 |
Web Hosting by Netfirms | Free Domain Names by Netfirms |
|
|
|
‘2.2 Article 2 of Protocol 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights states that:
“No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the state shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teachings in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.”
Parents have a right to educate their children at home. Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 provides that:
“The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable –
either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.”
2.3 The responsibility for a child’s education rests with his or her parents. An “efficient” and “suitable” education is not defined in the Education Act 1996 but “efficient” has been broadly described in case law as an education that “achieves that which it sets out to achieve”, and a “suitable” education is one that “primarily equips a child for life within the community of which he is a member, rather than the way of life in the country as a whole, as long as it does not foreclose the child’s options in later years to adopt some other form of life if he wishes to do so”.’
‘2.7 Local Authorities have no statutory duties in relation to monitoring the quality of home education on a routine basis.’
In 2005 Education Otherwise, one of several UK wide home education support groups had 4,000 families as members.
The Home Education UK website suggests that in 2007, 50,000 children were home educated. This would mean an average of between 250 and 300 children per Local Education Authority area.
Paula Rothermel estimates in ‘The Third Way in Education – Thinking the Unthinkable’ that 560,000 children in the UK were not in school in 2000. This paper argues for the creation of ‘learning centres’ which children may visit with their parents instead of segregated full time school, based on her research findings that parental attention and involvement is the most important factor affecting the educational achievement of children. Alan Thomas also concluded his 1998 study Educating Children at Home with this observation ‘ The overriding advantage is probably the individual attention that children get….’
‘5.1 When parents choose to electively home educate their children they assume financial responsibility for their children’s education.’ ‘5.2’ Local Authorities do not receive funding to support home educating families.’
This, and the fact that home education takes an enormous time commitment means that many home educating families are living on low incomes. In order for one parent to be at home to carry out the education, families must live on one income or sometimes on two part time incomes. For single parents the problem is compounded with many having to rely on benefits and/or part time wages. Despite this, parents committed to home education are resourceful and determined and research by Dr Paula Rothermel showed that ‘poverty was not an indicator of poor academic outcomes where parents, whatever their situation, were committed to their children’. Indeed, her research showed that ‘children from the lower end of the socio-economic class scale significantly outscored those from the upper spectrum of the scale’. (On the PIPS Baseline Assessment) .
Similarly, The Fraser Institute report into Home Education in the US and Canada showed that children from poorer backgrounds who were home educated by their parents significantly out-performed their schooled peers even where the parents had never finished high school themselves. This suggests that motivation to improve life experiences for their children is high among home educating families regardless of income or educational status of the parents.
Nevertheless, resources, activities and trips can be difficult to afford for many and the home education experience is enriched where a local group is able to organise shared activities which are not reliant on a family’s ability to pay. A two tiered situation where families are excluded from educational opportunities on the basis of what they can afford to pay is not acceptable.
The DSCF Guidelines also state: ‘4.4 It should be noted that parents of all educational, social, racial, religious and ethinic backgrounds successfully educate children outside the school setting and these factors should not in themselves raise a concern about the suitability of the education provided.’ In a local support group setting we find that our common ground is simply that our children do not go to school and that we are committed to providing them with the very best education we can. Because of this shared fundamental experience, we find that we enjoy diversity of all kinds within the group. Rothermel also found that in home educating families ‘fathers were more involved than the norm’ as did Page in 1997. Fathers often attend group activities either because they are the primary or equal carer and educator or because they are keen to contribute to the education whenever they have the opportunity. We aim to run at least some trips and activities at weekends so that this opportunity is open to as many dads as possible.
When the national Home Education charity Education Otherwise carried out a survey in 2002 they found that 243 out of 425 respondants stated that they educated their child at home because of SEN or a specific health need. This is borne out in most local group situations where a high percentage of children are diagnosed with dyslexia, ADHD, autistic spectrum disorders and other special needs. Frequently these children have been taken out of school because their needs were not being met within the system. Invariably, the individual attention of the home environment means the child soon begins to thrive educationally. The local support group is invaluable in providing a safe, non-pressured environment for all children to explore social issues, establish friendships and improve their confidence at their own pace. No one will tell them they are wrong for not wanting to be in a big group or for choosing to make friends with someone who is of a different age group or gender than themselves. Friendships are made, or not made, because of shared interests and free choice, not because of who you happen to sit next to. Parents are always on hand to assist and to help the young person over any obstacles without damaging their self esteem. In this nurturing environment, each child is able to find a level of social interaction which they feel comfortable with and is then able to move on at their own pace. There is huge benefit for everyone involved in the group as young and old are able to gain a better understanding of how we are all different and yet we may all contribute to a community in our own way.
