yes, that one. actually this is the second as i have added 3 and 4! but changing the title would prob change various links oops now the third! as have sort of finished, but would really like feedback before i submit, much nearer to the deadline!
i admit that my response isn’t finished or filed yet, that other peoples blogs have v much influenced me, but here goes!!
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.
YES
Comments:
There is no evidence to show that children educated at home are at increased risk of abuse of any kind. in fact, due to the lack of evidence of child abuse publicised in the population subset it may be that they are less at risk. i am presuming that the question is indeed referring to those educated at home rather than those ‘missing in education’.
Like other children they access healthcare providers, community facilities and have families, neighbours and friends, all of whom would be able to access the standard child protection facilities. i cannot see how this would work more or less successfully in the home educated population than it does in the schooled population [where there seems to be woeful under-reporting]
Is this new ‘rushed’ consultation the government response to the consultation that suggested no further inspection powers to be granted for LA’s? from reading the guidance, this does seem to be the premise. Again it seems that there is some muddling of thought between educational provision and child protection. the LEA has provision to investigate if it is felt that there is no evidence of home education provision. even should they investigate, this does not act to safeguard children at home. Are you instead suggesting that all home educators should be regularly visited by social workers? when social workers are already overloaded with cases that potentially have some basis, adding a huge layer of extra work in a population group that has not been evidenced to be of high risk does not sound reasonable. if you are suggesting all home educators are visited for a ‘safe and well’ assessment, is this not targeting the population group unreasonably?
I agree with the Government definition of bullying as:
‘Behaviour by an individual or group, usually repeated over time, that intentionally hurts another individual or group either physically or emotionally’.
I also find helpful the following clarification by the Anti-Bullying Alliance, which states that bullying mostly falls into two categories:
* emotionally harmful behaviour, such as taunting, spreading hurtful rumours and excluding people from groups; and
* physically harmful behaviour, such as kicking, hitting, pushing, or other forms of physical abuse.
The following three conditions are used to define incidences of harmful interpersonal behaviour as bullying behaviour. Behaviour is bullying behaviour if:
* it is repetitive, wilful or persistent;
* it is intentionally harmful, carried out by an individual or group; and,
* there is an imbalance of power leaving the person who is bullied feeling defenceless.
It crosses my mind that these repeated consultations are a form of government intimidation and bullying. with wilful and persistent spreading of rumours against the home education population, suggesting that the parents within that group abuse their children, are not educating their children, with a clear imbalance of power, leaving home educators feeling defenceless.
2 a) Do you think that home educated children are able to achieve the following five Every Child Matters outcomes? Please let us know why you think that.
2 a)
Be healthy
YES
Comments:
i am not sure why the 5 have been separated. I see no difficulty for any home educator in aiming to achieve these
The aim is for all children and young people to achieve the five outcomes of Every Child Matters, that is to:
* be healthy;
* stay safe;
* enjoy life and achieve their full potential;
* be interested and fully involved in the community they live in;
* achieve economic independence.
In particular, children and young people should expect to:
* be able to grow and develop in safety and free from prejudice and discrimination;
* be listened to and have their views taken into account;
* be treated with respect;
* belong to and be valued in their community;
* see their needs and interests at the heart of everything we all do.
in fact for many of them i would imagine it would be easier to turn the aiming into a reality.
However, in the be healthy, like in any population subgroup this is an aspiration rather than a 100% achievable goal, children may have illness, disease, accidents in this group as in any other. however, in a home educated environment, many children may find it easier to achieve their full potential despite illness that would cause difficulty in a larger group setting
2 b)
Stay safe
YES
Comments: I think this is palpably easier to achieve in the home educated setting, where the child’s abilities and freedoms are scaffolded by the parent, where there are less opportunities for being bullied, for having undesirable interactions with peers that may involve physical, sexual or mental aggression [as evidenced by a number of surveys]
2 c)
Enjoy and achieve
YES
Comments:
home education is a more direct, interactive and child focused method of education, whether it be of a ‘home school’ type, following a curriculum [even if not the rather dire national curriculum] , a child led or autonomous approach, or the many shades in between including Montessori, Charlotte Mason etc styles. This leads to a clear feedback between child and parent on interest, on the speed and depth which might suit each child individually. This means that the child is far more likely to enjoy their education, as it is tailored to them personally, with varying levels of child/parent involvement as suits the individual and the family. It is clear that not only do children learn at different speeds, but they learn in different ways at different times, and home education, is ideally placed to follow these patterns.
research has suggested that autonomous education is indeed a very efficient learning method.
I would suggest that home education has the ability here to outperform other educational establishments.
