We have widely reported on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill which, if it becomes an Act of Parliament, will mean increased restrictions and regulation of ‘Elective Home Education.’ Bristol City Council has long been considered friendly to home educating families. Historically, Bristol families have reported having positive relationships with local education officials and so many were aghast to read a letter which included restrictive guidance about what constitutes ‘suitable’ education at home.
The letter (1st page shown below) appears to favour an approach to home education which involves the replication of school at home, and implies that regular assessments, demonstration of progress over time and structured planning are essential. Notably, the letter also appears to stipulate that particular subjects are taught — even environmentalism and PSHE, which happen to be delivered by many schools in a politicised way. Under current legislation, there are no regulations about what subjects are taught at home; the Government guidance merely states that education be ‘suitable.’ Overall, the condescending tone of the letter, combined with the barely veiled hostility and a total lack of support, is alarming.
At first glance some of the requirements seem reasonable, but the document screams disapproval of established, if unorthodox, philosophies of learning, such as ‘unschooling’ and ‘deschooling’, and other forms of child-centred learning. It also neglects the fact that children’s educational progress sometimes isn’t linear, isn’t strictly age-related, and may not happen at a steady pace. Also, some children do not thrive in restrictive school environments, governed by a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, where their individual talents and needs are left uncatered for. Many school teachers would acknowledge the problems of a test-based school system which limits spontaneity and creativity. In certain cases, officials need to trust children to learn and accept that not absolutely everything needs to be measured.
Not all local authorities behave in this way. Peterborough City Council recently sent a letter to a ParentPower supporter who had withdrawn their child from school to pursue elective home education, and the tone of the letter was considerably more helpful and supportive:
I’d like to introduce our approach which is to foster mutually respectful relationships built on communication, working together to support you and your child. We’d like to reassure you that we recognise every home educator has a different approach and that no approach is better than another.
Successive governments since that of Gordon Brown, who commissioned the Badman review to report on home education, have expressed the desire to monitor, control or restrict home education.’ The letter from Bristol is indicative of what could potentially come from any local authority in the wake of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill being enacted — more control and more restrictions. Perhaps some families will be judged to be good enough, but others will not be able to fulfil the demands of a ‘school at home’ approach.
At the crux of the issue is the question: who is responsible for the education of the nation’s children: is it parents or is it the state? If it is the parents, then all parents have the natural right (i.e. a right that is derived from their status as parents) to educate their children as they see fit. While a growing number of parents have decided to educate their children at home, most parents delegate responsibility to a school they like and teachers they trust. This is not the same as accepting the state is responsible for the education of their children.
All parents should be worried that the Bill would give the state primacy over parents. If the Bill passes, for example, some parents will have to seek permission from the LA to withdraw their children from school. If you have a child in a school for children with ‘special needs’, or if you are under investigation by Children’s Services, then someone else, likely a stranger, possibly even an algorithm, will decide who should educate your children. Furthermore, all electively home educated children could possibly be subject to an Ofsted style inspection. The wording of the Bill doesn’t quite make it compulsory to permit a stranger to enter one’s home, but the Bill does include a coercive statement about how a refusal to allow a home visit would be considered in a decision about whether or not home education should be allowed to continue.
It is important to be clear that concern about children and their welfare is good, but the Government has provided no evidence that home educating parents pose an inherent risk to their children, and so support for a Bill that randomly places some families under a state inspection routine is excessively authoritarian. All parents should be wary of might well be ahead for home educating families. None of us know what is around the corner, or what decisions we will need to make for the benefit of our children; and it is naive to imagine that that these restrictions will never impact our families, even if we do not, at the present time, choose to home educate.
ParentPower Team