In 2001 bullying in school topped the list of reasons why young people contacted Childline for the fifth year running - they took over 20,000 calls from ‘distressed and desperate children’ on the subject. In 2005 they took 32,688. In 2006 the number rose to 37,000.
Kidscape has replied to 52,000 emails about bullying since it was formed in 1999. 500,000 people a year visit their website.
The charity Beatbullying claim that each week 450,000 children are bullied in school.
In 2007 a report from the Commons Education Select Committee claimed that 20% of children experience bullying in school.
Kidscape lists the results of persistant bullying as:
The Childline website acknowledges bullying ‘can make you so worried that you cant work well in school.’
The charity BullyingUK is contacted by up to 4 suicidal pupils a day. At least 16 children commit suicide a year in the UK as a direct result of bullying in school. As Mary Thompson, enquiries secretary for Education Otherwise puts it ‘Some children choose death instead of school’. Mary also makes the point that sometimes, discovering the right to home educate can save a child’s life. It really is that important.
A 2005 survey by Wits End Curriculum Solutions concluded that bullying was the main reason that parents take children out of school to educate them at home. This was also the main reason given, other than lack of provision for SEN, in the Education Otherwise survey of 2002, although many of the children with special educational needs had also been bullied. Things do not seem to have got any better for many years. Mary Thompson has volunteered on the Education Otherwise helpline for over 10 years. She says ‘Children are verbally, physically and sexually abused at school. I have heard all these things so very many times and many stories that I have heard will live with me for the rest of my life. Self harming, nightmares, food refusal, bedwetting, attempted suicides. So many stories I have heard over the years.’
She goes on,
‘The calls I receive today are similar to the calls I received more than ten years ago and it is dreadful to think that things do not seem to have improved at all.’
Everybody who has ever been a home education contact either formally or informally has experience of these terrible stories and has witnessed the trauma whole families have gone through. Many of the stories involve children who refuse to go to school – quite sanely and understandably because their safety and mental health are under threat there. There are many who have been threatened with knives and guns, girl who has been expected to sit in the same class as someone who has been convicted of raping her, a girl with a facial deformity told by a teacher he doesn’t wish to look at her ugly face in his class and a boy with a speech problem who was mimicked by his teacher in front of an entire class. Who could blame these children for not wanting to return to such an environment?
Childline states on its website ‘Some children have told us they have skipped school to get away from bullying’. Of course they have! The Commons Education Select Committee report found that 36% of children caught truanting blamed bullying. We think it's more reasonable to worry about the state of mind of a child who willingly attends school despite being in danger like this.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of parents who eventually make contact with home education support groups do so after many years of problems with school. One family began home educating their then 14 year old 2 years ago who had been ‘diagnosed’ with ‘school phobia’ at the age of 7. He had expressed suicidal thoughts since the age of 10 and had been prescribed anti-depressants. Among the advice this family had received, over 7 years of problems, from educational ‘support’ services included that they were not allowed by law to home educate, that school attendance had been ‘prescribed’ by an educational psychologist as treatment for school phobia and that the mother should make her son sit on a stool in the middle of the kitchen, refuse to speak to him all day and only feed him bread and water – the hope being that home would become such a terrible place to be that he would willingly return to school. This boy was also assaulted several times by EWO’s forcing him into a car to take him to school, he was left bruised and totally distressed. When the mother finally found her local home education contact she was close to a breakdown and felt that her marriage would not survive the ordeal.
She is not alone. Another mother writes on the BullyingUK website ‘I am sitting here in tears having sent my daughter screaming and vomiting into school after she told me she has been bullied by a boy in her class.’ The daughter, of primary school age, had been kicked and punched to the floor every day for 6 months but felt that she just had to put up with it. Nobody should have to put up with any of this.
Childline’s chief executive Dr Carole Easton says ‘we hear horrific stories from children every day’. Their website tells the story of a boy who ‘told Childline that one of his teachers had said the bullying would prepare him for secondary school.’ The Centre for Personalised Education carried out research in 2005 when it asked parents to explain their reasons for home educating. One mother replied ‘The school system was destroying both my son and me.’