I also think that in looking at this question, perhaps the government is ignoring the ability of home education families to be flexible in their resourcing, using open university, online course, colleges, tutors etc to provide as high an educational rigour as many schools do for examination subjects as required.
ultimately, i think that home educated children have a higher likelihood of being able to ‘enjoy life and achieve their full potential’ due to the freedom and ability they have to influence daily the education and knowledge they learn.
2 d)
Make a positive contribution.
YES
Comments:
i think this is a very poorly thought out aim. A positive contribution to what? Society, community, family, scientific theory? or just…
it seems that really the 4th aim is
‘be interested and fully involved in the community they live in’
and I believe that home education is ideally tailored to this, as the child to adult is fully participating in the community from early on.
2 e)
Achieve economic well-being
YES
Comments:
I think that any home educated child is as likely if not more so to ‘achieve economic independence’ as a school educated child. this is because as the child progresses into their teens, then part of the process is considering interests, and moving forwards. Skills suitable to ability and aptitude are developed.
I notice no great mention is made of the subsidiary aims
* be able to grow and develop in safety and free from prejudice and discrimination;
* be listened to and have their views taken into account;
* be treated with respect;
* belong to and be valued in their community;
* see their needs and interests at the heart of everything we all do.
which again I would say are probably at the heart of every families educational philosophy on how to proceed. I sincerely wonder how these aims can even be begun to be achieved in large schools with huge class sizes of disparate educational goals, abilities and aptitudes.
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?. If you answered no, why do you think that?
No
Comments.
from reading around the admirable every child matters documentation, it is clear that these targets are an aspirational goal, for LA’s to put systems in place that can work towards helping children achieve these goals. there is no outcome framework attached with 100% targets. They are in fact ambitions, not backed by legislative force, and certainly couldn’t be achieved to 100% within the schooled population who you seem to believe are more adequately monitored.
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?
yes
Comments:
I don’t actually see that the home educated community is supported in any way at the present. If you actuallyy wish to support home education, rather than vilifying and deriding, there are some simple and low cost options:
the provision of free meeting rooms for group home education meetings
the provision of places to sit free of charge examinations as external candidates – such as GCSE etc, and possibly the availability of free Open university courses.
suitable training and resourcing of any liaison personnel with home educators, such that they are not extrapolating school to school at home, but have a broad ranging understanding of the different methods of home education and can encourage the diversity without bias.
free access to school resources through local libraries would also be much appreciated.
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?
no
Comments:
I believe that the law as represented in the Elective Home Education Guidelines 2007 is appropriate for monitoring educational provision. This appeared to be the outcome from previous exhaustive consultations. please see guidelines at http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/localauthorities/index.cfm?action=content&contentID=11357&categoryID=75&subcategoryID=106 and the follow up consultation on implementation, both of which I responded to. Suggesting that a single question in a further consultation might negate the previous consultation does not appear valid.
I also feel that having a separate much larger consultation for LA’s/professionals only rather than all stakeholders running concurrently seems designed to purposefully introduce bias towards the governments agenda and hoped for outcomes.
The law needs to respect the balance between citizen and the state. Local authorities must respect the law, understand where they genuinely have duties and where they don’t and not overstep these duties
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?
Answer:
I would like to see the evidence behind this. it appears that the NSPCC itself holds no evidence for this. i find, in the absence of any references given, this to be a defamatory statement [In law, defamation (also called calumny, libel, slander, and vilification) is the communication of a statement that makes a false claim, expressly stated or implied to be factual, that may give an individual, business, product, group, government or nation a negative image] and feel that this should be immediately retracted.
Introducing compulsory checks for all home educating families will be a waste of valuable and limited resources, is highly unlikely to turn up the needle in the haystack and would be an abuse of civil rights and human rights, in contravention of Article 8 of the ECHR. Should this be introduced, the logical extension is for all children not receiving external childcare, and this would include those of pre-school age who do not attend nursery or alternative external to home placements.
I would like to reiterate that like other children, those home educated access healthcare providers, community facilities and have families, neighbours and friends, all of whom would be able to access the standard child protection facilities. In all the high profile child protection stories in the newspapers, there have been multiple flags from a variety of professionals including doctors and social services already involved. It does not appear that the presence [or absence in the case of some withdrawn] of schooling has been a deciding or flagging factor in raising the alarm of abuse.
I would again like to state that these repeated consultations are a form of government intimidation and bullying. There appears to be wilful and persistent spreading of rumours and slander against the home education population without corroborative evidence, suggesting that the parents within that group abuse their children or are not educating their children or looking towards their wider welfare. there is a clear imbalance of power towards the government, leaving home educators feeling defenceless and bullied.
I will be including this in a complaint to the Select Committee for Children Schools and Families [csfcom@parliament.uk] and also to my MP
————————————————————————-
hmmm comments please so i can improve on this. i really am quite crap at consultation writing! i got a bit bored towards the end, so have stopped there for now!
