Stealing your freedom

First it was allegations of abuse, now it's radicalisation – the dangers of home education

20th December 2015 by Jax Blunt 26 Comments

What *is* it that politicians think I’m doing with my children?

I think I’m home educating them. Educating them otherwise than at school, as is my legal right. Well some of them. Tigerboy is too young to count, and Big is now in school, and don’t get me started on that. It is a parental responsibilty to arrange for children to receive an education suitable to age, ability and aptitude, and I choose in the main to exercise that responsibility directly.

But apparently, I could be filling their (child’s) minds with poison

Yes really. So a senior government source says in the Independent today, and apparently it’s already been on Radio 4 as well.

I’m intrigued.

I’m not sure I know what filling a child’s mind with poison looks like, although I understand that the government has a whole strategy set up to Prevent (see what I did there?) it happening.

The strategy risks backfiring at the moment, according to people caught up in it recently, as in this article from Sky News.

We’re told that the concerns are partly because the government doesn’t know how many home educators there are, so it needs to conduct a review, because those children aren’t being monitored for radicalisation.

How come they don’t know how many there are? It’s a good question. Although there isn’t a register of home educators (the labour govt tried to bring this in following the Badman review and failed), all births in this country are registered, and pupils are registered in schools. I’d have thought some fairly straightforward arithmetic could be applied there really. Number of children – number of pupils. Should get us close to the numbers, surely?

The political solution to this problem? From the Independent article linked above

Under proposals being considered in Whitehall, parents and teachers will be given a specific point of contact at local councils in order to raise concerns about a child. Officials will also try to discover how many children are being taught at home, beyond the reach of inspectors.

*all* parents? So basically what we’re going to say is that anyone with suspicions about a child (what suspicions – that they are radicalised? Or just that they’re not in school? Home educators get unnecessarily reported to social services fairly regularly anyway, by people unaware that home education is legal) can call a number. Alternatively, those officials could apply the logic I specified above – I don’t think I’m giving away anything that hasn’t been suggested before.

Let’s expand on the perceived problem a little:

Fears have been raised that parents are claiming their children are being home schooled when in fact they are being taught at illegal religious schools.

Oh no – illegal schools, and home education being used as a smokescreen!

I’ve heard a variation on this theme before, usually associated with Khyra Ishaq. ‘Her parents said she was home educated, so we couldn’t do anything.’

It was wrong then, and it’s wrong now. Social workers who think that a child is being neglected can investigate. Should investigate! Illegal schools, are, as it says, illegal, there are already powers to deal with these situations. And if a child is in an illegal school, they are again not being home educated.

Home education is not the problem here, and a register of home educators will do nothing more than add needles to an already overpoweringly large pile of needles. (A needle in a haystack stands out. One needle in many doesn’t, and that is what the govt is trying to build.)

The idea of parents reporting parents, inspectors judging families on their radicalisation levels – that goes far beyond suitability of education. Will this suspicion fall mainly on Muslims? The various documents I’ve been reading tonight imply that being an ecological protester is nearly as bad (it was mention of eco terrorism that triggered the interrogation in the sky article above) – should I have signed that petition against fracking after all?

The thing is, when you start singling people out, telling other people that they are a danger, you damage the communities that are our best defence against the radicalisation everyone is so worried about. It takes a village to raise a child, goes the saying, but the village shouldn’t be Portmeirion. The mere act of observation changes a situation, and adding layers of suspicion in to every day interactions will not help at all.

Why am I against registration – surely it’s not that big a deal? I’ve written a lot about it in the past, and I’ll be going through the blog building some links to that stuff. But for now, here’s an excellent article from Gill – 10 reasons why home educated children should not be forcibly registered with local authorities. (Another thought – given the government’s trend to move educational control *away* from local authorities, is this going to end up being a centralised list rather than local?)

A home education register wouldn’t prevent the abuse that was the last excuse for a governmental review. It won’t prevent radicalisation, *if* that’s taking place. It *will* grossly interfere with my (and your) parental rights and responsibilities, and cost a shed load of money we’re told we don’t have to spend. Please don’t go there.

Contemplating the future of home education, and a call for posts celebrating educational freedoms.

21st November 2014 by Jax Blunt 15 Comments

Generally speaking, I’d rather be blogging about hot chocolate, or bubble blowing picnics 😉 but this was brought to my attention recently.

