|
(Continued from previous page) Written Communication 4.11 We should like to see added that likewise, where parents submit a report or another form of evidence, this should be kept on file. If there are any queries on parent-submitted evidence of provision, then these should be addressed to the parents promptly so that any misunderstandings may be swiftly resolved. Frequency 4.13 "It is recommended that the authority should ordinarily make contact on an annual basis." ARCH wonders why this is necessary since checks are made on schools at far greater time intervals. This appears to be discriminatory. 4.14 We would like to see this paragraph deleted. It contradicts sections 5.3 and 5.4. It assumes that home visits will be the norm. This is not in keeping with families' right to privacy or their right to submit evidence of their educational provision in a format of their choosing. 4.15 ARCH would like to see this paragraph re-worded so that it does not misrepresent the law. Home visits should be cited as one alternative for presenting evidence of educational provision. It should be made clear that alternative forms of evidence are equally acceptable. The choice lies with the parents. It is not an exceptional circumstance or cause for concern if the family do not wish to be inspected in their homes. Families have a right to family life and privacy (UNCRC, Article 16). Neither is it in keeping with the spirit of the UNCRC as outlined in the preamble to the Convention. Section 5 - "Efficient" and "Suitable" Education We think it would be wise at this point in the document to clarify what "efficient education" and "suitable education" mean in this context. These terms are not defined in Scottish Law. However, in the absence of Scottish legal precedent, it is likely that a court would look to the landmark English case of Harrison & Harrison v Stevenson (Worcester, 1981). In this case it was held that a "suitable education" was one which "prepares children for life in a modern, civilised society" and an "efficient education" was one which "achieves what it sets out to achieve." Suggested Characteristics of "Efficient" and "Suitable" Education. 5.5 Bullet point 4 talks about involvement in a broad spectrum of activities. This requirement does not accurately reflect the legal position in our opinion and is therefore likely to mislead. A broad spectrum of activities may be offered to the child but they do not necessarily have to take them up. We believe a parent forcing their child to do this might be seen to be acting contrary to Section 30. For example, if a child has a particular interest in astrophysics and the parents limit the amount of time the child spends on that activity in order to cover a broad spectrum of other things for which the child has no ability or aptitude at that time, they would not be educating according to Section 30. 5.6 This section needs to be rewritten with much clearer guidance being given to local authorities. Local authorities need to be made aware of how the criteria stipulated in 5.5 might be reasonably applied in a flexible manner depending on what stage families had reached with their home education venture. For example, it takes time to organise a wide range of resources and opportunities, so it would not be reasonable to expect that of a newly home educating family. Likewise, at any one point, the child may have great enthusiasm for only one or two themes but in the longer term may explore many different topics. So the parents may well be fulfilling their Section 30 duties but a home visit might appear to reveal rather limited resource at that point. No mention is made of the effects on educational provision of long-term illness in the child, traumatised children, gifted children or variations in learning style. These are successfully accommodated by home education using a wide range of methods and resources, in the home and elsewhere, which are not necessarily accounted for in 5.5. This highlights the need for Named Contacts to be suitably trained. 5.7 We are not aware that the law supports the local authority's insistence on home visits where there are serious concerns about parents' educational provision. This section also seems to suggest that local authorities would be acting within their rights in serving a notice on the parents under Section 37 of the 1980 Act purely on the grounds of parents not submitting evidence in a particular format. i.e. via a home visit. ARCH believes this would be unlawful. Many local authorities mistakenly cite "child protection" and "children's rights" as being paramount when demanding access to family homes and individual home educated children. However, as stated in section 5.8. "It is no more likely that child protection issues will arise in relation to home educated children than school educated children." It would seem therefore that this course of action would most likely contravene Article 16 (Right to Privacy) of the UNCRC. |