people don't think over-much about it, then this is truly horrifying! All the more reason for the local authority to ask them why they are suddenly taking such a keen interest.
'it does allow a "trial run" for HE without the risk of losing a school place, '
A trial run of home edcuation lasting less than three wekks! Surely this could be undertaken during the school holidays? I am not at all sure that twenty days would be long enough for parents to discover whether or not they felt up to this task.
I can tell you that for some parents it only takes a day or so! In fact I come across quie a few who deregister and then change their minds within a fortnight - which is fine if you have taken your child out of a failing school with no pressure on places, but tricky if the place is already filled!
ReplyDeletePeople have got other people to educate their children since time immemorial. The reason is as much to do with other people's areas of expertise than parents' lack of willingness to take responsibility for their child's learning.
ReplyDelete99% of people nowadays don't think overmuch about their responsibility for their children's education because that responsibility is largely actively taken out of their hands by the school system.
"She has already deprived herself of this responsibility by asking the local authority to carry out her duties, instead of doing the job herself."
ReplyDeleteNo no, she had been conned and brainwashed into believing that the education system would educate her child well enough and not damage him, it's what everyone else does who wants to go against the flow. She has woken up to the truth, because she is a parent who want what works for her children she must as the parent do the best job possible herself with whatever social and practical resources are available to her family.
Using the state education system is not the same as putting ones children in care.
Elizabeth
'99% of people nowadays don't think overmuch about their responsibility for their children's education because that responsibility is largely actively taken out of their hands by the school system.'
ReplyDeleteNot sure how this works! You must apply for a school place and take steps to see that you are acquire one for your child, if that is what you want. I don't see that responsibility for your child's education is 'actively taken' out of anybody's hands. If parents don't want the responsibility of educating their own children, then the state will do it for them. It is not taken out of their hands; they choose to give up this duty.
'No no, she had been conned and brainwashed into believing that the education system would educate her child well enough and not damage him, it's what everyone else does who wants to go against the flow'
ReplyDeleteSo presumably if everyone else was sacrificing their first-born child in the fires of the great god Moloch, then these parents would go with the flow and cast their own children into the flames as well? I kind of see this, but I still think that it does not remove entirely any responsibility for a parent's actions. Saying 'Please sir, everybody else was doing it!' is a pretty lame excuse at school. By adulthood, it really does not wash at all!
what happens if parent says im home educating child goes on hoilday for 2 weeks and then says no ive changed me mind thanks for keeping school place open for my child!
ReplyDelete'what happens if parent says im home educating child goes on hoilday for 2 weeks and then says no ive changed me mind thanks for keeping school place open for my child!'
ReplyDeleteParents often take their kids on holiday during term time, using all sorts of dodges. Why are you concerned about this?
simon said
ReplyDelete'Not sure how this works! You must apply for a school place and take steps to see that you are acquire one for your child, if that is what you want. I don't see that responsibility for your child's education is 'actively taken' out of anybody's hands. If parents don't want the responsibility of educating their own children, then the state will do it for them. It is not taken out of their hands; they choose to give up this duty. '
Not if most parents are unaware that they have such a duty in the first place. Nor if they get a letter from the LA reminding them of the need to apply for a school place. Nor if everyone is twittering about the child starting school soon etc etc.
I have also read about concerned parents not liking the '20 day rule' But as you said Simon, there is no obligation to attend.
ReplyDeleteAnd because the government would like us to think school is the only way, some people through ignorance don't know that there is the choice to home educate.
I know some people who have thought about taking their children out of school to educate otherwise and would find this comforting to know as I think the pressures from the education department and the 'main stream education' friends they've made make them feel as if only a teacher has the power to be able to educate.
So in a way this '20 day rule' would take some pressure off people like this I think.
Webb says-Parents often take their kids on holiday during term time, using all sorts of dodges. Why are you concerned about this?
ReplyDeletebut you could do this loads of times thus geting around any school attendance laws? you just keep child off for no more than 20 days saying your home educating? send him/her back saying i changed my mind? then in a few weeks time just repeat this! and than again and again?
Its a loophole in the system and once word gets around many parents will use this loophole just stick child on code z please? i be back in 20 days?
"When a parent signs over responsibility for educating her child to a third party"
ReplyDeleteDo they sign over responsibility? Or is the parent still legally required to ensure their child receives a suitable education? If they sign over responsibility, wouldn't parents with children at failing schools be able to sue the LA?
"she is saying in effect, 'I can't cope. I need somebody else to look after my child's needs as I am not up to it'."
Rubbish. She's saying I and my friends went to school my friends are sending their children to school, of course I'll send my child to school, what else would I do - it's the law.
"Parents often take their kids on holiday during term time, using all sorts of dodges. Why are you concerned about this?"
ReplyDeleteOnce the authorities realise that the 20 day rule is being abused by parents in this way, do you think they will reverse their decision and go back to instant de-registration? Or do you think they will introduce some kind monitoring/testing/visiting regimen in order to ensure people really do intend to home educate?
"I am sure that 99% of those who "choose" school do so because it is the norm and there is no great thinking about it in the first place; and certainly no thought of not being able to cope."
ReplyDeleteIn order to have a choice you need to be aware of the alternatives. I was given a form to enrol my son at school which I was told I needed to fill in "by law". When my son was 4 the head teacher told me that legally he should be attending school full time. How would a parent even know that HE is an alternative when they are being told that school is the only legal option. If I was aware of the "choices" I would never have sent my child to school.
Simon said,
ReplyDelete"she is saying in effect, 'I can't cope. I need somebody else to look after my child's needs as I am not up to it'. It is rather like those parents who turn up at social services from time to time and dump their kids there, saying, 'I've had enough. I can't do this any more and I want the local authority to take over the job of looking after my kids'."
Even when people actively choose school (as opposed to it being the default 'choice') I'm sure there are plenty of good reasons for using schools that do not involve the parent deciding they are not up to teaching their child! There's no need to be so derogatory about people who make different choices to you. You seem to believe that autonomous educators do this with parent-led educators, yet here you are modelling exactly the same behaviour that you claim to deplore.
anon says-Once the authorities realise that the 20 day rule is being abused by parents in this way, do you think they will reverse their decision and go back to instant de-registration? Or do you think they will introduce some kind monitoring/testing/visiting regimen in order to ensure people really do intend to home educate?
ReplyDeleteyour are right once parents start to abuse this the authorities will say we got to check that parent is home educating before your child can be taking off of the register for the school! its the first step toward their goal of a parent having to be approved before he/she can home educate!
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"So presumably if everyone else was sacrificing their first-born child in the fires of the great god Moloch, then these parents would go with the flow and cast their own children into the flames as well?"
So are us suggesting that there are no cultures that are routinely cruel to children where most people go along with the norm? What about female circumcision, for instance? Haven't there also been cultures (historically) that routinely practised death by exposure of unwanted newborns?
"So are us"
ReplyDeleteor even,
So are you
For once I totally agree with Simon in the original post. It is how it is. Not about the 20-day changes in deregistration because I think it's patronising and I worry that it's probably an incremental part of bigger changes to come.
ReplyDeleteBut after the recent amount of media exposure we've had, nobody can be excused nowadays for not knowing about home education, can they? So using a school is a completely voluntary and active decision to make.
"But after the recent amount of media exposure we've had, nobody can be excused nowadays for not knowing about home education, can they?"
ReplyDeleteHow does the recent exposure help the millions of children already registered at schools?
"How does the recent exposure help the millions of children already registered at schools?"
ReplyDeleteOr those who start thinking about schools after the current fuss has died down.