HERE
Note: Law and guidelines current at December 2009
Thursday, 31 December 2009
Friday, 11 December 2009
Friday, 4 December 2009
Please pass this leaflet on...
There are many home educators who do not use the internet very often, and may not know what the new Children, Schools and Families Bill is proposing. The following leaflet can be downloaded, in pdf form, from HERE
If you can, please print it out and take it to your local groups, or pass it to your local email lists. The Bill is going through parliament NOW and not enough home educators know what it really contains.
The text from the leaflet is below.
“Parents bring up children, not Government”1
If you think this is New Labour policy, think again
Clauses 26 and 27 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill currently in Parliament would lock home educating families into a bureaucratic system that is all about restricting educational freedom and nothing to do with ensuring children are well educated and looked after.
What is the Government proposing?
If the proposals in the Bill become law:
• Every year, parents would have to ask permission from the Local Authority to home educate
The Government is calling this a ‘register’, but a more accurate word would be ‘licence’. Local authorities would have the power to refuse ‘registration’ or to remove children from the ‘register’ if their parents do not cooperate with the system. ‘Registration’ would have to be renewed every year.
• Unregistered home educated children would be ordered to attend school
Local authorities would not be allowed to consider whether the education of unregistered children is suitable for their needs. The only consideration would be whether the child was ‘registered’ or not.
• Parents would be required to supply an advance plan for their children’s education every year in order to remain on the ‘register’
Local authorities would be given the power to decide whether the education provided is suitable, and whether it measures up to the plan. The power to decide what constitutes a suitable education for an individual child would be taken out of the hands of that child’s parents and given to a local council officer, who may have met the child only once.
• Local authorities would have to reassess home educated children and parents every year
If home educated children, or their parents, do not give consent for a child to be interviewed alone, the local authorities would not have the right to insist. But they would have the right to remove that child’s name from the ‘register’ as a punishment for this refusal to cooperate. Loving parents would be forced to override their children’s wishes in order to protect their freedom to be educated outside the school system.
Clause 26 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill gives this or any future government the power to issue guidance to local authorities about what they may demand of parents as part of this new ‘registration’, monitoring and inspection regime. MPs are being asked to approve the Bill without having sight of this guidance.
Clause 26 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill has been presented to Parliament before the results of a public consultation on the proposals have been released. Over 5000 people responded to the consultation but their views have been completely ignored in the drafting of the Bill.
There is no need to change the law regarding home education. Home educated children are at no more risk of abuse than any other group of children. Local authorities already have powers to take action if parents are not educating or caring for their children properly.
Please write to your MP now and demand that they vote for the removal of Clauses 26 and 27 from the Bill.
1 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/childrensplan
If you can, please print it out and take it to your local groups, or pass it to your local email lists. The Bill is going through parliament NOW and not enough home educators know what it really contains.
The text from the leaflet is below.
“Parents bring up children, not Government”1
If you think this is New Labour policy, think again
Clauses 26 and 27 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill currently in Parliament would lock home educating families into a bureaucratic system that is all about restricting educational freedom and nothing to do with ensuring children are well educated and looked after.
What is the Government proposing?
If the proposals in the Bill become law:
• Every year, parents would have to ask permission from the Local Authority to home educate
The Government is calling this a ‘register’, but a more accurate word would be ‘licence’. Local authorities would have the power to refuse ‘registration’ or to remove children from the ‘register’ if their parents do not cooperate with the system. ‘Registration’ would have to be renewed every year.
• Unregistered home educated children would be ordered to attend school
Local authorities would not be allowed to consider whether the education of unregistered children is suitable for their needs. The only consideration would be whether the child was ‘registered’ or not.
• Parents would be required to supply an advance plan for their children’s education every year in order to remain on the ‘register’
Local authorities would be given the power to decide whether the education provided is suitable, and whether it measures up to the plan. The power to decide what constitutes a suitable education for an individual child would be taken out of the hands of that child’s parents and given to a local council officer, who may have met the child only once.
• Local authorities would have to reassess home educated children and parents every year
If home educated children, or their parents, do not give consent for a child to be interviewed alone, the local authorities would not have the right to insist. But they would have the right to remove that child’s name from the ‘register’ as a punishment for this refusal to cooperate. Loving parents would be forced to override their children’s wishes in order to protect their freedom to be educated outside the school system.
Clause 26 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill gives this or any future government the power to issue guidance to local authorities about what they may demand of parents as part of this new ‘registration’, monitoring and inspection regime. MPs are being asked to approve the Bill without having sight of this guidance.
