If closer monitoring of home education in New Zealand and the USA does no good, why would we need it in this country?

In recent days two linked objections have been raised to the proposition that new legislation is needed in this country to regulate home education. The first is that increasing or decreasing monitoring in two other countries does not seem to affect the outcomes for home education there; the second that there is no evidence that there is anything wrong with the current arrangements in this country and that consequently there is no need for any new law. I want today to examine the first of these ideas, that it is possible and worthwhile to compare home education in this country with that in New Zealand and America. I strongly suspect that those making this claim know as well as I do why it is impossible to compare home education in this country with either New Zealand or the United States, but working on the assumption that there will be readers who do not understand the difficulties, I shall try briefly to outline the problem.

Let us begin by looking at the most recent investigation into motives for home education in the United Kingdom. This was conducted in Wales, but there is no reason to suppose that the findings are not also applicable to England. The full report may be found here:



http://wales.gov.uk/topics/educationandskills/schoolshome/pupilsupport/homeeducation/?lang=en



What was discovered about the motives for home education? The report says:



Broadly, from the responses gathered at this stage, the motivations of the Home Educating community can be seen to fall into four categories on a spectrum and, in this description, in no order of percentage choice.





1. Response to behavioural /attendance issues

The extreme stance expressed by some authorities that the majority of HE parents choose HE to avoid prosecution when they and/or their children simply disengage with education is not endorsed by this initial scoping, but it is the primary experience of the EWS in relation to HE and, as such, is perceived to be a much more significant motivation than it is in actuality.



2. Lifestyle choices

At the other end of the spectrum, the political position of some home educators is that the family unit and not the state has primary responsibility for the education of the child and therefore that education is most suitably and efficiently delivered in the family context. Other ‘alternative’ lifestyle choices include those of the traveller communities, or various religious perspectives.



3. Curricular/structural issues

Between these two poles are children and families opting out of the mainstream, not to disengage from education, but after struggling with, and giving up on, the curriculum or structural difficulties of school life, be it the size, the length of day or the interaction with some teachers.



4. Special social, emotional, health or learning needs

Towards the choice of HE as a lifestyle are those opting out of the mainstream because of social, emotional or other learning challenges, delicate health issues, difficulties with transition, or, most particularly, the experience of bullying. This appears to be the largest group in the spectrum. Many of these, though originally choosing reactively away from school, do seem to find HE particularly suitable to meeting, or allowing for, those particular needs and come to embrace this alternative educational experience as a proactive and positive decision.



Lest anybody object that this research was carried out by those opposed to home education and accordingly biased against the practice, let us recall that Paula Rothermel found pretty much the same thing when she surveyed British home educators. The main motives that she found were things such as, ‘having a close family relationship and being together’.

Now I find all this pretty astounding.   I was sure that I could provide my daughter with a better education than she would receive at school and it therefore made sense from a purely educational perspective not to send her to school. Such people as me are mentioned in the list of motives, but one does not get the impression that they are a majority or even a significant proportion.  I have an idea, which is borne out by what little research has been conducted in this country, that very few parents in Britain home educate for purely educational motives of this sort. Research by both Paula Rothermel and Education Otherwise confirms this. When Education Otherwise sent out two and a half thousand questionairres, the main reasons that were given for home education were bullying and lifestyle. Education per se did not seem to be a big factor in the decision to home educate.

In America, the situation is very different. The largest piece of research carried out there into the motives for home education, that carried out by The National Centre for Education Statistics in America, showed that 50% of those asked about their motives gave as the answer, ‘Can give child a better education at home’. This indicates that the commonest motives for home education in America are very different from those in this country. There, parents tend to choose the practice because they believe that they can provide a better academic education. In the UK, it is at best a lifestyle choice relating to wanting to be close to the children and at worst, a reaction to problems at school. In other words, British parents are not in general choosing home education for educational reasons.

It must be fairly clear that if, as tends more commonly to be the case, American home educators are primarily concerned with good academic education, then their children are likely to be achieving highly; regardless of whether or not they are being checked by the authorities. To try and compare this situation with that in this country is pointless. Most parents here are either forced into a position where they feel they have no choice in the matter or wish to keep their children at home as part of a lifestyle choice. This means that we are not able to draw any useful conclusions by the American experience of monitoring and regulation. Unless somebody is able to come up with evidence that home educating parents in New Zealand are very similar in their motivations to those in this country, we may probably disregard what has happened there as well. All of which means that when considering new legislation, we would be well advised to restrict ourselves to thinking about what is happening in this country and not trying to rope in America and New Zealand.

What is happening in this country and what does the evidence suggest? I shall be looking at this in the next few days.

The real reasons for the opposition to the Welsh proposals for the registration and monitoring of home education

The Welsh Assembly hope to introduce a scheme to register and monitor home educators and their children, to ensure that an education is actually being delivered. Most ordinary people see nothing wrong with this, but a small number of militant home educators are fighting the proposals ferociously. Many of these are the same people who fought against the attempt to change the law in England in 2009 and 2010. There are not many of them, perhaps a couple of hundred at most, but they are very vociferous.

