Friday, 14 September 2012

The Case Against Monitoring Home Education

Exam Results

"Greater regulation does not produce better results. The following quotation from a peer-reviewed academic article on this topic made the following observation:

'The authors of this study find no evidence from their analysis that supports the claim that states should exercise more regulation of homeschool families and students in order to assure better academic success in general or improved higher-education success in particular. On the contrary, the findings of this study are consistent with other research findings that homeschool students perform well academically - typically above national averages on standardized achievement tests and at least on par with others on college-admission tests - and do so regardless of whether they live in a state that applies low, moderate or high governmental regulation of homeschooling.'

(Brian D. Ray, Bruce K. Eagleson, "State Regulation of Homeschooling and Homeschoolers' SAT Scores," Academic Leadership, August 11, 2009)."

The above was quoted in Kelly L. Green's book 'A Matter of Conscience: Education as A Fundamental Freedom' from Rubeus Books.

More from Dr. Brian Ray can be found here:


And what about the safety of children who may suffer harm in the care of home educating parents (which is always the elephant in the corner in every debating room)?

""As the debate on home education has developed, I have become particularly worried about the way in which various issues have been conflated; I am especially worried about the conflation of safeguarding and child protection with quality of education. I deeply regret the way statistics have been used to suggest somehow that children are intrinsically at greater risk if they are being home educated; I believe I am right in saying that not a single home-educated child has had to be taken into care as a result of a child protection plan, yet there are those who have sedulously spread the myth that somehow children are at greater risk through being home educated."

The above is a quotation from Michael Gove's blog:

January 12, 2010

While debating the non-issue of home education during the Balls-Badman (hellish) period in the continuing struggle between local authorities and legally but alternatively educating parents and children, this was said by Andrew George MP in Parliament on June 9, 2009:

"... there may be public concern about this sector, but having visited a group of home educators in Penzance in my constituency, it was clear to me that in many cases these people have chosen this option precisely because they want to escape abuse and bullying in schools. Some choose it for other reasons. In a letter dated 19 June 2007 that I received from the then Under-Secretary in the Department, Lord Adonis, he made it clear that under section 47 of the Children Act 1989 the powers already exist to intervene in cases in which the state believes that a child may suffer harm. I agree with the hon. Gentleman. The state already has the powers to intervene where it suspects that harm may be going on."

Representatives of the state may intercede in any case when they have reason to believe that children are at risk whether those children are educated at home, at a private school, at a state school or anywhere. Home educators live under the same strictures of law as do any other parents. We are accountable to the law for how we treat our children and we are accountable to our children for their safeguarding. We are also accountable to our children for how they are educated. Safeguarding and education are not intertwined. They are separate issues.

So what, exactly, is the problem, Wales?

P.S. Did you know that one synonym of 'intervene' is 'come to school'? 

No comments:

Post a Comment