Comparing HE Guidance for LAs and Parents

I have been asked a few times whether the new guidance for LAs and that for Parents means that current home educators have to do anything different to what they're currently doing; especially because advice up until now has been to keep everything in writing, preferably avoiding visits at all, and if you're under the radar - stay there.

Trying to answer this question, made me realise that I haven't actually compared the two documents - so I'm going to attempt that now.  As a recap, here were my initial thoughts about the guidance for LAs, but as I haven't gone through the guidance for parents explicitly, I will do that here.
In an attempt to make it easier to determine which guidance I'm talking about, I will colour quotes from guidance for LAs in Red, and quotes from the guidance for Parents in Green.
(I apologise to anyone reading this who are red/green colour blind. I will endeavour to try and make it as clear as possible to which I'm referring from the text too.)

This is a shorter document, than that for LAs, at only 24 pages.

The guidance starts by saying:

This is departmental guidance from the Department for Education. It is non-statutory, and has been produced to help parents understand their obligations and rights in relation to elective home education.
...
The guidance represents the department’s view as to the way in which the current legal framework affects the provision of home education. It does not create new powers or duties, and only the courts can make authoritative decisions on the law.

Given that there is no duty for HErs to be on a register, to accept visits, or to be monitored by the LA, I do question the thought that it does not create new powers or duties.

Section 2.4 says:

2.4 You may also decide to exercise your right to educate your child at home from a very early stage, before he or she reaches compulsory school age. There are no requirements in that case as to the content of any home education provided - since there is no legal requirement for any education to take place at all, although state-funded places of between 15 and 30 hours a week would normally be available in early years settings for children of an appropriate age. 

Whilst state-funded places are often available for preschoolers, it is not compulsory for them to be taken up.  Many schooled-children are kept at home until they start at Reception.  Similarly, some children who are never going to go to school, accept the state-funded places and stay their until they are CSA (Compulsory School Age, ie the term after their 5th birthday).

Section 2.6:

Conversely, it is possible to deliver a suitable education very inefficiently.

You mean like school!?! Doo-da-doo <walks away whistling>


Section 2.7:

2.7 There is no legal definition of “full-time” in terms of education at home, or at school. Children attending school normally have about five hours tuition a day for 190 days a year, spread over about 38 weeks. However, home education does not have to mirror this. In any case, in elective home education there is often almost continuous one-to-one contact and education may sometimes take place outside normal “school hours”. 

5hrs x 190 days = 2hrs 36min every day of the year.
I'm glad it has said that home education does not have to mirror this, because it is arguable that schools do not even achieve this.  Monkeymum has done a detailed breakdown of the time spent in schools, and it comes down to 51min every day of the year!  In fact, I've seen a similar calculation on a blog (that I can't find right now), that says if you were to do school-at-home, and teach the national curriculum as set out in teacher's plans, it would take a maximum of 2 hrs a day, right up to GCSE level!
I like the quote at the end of MonkeyMum's post: "As I said earlier, I’m not anti-school. 51 minutes per day, actively learning, sounds brilliant to me. But what about all the other hours spent in school?

Our family time is too precious for that."

Sections 2.8 and 2.9 say:

2.8 Home-educating parents are not required to:
• have a timetable
• set hours during which education will take place
• observe school hours, days or terms
2.9 In practice, the question of whether education for a specific child is full-time will depend on the facts of each case; but you as parents should at least be able to quantify and demonstrate the amount of time for which your child is being educated. Education which clearly is not occupying a significant proportion of a child’s life (making due allowance for holiday periods) will probably not meet the s.7 requirement. 

This is worrying, from an Unschooling point of view.  If your home education looks like school-at-home, or is eclectic, so you have some structured time, as well as free learning, it will be very easy to quantify how much time is spent on learning/education.  However, if your approach to HE is a whole life approach, where there is no distinction between work or play or anything else, and specifically if it is child-led, this will be more difficult to do.

Swapping briefly to the Guidance for LAs, Section 2.4 says:

Many home educating families do follow a clear academic and time structure but it should not be assumed that a different approach which rejects conventional schooling and its patterns is unsatisfactory, or constitutes ‘unsuitable’ education. Approaches such as autonomous and self-directed learning, undertaken with a very flexible stance as to when education is taking place, should be judged by outcomes, not on the basis that a different way of educating children must be wrong.

Where is the need to account for each hour of education coming from, if it is not coming from the guidance for LAs?  In fact, the word "quantify" is not in the LA's guidance at all!

 Back to the Parent's Guidance, Section 2.10 says:

More generally, you should bear in mind that: a. even if there is no specific link with the National Curriculum or other external curricula, there should be an appropriate minimum standard which is aimed at, and the education should aim at enabling the child, when grown-up, to function as an independent citizen in the UK - and furthermore, beyond the community in which he or she was brought up, if that is the choice made in later life by the child

 And yet, this "appropriate minimum standard" is not defined anywhere.  Again, going back to LAs guidance, section 9.4b says:

b. notwithstanding (a), the home education provision does not need to follow specific examples such as the National Curriculum, or the requirement in academy funding agreements for a ‘broad and balanced’ curriculum, nor the independent school standards prescribed by the Secretary of State

So, if HE provision is not required to meet independent school standards, what is the minimum standard that needs to be aimed at, and how can that be monitored or assessed or quantified for those home educators who live their learning?

Section 2.10 c says:

c. local authorities may use minimum expectations for literacy and numeracy in assessing suitability,

so again, referring to some minimum expectations, which are not quantified. I am not bringing up these points because I think home educators should be free to kick back and not learn anything; on the contrary, I personally still love learning and enjoy getting more and more qualifications under my belt.  However, if the suitability of education is to be judged on "outcomes", as in the 2.4 quote above from the guidance for LAs, that can only occur at the end of the time of education.  If we can refocus, so stop thinking of education as occurring only at school, but is indeed truly life long, it could change our whole society. 
Personally, I'd prefer 18yos to come out of "education" having no qualifications, but a desire and aptitude to learn more, rather than coming out with a hands full of qualification that they then chuck to one side because they are "fed up with learning" or "learning is boring", and being unable or unwilling to learn as they live their lives.  But that's just me.

