|
Post by jo70mo on Sept 30, 2011 11:08:53 GMT 1
2. Principles and Policy Statement:
Lancashire believes that school-based education provides a broad and balanced curriculum, which promotes social development, moral and spiritual awareness and equal opportunities. However, Lancashire also values equally the plurality of educational provision available for children in Lancashire including those arrangements made by parents through Elective Home Education (EHE).
It is recognised that there are many approaches to educational provision and what is suitable for one child may not be for another. The provision will reflect the home educator's philosophy, approach or framework for the education of their child.
The type of educational activity can be varied and flexible. It is recognised that home-educating parents are not required to:
teach the National Curriculum have a timetable mark work done by their child set hours during which education will take place  have premises equipped to any particular standard have any specific qualifications cover the same syllabus as any school make detailed plans in advance observe school hours, days or terms give formal lessons reproduce school type peer group socialisation match school, age-specific standards.
Nevertheless, parents are required to provide an efficient, suitable, full-time education. Lancashire will offer advice to parents on these matters if requested. Where parents choose to electively home educate their children they assume financial responsibility for their children's education.
|
|
|
Post by jo70mo on Oct 1, 2011 18:53:56 GMT 1
They have missed out that parents do not have to provide abroad and balanced education. also missed that we are not required to ‘formally assess progress or set development objectives’
It is poor that they paraphrase the efficient, suitable etc as the actual quote makes it much clearer about it being suitable to the individual child. If they are wanting to inform parents then this would be the best place to give a clear quote of the Law regarding the Parents' duties.
|
|
fran
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by fran on Oct 2, 2011 11:55:19 GMT 1
They have also left off "formally assess progress or set development objectives" in their list of what HE'ers don't need to do.
Does this stuff need to be in here at all though? It is listed in the guidelines, why spell it all out here unnecessaily?
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I think we should just write a document how we think it should be - short and concise for a start and present them with that.
|
|
|
Post by jo70mo on Oct 2, 2011 12:06:20 GMT 1
I think if they are going to include it they need to include it in full. It speaks volumes about them when they choose to leave bits out. It means they can mislead home edders who haven't taken the time to inform themselves from other sources. I tend to think it should be in there so new people know up front the limits of what the LA can say they should be doing.
|
|
fran
New Member
Posts: 15
|
Post by fran on Oct 2, 2011 12:28:33 GMT 1
It should also say, "match school based, age-specific standards." They left the based out of their list.
When you say include it in full, do you mean the section or the whole of the guidelines?
|
|
|
Post by jo70mo on Oct 2, 2011 13:43:33 GMT 1
the section. may not be necessary but thats my thinking so far.
|
|
elizm
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by elizm on Oct 2, 2011 17:34:52 GMT 1
They have missed out that parents do not have to provide abroad and balanced education. also missed that we are not required to ‘formaly assess progress or set development objectives’ broad and balanced curriculum is like motherhood and apple pie, what possible problem could anyone have with it. Clearly who ever has left this out has done so deliberately. the issues are: A broad and balanced curriculum is a pretty subjective thing, it could be an easily used stick whereby an inspector could impose their view of education on a family. Following a broad and balanced curriculum at all times is certainly not necessarily the best way to learn anything. there is plenty of research on self directed learning, I'll put up some links in later, to indicate that an externally controlled broad and balanced curriculum is far from the best way to get an education. I think it's a crucial aspect of the DFE guidelines on HE and they should not leave it out. they say this doc was written with regard to the guidelines, so it should be, those guidelines were widely consulted on, more than the 20 days given for this one!
|
|
elizm
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by elizm on Oct 2, 2011 21:23:13 GMT 1
www.uncharted-worlds.org/aeuk/2009-aeuk-select-committee-enquiry.htmlThis links to the document on Autonomous Education produced by AEUK for the Select Committee report on the Badman Review. The Badman Recommendations were subsequently dropped following criticism of the Select Committee and debate in Parliament. It's worth reading given that Lancs are attempting to implement some of the the recommendations in this consultation even though they were thrown out by parliament. There is even the following Literature Review on Self Regulated Learning that was commissioned by the DCSF: In July 2009, the Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning published Self-Regulated Learning: A Literature Review. This is available from the DCSF website oh well it was, can't find it now ;-0 but here is a copy www.learningbenefits.net/Publications/ResReps/ResRep33.pdf
|
|
|
Post by archelaus on Oct 5, 2011 17:52:38 GMT 1
Implies Lancashire (the whole county?) doesn't believe home ed can encompass the same as school-based ed, that it's inferior in some way. Is this ignorance about home education or prejudice ?
Why is a statement like this about school in a document about home education in the first place ?
|
|
elizm
New Member
Posts: 20
|
Post by elizm on Oct 6, 2011 19:44:33 GMT 1
I do think it's worth reiterating the list of things HE families don't need to do from the DFE Guidelines. This is clearly not obvious to the LA team and their leaving out of some points indicates they don't agree with them.
It'll be easier for them to keep within the law if they have a document that details exactly how they can do that and the makes it explicit to them what requests might be beyond the law.
|
|
fionan
Junior Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by fionan on Oct 25, 2011 23:02:03 GMT 1
I have a theory about why broad n balanced was left out and why formally assess progress was left out. It's because they are being copied from THE WRONG GUIDELINES. If you google for elective home education guidelines, one of the things you get is the DRAFT guidelines originally put forward by DfES in May 2007. www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=conResults&external=no&consultationId=1479&menu=3Listed in the consultation documents are something called "the home education guidelines" www.education.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/Elective%20Home%20Education%20Guidelines%201.docThe initial DRAFT guidelines put out to consultation in May 2007 were the ones DfES got out the back of the drawer from an unfinished consultation in 2005. That's why they have stuff about the 1995 Pupil Registration Regulations (instead of 2006 Registration Regs) and about parents' proposals (which had been nicked from the Scottish Guidance, where the law is different and parents DO have to submit proposals) Anyway the 2007 DRAFT didn't have not broad and balanced or not assessing progress in its original list. It's easier to copy and paste the 2007 DRAFT because it's in dot doc form, whereas the finished Guidelines are in pdf. Of course, Councils could convert the doc format or copy and paste from my web page edyourself.org/articles/guidelines.php but I guess if someone doesn't realise that the dot doc DRAFT and the finished pdf are different...
|
|
|
Post by archelaus on Oct 25, 2011 23:36:03 GMT 1
That makes a huge amount of sense. The old Protocols doc, written in 2008, had those bits missing and quoted the wrong pupil reg regs. It also shows that, when writing this version, they haven't revisited the complaint docs as it was all pointed out in there: www.lancashire-he.org.uk/docs/Protocols%20with%20Comments.pdfThe CC's CME page still has the draft CME guidance on it despite it being flagged up to the CC, LA and web manager several times. Their definition of CME is wrong as well. Aside from the mistake that puts all EHE children as CME, they've reworded the law, made it harder to read and slipped in 'monitored by the LA'. Showing again that they class unknown HEers as CME. 'Children or Young People would be deemed to be missing education if they are of compulsory school age (5 - 16) and fit into at least one of the following criteria:
They are not on the roll of a school (either within Local Authority control or Independent) They are not accessing any other form of alternative provision. This would cover children & young people receiving education at home monitored by the Local Authority. It would also cover County funded alternative provision such as college placements or work experience Children or Young People would be deemed to be at risk of ‘Missing Education’ if they have been out of their educational provision for a period of four weeks or more.'Lancashire needs a better mechanism for keeping up-to-date with current law, guidance, government policy, etc.
|
|