Can anyone help me understand the guidelines?

[LovingHomeEd]

Hi all,

I've been reading up on the guidelines/policies etc trying to understand the legal/political situation better but I am confusing myself even more so I'm hoping someone can put me on the right track?

Does the part of the Education Act that describes what constitutes a lawful education (suitable, efficient and effective) apply to the education provided by schools as well, or do they have a different Act to follow? Or is there not an act for them because they teach the curriculum?

I'm just struggling to get my head around - I've read the definitions of suitable, effective and efficient and that makes sense to me, but it's clear that not every child is provided with that in school and that's what's confusing me. Is the law different/stricter for those educating outside of school? Or is it the same but schools don't have it held over them in the same way?

Probably completely misunderstanding this so I'd be very grateful if someone could help - thank you!

[Ali Admin]

Parents are responsible for ensuring their children receive an efficient education that is suitable to A,A & A. That duty may be fulfilled by sending them to school or otherwise in England.

Sending your children to school means you're off the hook legally, regardless of whether the school is 'failing' or not. Schools are inspected by Ofsted on behalf of parents who have chosen to delegate direct responsibility for their children's education.

As I understand it, only Ofsted can take action against a failing school and there is no mechanism in England for young people as consumers (or their parents on their behalf) to do so as it is the parents who are ultimately responsible for causing their children to receive a suitable education.

There have been a few court cases brought by parents / young people who have been failed by their schools, mostly relating to bullying and failure to address special needs such as dyslexia, but they have fallen as the child's education is the parents' responsibility. Unless, of course, the failed young person is in the care of the LA, in which case they'd have to sue themselves and they couldn't allow that (just think about the disproportionately poor academic and other outcomes for children leaving care).

The ptb believe that shifting responsibility on to schools or LAs would open the litigation floodgates, as Lord Adonis admitted when it was suggested that England follow Scotland's example. Here is the relevant discussion of the Education and Inspections Bill and here is a link to the letter from Lord Adonis to Lord Judd 'fessing up that the govt was scared of possible litigation if every child had a statutory right to education rather than just schooling.

Scotland went down that route with its SinSS Act 2000 but the relevant section hasn't been fully tested yet and not many parents are aware of its implications, i.e. that each and every child is entitled to a suitable education in a state school if parents choose that option (parental choice is protected under the 1980 Act). Just as if Previously LAs just had to make enough school places available and inspect schools once in every blue moon.

Where school education is provided to a child or young person by, or by virtue of arrangements made, or entered into, by, an education authority it shall be the duty of the authority to secure that the education is directed to the development of the personality, talents and mental and physical abilities of the child or young person to their fullest potential.

Eventually more cases will be brought that aren't settled early by worried LAs. Not before time, but if you want to ensure your child is educated in England or Scotland, you still can't trust a school to do it!

[LovingHomeEd]

Ali, thanks for that, I will read the extra bits you've mentioned a bit later on

So ....... I educate my child at home and it's up to me to prove I am doing it properly if they come knocking on my door. But if I send my child to school no-one has to check that my child, personally, is being provided with a suitable education? I get that Ofsted inspect but they don't check on each individual child, presumably?

If the LA decide I'm not educating my child appropriately they can issue a School Attendance Order - which could mean my child being sent to a school that isn't providing him with a suitable education - but that would be okay by them?

And if I then refuse to send my son to that school because I don't believe the education being provided is suitable for him I can then be prosecuted? Have I got that right (hypothetically, of course)?

So from a legal point of view home educators do have more hoops to jump through potentially than either schools, local authorities or parents whose children go to schools that don't deliver the goods? Is that the case?

I'm starting to get the difference between schooling and education now as well (sorry, bit dim when it comes to this sort of thing!). So the LA/Government/school essentially doesn't have to ensure every child of a certain age has to have access to a suitable 'education' because that responsibility lies with the parents - all that matters essentially is that bums are on seats? Unless you take your child's bum off of that seat in which case you might be asked to prove you are doing better than the school is expected to? And if your child is in a school that isn't providing them with a suitable education then you can't sue because it would be down to you to find them an alternative, presumably? It all seems very unfair? The standards imposed on us are higher than the ones imposed on the schools? Is that the case?

Sorry for asking so many questions

[Ali Admin]

I think you got it, despite my rather hurried post.

The bottom line is that, while school is presumed in law to be providing a suitable 'education', parents are still responsible if it fails to do so.

Meanwhile, those in charge of failing schools still presume to be able to tell home educating parents what to do and how to do it, although we know they have no such authority.

It can be a case of heads you lose and tails you lose too, unless you have a working knowledge of all the interrelated legislation.

[LovingHomeEd]

Thanks for your replies and info, Ali - what a cheek! I'm not sure why this hadn't dawned on me before - I knew about what I was supposed to be providing in order to keep within the law but I just hadn't thought about whether that applied to school as well. This has made me rather cross! Surely the law should apply equally (seeing as Every Child Matters)?

[Ali Admin]

It is actually quite shocking when you look at the bare bones of it.

Sending your children to school where they could be bullied, assaulted, left to rot at the back of the classroom is absolutely fine, indeed recommended.

BUT home educate your children and they suddenly start to 'matter' as individuals.

How's that for double standards? Sickos

[Earthtracer]

LovingHomeEd raises some very interesting points and in doing so has made me realise a few things I (and I susopect others) had never thought of! Josef Heller would be proud!

[Diane]

"Sending your children to school where they could be bullied, assaulted, left to rot at the back of the classroom is absolutely fine, indeed recommended."

School is primarily a tool for the state to use to keep the ordinary person in his or her place. It's not actually for the benefit of the ordinary person hence the bullying and the double-speak from the authorities.

Diane

[elizm]

The Lord Adonis Letter

I'm sure there used to be a nice photocopy of the letter on headed paper and everything on the net somewhere. I think it was linked from the EO site once upon a time.

Does anyone have a copy of it?

Elizabeth

[elizm]

http://www.education-otherwise.net/a...6_copiable.pdf

Just found it with more clever Googling