So now we’re being told that
children who are home educated are at risk, and families who choose to home educate should be better regulated (for “better” read “more”). I would love for someone to tell me exactly what degree of assessment or supervision would be deemed necessary in order to successfully identify the
minute proportion of children who are not in mainstream education and also abused.
There are currently
thousands of children in full time, mainstream education or state care who still suffer appalling abuse (at the hands of their parents, carers, teachers or peers) that nevertheless remains undetected (or, even worse) unchallenged by a range of trained professionals. Bearing this failure in mind, it seems wholly disproportionate to place undoubtedly significant resources (that we all pay for) in such a statistically insignificant area, simply because of several high-profile cases that have shown children's services in a particularly bad light. Let’s not turn child protection into a PR exercise.
In UK law, the responsibility for a child's education (deemed suitable for the individual child by the child’s parents) lies at all times with those parents, whether they attend school or otherwise. What reasonable justification is there to increase scrutiny of parents who take this responsibility extremely seriously by taking steps to ensure their child receives an individualised and personal education, rather than the national curriculum - a universal package of questionable substance, authority and relevance to 21st century living? Are any parents ever held formally responsible for those many young people who pass through school without learning a single skill that enables them to become productive or fulfilled members of society?
If local authorities are to be given more powers to check on the quality of education that home educated children receive then the paradigm of "school setting equals valuable education" must shift, unless we’re all to end up in court. A valuable education is actually one that offers an infinite number of real and enjoyable opportunities to learn, and that can take place in any number of settings, at any age. It cannot always be (and is often best not) measured against the yardstick of examinations and key performance indicators. Currently, education professionals are, apparently “confused” at the lack of clarity in the Education Act’s description of what “suitable education” is. It reads:
The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable—
a. to his age, ability and aptitude, and
b. to any special educational needs he may have,
either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.
Really, what is so confusing about that? It seems to me that the failure of these people to understand that one child’s needs, methods, opinions and interests in learning might be very, very different from those of another is due to a profound ignorance of each child’s status as an individual. An inability (or refusal) to see children as individuals is inextricably linked with a failure to even question what we generally accept to be a valuable education in this country: the institution of school, an externally defined national curriculum, standardised testing and examinations. It’s all about paternalism, homogeneity, conformity, and standardisation. And those things lead to intellectual dependency and a lack of critical thinking, as already demonstrated by many of our educators.
It’s bloody obvious that there can be no single and correct definition of "suitable education" that applies across the board. Some education professionals might find this concept "confusing", but only because they are so narrow-minded as to automatically assume school, teaching and the national curriculum to be the correct or “best” approach in the first place. Home-educated children and their families have already discovered that school as we know it is generally unnecessary and indeed often detrimental to fruitful, holistic learning.
One’s own learning, wherever and however that is secured, is always far, far more valuable than any kind of education that an educational professional deems suitable to give to you.