Clause 26 of the Children, Schools and Families Bill has been presented to Parliament before the results of a public consultation on the proposals have been released. Over 5000 people responded to the consultation but their views have been completely ignored in the drafting of the Bill.
There is no need to change the law regarding home education. Home educated children are at no more risk of abuse than any other group of children. Local authorities already have powers to take action if parents are not educating or caring for their children properly.
Please write to your MP now and demand that they vote for the removal of Clauses 26 and 27 from the Bill.
1 http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/childrensplan
Thursday, 3 December 2009
Protect the family home! Please sign.
PETITION
Title - Home-ed-families
Category – Education and skills
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to uphold that parents have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of their child, not to undermine parents legitimately fulfilling their fundamental duties, and to assume that the best interests of their child is the basic concern of parents unless there is specific evidence to the contrary.
In particular, the government should ensure :-
• No right of access to the family home without evidence of a crime
• No right to interview a child alone without evidence of risk of serious harm
• No CRB checks or registration for parents to look after their own children, or to informally look after those of their friends, family etc
• No licensing / registration / assessment / monitoring of methods by which parents fulfil their duties without evidence that they are failing to do so, and with specific recognition that education "otherwise" than at school is a perfectly legal option to fulfil their duty regarding education
• No undermining of parents as being in the best position to determine how to meet their child's needs, according to their age, ability, aptitude, and any special needs they may have
• Greater focus on applying existing resources and procedures to cases of children known to be at risk, rather than dilution of these resources by routinely monitoring whole sections of the community
• Compliance with the fundamental presumption of innocence unless there is specific evidence to the contrary
Category – Education and skills
We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to uphold that parents have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of their child, not to undermine parents legitimately fulfilling their fundamental duties, and to assume that the best interests of their child is the basic concern of parents unless there is specific evidence to the contrary.
In particular, the government should ensure :-
• No right of access to the family home without evidence of a crime
• No right to interview a child alone without evidence of risk of serious harm
• No CRB checks or registration for parents to look after their own children, or to informally look after those of their friends, family etc
• No licensing / registration / assessment / monitoring of methods by which parents fulfil their duties without evidence that they are failing to do so, and with specific recognition that education "otherwise" than at school is a perfectly legal option to fulfil their duty regarding education
• No undermining of parents as being in the best position to determine how to meet their child's needs, according to their age, ability, aptitude, and any special needs they may have
• Greater focus on applying existing resources and procedures to cases of children known to be at risk, rather than dilution of these resources by routinely monitoring whole sections of the community
• Compliance with the fundamental presumption of innocence unless there is specific evidence to the contrary
Sunday, 8 November 2009
Home Education Youth Council (HEYC) Vows disobedience
Meeting with a civil servant, home educated youths declare non-compliance with proposed ‘immoral’ legislation
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE-05 NOV 2009.
Email: press@heyc.org.uk
Phone: 07870 104 216
Representatives of the Home Educated Youth Council met with Penny Jones, Deputy Director at the DCSF to discuss proposed legislation to monitor home educators. The legislation will be read out as part of the Improving Schools And Safeguarding Bill in the Queen’s Speech, and will set forth proposals to give local authorities the power to enter the homes of electively home educating families, and to speak alone to home educated children without their consent.
HEYC considers the proposals immoral and discriminatory, but the DCSF have no plans to scrap any of the proposals at present, despite the widespread opposition to them, and doubts as to the veracity of the research upon which they are based. Therefore, at the end of the meeting, they laid down an ultimatum: non-compliance to the proposals if they ever become law.
As children themselves, HEYC is very concerned about the damage that could be done to children who feel they must agree to see an inspector alone or be sent into the school system, and are outraged that an inspector would have the right to interview a child alone even against their wishes, since this directly violates children’s rights. The representatives of HEYC feel that this situation could be very upsetting, especially for small children. At present, there are no limits to the amount of time an inspector could choose to spend with a child, or what questions they would be allowed to ask. “I don’t think such power should be given to authorities who have sometimes demonstrated a deplorable lack of understanding of home education philosophies and current law.” Says Chloe Watson, Chair of HEYC
During the meeting, the representatives of HEYC asked if there had been any assessment of possible harm to children that could come out of these proposals, especially for younger children, who may be frightened at being taken away from their parents by a stranger. Ms. Jones said that no such assessment had been taken, and that there were no plans to do so, despite warnings from the home educated community that the proposals could be detrimental to some children’s well being.