Section 2.10d:

d. education may not be ‘suitable’ even if it is satisfactory in terms of content and teaching, if it is delivered in circumstances which make it very difficult to work (for example in very noisy premises). This might also affect whether it is ‘efficient’ and indeed, whether it is ‘received’ at all for the purposes of s.7; 

Dare I mention schools again?  With 30+ kids? No TA? I even have a friend who teaches primary and is covering 2 classes because the other teacher went on maternity leave, and the school has been unable to fill that post!

e. education may also not deemed suitable if it leads to excessive isolation from the child’s peers, and thus impedes social development. 

Unlike schools, who put "disruptive" children into isolation for hours, days or weeks, without identifying or managing any underlying cause.

Section 2.11 I'm including because it is a good thing, and reminiscent of section 3.13 of the old Guidelines for LAs:

2.11 There are no legal requirements for you as parents educating a child at home to do any of the following:
• acquire specific qualifications for the task
• have premises equipped to any particular standard
• aim for the child to acquire any specific qualifications
• teach the National Curriculum
• provide a ‘broad and balanced’ curriculum 

• make detailed lesson plans in advance

• give formal lessons
• mark work done by the child
• formally assess progress, or set development objectives
• reproduce school type peer group socialisation
• match school-based, age-specific standards 

For comparison, the OLD guidelines said:

Home educating parents are not required to:
teach the National Curriculum
provide a broad and balanced education
have a timetable
have premises equipped to any particular standard
set hours during which education will take place
have any specific qualifications
make detailed plans in advance
observe school hours, days or terms
give formal lessons
mark work done by their child formally
assess progress or set development objectives
reproduce school type peer group socialisation
match school-based, age-specific standards. 

In the new guidance for LAs, this list is no longer there in this format but all the points are there within the paragraphs and text.

Section 2.12:

2.12 However, many home-educating families do some of these, at least, by choice. Furthermore, it is likely to be much easier for you to show that the education provided is suitable if attention has been paid to the breadth of the curriculum and its content, and the concepts of progress and assessment in relation to your child’s ability.

So, even though we don't have to follow the NC, don't have to provide a broad and balanced curriculum, don't have to mark work, don't have to assess progress and don't have to set development objections, home educators are being advised it'll be "much easier"  for us, should we do all this...

Section 2.13 says:

You should, however, consider whether home education is realistically possible in your family’s particular circumstances, and if your child is happy to be educated in this way. The local authority may wish to gain the child’s opinion on the suitability of the home education received (as distinct to the question of the child’s preference for being educated at home rather than at school), as this can be relevant to any decision it needs to make on whether the s.7 requirements are met.

I do wonder if Ofsted actually asks any school children whether they think their school education received is suitable?  After a quick google, I can see that Ofsted asks the opinions of some parents (I don't know whether any parent can reply, or if they are chosen?) but not asking the children directly.


Section 3.1 ends:

 Also consider whether home education is in your child’s overall best interests, including social development.

Because of course, all HE kids are kept locked under the stairs, have no friends, and don't know how to socialise.  <eye roll>

Most of the rest of Section 3 isn't too bad, as it seems to be trying to prevent off-rolling, and advising against temporary HE for the wrong reasons (though it considers changing school to be a bad reason, whereas I think home educating whilst you are waiting for a preferred school place isn't necessarily a bad thing, assuming you are home educating during that time).
What it doesn't do, however, is recommend that you talk to other home educating families whilst you are still in the 'considering' stage.  I would consider this vital (much more so than contacting the LA), as other families can share what HE is really like, can advise what groups and meets are local, and in all honesty, are going to be much more supportive than the LA ever will.

Section 3.8 says:

3.8 In summary, therefore, as parents you should consider:
a. why are you thinking of educating your child at home?
b. what does your child think about the idea?
c. do you have the time, resources and ability to teach your child properly?
d. is your home suitable for undertaking teaching and learning, in terms of noise, space and general environment?
e. What support do you as parents have from others? What would happen if you were unable, perhaps through illness, to provide teaching for your child for a period of time?
f. can you provide social experiences, access to cultural and aesthetic experiences and physical exercise, to help your child develop?
g. Do you envisage educating your child at home for the whole of their time of compulsory school age, or only temporarily? What are your long term intentions for the education of your child?

I question (c) "ability to teach your child properly".  Section 2.11 has already said you don't need specific qualifications, and studies from America (mainly because HE is more prevalent over there, so there have been more studies done, than in the UK) have shown that parental qualification have no impact on the success/attainment of homeschooled children, whereas the quality of time spent together does correlate with academic achievement.  As you've come to expect, I can't remember where I read that, and can't find it from a search, but have found this summary of research which includes a summary of Paula Rothermel's research from 2001 which says:

It showed that whilst 14% of parents interviewed had some teacher training home educating parents were more likely to come from manual and semi‐skilled backgrounds and, contrary to most educational research findings, lower social class did not equate with poorer performance in children; in fact the reverse was often true.

I also question points (d), (e), (f) and (g).

9.4g of the LA's guidance says:

g. any assessment of suitability should take into account the environment in which home education is being provided. Most obviously, home accommodation which is noisy and/or cramped is likely to make it very difficult for a child to learn and make satisfactory progress.

 Whereas a home educated child can learn in any room of the house, in the garden, or elsewhere (libraries, parks etc before we even mention groups that meet in hired halls or in specific buildings), classrooms can be only 55m2 for 30children!

As I said above, to conquer (e), the guidance for parents should specifically point parents towards meeting other home educators. (f) is part of home education - how many times do I need to say that HE kids are not kept under the stairs?! And (g) is irrelevant.  Schools will always be there.  HE will, hopefully(!), always be there.  Parents need to make the decision based upon what is best for their children now.  Yes, look to the future, but things change.  Circumstances change.  Children's interests change.  The NC changes often enough!  One of the great benefits of HE is the flexibility.

