I’ve just sent this to my local list, and thought I’d share with you lot too:
Can I just make ppl aware that the consultation period for the new LEA guidelines from DfES is now underway. There is a dedicated yahoo group compiling a response from EO and non EO members – it can be found here.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HE-consult-UK/
Mike Fortune Wood is compiling comments via his website here:
http://www.home-education.org.uk/consultations.htm (you can download the draft guidelines from there).
DfES has also in the past couple of days added the national Christian HE organisation Home Service to the consultation, although I don’t know how they are planning to respond – it’s not an organisation I am personally familiar with.
If you are not happy with any of these methods of replying, you can write to DfES direct, or get your MP involved (perhaps via the excellent faxyourmp – it increasingly feels to me that DfES is attempting to marginalise individual home educators and find a party line for us, which I don’t think exists.
I would encourage everyone to discuss this at groups, with friends who aren’t on email lists – basically raise the profile of this consultation, don’t let it fade away, and don’t let it pass you by without making your feelings known, whatever those feelings may be.
Comments
9 responses to “DfES guidelines”
I keep thinking I should, Jax. the problem is, the document is just so longwinded and convoluted that it is offputting. I think this is prob the aim. I have been reading the discussion on other groups though, and perhaps will do the fax your MP – i could do it twice if organised, up here in Leeds, and then when I move! As SB not ‘legal’ yet, I haven’t faced LEA or anything though
tbh Helen, I think those of us who are only just approaching legal requirements are the one with most to lose if we don’t get involved now with the political aspect of it all. Coo, Big will be legal very soon – Easter holidays are coming up aren’t they?
I haven’t personally responded yet, for similar reasons to your own, and it’s not a good enough excuse for my lack of action. I’d like to get much more involved in the group response, but I’d also like to put my own point of view forward – within the various groups there can be rather a “mustn’t tread on anyone’s toes” approach that means everything gets a bit watered down and can I think appear rather undecided.
Out of interest, what would your responses be? I read the blurb on the website, and ploughted through it all, with the constraint that pdfs make my monitor flickery, so I try to read them as quickly as possible. I actually thought it clarified the law as it stands quite well, and would be useful for LEAs to have a better idea of what their job is and what HE can be. But when I mentioned this on MudPud I was shot down in flames, so I must have missed something.
As far as i can see , it blurs the legality of visits. cant quite decide whether it is doing this to see if we are child abusers or for ed purposes. Also, although prob ok for those who are structured/ semi structured, seems v unhelpful for autonomous as it wishes to describe what should be provided n educational terms. Almost as if trying to impose nat curriculum without saying – so it seems to me.
i agree jax, and am mulling over a way to sat it.
There’s quite a bit of stuff in there that’s hugely self contradictory, it starts out by stating that there is no need to enquire as the original assumption should be that education is being provided unless there is evidence to the contrary, and then goes on to blurble about annual monitoring and what form this should take.
There’s also a bit about broad and varied experiences which is fine for anyone with a curriculum and lots of external activities, but anyone who is perhaps focussing on following the interests of the child might find more difficult.
I think my response would/ will be that it needs to be a lot shorter and less contradictory than it is, and to emphasize the difference between education and welfare – it is NOT up to the LEAs to monitor home educating families on welfare grounds. Given that it is stated to be acceptable to judge educational provision without meeting the children, to then insist that you must to check their welfare is ludicrous imo.
But I really need to formulate my response more coherently.
Jax – would you like to see the response I sent about the Executive about the Scottish guidance when it was at consultation. I’ve only skim read the English one so far, but I do plan on reponding over the next few days, and sadly I suspect that the comments I want to make this time will not differ too much from with ours. I would also encourage people to respond, as I a concerted letter writing and lobbying effort brought about significant changes for us. Democracy in action – must be something educational in that 😉 I even met Alison for the first time marching for Freedom in Education. I do like a good march 😉
Joyce, if this is cheeky tell me to bugger off but…
Would you be willing to post something like this to EO and UKHE to be forwarded onto local lists? I think if people heard about your Scottish experiences and how lobbying made a difference, then maybe it might spur more people into action. It’s been discussed elsewhere that lots of us feel inhibited about speaking up, which is obviously a big problem. I also think though that people don’t understand that the outcome of this consultation really could change our lives dramatically, and even if they do, they feel disempowered. I think it would be extremely helpful if the Scottish contingent could kick some English a***’s into gear by reminding everyone about your experiences. :0D
or blog it Joyce???
Do both Joyce! Please 🙂