"Upsetting both sides of the argument.."
Well, I watched most of the second reading debate of the CSF bill, was duly disgusted by Balls, impressed by Gove, disappointed by Laws and amazed by the tireless, dogged perseverance of Stuart. Hats off to that man. You can watch the whole debate here, from about 2 hours in.
On the whole, the issue of home education was represented well I thought, reflecting the many hours of hard work spent by home educators in patiently educating their MPs and in generally raising awareness.
Open Letter to the Guardian Published
We believe that schedule 1 of the children, schools and families bill represents an unacceptable imposition of state control over families. Although it is aimed at children educated outside the school system, it has implications for all families.
Most parents would not make home-based education their first choice; but any family might need it if school seriously failed their child. Currently, this choice is lawfully available to all parents. If enacted, the bill would – for the first time – transfer responsibility for a child's education from the parents to the state. We believe this is a matter which should be of great concern to everyone.
A change in the law is unnecessary. Parents are already required by law to provide an education suitable to the age, aptitude and ability of their children, and to any special educational needs they may have. Local authorities already have the power to take action if parents do not do this.
Evidence indicates that home education is highly effective. Many home educating families use child-led educational methods which lie outside the prevailing educational paradigm. Diversity in education is precious in a democracy, and we need the law to protect it, and to protect the best interests of each individual child.
The interests of children are strikingly absent from schedule 1, which is concerned mainly with setting up a bureaucratic system administered by local authorities. They would be given the power to deny parents permission to home-educate, at any time, unless parents adapt their educational approach to fit in with the requirements of the system. The resulting insecurity would be damaging to many children, especially those with special educational needs.
Second Reading of Children, Schools and Families Bill Today
...is due to happen today, Monday 11th January.
A letter lodging objections to the bill and signed by people such as Oliver James, Frank Furedi and Roger Scruton can be found in today's Guardian.
A number of MPs have also lodged their objections:
"That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Children, Schools and Families Bill because it adds hugely to the bureaucratic burdens on schools and colleges without improving real opportunities and educational standards for pupils and without genuinely empowering parents; its proposals for the regulation of home education introduce powers which are excessive and risk undermining key freedoms for home educators; it fails to put in place a coherent system for delivering school improvement; its provisions on family proceedings have not been properly consulted on and do not take account of existing reforms; and it does not include much needed policies to introduce a Pupil Premium to support the education of children from disadvantaged homes or to establish a new Educational Standards Authority to restore confidence in educational standards and to reduce the extent of destabilising political interference in English education. "
All of which is right and good and thoroughly sensible. We must hope that our MPs do their utmost to reinforce this message, though the government have the procedural powers here. They will be employing the whip on this one - (yes, that's right, when reason deserts you, use coercion), and are fond of using guillotine motions to curtail debate.
The Order of Business for 11th Jan reveals that the government intends that
"proceedings in the Public Bill Committee shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a conclusion on Thursday 4 February 2010."
The real fight will probably start when the bill reaches the Lords.
Ed Balls accused of wasting £1bn on red tape
"The schools secretary Ed Balls was today accused of wasting more than £1bn on red tape for parents and teachers – a month after he told schools to turn off lights to save money.
An education bill, which will have its second reading in the Commons today, would cost the public £1.1bn over a decade if it becomes law, government statistics compiled by the Liberal Democrats show.
The Children, Schools and Families bill has been heavily criticised by parents, professors and teachers who dismiss much of it as "bureaucratic" and "pointless".
The National Union of Teachers warned that one of the bill's clauses, which forces teachers to hold a licence to practise, would be an "entirely unnecessary, pointless hurdle". The government's figures show this measure alone would cost the public £94m over a decade – over £9m each year.
Another clause, which compels every parent who home educates their child to register with their local authority, would cost £191m over ten years – over £19m each year. It would give local authorities the power to refuse parents the right to educate their children at home.
More than 900 parents, scholars and teachers have written a letter, published in the Guardian today, condemning the register as a bureaucratic intrusion by the state into their children's education."...
Department for Children, Schools and Families Public Consultation Response Home Education – registration and monitoring proposals
Classic 'we hear what you say and we're going ahead anyway' stuff...
_______________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
Why the consultation took place
On 11 June, the Secretary of State placed Graham Badman’s report entitled, Review of Elective Home Education in England, in the House of Commons Library. The report set out an analysis of evidence about the standard of education received by home educated children, and the extent to which local authorities were able to satisfy themselves that a suitable, full time education was being provided in a safe environment. It contained 28 interrelated recommendations which, together, mapped out how improved relationships between local authorities and home educators could lead to better support for home education, particularly where home educated children have special educational needs (SEN), want to take formal qualifications, or access education in further education colleges.