Section 4.1 says:

4.1 If your child has never been enrolled at a school, you are under no legal obligation to inform the local authority that he or she is being home educated, or gain consent for this. However, it is strongly recommended that you do notify your local authority of the fact, in order to facilitate access to any advice and support available. Some local authorities operate voluntary registration schemes which are linked to support arrangements.

Why advice and support can the LA offer? Section 3.6 has already said you're on your own:

Remember that if you choose to educate your child at home, you as parents must be prepared to assume full financial responsibility for the child’s education, including bearing the cost of any public examinations (which would have to be entered via an external examinations centre, which may be some distance from your home). Some local authorities may provide financial or other assistance to home-educating families for public examinations, but this is discretionary. Other costs to consider include books, paper, IT and other equipment, and educational visits and sporting activities. Local authorities can consider giving support when special educational needs are being met through home education and additional costs are incurred as a consequence of those special needs. Even in these cases, assistance is discretionary. Some local authorities operate support groups or forums for home-educating families, or provide access to advice; but again, this is discretionary. 

And given how much LAs are trying to underhandedly register and monitor home educators (not to mention the current consultation about registration), no HErs worth their salt would recommend anyone joining any support group or forum run by the LA. Get your support from other HErs instead, or from one of the various HE websites eg http://educationalfreedom.org.uk or charities eg https://www.educationotherwise.org/. These sources are much more trustworthy, imo, and will help you get in touch with other home educators should you need it (but as a hint, join Facebook and type "Home Education *your LA*" and you should find at least one HE group local to you).

Section 4.2 starts in a confusing way, imo:

4.2 If your child is currently on the roll of a school you are not obliged to inform the school that he or she is being withdrawn for home education or gain consent for this.

If your child is registered at a school, you MUST deregister by writing to the head teacher; otherwise you risk your child being CME (Children Missing Education) and you could get fined or worse.  What section 4.2 means, is that when you ask the school to remove your child's name from the school roll, you do not need to specify that you are home educating, though it is sensible to do so.  You also do not have to give any reasons as for why you want to home educate.  As the parent, you are legally responsible for your child's education, whether at school or otherwise, so once you deregister, that is it.  You don't need to have any contact with the school; you don't need to have any meetings with the school nor fill out any of the school's forms.

Chapter 5 is all about the duties of the LA, and how much contact they will have with you.

5.1 Your local authority has no formal powers or duty to monitor the provision of education at home. However, it does have a statutory duty (under s.436A of the Education Act 1996) to make arrangements to enable it to establish the identities, so far as it is possible to do so, of children in its area who are not receiving a suitable education.

5.3 The local authority is therefore likely to make such enquiries if it becomes aware that you are educating a child at home - or may be doing so. As parents you are under no legal obligation to respond, but if you do not, the local authority is entitled to conclude from the absence of any response that it appears that your child is not receiving a suitable education, with all the consequences which can follow from that (see below).

If the LA get in touch with you, it is ALWAYS advisable to reply.  You don't need to complete any forms - a letter should be sufficient - but don't forget to respond.

5.4 Some local authorities will ask to see the child at home or in another location, as well as seeing examples of work done. As parents, you are under no legal obligation from education law to agree to such a meeting (but see section below on safeguarding) or to produce specific evidence but you should consider carefully the reasons for not doing so, what is in the best interests of your child, and what is the most sensible approach. If you do not do enough to satisfy the local authority about the education being provided at home it may have no option but to conclude that the education does not meet the s.7 requirement.

Section 6.6 of the LA's guidance says:

6.6 Informal enquiries can include a request to see the child, either in the home or in another location. But the parent is under no legal obligation to agree to this simply in order to satisfy the local authority as to the suitability of home education, although a refusal to allow a visit can in some circumstances justify service of a notice under s.437(1).

Previously, it was always advisable to say no to visits, however, now a refusal to allow a visit can justify service of a notice.  As such, I think if your LA has asked/arranged a visit, I would reply asap to ask them if you could submit a report instead (that way you can keep everything in writing, as that is my preference) or if that won't be acceptable then suggest to meet in a neutral location such as a cafe or a library.  You are showing your preference to keep everything in writing, but are showing willing to meet if necessary.
If you do agree to have a visit from the LA, I would recommend having a HEing friend there too, to be your advocate and witness.  Whether you want them to take notes of the meeting, or simply be there supporting you, it's up to you.

Section 5.5 includes:

 Local authorities should be bearing in mind that, in the early stages, your plans may not be detailed and you may not yet be in a position to demonstrate all the characteristics of an "efficient and suitable" educational provision. You may want to ask the local authority for advice and support. A reasonable timescale should be agreed for you to demonstrate that all aspects of your provision in place, but this does not mean that there can be any significant break between the end of schooling and the provision of good education at home.

I'm a big advocate for deschooling - I think it is essential for all home educating parents, and useful for children who have been in school.  However, NEVER use that word with the LA.  They do not understand it or why it is important. Section 6.2 of the guidance for LAs shows their ignorance:

6.2 Families beginning home education sometimes state that they are entitled to a period during which the home education provided for the child may not meet the requirements in s.7 because they are still, as it were, building up the provision to a satisfactory level. Some parents may go further and describe this period as being necessary for ‘deschooling’. There is no legal basis for such a position. Any statement along these lines could be an indication that the child is not being properly educated.

So, do not use the word "deschooling" with the LA, ever.

Section 5.6-5.10 are all about what happens if the LA does not think you are providing a suitable education.  Hopefully, it won't ever happen to you, but the key thing to remember is to always reply and respond to their letters.

5.11 says:

This duty does not entitle a local authority to insist on visiting a child’s home, or seeing the child, simply for the purposes of monitoring the provision of home education.

Which is interesting when they've said way up there ^^ that the LA has no duty to monitor HE.
The rest of Chapter 5 is to do with the safeguarding role of the LA.

Section 5.13 says:

Your local authority’s published policy on elective home education may explain the circumstances in which the authority may decide that use of the Children Act powers is justified. The Secretary of State has no power to intervene in relation to unjustified use of these powers. In any event, parents should not be using home education as a way of preventing proper oversight of children.

The question(s) I have is:
If there has been unjustified use of these powers, who can we complain to?
Who is the ombudsman? 
If the Secretary of State has no power to intervene, who does have the power?

