Lancashire
a page for information, news and comment in Lancashire
related links:
Meeting the LA Education Department
Guidance on improving LEAs
EHE consultation response
(closed July 31st 2007)
Lancashire County Council
Local Authority
1 Do you agree that it is helpful for the DfES to issue guidelines to local authorities?
Yes
Comments:
The principle of issuing guidance to Local Authorities is good – however it is our view that the guidance should incorporate a much greater emphasis on safeguarding – we feel that the current guidance document is inadequate in this respect, given that it focuses virtually singularly upon the “educational interests of children and young people” and the “suitability” of such provision rather than looking at the wider context of Every Child Matters and safeguarding.
The Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment for Elective Home Education Consultation states that the objective is “to ensure that all children who are being educated at home receive a full-time, high quality education which is suitable to their needs”. We do not believe the guidance in its current form is likely to achieve this objective.
2 Do you agree that the description of the law (paragraphs 2.1-2.3) relating to elective home education is accurate and clear?
Not Sure
Comments:
The description of education law is accurate as it stands. However, although some tokenistic references to child protection issues are included later in the guidance the failure to include reference here to legislation around safeguarding and child protection, as well as issues around listening to the views of children and young people gives a one sided perspective on the law that might relate to children whose parents elect to home educate. There appears to be little recognition of Every Child Matters issues in this section.
If this is to be a comprehensive statement of legislation relating to children who are home educated, then reference to legislation should possibly also include clarity that the law and regulations around children in employment and children in entertainment apply equally to children who are home educated as to children who are in schools (eg prohibition on working during school hours even though such children do not attend school).
It is hard to agree that the description of the law is “clear” given the wording of paragraph 2.3 which is not at all clear, and not very helpful. The definition of “community” is not clear.
3 Do you agree that the description of local authorities’ responsibilities (paragraphs 2.5-2.11) is accurate and helpful?
No
Comments:
This section is not helpful as there is no clarity or common understanding of what minimum standards of educational provision should be expected. Whilst it is good to see reference to the fact that LAs must be satisfied, in the absence of any criteria or benchmarking it is difficult to identify what measures would be used to enable the LA to reach any reasonable conclusions and to ensure some equity of practice across the country.
It is very regrettable that there is no requirement for parents who elect to home educate to notify the LA – this is likely to result in first contact between LAs and such parents being negative as LAs will be seeking information regarding such pupils in order to confirm that they should not appear on the Children Missing Education database – it would be far more positive if parents were notifying the LA where they elect to home educate as a child becomes of compulsory school age. Section 2.6 is potentially misleading, as it is difficult to see how, in the absence of information from parents that their children are being home educated, failure to register children at school would not result in such children being at the very least subject to enquiries under CME arrangements.
Although the document refers to local authorities’ responsibilities, it appears to focus solely on the role of the former education authority’s involvement, rather than acknowledging the wider role of Children’s Services Authorities around safeguarding and the whole Every Child Matters agenda. Local authority staff visiting families who elect to home educate cannot merely consider the limited legal duties of the local authority around education legislation but must discharge their duties having regard to the welfare of these children and this could lead to tensions which are not acknowledged in this section.
4 Do you agree that the section on contact with the local authority (paragraphs 3.4-3.7) is accurate and helpful?
Not Sure
Comments:
This section does not really reflect the Every Child Matters agenda, nor does it really assist LAs in terms of how they might reach a judgement that an appropriate education is not being provided.
It might be useful to include some guidance on what information LAs might wish to record in terms of any such contact.
The suggestion that a child need not attend any meetings is a potential concern – is that judgement reached by the parent or the child – this may be problematic where the preferences of the parents to home educate do not match the wishes of the child. We feel that as a minimum some contact with the child should be expected – look to the West family scenario as evidence of why this should be required. Again, it is important to note that LA staff cannot only consider contact with the family in the light of education issues but must consider the wider issues of the best interests of the child and safeguarding duties.
5 Do you agree that the section on providing a full-time education (paragraphs 3.11-3.14) – and in particular, the characteristics of provision (paragraph 3.13) – is accurate and helpful?
Comments:
It seems strange that although education provided for children who attend school is subject to rigorous monitoring and inspection arrangements, that provided for children who are home educated is subject to much less rigour.
The guidance in this form is unlikely to help LAs to either reach a meaningful conclusion that provision is unsatisfactory or to investigate effectively. The absence of a meaningful definition of full time education as applicable to ehe pupils is not helpful – we feel this should be clearly identified. There are also issues re the use of private tutors and child protection arrangements – staff in schools required to be CRB cleared – should there be a similar requirement for these pupils.
It is very difficult, in the absence of any agreed standards or benchmarking, to establish how the LA is going to reach a conclusion that the provision is unsuitable.
6 Do you agree that the section on developing relationships (section 4) is useful?
No
Comments:
This section does not appear to acknowledge the complexities for staff working in LAs who are seeking to safeguard children, to work within the duties and powers of the Education Acts 2002 and 2003 and the Children Act 2004 – there are potential tensions between messages to parents about LA staff having limited powers and duties under education legislation to intervene in respect of home educated pupils, set against duties for the same staff under child care legislation.
This section also appears to give families who so choose an opportunity to avoid engagement with the LA – would be of concern where families believed to be opting for home education for example to avoid prosecution for non-attendance etc
7 a) Are the suggested resources in section 5 and appendix 2 useful?
Comments:
Flexi-Schooling – the references to this are very limited given the potential implications for schools and LAs and we feel this area requires far greater clarity and guidance than is included in this document. At the very least, clarity is required on whether such pupils are subject to the requirements of the National Curriculum.
Work experience – further guidance on how this might be managed would be useful as we have so far been unable to identify how these pupils could be supported in work experience placements.
The resources seem useful but they would need to be constantly updated. The elinks in Annex B were considered useful.
7 b) Should any other contacts be included?
8 Please use this space for any other comments you wish to make about the guidelines
Comments:
There appears to be an assumption within the whole document that all parents who elect to home educate their pupils do so in good faith and with every intention of making such provision. Whilst this is likely to be true in the majority of cases, there are some cases (however few) where parents so elect to avoid the consequences of prosecution for non-attendance etc, and the assumptions within the guidance compromise the LA’s ability to intervene effectively and promptly in such situations.
Section 2.4 – no questions were asked but this is a crucial issue. The failure to require parents to register is a concern – especially as section 2.6 is very misleading. Whilst it is clear that children whose parents have opted to home educate should not be placed on the list maintained by the LA of children missing from education, it is impossible to see how they can be omitted from that list until such time as a parent confirms they intend to so educate their child – surely it would be more productive to require parents proactively to register their children as such, rather than having to respond to enquiries from the LA as to why such children appear to be missing from education.
No question was asked about the accuracy of sections 3.8 – 3.10 but the legislation referred to in 3.9 is inaccurate in that these regulations have been repealed and replaced by new regulations which came into effect on 1 September 2006 (section 8 of the new regulations applies here).
Similarly no question was asked about sections 3.15 – 3.19, regarding children with special educational needs whose parents choose to home educate. Again, it is unfortunate that in the absence of a requirement for parents to notify the LA that they intend to home educate, there could be pupils whose special educational needs are not even identified by the LA as we are unaware of them and unable to identify any special needs they may have.
Training – it might be helpful if the DCSF produced training materials or courses for teachers who are monitoring EHE provision on behalf of LAs.
~~~~~
Comment:
~~~~~
News:
~~~~~
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.