Unfortunately families in these distressing situations are still very lucky if they learn of their right to remove their children from school in order to educate them at home. This is despite DSCF Guidelines that LEAs should provide clear and accurate information about the legal right to home educate. Many of the people on the frontline of helping families experiencing difficulties with school including teachers and educational welfare officers are either ignorant of the law or deliberately mislead families. On May 13th 2003 MP for Uxbridge Mr John Randall initiated the first ever parliamentary debate on home education. In his speech he said ‘it is rather astonishing and dismaying to know that many parents of extremely unhappy children remain in ignorance about their legal rights to provide home education.’
The DCSF leaflet ‘Ensuring Children's Right to Education – Guidelines on the Legal Measures Available to Secure Regular School Attendance’ sets out guidelines for LEA officers, schools, court officials and other organisations dealing with children who persistently truant or refuse to go to school. Paragraph 9 deals with the procedure for serving a parent with a Statutory Attendance Order. At the stage where an LEA informs a parent of its intention to serve an SAO, the guidance states that the LEA ‘should also inform the parent that they have the right to educate their child at home if they choose to.’
Unfortunately this seems rarely to happen and families more often chance upon home education through a casual conversation or internet search. Sometimes this comes too late and the child has reached an age when they can leave education behind, which most who have experienced problems in school do as soon as they are able. Mr Ivan Lewis, Under Secretary of State for Education and Skills said in his reply to Mr John Randall that young people dropping out of education at 16 is ‘still a major problem and often happens because young people get turned off education far too early in their educational lives.’
He is quite right of course. Conversely, the vast majority of home educated young people see education as a continuous lifelong process which they continue to engage with after 16 in many different ways. It is not unusual for young people to start businesses at a young age – for example in web design or giving music lessons. Many go on to college at different levels and for many different subjects. More and more, home educated youngsters are gaining university places on the strength of portfolios of work completed at home or in the community – including to some of the UK’s top universities. Others take a more conventional route and sit GCSE and A level courses at home, in their communities or at college. Some continue to study at home after 16 as they are able to proceed at their own pace, especially if they have recently come from a distressing school situation. Home Education support groups are open to young people of all ages who are continuing to learn at home.
As Mr Lewis implies, bullying is not the only reason for truanting, and the problem of lack of engagement with school style education is touched upon by Alan Thomas in the conclusion of his study Educating Children at Home He writes ‘A second, possibly more potent influence, is the way in which some children resist more formal teaching. If they lose interest or do not understand, they stop listening. Because it is in a one-to- one situation, the feedback for the parent is immediate and acute. Dogged persistence is fruitless. What is the point of explaining something to someone who is patently not taking it in? Children in school who resist learning or do not pay attention must somehow be cajoled into compliance, or at least a pretence of it. There is no other option. If a child persists in not learning or attending, the fault is located in the child or his or her background. At home, on the other hand, parents begin to see that their children are not necessarily being lazy or uncooperative. They just want to learn in a different way, though they may not be able to articulate how.’
We are not anti school, but we do believe that for many children, school is not an ideal environment for them to receive an education and we believe that as a viable, effective and legal alternative exists, parents and children should have the right to access that alternative regardless of their social or economic situation. This means getting information to them and providing the support and activities to allow everybody to receive a full educational experience.
We are sometimes told that people only deregister their children to avoid prosecution or because they cannot be bothered to get their children to school or that things will not get better in the system if those who have problems are taken out of it. We say that everyone has the basic right to feel safe, be happy and enjoy their childhood and education and that parents should not be put in the position where they have to choose between being prosecuted or putting their children’s safety and mental and emotional welfare at risk when there is provision in law to avoid this situation. We do not believe that bullying is a necessary evil which prepares children for life in a harsh world. We believe that compassion, understanding, confidence building, setting a good example and showing respect for differences are far more effective ways of preparing a child to be a force for good in our modern world.