Section 6.1:

You will therefore wish to satisfy yourself by taking up appropriate references, and check that any private tutor has a recent Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) disclosure certificate.

Again, this is a personal thing, but needs to be said - self-employed private tutors cannot get an enhanced DBS check.  A basic one, yes, but as a self-employed private tutor myself, unless I get employed through a school or a tuition agency (which would take a large cut of any payment, so I don't want to) I cannot get an enhanced DBS check done on myself.

And the rest of the document seems quite sensible at a glance.

So, going back to my initial question, on the whole I do NOT think HErs need to do anything different. Keep home educating, to the best of your ability, according to your child's needs and interests (or age, ability and aptitude in legal speak).  You do not need to suddenly contact the LA or register if you are currently 'unknown'.  If the LA gets in contact, ALWAYS reply.  You can ask to keep everything in writing, but have to show willing to have a visit if they insist, however, the visit does not have to occur in your home, but could be in a neutral location such as a library or a cafe.

I hope that makes sense.

Weekly Update No14

I didn't keep going with my smoothies. 😟
I started the week well, but then slipped; and slipped again; and again...
Getting distracted by all the Home Ed stuff that is going on atm certainly hasn't helped.

So, I've put on half a kilo - not massive in the great scheme of things, but is in the wrong direction, and I know it was my fault (as opposed to genuine fluctuation).

DD2 made baked doughnuts yesterday - cinnamon sugar ones and chocolate flavour ones.  I may have had 4 more than I intended to...

So, this week I am going back to ready prepared smoothies.
I can't afford to always buy the fresh/organic ones from my local raw juice bar, so I have bought a load of different ones from the supermarket, after reading through the ingredients list of what is in them.  The draw-back to this tactic, is that the bottles are not single serving sizes and different smoothies have different serving sizes - some are 150ml and some are 250ml.  Also, as they're all fresh, I have to be organised and keep on top of best before and use by dates.  I do have some fruit that I am going to blitz up into a home-made one, but at least having the option of ready prepared ones should hopefully put me back on the straight and narrow.

And as Easter is coming up, my girls want to make their own Easter treats, that we do every year.  Homemade Hot Crossed Buns and Homemade not-Cadbury's Cream Eggs are delicious.  I will have to be very disciplined to not only not lick out the bowl, but also not to eat too many once they have been made.
Wish me luck!

Why a Home Education Register is NOT a Good Idea

Ideally, I didn’t want to have to write this. I saw a FANTASTIC blog post a year or so ago that explains why perfectly. Now thegovernment has opened a consultation about bringing in a register, can I find that post? Nope! So, I’m going to do my best to explain in my own words. It won’t be as good as the previous one, so if anyone happens to know the post I’m talking about, please add the link into the comments below!

Whilst searching for the aforementioned blog, I did come across (and have shared with me) some other good articles so will list them for you, as they are worth reading anyway:
Response to the Second Reading of Lord Solely's Bill
Response to Lord Solely's Blog

It's Not Home Educators who abuse children

Forcing HE children into schools won't work

No to Monitoring

I started had a mini-rant about registration on a previous post, and whilst I hope this stays an objective article, I will apologise in advance in case it takes a ranty turn! lol

So, what is wrong with registration?

And I'm immediately, going to twist that around and ask, what is right with registration?
What [positive] thing is having a list of home educators going to achieve?

It's important for the government to know how many home educated children there are.

Why? The government knows all births and deaths of children.  The government knows all children who are registered at a state school, and probably those who are registered at independent schools too.  It's not difficult to calculate the number of children who are left.

But what if the children are not being educated properly? The LA has to check!

As opposed to all those children in schools who are not being educated properly? The ones coming out of school without GCSEs or other qualifications. The children with SEN or simply struggling because of the teacher or the environment and are being left behind?  Or what about the academically advanced children, who are not being stretched, so are either sat at the back quietly being bored (because they're "good" children [like I was]) or are being disruptive because they are bored and so get into trouble?  And the many, MANY adults who have left school and think they're "thick" and "can't learn" because of what they have faced at school, not realising that learning is life-long, and some people are not ready to be stuffed with facts at a young age, but mature later.

Incidentally, I'm not 'dissing' teachers - I have great respect for teachers, and think they do a fabulous job with the few resources they are given.  It's schools, and the government's lack of support for them, that I dislike.

Anyway, the legal responsibility for educating children lies with parents, not the government. Section 7 of the Education Act states:

The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable -
(a) to his age, ability and aptitude, and
(b) to any special educational needs that he may have,
either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.

Which means, in real terms, if your child goes to school and comes out having learned nothing, it is the parents' fault for not changing schools/providing alternative education in order for it to be suitable.  i.e. You cannot sue the school/government - it's not their fault.

But what if the children are not being educated properly?

IF there is evidence that the children are not being educated properly (allowing for differing styles of HE; not just "school at home"), then there is a process in place, and in that circumstance it would be right for someone who has concerns to report them the the Education Welfare Officers in your local LA.  However, it is totally wrong to assume that just because a child is home educated, means that they are not receiving a good education.

But what if people are using HE as a cover for abuse? Or trafficking? Or radicalisation?

Let's take these one-by-one, though I'm going to go through that list backwards.

Radicalisation - Anecdotally, admittedly, but I haven't heard of a single HE kid being radicalised.  The closest I've come, is from the papers about children using illegal schools - but that's NOT home ed.  And even then, I'm not even sure I've heard any of those children actually being radicalised?  All the ones I can think of from the papers, came from schools.

Trafficking - again, anecdotally, I've not even heard of this ever happening.  The closest to trafficking I can think of, are those kids who have been removed from schools in order to become child-brides elsewhere in the world.  These children were in school, so they were known to the authorities.  It is the school's duty to inform the LA that a child has been removed from their school roll.  The LA will then be in touch with the family and offer them support.  Often, however, these girls are not deregistered, but mysteriously do not return to school after the summer holidays.  This is not home education.