From here

A representative from the DfE joined the committee to discuss elective home education (EHE). Although the department does not have any immediate plans to review this policy, a series of conversations with stakeholders have now begun in order to assess whether it is still relevant given the government’s guidance has remained unchanged since 2007. Members talked about the difficulty they have in knowing home education pupils exist at all without a statutory registration process and the limited safeguarding powers they and their staff have to protect home educated pupils from harm. Several members expressed serious concern that the parental voice appears to be prioritised over that of the child or young person being educated in the home which directly contradicts the child-centred approach used in schools. Checks and balances around the suitability of the setting, the quality of teaching and the content of curriculum provided in the home setting was also raised with some members suggesting that EHE seems to be a grey area for Ofsted.

Apparently stakeholders in home education don’t include parents. Because not only is no one talking to us but freedom of information requests about this have been refused.

The thing that I find interesting about this is that the current govt, in particular one Graham Stuart, has been extremely pro home education. In fact, it was Graham Stuart who coordinated the parliamentary fight back against the Badman report in form of parliamentary petitions, with over 120 being submitted in one evening, a new record. So if the Conservatives are largely positive about the status quo, why would the Department for Education be consulting with stakeholders on possible governmental policy change, behind home educators’ backs? Anyone else wondering if actually this is civil servants preparing for a change of government to ones which are definitely not in favour of home education?

To return to the quote from ADCS above. (ADCS, for those not in the know, refers to the Association of Directors of Children’s Services. Social workers, welfare, that sort of thing.)

Line by line:

“Members talked about the difficulty they have in knowing home education pupils exist at all without a statutory registration process”

Um. They’re children. Pupils are children registered at schools, and by definition, home educated children aren’t. Anyone else concerned that the ADCS don’t have the faintest grasp of the legalities here? Our children are known to exist. They are registered with doctors, we often receive child benefit or tax credits, they are registered at birth. They aren’t listed as pupils because they aren’t pupils.

“and the limited safeguarding powers they and their staff have to protect home educated pupils from harm.”

This again. Children’s services, and the police, have exactly the same safeguarding powers to protect home educated children as they do to protect every child. Home educated children are not somehow a special case, immune to welfare law. It’s really worrying that the people in charge of social work departments seem to believe this, but perhaps does begin to explain why so many serious mistakes are made. I suggest that the people sitting around this table do some research to discover exactly what powers they have, and then train their staff in them as well.

“Several members expressed serious concern that the parental voice appears to be prioritised over that of the child or young person being educated in the home which directly contradicts the child-centred approach used in schools.”

Ah hahahahahahaha. *pause for breath* What, you’re not joking? You seriously want to describe schools as child centred in opposition to home education?

I must be mistaken. There must have been some massive upheaval in the education system, in which age segregation and the entire concept of a national curriculum was thrown out. Because how on earth can a system where children are grouped according to birthdate and then follow an externally set curriculum be described as child centred against a family education built around that family and child?

And yes, the parental voice is prioritised in that the parent is responsible for ensuring that the child receives an education. It’s what the law says.

If you really want to change that, you’ve got a whole can of worms in your hands.

“Checks and balances around the suitability of the setting, the quality of teaching and the content of curriculum provided in the home setting was also raised with some members suggesting that EHE seems to be a grey area for Ofsted.”

I confess, I’m not entirely sure what responsibility Ofsted has in regards to home education. As there is no statutory requirement for anyone to monitor home education, I can’t think they’ve got much of one, quite frankly. And the rest of this bit, where to start? The suitability of the setting. It’s not a setting, it’s a home. Quality of teaching? Many of us would say we don’t teach. We guide, assist, facilitate, direct. Teaching isn’t necessarily a required model for home education, although I can imagine it’s difficult for people so institutionalised to understand that. And curriculum? There’s nothing in the law about needing to follow a curriculum.

How can these people have such a poor understanding of the legislative framework they are supposed to be working within? I think it’s really quite frightening. I suggest some training is required, or at the very least, they should do a bit of homework 😉

We currently have many freedoms in home education, we aren’t required to be registered, monitored or to follow a curriculum. A lot of that is down to fighting off the Badman review during the last labour govt, and the historic night I mention above. That was on the 8th December 2009, and on the 5th anniversary, I shall be holding a freedom in education carnival to celebrate. Please, if you feel like joining in, write a post on the theme of freedom in education, whatever that means to you, and submit it to me via the comments below, via my contact form, or by finding me on twitter. I look forward to seeing what you all come up with.