One of the things that I would like to know about these people is whether or not they really believe what they say. Let me explain. Although there are some home educating parents who are grateful for the help of their local authority, I am guessing that the vast majority just want to be left alone. This is the case with the whole spectrum of home educators; ranging from radical unschoolers at one end to the fanatically structured at the other. It is obvious why this should be the case. If you practice autonomous education, then the very act of examining and asking probing questions about the education could have the effect of altering its style or direction. If on the other hand, like me, you are an extremely structured educator, then you are just as likely to be unwelcoming to inspection. This is because those investigating the education that you are providing will not understand what you are up to and the hour or so spent in a visit will just disrupt the smooth running of the day’s work. This is why I did not register with either of the local authorities where we lived while I was educating my child; there would have been no point.

So far, so good. Up to this point I am in complete accord with all the other parents who do not wish to be registered or monitored. Where I perhaps differ is that I have not the least doubt that a regimen of national monitoring of this sort would have an effect, a generally beneficial effect, upon home education. To understand why I think this, it is necessary to look at the supposed beliefs of those home educators who are opposed to the proposals currently under consideration in Wales.

Militant home educators are a tricksy bunch. They will say anything at all in support of their cause if they think that it will play well with those who know nothing about home education. For example, during the Badman business, the focus was upon ‘rights’. There was much talk of the ‘rights’ of parents and, to a lesser extent, those of the children themselves. You will not hear much about this during the present campaign, because it has rightly been gauged that popular opinion is in favour of monitoring and talk of ‘rights’ will not sway most parents whose children are at school. Instead, the emphasis is on the cost of registration and monitoring and the pointlessness of it.

The thing that I am unable to figure out is whether or not the home educators opposed to the idea of monitoring really believe that it would have no effect or only a bad effect upon home education? I somehow doubt that do. At the moment, one withdraws a child from school or fails to send her and there is an end to the matter. Parents can avoid meeting with or speaking to local authority officers and fob them off for years at a time with copied ‘philosophies’ or threats of legal action. Some of the children of such parents are probably being educated; others are probably not. Does anybody really doubt that if they knew that they would be expected to give some account of the education that their children were receiving, then many of those parents would put their shoulders to the wheel and provide some structured teaching and get their children to read, write, study history and do sums? I would say that this is a racing certainty. Of course, most autonomous educators do believe this; but unlike me, they think that it would be a bad thing if this were to happen.

Diverting the debate to various states in America or other countries, such as New Zealand is very neatly done, but does not alter the fact that compulsory registration and monitoring would have a great effect on home education either in England or in Wales. One of those effects would be that more parents would be undertaking structured work with their children; that is to say actually teaching them. I think that this would be a good thing and so, I suspect, would almost all non-home educators. The militant home educators who are opposing any such move tend to be autonomous educators who think that for parents to feel obliged to teach their children regularly would be a bad thing. Because this sounds pretty mad to most people whose children attend school, they find it necessary to dissemble and claim instead that they are worried about the waste of money that such a scheme would entail. This is not an honest way to carry on. I think that it would be interesting to hear what those who do not approve of the idea of registration and monitoring think the actual results would be. Do they, like me, think that the natural consequence would be more parents teaching their children in a  structured way? If so, is this at the heart of their opposition?

What about New Zealand?

The more articulate home educators in this country are very good at citing various faraway places as showing why the situation in this country with regard to home education should never change. We saw this here recently, when somebody brought up New Zealand as a knockdown argument against the  routine monitoring of home education. I suspect that those using the case of New Zealand in this way actually know very well why it is not comparable with this country, but for the benefit of those who genuinely do not, let’s have a look at why the cases of this country and New Zealand are wholly dissimilar when it comes to home education.


In England, any parent wishing to educate a child at home must do one of two things. The first option is, as in my own case, to do nothing at all; that is to say just not sending the child to school at the age of five. The second is if the child is attending school,  writing to the Head and saying that you are taking your child out of the school. That’s it. No seeking permission, no registration; nothing at all. It is this state of affairs that many militant home educators are determined to maintain at all costs. Where does New Zealand fit into all this? Some people in this country are concerned that children being educated at home might not be receiving a good education. New Zealand, until a few years ago, used to monitor home education pretty closely and found that 95% of children being educated in this way were getting an acceptable education. This appeared to remain the case even when routine monitoring was stopped. Therefore, so the argument goes, it would be a waste of time and money to start routine monitoring of home educated children in England.

Assuming that it is true that 95% of home educated children in New Zealand are getting good education, does that tell us anything useful about the current situation in England? Not in the slightest. This is because parents in New Zealand are not allowed to educate their children at home until they have fulfilled certain conditions. The law there is very clear. The 1989 Education Act says that permission to educate a child at home will only be granted if it can be shown that the child, ‘will be taught as regularly and as well’ as if he were at school. Note that; home educated children in New Zealand must be taught and not only that,  taught as much as children at school and to at least as high a standard. Of course, some children in this country are getting this at home; many are not. There are an awful lot of parents here who do not approve of regular teaching, certainly not as frequently as it is given in schools. These would be breaking the law in New Zealand.