And Abuse - Did you know school children are statistically much more likely to be abused than home educated children?  There are plenty of kids in schools whose bruises etc go unnoticed, or where their sudden change in personality is just put down to 'a phase'.  School is not the fail-safe it is purported to be.  Again, I'm not blaming the teachers, they don't have time to go to the loo themselves, let alone understand everything about a pupil's personal life, whilst trying to maintain control of a classroom of 30+ kids, and write report after report to show they're adding value...

But what about [Insert Name of Someone you've read in the Papers]? They were abused and died because of Home Education.  A register would have protected them!

No, just no. Did you know that there has not been a Serious Case Review where Home Education has been identified as the cause/reason for the abuse? In fact, in EVERY SINGLE SCR the child is ALREADY KNOWN to the authorities!  As I've said, children who were in school automatically get referred to the LA.  The LA will then contact the family, so the family will be known.  Being on a register, and being visited once a year won't make any difference.  Even in the case where a boy hadn't previously been in school, his family were reported and nothing was done.  The SCR claim that EHEOs didn't have the power to access the home - which is/was true - BUT Social Services do have that power when accompanied by a police officer; and in his case, it was definitely a Welfare Issue, not an Education Issue, so EHEOs should not have been involved in the first place!

Ok, ok.  But you still haven't explained what's so bad about being on a register?  It's only a list of names!

A register is never just a list of names.  If it were, it would be a waste of time and money for the government and local authorities trying to achieve it.  A list, by itself, wouldn't make any difference to any of the concerns you have mentioned, as once someone has been added would they stay on that list forever?  What if the child goes to school at some point?  Or does the list need to be maintained?  How would it be maintained? Is it enough to trust schools to tell the LA when I child enrolls? Or do HErs need to be contacted every-so-often, to check they're still home educating?  And if they are checked on regularly, this will easily morph into monitoring.

And what's wrong with monitoring?

Read the links above, if you haven't already.

In short, how will a person, who has no training in education or pedagogy, who has no understanding of home education nor different education styles, understand from a brief visit whether the education being provided is suitable to the child's age, ability or aptitude?  Given that home educators do not need to follow the National Curriculum (nor should they have to - imagine HE as the ultimate private school), and the new guidance says that outcomes do matter, you can only truly judge home education at the end point, by which time there is no need for EHEOs to be involved.  Any attempt to intervene earlier, is scope creep towards enforcing specific curricula and eroding the rights of the child for having an education tailored specifically for them as an individual.

So, am I right in thinking that if a child has never been to school, they are not "known" to the LA?  What if something changes - suppose a parent becomes an alcoholic, or starts a relationship with an abuser?  Children should not be invisible and need to be protected!

Home Educated kids are not invisible.  They are registered at birth, at doctors, dentists, opticians.  Many have passports.  Many do "extra-curricular" activities.  In fact, if I even go into the supermarket, my girls will be asked "No school today?" because they are around during the day, and not in school uniform.  Even Graham Stuart MP said, when he was Chair of the Education Select Committee, that Home Educated children are "peculiarly visible".  And everyone who HEs knows he's not wrong.

And what if a child is just kept under the stairs?

Then they are will receive a letter by owl and be accepted into Hogwarts, where their lives will be changed for the better, and they will save the world from He Who Shall Not Be Named.

Seriously, though.  If a child was being kept under the stairs, they are not being home educated, they are being abused.  Despite what the new guidance thinks, education and welfare are totally separate.  If you suspect a child is suffering from abuse, then you should absolutely step in; report to social services, and do your damnedest to save that child.  This is not a home education issue - this is being a decent person issue.

But, but, but...

What magically happens when a child turns 5?  Given how vulnerable babies, by their very nature, are; why are people trusted to bring babies up without interference? Yes, some areas have a good Health Visitor service, but this seems to be a post-code lottery, and even then it's only a 6month check, maybe a 12month check, and maybe a 2or3 year check.  Many people only see the health visitor immediately after birth, and that's it.  

What about schooled children?  Given that they need checking upon everyday they are at school, why are they trusted back to their parents during school holidays?  6+ weeks is a long time to be left over the summer!  And I've already mentioned that schooled children are statistically more likely to be abused than HE children.

I cannot claim credit for coming up with this analogy, and I hope I can do it justice - food.

As parents, we are entrusted to feed our children.  We all know what healthy food is, and we know that if we aren't able to cook and prepare healthy food ourselves, it is important for us to source healthy food for our kids.  Similarly, we know that 'healthy' may mean something different for our individual children - maybe they are allergic to specific foods; maybe they have SEN and will only eat certain things.  And we all know that it's ok to eat something 'less healthy' every now and again.  Certain conditions excepting, a doughnut or chips will not kill you; they're only problems if that's all you eat.

How would you feel if your name was put on a register of people who fed their own children?  To ensure you continue to feed your children, they will be in touch regularly.  They used to accept a signed letter, where you stated that you continue to feed your kids without problem, but due to new guidance that's no longer enough. Occasionally they come round to your house, and check your kitchen cupboards, looking for unhealthy foods.  They'll look at your kids to check that they look healthy - maybe use BMI as an indicator of health, as that's used in schools.  They may even chat to your kids, and ask them what their favourite foods are, and what they eat regularly.  Because it is important to listen to children's voices, they'll also ask the children what they think of you're cooking, and whether they'd prefer their food to be cooked by someone else.  And what if they happened to arrive on a day before you normally go shopping, so your fridge/cupboard is empty, or you have no fresh fruit/veg left in the house? Or maybe you don't own any cookbooks, preferring to find recipes online? Or maybe you don't own a dining table? Or have not enough, or too many, knives and other cooking equipment?  And why do you think you can do better than a trained chef or cook?

I'm not going to labour the point (though I could go on) but I hope that you agree that this would be unnecessarily intrusive, and actually wouldn't solve any of the issues that they were claiming it would.

I've now run out of steam, so I'm going to stop there.
I hope this explains some of the issues that home educators have with being put on a register (and I haven't even mentioned that compulsory registers are used for criminals) and isn't too long-winded.

Home Education Consultation April 2019

Here are my thoughts regarding the New HE consultation that is open from2nd April – 24th June 2019. The questions you get asked vary depending on how you have answered previous questions, so there will be some questions that are not visible to me.