The Secretary of State’s initial response warmly welcomed the report and recognised that the review made a compelling case for immediate and urgent reforms to ensure that all home educated children are known to, and monitored by, local authorities. The government announced it was launching a public consultation on the proposals for registration and monitoring. The consultation was launched on 11 June 2009 and closed on 19 October 2009. Replies were invited by letter, e-mail or interactive web-site.
2. Overview and next steps for the policy
Sign the Petition!
If everyone gets just 4 more people to sign the petition *this Weekend*, then we will get past 20,000 signatures by Monday, for the 2nd reading.
This is very important!
4 more signatures each is nothing!
Report on APPG meeting
"Meeting was chaired by Graham Stuart MP. There was a short presentation by Diana Johnson MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Schools helped by civil servant Penny Clark (or it may have been Penny Jones)
Graham Stuart MP
Welcomed everyone. Said this was the first meeting of the APPG on Home Education.
Diana Johnson MP
Mentioned she had had a meeting with Graham Stuart yesterday about Home Education (HE). Said the Government was committed to supporting choice for HE. Wants a more constructive and supportive approach. Said the Government would publish Statutory Guidance around the registration scheme later in the year and this would be put out to consultation. Wanted to highlight what she sees as key areas:
LA forums for HE families
Plans to extend flexi-schooling
Use of school libraries to be made available
Support to families with children with SEN."
Education Otherwise Press Release
Education Otherwise believes that Clause 26 Schedule 1 of the Children,
Schools and Families Bill is profoundly flawed and must not pass into
legislation. In addition to the devastating effect on home educating
families, the proposed measures would be incompatible with existing laws and
would have unforeseen consequences far beyond the present target group.
"It would never be appropriate for LA officers within the role of supporting
families with home education to insist on interviewing a child alone. The LA
officer is not at all likely to be someone a child knows well or trusts and
such power gives the impression that LA officers do not trust parents and
believe they can get to some hidden truth by seeing children alone. LA
officers need to share any concerns about the child's education with parents
and in cases where the LA officer has concerns about the welfare of a child,
the usual safeguarding procedures apply." Gloucestershire County Council
"Parents who we have spoken to and who home educate are fully aware of the
responsibility they are taking on and often find it a costly option and let
down by their local authority. In this context the introduction of
registration and monitoring processes held by the local authority can seem
inappropriate and intrusive. The provision of information and support for
parents instead, would be helpful." Treehouse charity for autism education
Read more http://tinyurl.com/eopositionclause26.
Ann Newstead
Spokesperson & Trustee
08445 868839
http://www.education-otherwise.org
http://twitter.com/EdOtherwise
http://tinyurl.com/EOFacebook
http://youtube.com/EducationOtherwise
http://www.freedomforchildrentogrow.org/
Education Otherwise Association Ltd Registered Charity No. 1055120
A company limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales, No.
01917107
Correspondence Address: PO Box 325, Kings Lynn, Norfolk, PE34 3XW
A critique of the data presented to the Enquiry into the 2009 Review of Elective Home Education in England
Tania Berlow and Jacquie Cox
1/1/2010
STATISTICAL EXPOSE
· There are an estimated 20,000 Electively Home Educated (EHE) children registered with Local Authorities in England1. There may be another 40-60,000 EHE children not registered with Local Authorities. There is currently no obligation for families to register in this way. Under current law and guidelines parents have a duty to ensure their children receive a suitable education, not Government.
· If a Local Authority has reason to believe that a suitable education is not taking place, they then have a duty to intervene. The recent Review into EHE did not concern itself with asking why many Home Educators choose not to register as electively home educating. Any data discussed in this document is referring to those EHE children known to the Local Authorities, through registration or otherwise.
· The Badman Review on Elective Home Education (EHE)2 was commissioned by the Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF) used 3 questionnaires.
· The first questionnaire was not used to extract data but was used to inform the type of
questioning that came in the second questionnaire. 90 Local Authorities (LA's) responded.
· The second questionnaire was answered by only 25/152 LA’s and only 20 of these 25 LA’s gave figures that could be used. It appears that the data from this questionnaire has been disregarded for the statistics used in the Impact Assessment used to inform the Children Schools and Families Bill.
· When home educators questioned the provenance and the robustness of the data used by the review author to draw conclusions and make recommendations to the Secretary of State, the author asked the Star Chamber for more time to conduct a further supplemental data gathering exercise, which was completed by Local Authorities after the Review was published3.
