Home Education: Public Consultation

Children, Schools and Families written question – answered at on 23 February 2009.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Damian Green Damian Green Shadow Minister (Home Affairs)

To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families

(1) what steps he has taken to ensure that people who do not have access to the internet are able to respond to his Department's consultation on home educators;

(2) what steps he has taken to inform home educators about his Department's consultations on home education;

(3) what representations he has received from local authorities about his Department's consultations on home education; and if he will make a statement.

Photo of Jim Knight Jim Knight Minister of State (Schools and Learners), Department for Children, Schools and Families, Minister of State (Department for Children, Schools and Families) (Schools and Learners)

The team carrying out the independent review of home education has invited stakeholders including home educators and local authorities to offer evidence to inform the review. This call for evidence is not a public consultation.

The Department has notified a number of key stakeholders about the review. These include local authorities and all the representative groups from the home education community that the Department is aware of. Evidence can be supplied to the review team using an online form, through email or by writing to the review team.

All local authorities have been invited by the review team to complete a questionnaire and 48 responses have been received.

Does this answer the above question?

Yes1 person thinks so

No34 people think not

Would you like to ask a question like this yourself? Use our Freedom of Information site.

Annotations

Fiona Nicholson
Posted on 25 Feb 2009 4:06 pm (Report this annotation)

The Minister appears to be saying that home educators can write to the Review Team. Which email address and postal address should be used for this correspondence?

Fiona Nicholson
Education Otherwise

Diane Varty
Posted on 25 Feb 2009 4:41 pm (Report this annotation)

As a crucial stakeholder in this review, I will say that I was not informed by the DCSF, even though I have responded to several other consultations. I was, in fact, emailed by a fellow home educator. Additionally, I would seriously doubt that the review is independent since Graham Badham was awarded a CBE for his school efforts by the DCSF, and is a former Education Welfare Officer. How can someone who knows nothing about home education conduct a review? Why is he conducting another costly exercise when home educators have been reviewed and consulted to death in the last three years?

There should be a serious review on the DCSF policy of spending public money, in my opinion.

Natalie Brown
Posted on 25 Feb 2009 9:04 pm (Report this annotation)

DSCF did not make any effort to contact home educators and those home educators without Internet access were completely disenfranchised from this review. I would like to see a list of all the people/organisations who were asked for evidence.

I find the use of the word "stakeholders" in relation to my children deeply offensive. No-one, NO-ONE is a stakeholder in my child. The review is an exercise in rent-seeking - a cynical attempt by those with vested interests in e-learning to hold home educators to ransom. To take away freedom in education and sell us back education compulsion.

Since Mr Badman has a vested interest in education compulsion his chairmanship of the review panel violates a key principle of the British constitution. That principle is nemo judex in sua causa: no-one should be a judge in his own case.

The entire review is a farce. The State wishes to dismantle the family and parental responsibility and this review is a thin smokescreen for attacking the last remaining strongly bonded and high functionning families in the land. I will neither bow to your conclusions nor accept or comply with the spewings forth of your panel whatever form they take and no matter what the consequences.

Raquel Toney
Posted on 25 Feb 2009 11:40 pm (Report this annotation)

Natalie Brown you have my vote and now all of a sudden after years of being a failed Latin student, Latin has become interesting to me. And they paid my teacher all those pennies to make me chant "amo, amas, amat"!?

Fiona Nicholson
Posted on 26 Feb 2009 6:42 am (Report this annotation)

Answering my own question here: Parliamentary Under Secretary of State Sarah McCarthy Fry has suggested this email address. Can I confirm it is still valid, please.

homeeducation.review@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk

Fiona Nicholson
Education Otherwise

http://www.freedomforchildrentogrow.org/eogb0209.htm

Fee Berry
Posted on 27 Feb 2009 7:34 am (Report this annotation)

If a review is taking place, in any subject, one would assume that the department concerned would make it their business to know who the major stakeholders are. In this case it seems to me that there is a big section of the home education community - those who don't use computers, and don't have an online presence - who are likely to be completely unaware of the review.

We have been subject to repeated consultations and reviews of guidance, and many of us have contacted the department in its various guises in connection with those reviews. I also participated in the research funded by the government, which I thought was extremey biassed and poorly conducted. I only know about the review because of the home education community response to it.

In conducting a review and collecting information it seems to me that the government should be at least as neutral as a market research company. The questions included in the review betray a bias which makes it hard for home educators to believe in the fairness of the review procedure. The comments made in public by the NSPCC representative in which he talks of "hundreds" or "thousands" of girls forced into marriage, who was unable to come up with one specific and actual case... also undermines my confidence that the review is being conducted in a fair and unbiassed way.

Fiona Nicholson
Posted on 2 Mar 2009 9:56 pm (Report this annotation)

The Minister stated on February 23rd that 48 responses have been received from local authorities.

Was the deadline of February 6th extended?

Was it possible for local authorities to complete the questionnaire after the deadline of February 6th?

Were all these 48 responses received no later than the end of February 6th?

Have additional responses been allowed since the Minister gave the figure of 48 responses?

Fiona Nicholson
Education Otherwise