The overview says:

This consultation is about establishing a local authority registration system for children who do not attend state-funded or registered independent schools.Why We Are ConsultingThis consultation is a follow-up to the consultation and call for evidence on elective home education held by the Department for Education in 2018.It seeks views on proposed legislation to establish a register maintained by local authorities of children not attending mainstream schools, together with associated duties on parents and the proprietors of certain educational settings. It also consults on proposed legislation to establish a duty to support parents who educate children at home and seek support from their local authority in doing so.

The Introduction says:

IntroductionThe survey may appear lengthy from the number of pages it contains. However, please note the following:After some preliminary questions about you as a respondent, the survey is structured around the four basic propositions in the accompanying consultation paper, which if possible you should read before completing the survey:a duty on local authorities to maintain a register;a duty on parents to supply information for the register;a duty on certain settings to supply information; anda duty on local authorities to provide support for home educationFor each of these four propositions, you are asked whether or not you agree with the proposition. An answer is required. Whether you answer 'yes' or 'no' determines the next page of questions presented to you, which is about details related to that proposition.For each proposition, the subsequent questions on detail are almost identical whether your answer to the initial question is 'yes' or 'no', but seeking responses on the details separately for respondents who agree or disagree with the propositions helps us to analyse responses more meaningfully.After the basic question and detailed questions on each of the four propositions, there is a final page of concluding general questions.This structure means that the number of questions put to each respondent is only just over half of the total in the overall survey form.Thank you.

The first page asks you for your name, email and in what capacity you are answering the question (eg home educating parent, or on behalf of an organisation or whatever). Incidentally, you do NOT have to fill in either your name nor email, if you don't want to.  Because I have answered that I am a home educating parent, my first question is no7:

Do you agree that local authorities should be obliged to maintain a register of children who are not registered at specified schools (those listed at paragraph 2.2 of the consultation paper) or being educated under s.19 arrangements?

Following my response of ‘No’ to question 7, I then encounter questions 20-31. For each set of questions, I'll give a few of my answers.
There should be no register for home educated children.

A register will hold no benefit for anybody. Any child that is removed from school is ALREADY registered with their LA. Many LA EHEOs are not qualified in home education, let alone pedagogy, teaching or how children learn best. LAs do not have enough funding/budget to adequately support home educators, and having to maintain a register will cause monies to be stretched even further, resulting in the individual families and children not receiving the care they deserve. In order to try and reduce this increased workload, LAs will be forced to cut corners and "encourage" all home educators to tick-box, and coercively restrict the education provision for these children until it mimics a school environment.

There should be no register of home educated children.

Children who are being educated under s.19 arrangements should ALREADY be on a register - either from the school or tuition service that is being provided. As the LA are responsible for providing such arrangements, of course the LA should be aware of who is receiving such services.

There should be no register of home educated children.

Flexi-schooled children will already be registered at the school which they attend.

There should be no register of home educated children.

IF there is a welfare concern, of course information should be shared between various other LAs and agencies. There is ALREADY a procedure in place that can be followed should it be required.

There should be no register of home educated children.

However, if such a register were to be created, of course the LA should be open to inspection from other bodies.

The only non-voluntary registers are birth and death (which are both understandable) and a register of criminals. Home educators are not criminals, and should not be forced to join a register because they have opted to take full responsibility for their children's education, rather than outsourcing it.

Question 32:

Do you agree that parents should be under a legal duty to provide information to their local authority about a child who is within scope of the proposed registration requirement?

To which I answered ‘No’, and it opened up questions 38-42.

Parents should not be forced to provide any information about their children.

Parents should not be forced to provide any information about their children. Parents are legally responsible for the education of their children. If this legal responsibility were removed from parents, there would be many cases of schools being sued because they have not fulfilled their duty of keeping children safe, nor educating them adequately.

Question 43:

43. Do you agree with the general approach that the proprietors of settings providing education in school hours - other than specified types of school - should be under a duty to supply information to local authorities about any child in scope of the proposed register?

I think this means that if a club or service provider, runs during school hours, it will be forced to inform the LA about any children that it caters for.  I said “No”, and got Qs 49-53 – some of which specifically include non-registered HE groups...

Unless their is a welfare concern about a specific child, service providers should NOT be passing on details to the LA about any children.

Q54: Do you agree that there should be a statutory duty on local authorities to provide support on request to parents who educate children at home, of a type to be prescribed by the Secretary of State in regulations?

I found it difficult to understand what was meant by this question:
Does this mean (a) IF a parent requests it, the LA must provide support, OR (b) the LA has been requested by the government to contact all HErs to offer support? My answer to each of these questions would be different.

I’ve decided to assume it means (a) but will clarify exactly what I mean in each text box on the next set of questions.

Assuming this is at the parent's request, so is optional.

There should be no register of home educated children.

LAs should share information about groups, websites and online-groups as requested by local home educators. They should not claim that their legal team has said they are not allowed to give information where they have the express permission from the organisers of said groups.

These should be available to all, and not determined on whether the family is on a register or not.

Q71:

Do you have any comments on the conclusions set out in the published equalities log, UNCRC analysis and family test?

Where are the links to these published documents to enable the question to be answered from an informed position? By not providing easy access to the documents, you could claim that many people have no concerns about the conclusions drawn, when in fact they have been unable to answer due to not knowing what the documents say.

There seems to be multiple ‘Equalities Log’s and I couldn’t find one relevant to this topic.

I don’t know what specific UNCRC analysis is being referred to, but alink to the UNCRC pdf can be found here. 

Here’s a link tothe Family Test. 

There should be no register of home educated children.

Access for support should be entirely voluntary and at the request of the parent. Should support be requested, then LAs should do everything in their power to help the family and child, whatever support is required, including, but not limited to, helping the family to get in touch with other home educating families and local peer-run support groups.

Some home educators want financial support for accessing exams, and enabling home educated students to take exams as private candidates. Again, this should be optional, at the request of the parent, but should it be requested then it should be implemented.

