Friday, 1 March 2013
A question about autonomous education
I was talking the other day to a local authority officer who works with children who are not attending school. She asked me a question which left me a little foxed, so I thought that I would ask readers here to offer their views. As most home educators probably know, the Department for Education, in addition to closing down the practice of flexi-schooling, are targeting the children of Gypsies, Travellers and Roma; with a view to ensuring that they spend more time in school. There is a bit about this here:
http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/c/traveller%20cons%20doc%20dec12.pdf
Now as we know, some home educating parents feel strongly that a child can receive a perfectly good education just from being part of a family and participating in ordinary, everyday activities. We looked recently at Iris Harrison and her children. This was the lifestyle that they pursued; really just doing what they felt like doing and so educating themselves. Some days playing the violin; on others tinkering with an old car and so on. Some autonomous educators believe that this is the best type of education, where a child is free to choose his or her own curriculum and learn only about those things in which there is an intrinsic interest.
The question I was asked was this. Would this sort of education be regarded by many home educating parents in this country as being a suitable one for members of minority cultures such as the GTR community? Would it be acceptable just to leave it to these children and their parents to worry, or not, themselves about what might constitute a suitable, full-time education?
There was a supplementary question, depending upon the answer to this first point, but we might return to this later.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am not sure why they are singled out anyway? Are they some sort of sub human? Treat them just like one treats anyone else.
ReplyDeleteNo idea whatsoever about the AE question but hope your LA official didn't have anything to do with sanctioning this! http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/mums-anger-told-son-can-1690188 I hope they catch every cheating school that does this! They should set up a hotline there are so many!
ReplyDeleteOh, it's common enough; and it's not just the schools that are cheating. Try this one too...
Deletehttp://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/10213313.Educate_your_autistic_son_at_home__council_tells_mum/
Simon
ReplyDeleteWhat is it that you believe qualifies you to sit in judgement on an individuals belief and/or lifestyle choices?
What measure do you use to determine success in life, and your method a success?
Given your penchant for examining questions in greater detail, I would be interested in your thoughts!
I've heard it said that if you are middle class and your philosophy is 'autonomous' your child is receiving an education. If you aren't people refer to it as educational neglect.
ReplyDeleteThe LA employees have this bias too. I can give examples of two different LAs who treat middle class autonomous educators with respect and working class autonomous educators with suspicion and initiate SAO proceedings.
In case the case of the latter when someone with a posher accent spoke to them they dropped the case and found the family's education 'satisfactory'.
An interesting point. How about looking at the child themselves? IF concerns are raised with the LA about a child from any community then they have a duty to satisfy themselves that an education is taking place. Travelling children may be harder to identify, but I cannot recall hearing any news stories about them being at greater risk of abuse than any other group. Sadly, the same can't be said of those children in Council care.
ReplyDeleteMost of the autonomous home educators I know are well aware of what their children are learning about at any given time, and could give examples. I'll be the first to admit that I only know a relatively small sample, but my experience is that there is a great deal of effort going into sourcing resources and encouraging children, and that, most importantly, it works well for those children.
GRT families have different priorities to middle class white families, and a very different way of life. I don't feel that it is my right to tell a culture that it has to change but, to come round to a theme yet again, I do feel strongly that the old fashioned 'adult education' as in offered by the Workers Educational Association where adults could go to night school and take qualifications that they missed, for whatever reason, at school should be reinstated and developed.
Surely, in this internet age it couldn't be that hard? Why do we have to have this fixation that you do a certain set of exams at a certain age or you have missed the academic boat forever? The Victorians didn't; and they made massive strides as a society.
Anne
'GRT families have different priorities to middle class white families, and a very different way of life.'
ReplyDeleteA horrifying and dangerous assumption. I mention in today's post the case of Victoria Climbie. It was precisely this attitude which helped to condemn the child to death. Social workers and nurses noticed that the child seemed terrified of her aunt, but thought that this was due to the different culture which Africans and Caribbeans have of greater respect for adults. This was one of the reasons that the abuse was not picked up on; respect for differing cultural norms. I can't think that doing the same thing with Gypsies is a brilliant idea!
So is there a higher death rate amongst children of GRT families than say white C/D static living families, Simon? I'm not asking that to score points but because I don't know and I'm sure there's a better word for that group too. I'm trying to say, do GRT's have more deaths/injuries per head than those of a similar socio-economic group who attend school.
DeleteI have a nasty suspicion that it's the sort of research that no one actually wants to do, because of what it might show up.
My feeling is that if there is a shown welfare problem in a specific group, then yes, they do warrant more HELP. Not intervention. Not control. Active help. Like internet based schools. Like encouraging vocational qualifications. Like genuine help to learn the host language of the country they are living in.
It's like giving TB jabs to children of Asian origin who are more likely to visit the subcontinent but not routinely to white children (as happens to babies where I live). There is a clear risk factor, so it's dealth with.
Education is NOT the same as welfare. No one, to my knowledge, has ever died because they could not solve a quadratic equation.
Anne
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"Would it be acceptable just to leave it to these children and their parents [GRT families] to worry, or not, themselves about what might constitute a suitable, full-time education?"
No. They are subject to the same laws of the land as other home educators are. LAs should make informal enquiries, and if they fail to receive sufficient information to convince them that there is not a failure to provide a suitable education, they should take the first step in the SAO process which legally requires the parents to satisfy the LA that they are providing a suitable education.
A more appropriate question seems to be, how does the LA judge that the provided education equips a child for life within the community in which they currently live, whilst ensuring it does not close down the child’s future options.
'A more appropriate question seems to be, how does the LA judge that the provided education equips a child for life within the community in which they currently live, whilst ensuring it does not close down the child’s future options.'
ReplyDeleteAn even more appropriate question seems to be, 'Does the law actually state that the LA has this responsibility?'
The law states that the LA should intervene if they believe there is a failure to provide a suitable education. Case law has established that they can make informal enquiries in order to carry out this duty. Parents do not have to reply to informal enquiries, but if they refuse, or if they LA is not convinced by the evidence, case law has established that the LA can then consider issuing an SAO. The first step of this process is the issue of a letter giving the parents at least 15 days, legally requiring them to satisfy the LA that they are educating properly. So yes, I do think the LA has this responsibility.
DeleteThis was the basis of the Joy Baker court case. The LA did not believe that an AE education could be classed as a suitable education. The court disagreed and found in favour of Joy Baker. But the court didn't dispute the fact that the LA had the duty to make enquiries and reach a decision about the suitability of the provision, they just disagreed with that decision.
The level of evidence expected in a court case in defence of an SAO would be sufficient to convince 'a reasonable person', 'on the balance of probabilities', that a suitable education is being provided. So this is the level of evidence I would provide an LA if they ask.
I'd like to find out more? I'd like to find out more details.
ReplyDeleteVisit my web-site: see