- 2014 Consultation
- Groups and Meetings
This is a collection of personal responses offered for inspiration and information. Some remain in draft and may be modified before final submission.
Take a look at some of the new submissions...
Mike Eddies has done excellent work writing a very full response and his submission would be an excellent read before you get started - for ideas and inspiration.
Conchur Dickinson provides a good example of a short personal response:
"This policy is fundamentally flawed. As a bare minimum it should have stated why it is needed, the ultimate aims of the policy and some way of measuring its success or failure. Crucially it should have some basis in law, not simply twist unrelated legislation to fit an unstated agenda and enforce wildly inappropriate restrictions on parents attempting to do their best for their children. The law states that it is a parent's duty to educate their child, and the state has no need to be involved at all unless concerns are raised that this education is not being provided. The boards have no right to appoint themselves as regulators of home education, they should instead be concentrating on ensuring that they provide a suitable and effective education for the children whose education has been delegated to their care by their parents choosing to send them to school.
The inadequate publicity surrounding the late-stage ‘consultation’ and the stone-walling of any questions by board representatives further undermines any faith that parents have in the board’s good intentions. The language used in the draft is very prejudicial against home education and assumes that parents are automatically failing in their duty, unless they submit to some ill-defined and undoubtedly heavily biased monitoring process presided over by officials with limited experience or understanding of how education happens outside of schools.
Any policy attempting to interact with home educating families should instead be based on offering optional support and assistance for parents choosing this route. The provision of exam centres, group facilities and other educational resources would be of much more benefit to home educated children than some half-baked, stressful (not to mention illegal) mandatory inspection system."
The full documents are linked at the bottom, other responses can be found here.