There is much work to be done in the field of research into Home Education in the UK, but what little has been done consistently shows well above average academic results and below average behavioural and social problems. For example, Dr Paula Rothermel's 2002 University of Durham study assessed 196 children under the age of 11 who were educated at home using academic and psychosocial tests. The academic results were astounding. 64% of reception aged children scored over 75% on the PIPS Baseline Assessment compared to 5.1% of children nationally. 80.4% of home educated children scored within the top 16% on the National Literacy Project Assessment. The psychosocial test results showed that the home educated children were ‘socially adept’ and ‘without behavioural problems’. As previously mentioned, these results showed regardless of social or economic status. Rothermel’s conclusion states ‘Overall, the home-educated children demonstrated high levels of attainment and good social skills. Common to all families was their flexible approach. The children benefited from parental attention and the freedom to develop their skills at their own pace. Families enjoyed strong bonds and parents were committed to providing a nurturing environment for their children.’
Rothermel's paper also includes a comprehensive study of previous research, notably Webb (1990), who ‘conjectured that children learning at home experienced true involvement in directing their learning and concluded that more people would home-educate if they knew this to be a legitimate option.’ And Page (1997) who ‘perceived the children to be academically competent and found the families to be close..’
However Rothermel also felt a ‘sense of families searching out an ideal that was not home and not school but some midway alternative’ and also found that ‘families often felt isolated within their communities’.
Whenever there is something different about the lifestyle choices a family or individual makes, there is a danger of either real or perceived social exclusion or isolation. Home Education support groups are vital to families, providing a place to feel included and a place to share experiences. This results in raised confidence and self-esteem among all members of the family, which has a great knock on effect in other areas of their lives.
Leslie Barson studied how home education support groups work for her paper ‘Communities of Practice and Home Education Support Groups’ . She observed that ‘parents in the transition to home education have to deal with many areas of uncertainty’. This is especially true of those families where withdrawal from school has been the result of a traumatic and/or long drawn out experience. Often confidence is low and support is hard to find among family, friends and those professionals who have been trying to help resolve the issues. However, it is also true of those families who decide that home education is the best choice for their children from the beginning. Telling your relatives, friends and health visitor that you wont be sending your 3 or 5 year old child to school can be a tricky time and responses can knock your confidence. As Barson states ‘ The home education support group is a very important aspect of the home education experience as it is here that many parents will learn much of what it is to be a home educator.’
Alan Thomas provides a useful insight into how families actually go about delivering home education in Educating Children at Home. He frequently observes that children often seem to take the lead in their educational provision and that parents respond by gradually becoming less formal in their approach. He explains ‘ As the parents fashion a pedagogy suitable to their circumstances, they find themselves trying out new approaches which would be impossible even to attempt in school. In so doing, their experiences provide us with new and sometimes striking insights into education and child development.’
He concludes ‘Home educators give us a view of education which, in many respects, is markedly different from what is on offer in school. What they have learned from their pioneering experiences has the potential to bring about the most fundamental change in education since the advent of universal schooling in the nineteenth century.'
This idea of home educators as trail blazers and being in a unique position to try out new educational methods is also present in Mr John Randall’s speech to Parliament. He concludes by saying ‘home educators are leading the way, preparing their children for a future in which learning is a continuing part of their lives’. In his response, Mr Lewis agrees, saying ‘ we need to pay more attention to the contribution that home educators make.’
The Education Otherwise website makes the observation that ‘research into home education has reached the conclusion that we should not be asking ‘is home education a viable option?’, but instead ‘why is home education so highly successful, both socially and academically?’.
We feel that support groups provide a vital service to home educating families and we want to ensure that all families can be included in all activities regardless of their ability to pay.
Many research papers and books are listed and linked to from Education Otherwise
Educating Children at Home
By: Alan Thomas
Published by Cassell, 1998
Hardback: ISBN 0-304-70179-3
Softback: ISBN 0-304-70180-7
Home-Education: Aims, Practices and Outcomes
Paula Rothermel
University of Durham, 2002
Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, University of Exeter, England, 12-14 September 2002
Available here
This paper also includes a comprehensive bibliography of published and unpublished studies.
The Fraser Institute report into Home Education
Research at Personalised Education Now
Centre for Personalised Education
Parliamentary Debate on Home Education
Home Education Research Association
Home Schooling: A British Perspective Sean Gabb University of Buckingham Written September 2004
Home-based education effectiveness research - and some of its implications - Research paper by Roland Meighan in 1994
Thinking the Unthinkable: The Third way in Education by Paula Rothermel - University of Durham, UK is available HERE