In order to home educate in New Zealand, one must ask for permission from the Ministry of Education. No nonsense here about just dealing with a local authority! Permission is not always granted. There are two reasons for this. One is that if a child about whom there is anxiety is taken from school, the school will contact the Ministry of Education and explain why they think why home education is a bad idea. Secondly, to gain permission anyway, called being granted an exemption, parents must fill out a very detailed outline of the type of teaching which they mean to undertake. Teaching, remember, not just allowing the child to learn autonomously. Here is a very abbreviated version of the sort of thing parents would need to be setting out in detail before they could even be considered for permission to teach their child at home:

1. Special Education Needs
If enrolled in a registered school, would your child be likely to need special education, forexample in a special class or clinic or by a special service? If yes, how do you plan to meet your child’s special educational needs?

2. Knowledge and understanding
Describe your knowledge and understanding of the broad curriculum areas you intend to cover as you educate your child.

3. Curriculum
Describe your curriculum or programme. Detail what you intend to cover with your child in different areas of your stated curriculum. The National Curriculum Framework may serve as a guide but use of this is not compulsory. It lists seven essential learning areas and eight grouipings of essential skills. These are listed below for your information should you wish to use the National Curriculum Framework as a guide.

4. The National Curriculum
Essential Learning Areas
Language and Languages
Mathematics
Science
Technology
Social Sciences
The Arts
Health and Well-Being

Essential Skills
Communication Skills
Numeracy Skills
Information Skills
Problem-solving Skills
Self-management and competitive Skills
Social and co-operative Skills
Physical Skills
Work and study Skills
Whatever source of curriculum you select, you should be specific about the skills you want your child to learn and you should be clear about matching the learning needs of your child to your programme.

5. Topic Plan
To help the Ministry understand how your curriculum vision translates into practical terms, we ask you to includ one topic of your choosing.

We are looking for the following elements in your statement:
The Topic Title –
The Aim – what you are going to teach your child.
Resources – what materials you would use to teach the topic.
Method – what steps would you take to communicate/teach the material? Please be as
clear as possible.
Evaluation – how you will test/measure the effectiveness of your teaching.

6. Resources and Reference Material
(There is no need to list the titles of books.) Please provide a comprehensive list of all resources and reference material available to you. Also list the type of material you may intend to include in the future. Do not list the titles of every publication.

7. Environment
State how you will use the environment and your community to extend and enrich your child’s education. Please include in this a description of any educational visits you hope to make.

8. Social Contact
Describe how you intend to provide for your child’s need for social contact with other children.

9. Assessment and Evaluation
Explain how you are going to assess and evaluate the progress your child is making. Remember, you will need to have some record of this over the years, eg, if your child wants to enter an apprenticeship, this will be needed.

10. Regularity
The legislation requires a commitment to regularity. In explaining your routines, show how you will meet the requirement that your child will be taught at least as regularly as in a registered school. Some parents provide a timetable to meet this request, some describe their integrated approach. You may like to include one of the following:
• Timetable or
• Integrated curriculum description or
• Description of typical routines used.

11. Other Information
Please make any other comments you consider relevant.





There are several consequences of all this. First, the sort of parent in this country who has a row with the head at her child’s school or is anxious about bullying and then dashes off a letter deregistering the kid, is unknown in New Zealand. Applying for an exemption is a serious process which can drag on for ages. It is very common for the Ministry of Education to consider an application  and then write back asking for further and fuller details. This alone discourages parents from just taking their children from school in response to some temporary problem. It is one thing to take a child out of school and say that you will ‘de-school’  for six or nine months; quite another to realise that you will be expected to provide fulltime teaching from the word go! Although the majority of applications for an exemption are eventually granted, quite a few are not. These are the cases where the school is worried about the child or the parents seem to be incapable of providing an education.  It must be borne in mind too that applications for exemption must be renewed twice a year and can be withdrawn at any time.

I think that readers are now beginning to see why 95% of home educated children in New Zealand might be getting a good education. It is because those who are not prepared to teach their children as much and as well as a school are not allowed to home educate in the first place. Those who do not feel up to the job of teaching to a high standard usually don't  bother to apply for an exemption. Trying to draw any comparison between this state of affairs and the case of England, where anybody can take their child from school at the drop of a hat and then announce that the kid will be doing nothing for six months, is absolutely meaningless. I am not at all surprised that the great majority of home educated children in New Zealand are receiving a good education. This would also be the case in this country if we put into place the same system here.

Of course, if those who talk enthusiastically about New Zealand and the high educational standards achieved by home educating parents there are in favour of a rigorous system like the one there being instituted in this country; I would be the first to give my support. Imagine parents in this country being expected to teach their children fulltime to as high a standard as schools! It sounds great to me and I will certainly join in any campaign for this. Until then, it is probably best that English home educators give the subject of New Zealand a wide berth, as it raises more questions for them than it answers.

Home Education in New Zealand

Here is a very optimistic and upbeat account of home education in New Zealand:


http://www.bayofplentytimes.co.nz/life-style/news/right-at-home-with-learning/3951948/