The rest of the proposals include right of access to the “the premises where education is conducted”, even when that is a family home, or the home of a private tutor. There would only be two weeks notice, and inspections could be carried out at any time, so home educating families would not be able to risk going on holiday for more than two weeks for fear of missing an inspection and being deemed inadequate, or worse, risk being suspected of taking their children abroad for nefarious reasons.
“We see the proposals as condoning an invasion of privacy and violation of rights. Since this could quite possibly be harmful to home educating parents and children, we think civil disobedience is a proportionate response.” Says Chloe
END
Friday, 6 November 2009
Saturday, 26 September 2009
Missing: The 2007 Elective Home Education Guidelines
Click here to find the missing 2007 Elective Home Education Guidelines for Local Authorities.
They used to be HERE but they seem to have vanished!
Luckily, they were saved offline, so that people who need to see them can still refer to them.
Tuesday, 15 September 2009
Sunday, 13 September 2009
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Tuesday, 25 August 2009
Frequency count for the Badman review questions.
How could Graham Badman came to his conclusions after seeing this? One has to wonder what the purpose of a consultation is? And who the consultation is supposed to serve?
N.B. This was all conducted online. No hope for those who do not have access to a computer.
The questions were not advertised anywhere either.
original found HERE
N.B. This was all conducted online. No hope for those who do not have access to a computer.
The questions were not advertised anywhere either.
original found HERE
Basic Information
How have respondents responded? | ||
Response Types | Responses | |
On-Line: | 2081 | 99% |
Off-Line: | 0 | 0% |
Paper based: | 0 | 0% |
Email: | 13 | 1% |
Total: | 2094 | 100% |
Responses Information | ||
Information | Responses | |
Key Responses: | 0 | 0% |
Confidential Responses: | 960 | 46% |
Acknowledgements Requested (Sent): | 1123 (1123) | 54% ( 100% ) |
Future Contact: | 887 | 42% |
Respondent Information Questions
Please specify in what capacity you are responding to this questionnaire | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
A home educating parent: | 1418 | 68% | 68% |
Member of the public: | 207 | 10% | 10% |
A home educated child: | 199 | 10% | 10% |
Other organisation / capacity (Please specify): | 162 | 8% | 8% |
Working in local authority with other responsibilities: | 39 | 2% | 2% |
Working with children or families in another capacity(e.g. third sector): | 37 | 2% | 2% |
Working in local authority with responsibility for home educated children: | 31 | 1% | 1% |
Total: | 2093 | 100% | 100% |
Consultation Questions
1 Do you think the current system for safeguarding children who are educated at home is adequate? Please let us know why you think that. | |||
There were 2013 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1618 | 80% | 77% |
Not Sure: | 226 | 11% | 11% |
No: | 169 | 8% | 8% |
Key Indicators: | |||
System will never be failsafe/cannot protect everyone | 42 | 2.1 % | 2.0 % |
HE parents report to/meet with LA/EWO already/Annual visits are adequate | 101 | 5.0 % | 4.8 % |
More acceptance/recognition/support for HE | 92 | 4.6 % | 4.4 % |
More checks/regular contact with LA needed | 76 | 3.8 % | 3.6 % |
Existing systems/laws/safeguards are adequate | 364 | 18.1 % | 17.4 % |
Children suffer abuse/bullying etc at school/look at school system | 380 | 18.9 % | 18.1 % |
HE children are seen by wide range of people/abuse would be reported | 210 | 10.4 % | 10.0 % |
HE child at no more or less risk than school child | 253 | 12.6 % | 12.1 % |
This penalises/discriminates/is offensive to HE sector | 118 | 5.9 % | 5.6 % |
Same guidelines/systems exist for HE as does for all children | 137 | 6.8 % | 6.5 % |
Home | 92 | 4.6 % | 4.4 % |
Home | 58 | 2.9 % | 2.8 % |
No evidence suggests they are at risk/where is evidence | 159 | 7.9 % | 7.6 % |
Current systems to be improved/implemented properly | 137 | 6.8 % | 6.5 % |