So this is an overview of some of my responses to the consultation. I am not claiming they are perfect answers, but give a guide as to how I answered the questions.
Please don't simply Copy & Paste my answers. However, you are more than welcome to use anything I've written in this post as the basis of your response and to change it into your own words.

Response to Elective Home Education Guidance - April 2019

Today, the government has released it's new Elective Home Education Guidance, and it is shocking.
(For comparison, here are the old guidelines that were perfectly adequate and suitable for what they were intended.)

These are my raw thoughts, as I read through the document for the first time, but given the consultation that took place last year, I am not expecting it to be good.

I've only just started reading the introduction and have already come across this sentence:

Educating children at home works well when it is a positive, informed and dedicated choice. However, the past few years have seen a very significant increase in the number of children being educated at home, and there is considerable evidence that many of these children are not receiving a suitable education.

Where is the evidence for this?  Where is the proof?  It's a disappointing, though not surprising, start to a document that shows it will be full of prejudice.

Still in the introduction:

Where necessary - because it is evident that a child is simply not receiving suitable education at home and the use of school attendance powers is not achieving a change in that situation - the local authority should be ready to use its safeguarding powers as explained in this guidance

So basically, if a child is not receiving a suitable education, then the LA should make up some safeguarding concern in order to get the change it wants?

Section 2.4 has take the place of the old 3.13 - a list of 'nots': things that are not required for home education.  Unfortunately, this list has not only decreased, but significantly changed in some areas.

Approaches such as autonomous and self-directed learning, undertaken with a very flexible stance as to when education is taking place, should be judged by outcomes, not on the basis that a different way of educating children must be wrong.

For approaches such as Unschooling, unless the LA is content to wait until the child is of school leaving age, how can the LA judge 'outcomes'? Or is the LA now saying that the child must keep up with school-aged peers?  How does that fit in with SEN?

Section 4.2 is all about the need for creating a register of home educators, even though that word isn't used:

Identification of children who have never attended school and may be home educated forms a significant element of fulfilling an authority’s statutory duty under s.436A of the Education Act 1996 - to make arrangements to enable the authority to establish, so far as it is possible to do so, the identities of children in its area who are not receiving a suitable education. The duty applies in relation to children of compulsory school age who are not on a school roll, and who are not receiving a suitable education otherwise than at school (for example, at home, or in alternative provision). Until a local authority is satisfied that a home-educated child is receiving a suitable full-time education, then a child being educated at home is potentially in scope of this duty. The department’s children missing education statutory guidance for local authorities applies. However, this should not be taken as implying that it is the responsibility of parents under s.436A to ‘prove’ that education at home is suitable. A proportionate approach needs to be taken. 

There are many, MANY, reasons why creating a register is not a good thing (too much of a rant for me to go into detail now) but it looks like that's the way the government wants us headed.   A register, then a prescriptive curriculum, then only school-at-home will be allowed.  DD1 and DD2 have never been to school, so are not 'known' to the LA.  They are, however, known to various specialist teachers (eg dance, gym etc), known to doctors, dentists, opticians, and many more people besides.  We don't want and don't need anything the LA can provide, and do not want to be on such a register.  Until schools can ensure that zero pupils are ever abused or leave school without basic qualification, then they have no right to interfere with my private life.  (Sorry for that mini rant, but you get the gist.)

Section 4.4:

Some local authorities already actively encourage referrals from doctors and hospitals of children whom there is reason to think may be home educated.

I don't know how this fits with a data protection or doctor:patient confidentiality?  My GP and nurses know that my girls are HE as they are often with me for appointments.  Do, I now need to hide them away so I don't get asked the inevitable "no school today?"?

NEVER mention "deschooling" to the LA.  Section 6.2:

"Some parents may go further and describe this period as being necessary for ‘deschooling’. There is no legal basis for such a position. Any statement along these linescould be an indication that the child is not being properly educated."

Deschooling is a really important part of home education.  It is important for the child that needs to work through school trauma, but it is also important for the parent as they learn that education is more than school, and a life set up for learning and natural curiosity means that education never stops.


Section 6.5 says:

"Parents are under no duty to respond to such enquiries, butif a parent does not respond, or responds without providing any information about thechild’s education, then it will normally be justifiable for the authority to conclude that thechild does not appear to be receiving suitable education and it should not hesitate to do 18so and take the necessary consequent steps"

And section 6.6 says:

" although arefusal to allow a visit can in some circumstances justify service of a notice unders.437(1).8"

So, home educators can no longer say no to a visit?  It doesn't specifically say, but I hope that a 'visit' at a neutral location (such as a library or cafe) is allowed, rather than having to be at home.  My involvement with Educational Freedom means I am aware of EHEOs using visits as subterfuge for judging parents and home conditions, resulting in SS involvement.


Section 6.12:

"On the other hand the information provided by parents shoulddemonstrate that the education actually being provided is suitable and address issuessuch as progression expected and (unless the home education has only just started)achieved. It should not be simply a statement of intent about what will be provided, or adescription of the pedagogical approach taken – this would not enable the authority toreach a legitimate conclusion that a suitable education is actually being provided. "

7.3:

" There is no proven correlation between home education and safeguarding risk. Insome serious cases of neglect or abuse in recent years, the child concerned has beenhome educated but that has not usually been a causative factor and the child hasnormally been known anyway to the relevant local authority. "

Actually, HE has NEVER been known to be a causative factor, but hey, why let facts get in the way...7.6:

"Although some cases will berelatively clear-cut (for example if a child was being provided with no education at all formonths)..."

How much do they truly understand and accept unschooling?7.9:

"Such enquiries may yield enough information. If they do not, and in particularbecause the parents refuse access to the child then the authority has a number ofoptions available. It can apply to a court for a child assessment order"

This is in the section of safe-guarding, but we don't know how the LA will apply it.7.12:

"However, an ESO imposes a duty on parents to allow the supervisor(the authority) reasonable contact with the child,..."

Section 7.13:

" The use ofsuch an order is of course a last resort, and should only be necessary in a very smallminority of cases. But the key point for local authorities to bear in mind – and make clearto parents – is that this could be the end result of continued failure to provide suitableeducation and a continued obstruction of an authority’s efforts to ensure that the childreceives suitable education."