Home education on the rise – a cause for concern?

24th October 2014 by Jax Blunt 24 Comments

Only if you’re a Labour politician.

To: Department for Education

Home Education 210289

Barry Sheerman

To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make it her policy to collect information on the (a) number, (b) religion and (c) ethnicity of children being homeschooled in England.

Answered by: Mr Nick Gibb on: 20 October 2014

There are no current plans to collect personal information on children receiving elective home education. The Department for Education is aware, however, of some concerns amongst local authorities about the information they have on such children in their areas. We have recently begun discussions with a range of representative bodies about these concerns and other home education issues, especially in relation to safeguarding

(source)

Oh, really. Some concerns in local authorities exist regarding home education, especially in relation to safeguarding. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, home education is NOT, in and of itself, a safeguarding issue. Conflating the two is ignorant and offensive. School is NOT a child welfare solution.

Are we clear now?

And Sheerman again:

I will finish on something that still bugs me from my days as Chair of the Children, Schools and Families Committee—something on which the present Chair of the Education Committee and I disagreed in those days. I am very worried that we do not know where a number of children in our country are or what stimulation and schooling they are getting. I am really worried about home schooling. In my constituency and others, I find a lax attitude to home schooling, and the ease with which people can say a child is being home schooled is dangerous territory. When it was confined to a small number of middle-class families who thought their child might be bullied at school and needed that home support, it was perhaps something we could tolerate, but I always thought that we ought to know where every child is in this country

(source)

(interrupted)

I always thought that we ought to know where every child is in this country, how it is being supported, how it is being stimulated and how it is being treated. I am increasingly concerned about the large number of children now being home schooled. Their number is growing rapidly.

I am also worried that people from a strong faith background are choosing to use home schooling. I see it going on in my own community and know it is going on in other communities. I have a lot of evidence that the home school is not genuinely in the home, and the children are ending up in scruffy little back rooms being taught in a way that I do not approve of. I believe that we should know what children are being taught and how they are being taught.

Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness, Conservative)

I think the hon. Gentleman will get an extra minute if he is lucky. May I say to him that I do not believe he does have an evidence base of any sort for these slurs against home-educating families up and down the country? Why do we not seek a point of agreement that what we should do is try to establish a better evidence base about what is happening in home schooling? If we did that, we could talk on the basis of evidence, rather than slur and anecdote.

Barry Sheerman (Huddersfield, Labour)

When the hon. Gentleman and I were on the Select Committee looking at this subject we disagreed, and we will continue to do so. The increasing evidence of the larger number of home schooled children is a worry in any society. This week, we had a statement on what was happening to children in one town. I believe we have a duty as parliamentarians to know where every child is, what the curriculum is and what the qualifications are of the people looking after them.

I apologise for the lengthy quotes above. But I wanted to give you the full background.

I want to show you what this particular elected representative thinks of us, parents. If you’re in a minority of slightly awkward middle class families, determined to be different, your home education can perhaps be excused. But if the numbers increase. If non middle class families start doing it. If “people from a strong faith background” (I’m not quite sure what this phrase is alluding to, but I can’t see he means it as anything good) get involved, then he wants to know where every child is, what the curriculum is and what the qualifications are of the carer.

(I’ve half a mind to suggest that every home educator send him a diary for a week. I’m sure that would hugely improve the safety of home educated children everywhere. Would that build the evidence base they are looking for?)

Newsflash Mr Sheerman.

Children don’t grow to a curriculum. One of the many reasons that parents choose to home educate is to be able to offer education suitable to the individual child, because a one size fits all system of education doesn’t work.

And parents don’t have to be qualified to parent. (Pauses for a moment to imagine precisely how that could be achieved. Mandatory contraception until you passed a parenting class??) And *we* are in charge of our children’s care, and our children’s education. We may choose to delegate to schools, and schools require inspection so that the left hand knows what the right is doing. Parents don’t require inspection, the family unit is the family unit, and there is still a right to privacy within it (I despair when people point to the family right to a private life as if it is a bad thing. Do you *want* to live in a house with glass walls where everyone knows what you are doing at all times? Privacy is not about hiding, it’s about being private. Think about it.)