Parents are responsible for safeguarding etc | 158 | 7.8 % | 7.5 % |
HE parents are caring/committed to childs best interest and safeguarding etc | 223 | 11.1 % | 10.6 % |
2 a) Be healthy | |||
There were 2049 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1954 | 95% | 93% |
Not Sure: | 68 | 3% | 3% |
No: | 27 | 1% | 1% |
Key Indicators: | |||
HE children are healthier/more aware of healthy living | 374 | 18.3 % | 17.9 % |
HE children have more opportunity to excersise/be outdoors etc | 643 | 31.4 % | 30.7 % |
Food healthier at home than at school | 362 | 17.7 % | 17.3 % |
No exam/testing stress at home | 55 | 2.7 % | 2.6 % |
Away from risk associated with school (bullying/physical harm/germs etc) | 247 | 12.1 % | 11.8 % |
HE children spend more time with parents/parents can monitor diets, spot illnesses etc | 328 | 16.0 % | 15.7 % |
HE children prepare food/cook | 185 | 9.0 % | 8.8 % |
HE children have less illnesses | 59 | 2.9 % | 2.8 % |
Cannot ensure children stay healthy 100% of the time | 76 | 3.7 % | 3.6 % |
No reason why they shouldn't be/they are as healthy as school children etc. | 424 | 20.7 % | 20.2 % |
2 b) Stay safe | |||
There were 2043 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1936 | 95% | 92% |
Not Sure: | 67 | 3% | 3% |
No: | 40 | 2% | 2% |
Key Indicators: | |||
Bullying/drugs/knives/underage sex etc associated with/experienced at school | 678 | 33.2 % | 32.4 % |
Smaller child/adult ratio in HE | 158 | 7.7 % | 7.5 % |
HE children learn independence/how to look after themselves | 136 | 6.7 % | 6.5 % |
Parents & family monitor & supervise their child/offer best protection or care | 672 | 32.9 % | 32.1 % |
HE child be at no more risk than school/other child | 253 | 12.4 % | 12.1 % |
2 c) Enjoy and achieve | |||
There were 2037 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1926 | 95% | 92% |
Not Sure: | 75 | 4% | 4% |
No: | 36 | 2% | 2% |
Key Indicators: | |||
Children learn at own pace | 363 | 17.8 % | 17.3 % |
One to one learning | 130 | 6.4 % | 6.2 % |
HE children achieve good quals | 155 | 7.6 % | 7.4 % |
Learning is personalised/tailored to child | 723 | 35.5 % | 34.5 % |
2 d) Make a positive contribution. | |||
There were 2029 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1904 | 94% | 91% |
Not Sure: | 92 | 5% | 4% |
No: | 33 | 2% | 2% |
Key Indicators: | |||
Actively/more involved in community | 487 | 24.0 % | 23.3 % |
Charity/voluntary/fund raising involvement | 186 | 9.2 % | 8.9 % |
No less likely than school/other children | 157 | 7.7 % | 7.5 % |
They are confident/can think for themselves | 269 | 13.3 % | 12.8 % |
More likely to make a positive contribution | 372 | 18.3 % | 17.8 % |
Positive contribution to what? | 133 | 6.6 % | 6.4 % |
They achieve academically/will pursue meaningful careers | 61 | 3.0 % | 2.9 % |
2 e) achieve economic well-being | |||
There were 1997 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1816 | 91% | 87% |
Not Sure: | 144 | 7% | 7% |
No: | 37 | 2% | 2% |
Key Indicators: | |||
More involved in real life situations/shopping, banking etc | 196 | 9.8 % | 9.4 % |
Can learn/pursue subjects & careers that interest them/not restricted by curriculum | 275 | 13.8 % | 13.1 % |
HE children self-motivated/confident/independent etc | 303 | 15.2 % | 14.5 % |
No different for School or Home Ed children | 182 | 9.1 % | 8.7 % |
What does this mean? | 119 | 6.0 % | 5.7 % |
HE achieve better academically | 117 | 5.9 % | 5.6 % |
Where is evidence/do a survey/provide proof | 39 | 2.0 % | 1.9 % |
No reason why they shouldn't/of course etc | 265 | 13.3 % | 12.7 % |
3 Do you think that Government and local authorities have an obligation to ensure that all children in this country are able to achieve the five outcomes? If you answered yes, how do you think Government should ensure this?. | |||
There were 1985 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
No: | 1157 | 58% | 55% |
Yes: | 571 | 29% | 27% |
Not Sure: | 257 | 13% | 12% |
Key Indicators: | |||
This is the parents' responsibility | 656 | 33.0 % | 31.3 % |
Less interference from Govt/LAs | 187 | 9.4 % | 8.9 % |
Govt/LA responsible when children are in schools | 68 | 3.4 % | 3.2 % |