8.1:

"It can, ofcourse, be the case that a local authority has no knowledge of a child’s specialeducational needs if the family has not sought assessment or support. However, localauthorities have a duty under s.22 of the Children and Families Act 2014 to try to identifyall children in their areas who have SEN. This includes home-educated children. "

8.3:

" Some parents educate, or attempt to educate, children at home because ofdissatisfaction with local SEN provision. However, educating at home a child who hasspecial needs is often more difficult than for other children"

**Attempt** to educate? Prejudice much!

 Look - Something positive!!!! See, I'm not biased and only reporting the bad things, lol. 8.10:

"When a home-educated child’s EHC plan names a school, some local authoritiesinstruct the school to add the child’s name to its admission register without the parent’sagreement, with the result that the parent is committing an offence if the child does notattend the school. It is not lawful for a school to do this, and local authorities shouldensure that both schools and their own staff know that. "

9.4e tries to soften the bit about outcomes...

"e. although it may well be a good starting point in assessing suitability to assesswhether the curriculum and teaching have produced attainment in line with thenational norms for children’ of the same age, it must be borne in mind that the s.7requirement is that the education is suitable to the child’s ability and aptitude. If achild’s ability is significantly above or below what might be regarded as ‘average’then allowances must be made for that; and similarly the home education maylegitimately cater specifically for particular aptitudes which a child has, even if thatmeans reducing other content; "

9.4f:

"f. factors such as very marked isolation from a child’s peers can indicate possibleunsuitability. Suitable education is not simply a matter of academic learning butshould also involve socialisation;"

Because all He kids are kept locked under the stairs... :

Beware if you don't live in a spacious house... :(    9.4g:

"g. any assessment of suitability should take into account the environment in whichhome education is being provided. Most obviously, home accommodation which isnoisy and/or cramped is likely to make it very difficult for a child to learn and makesatisfactory progress"

Unlike overcrowded classrooms, which are known to be quiet and spacious...

 9.7:

"9.7 An efficient education, within the meaning of s.7, is one which achieves what it setsout to achieve. It is important this concept is not confused with suitability. A whollyunsuitable education can be efficiently delivered – but would still be unsuitable."

Sections 9.8 and 9.9 discuss what it means to be full time.

9.9:

"Despite this greater flexibility inherent in home education, local authorities should beenabled by parents to assess the overall time devoted to home education of a child onthe basis of the number of hours per week, and weeks per year so that this informationcan be set alongside that relating to suitability to ensure that the home education meetsthe requirements of section 7. "

Beware if you admit to learning alongside your kids...  10.1:

If information and views provided by the child castdoubt on whether the education provided is actually suitable in terms of the s.7 criteria(for example, the child indicates that the parent is not providing education suitable to hisor her age because the parent does not sufficiently understand the subjects in question)

 Also 10.1 - I wonder if they ask schooled kids the same thing, or suggest alternatives to their parents..?

" Nonetheless, if it is clearto the local authority that a child does not wish to be educated at home although theeducation provided meets the s.7 requirement and there are no safeguarding concerns, itshould seek to discuss the reasons for this with the parents and encourage them toconsider whether home education is ultimately likely to be successful if their child isunhappy to be educated in this way. "

On a personal point, section 10.12 is about tutors and DBS. The guidelines do not make clear that self-employed tutors can only get a Basic DBS, rather than an enhanced one.

Section 10:15 seems to contradict some of the other points they've made:

"10.15 Children learn in different ways and at different times and speeds. It should beappreciated that parents and their children may require a period of adjustment beforefinding their preferred mode of learning and that families may change their approach overtime. Parents are not required to have any qualifications or training to provide theirchildren with a suitable education. It should be noted that parents from all educational,social, linguistic, religious and ethnic backgrounds successfully educate children outsidethe school setting and these factors should not in themselves raise a concern about thesuitability of the education being provided." 

Overall, these guidelines are disappointing.  As a home educating family, we can expect more disruption and interference to our daily lives.  The LA does not have enough budget as it is, yet is expected to do a whole lot more work, not least contacting families such as mine that do not want any of their "help".

Weekly Update No13

From last Monday to today, I have lost half a kilo (a pound); but actually I got down to my lowest weight for 100 days! (Yes, by weighing myself daily, I can work out random stats like that.)

Drinking one or two smoothies a day, followed by a proper dinner, has been working really well for me. My evening meals have included Egg-whitepizza, omelette, fajitas (in lettuce cups rather than wraps). Unfortunately, I ate too much over the weekend.

Sunday was Mother’s Day (in the UK it is celebrated the 3^rd Sunday in Lent; whereas other places in the world such as the USA celebrate Mother’s Day on the 2^nd Sunday in May) and I wanted an Afternoon Tea. As I knew not to expect one, on the Saturday beforehand, I bought myself a platter of sandwiches, a selection of cakes, and scones with clotted cream to share with my girls. I ate too much of the wrong things, so wasn’t surprised when I put on weight the next morning.

On Mother’s Day itself, I had volunteered to do refreshments at my church (before I realised it was Mother’s Day) so didn’t get home until nearly 1pm. Despite being told that we’d be going out for lunch, my husband hadn’t booked anywhere… on a normal Sunday you need to book to get a table anywhere, let alone on Mothering Sunday! So I ate a scone, or 3…

In the evening, we ordered a takeaway. I shared starters with my husband, and ate half a portion of Salmon & Spinach, with [half] sauteed potatoes, carrots, green beans and broccoli. I ate far too much! I was in agony overnight with the stomach problems I get, so literally got zero sleep before 7:30am. Between 7:30-9:30am I was able to doze on and off, in between my alarms going off. When taking my girls to their Home Ed activities this morning, I have been sensible and got a taxi, rather than driving with no sleep. It wasn’t a surprise that my weight had gone up slightly, but as I said it has gone down overall from last Monday.

So this week, I am going to keep going with the smoothies and proper dinner, trying to be careful with portion sizes so that I don’t irritate my stomach any more.