The state is the parent of last resort, to step in when a family fails. And it’s not very good at it. Before you come gunning for families, Mr Sheerman, how about you sort out the child protection scandals within the organisations that are *supposed* to be there to protect children?

When we defeated Badman during the last Labour government, we knew it was but a battle in a war. If Labour get in again at the next general election they will again attempt to override family rights and privacies for the common good. This is laying the groundwork for that attack.

Just a thought.

Drip, drip, drip….

13th July 2014 by Jax Blunt 2 Comments

That’s the sound of your civil liberties eroding.

Back in April the ECJ (european court of justice?) ruled that a part of our current legislation, the Data Retention Directive, was breaching human rights with regards to privacy.

Our government’s response is to attempt to rush through emergency legislation this week.

Yes, that’s what I said. As a result of something that happened in April, the govt is rushing through ill conceived legislation without proper scrutiny, and with cross party consensus this week.

That should set alarm bells ringing for anyone who follows politics. Legislation that hasn’t been scrutinised? That isn’t being discussed, dissected, debated, and held up for approval? And an emergency response that takes 3 months to come to fruition – well, it’s not really an emergency reaction is it?

This government is proving itself to be as anti human rights and privacy as the one that brought in the ill fated snoopers’ charter that was fought off. In this instance, they are hoping that they can rush it through before enough of us can mobilise to alarm our MPs about it.

I’m going to tweet my MP. I doubt it will do much good. She is a party animal, in that what the party says, she does. But I will register my disapproval of this process, and I will consider very carefully how, or indeed if, I vote in future. I am gradually coming to the conclusion that continuing to turn out to vote in a system that then disregards my every input is just validating a sham democracy that has nothing to do with representing the views of voters, and everything to do with maintaining the lifestyles of people in power.

So, will you take a moment or two to highlight your concerns to your MP? Let them know that we are watching. That we do care. And that endless DRIPs of poorly conceived legislation weaken our democracy and our safety rather than strengthening it.

If you want to read more on this, and I do recommend that, can I suggest starting with Paul Bernal? Excellent blog post here.

And just like that, I could vanish.

29th July 2013 by Jax Blunt 19 Comments

Well, not me. My blog. And not so much vanish as get filed in the bottom drawer of a locked filing cabinet in a disused laboratory with a sign on the door…

Wondering what I’m talking about?

It’s the government’s latest wheeze to protect the children. Won’t you think of the children, they cry, while coming up with a plan to censor vast swathes of the internet. Have a look at the list here at Openrights group.

The idea, as I understand it, is that these things will be on by default. So your new internet connection comes with parental controls switched on, and then a secondary screen asks: Do you want to block

? pornography

? violent material

? extremist and terrorist related content

? anorexia and eating disorder websites

? suicide related websites

? alcohol

? smoking

? web forums

? esoteric material

? web blocking circumvention tools

And all these things are ticked. I don’t think anyone has confirmed the list as it would be, but this is put together from current block lists from ISPs.

Now, I can see that we probably don’t want our 3 years olds accessing pornography. Definitely no violent content (so that’s Tom and Jerry wiped out then). Extremist and terrorist related content. Um, hang on. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. Who decides who is a terrorist?

Let’s skip on a bit. Web forums. *all* web forums?? That’s a bit sweeping isn’t it? Still, that’s one way to quieten those irritating biscuit related questions from Mumsnet.

And esoteric material. That’s an interesting one. What classes as esoteric? The definition is “Intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest.” Which, if you think about it, covers an awful lots of things. You got any niche interests? How about home education? That’s pretty small, after all, isn’t it? Might not start at defined as esoteric, but you could easily see how it could wind up on the list. Or odd political interests, like the basic income perhaps?

Ideas could come and go on the internet without anyone ever really seeing. Movements that currently start small and grow wouldn’t ever get that chance – all sorts of religions would definitely fade away.

Is that really how you want to keep your children safe? By keeping them as ignorant as the politicians wafting about westminster?

Because surely only someone utterly ignorant of how the world/internet works would come up with such a plan. It’s just beyond awful. And the best way to fight back about it? Shout. Make sure our voices are heard. If you *want* to be able to have a varied and yes, esoteric internet, it is time to put a stop to this nonsense.

The open rights group and wired are excellent resources on all of this, and don’t forget to keep your MP in the loop. (I wonder how many emails would class as annoying :/)

Stealing your freedom

Footer