Govt/LA should only be responsible where parent irresponsible/fails to provide etc | 85 | 4.3 % | 4.1 % |
These targets are not ensured at schools/Govt should concentrate on schools | 210 | 10.6 % | 10.0 % |
Does not agree with the 5 outcomes | 127 | 6.4 % | 6.1 % |
Govt's role is provide support/resources/facilities for achieving 5 outcomes | 286 | 14.4 % | 13.7 % |
Current systems/measurements are adequate | 56 | 2.8 % | 2.7 % |
This is insulting/discriminiting to HE | 32 | 1.6 % | 1.5 % |
4 Do you think there should be any changes made to the current system for supporting home educating families? If you answered yes, what should they be? If you answered no, why do you think that? | |||
There were 2006 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Yes: | 1162 | 58% | 55% |
No: | 602 | 30% | 29% |
Not Sure: | 242 | 12% | 12% |
Key Indicators: | |||
LA/Govt to be more understanding of/trained in HE | 463 | 23.1 % | 22.1 % |
General Financial help/help with books, sports access/subs, resources, libraries etc | 576 | 28.7 % | 27.5 % |
Exam Centre access or help with costs of exams | 411 | 20.5 % | 19.6 % |
Help not required/needed/procedures ok as they are | 286 | 14.3 % | 13.7 % |
Too much bureaucracy involved with support | 141 | 7.0 % | 6.7 % |
Less harrassment from Govt/LA | 118 | 5.9 % | 5.6 % |
Tax relief/Taxes paid, or have saved the State money! | 226 | 11.3 % | 10.8 % |
There is no current support | 334 | 16.7 % | 16.0 % |
Funding for college/able to attend colleges/training | 59 | 2.9 % | 2.8 % |
Resource centres | 67 | 3.3 % | 3.2 % |
Flexi-schooling | 50 | 2.5 % | 2.4 % |
Offer list of HE contacts/support networks/national facilities | 149 | 7.4 % | 7.1 % |
5 Do you think there should be any changes made to the current system for monitoring home educating families? If you answered yes, what should they be? If you answered no, why do you think that? | |||
There were 1995 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
No: | 1283 | 64% | 61% |
Yes: | 477 | 24% | 23% |
Not Sure: | 235 | 12% | 11% |
Key Indicators: | |||
More/regular checks needed | 131 | 6.6 % | 6.3 % |
Fine as it is | 566 | 28.4 % | 27.0 % |
LAs need to understand/apply law accordingly/be trained | 421 | 21.1 % | 20.1 % |
Guidelines needed | 47 | 2.4 % | 2.2 % |
National consistency within LAs | 87 | 4.4 % | 4.2 % |
We do not neeed monitoring | 468 | 23.5 % | 22.3 % |
Mandatory registration | 57 | 2.9 % | 2.7 % |
6 Some people have expressed concern that home education could be used as a cover for child abuse, forced marriage, domestic servitude or other forms of child neglect. What do you think Government should do to ensure this does not happen? | |||
There were 1812 responses to this question | |||
Options | Responses | Across Consultation | |
Key Indicators: | |||
Nothing | 58 | 3.2 % | 2.8 % |
Concentrate on known/reported cases | 155 | 8.6 % | 7.4 % |
This is scaremongering/exaggerated/out of proportion | 161 | 8.9 % | 7.7 % |
More understanding of/awareness/tolerance/info on HE | 186 | 10.3 % | 8.9 % |
Systems can never be failsafe | 105 | 5.8 % | 5.0 % |
This happens to school children/Look at schools | 686 | 37.9 % | 32.8 % |
Welfare & education not the same thing | 57 | 3.1 % | 2.7 % |
Too much emphasis on HE/insulting/offensive/discriminative | 515 | 28.4 % | 24.6 % |
This is | 80 | 4.4 % | 3.8 % |
Abuse would be picked up by doctors/neighbours etc | 110 | 6.1 % | 5.3 % |
Where is the proof/evidence etc | 616 | 34.0 % | 29.4 % |
Staffing issues (pay,training, quality of staff etc) | 42 | 2.3 % | 2.0 % |
Proper support for HE (finance,books,sports subs etc) | 25 | 1.4 % | 1.2 % |
134 | 7.4 % | 6.4 % | |
Govt to get own house in order | 48 | 2.6 % | 2.3 % |
More awareness of warning signs | 26 | 1.4 % | 1.2 % |
This is excuse to regulate/intrude on HE | 113 | 6.2 % | 5.4 % |
Current systems & laws ok/or ok if implemented properly | 225 | 12.4 % | 10.7 % |
HE's good parents/caring/committed/give up time etc | 201 | 11.1 % | 9.6 % |
Regular checks/on the spot checks/monitoring or registration | 178 | 9.8 % | 8.5 % |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)