Perceptive insights from Pembrokeshire Council officer into some of the fundamental issues underlying Local Authorities’ interaction with home educating families
What’s been said?
Pembrokeshire Council’s Schools & Learning Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 26 September gave rise to a fascinating and very insightful discussion.
Agenda item 9 concerned a report on Elective Home Education that had been prepared by James White (Head of Engagement, Performance & Community) and Kelly Hamid (Education Welfare Service Manager.) Pembrokeshire’s Director of Education, Steven Richards-Downes, was also in attendance.
The Committee was asked to “scrutinise and have oversight of this update on the implementation of the new Welsh Government guidance for Elective Home Education in Wales [and] the increasing numbers of Elective Home Educated children and young people in Pembrokeshire, and across Wales.”
The Recommendation, unanimously received at the end of the discussion, was that the Committee:
“a) Note the content of this report.
b) Note the actions undertaken by the Education Welfare Service (EWS) to date to implement the guidance and increase capacity.
c) Note the increasing number of Electively Home Educated (EHE), both within Pembrokeshire and Wales as a whole.”
In his opening formalities the Chairman, Cllr Rhys Jordan, informed members that they had received correspondence from home educators in connection with Agenda item 9. One home educating parent, aware that this report would be being reviewed by councillors, had written in advance to the Committee, and this led to them being invited to participate in the meeting.
The Chairman carried out his duties very even-handedly, giving the parent opportunity both to speak and to answer questions from councillors. His closing remarks were a fair reflection of the outcome when he said, “I think we’ve given this a really good hearing and had a good debating conversation around it.” (We should also note that the meeting would have been very different had the home educating parent not taken action and got in touch with the Committee.)
Why does it matter?
Councillors were very engaged with the subject matter. Most seemed genuinely interested to hear what a real home educator had to say, and they had many questions. Several addressed the rising numbers of EHE; others expressed the usual concerns about children not being ‘known’ to the authorities, or wanted to know how often EHE children were monitored by the authorities. One asked how ‘guidance’ could be statutory; another wanted to know about outcomes – were EHE children going on into work or were they “living off the state?”
A later contributor, Cllr Mike Stoddart, pointed out the flaw in using exam results alone as a measure of educational ‘outcomes’ then, identifying himself as an ‘old-fashioned liberal,’ highlighted the real point at issue in the whole discussion – “to do with the relationship between the citizen and the state, and to what extent are we as individuals under the control of the state…” He went on to acknowledge the difficulty from the state’s angle of “children being hidden away from view, where the state agencies can’t… help them.”
James White concurred, adding that the debate was essentially about “where do you strike the balance between the autonomy of the individual and the legitimate role of society?.. and it’s not something that just arises in the context of homeschooling…”
The whole exchange of views is well worth listening to. White’s cogent overview of the issues and awareness of HE policies beyond these shores clearly demonstrate how LA policy and interpretation of government guidance have been shaped by the children’s rights factor and UNCRC thinking. In his concluding remarks, he returned to the ideological issues underpinning the wider debate, urging councillors at one point to think about,
“what is the legitimate role of society in the state in ensuring that all children have their rights upheld, whether they are in school or whether they are homeschooled.”
He also acknowledged the home educator’s point that the core legislation hasn’t changed since 1996, but went on to explain how “you do go round the houses a little bit on this in terms of policy,” referencing the Portsmouth case and what view an LA might take about the evidence or lack of evidence it gets from a parent.
Some of Kelly Hamid’s EWS input was a matter for concern. She spoke of the variety of ways in which suitability of education could be demonstrated, as if this were a given. Cllr Mike Stoddart queried whether one could insist on such provision.
Later his wife, Cllr Vivien Stoddart, referenced sections 3.4 and 3.5 of the report, querying whether families might not find it very offensive for EWS staff to witness a child doing its work. She felt this could lead to families withdrawing from the service rather than taking up its support, and was uncomfortable with this approach, finding it “quite intrusive and demanding,” though the Report itself had acknowledged that there was no mandate to insist on visits or meetings.
Hamid praised the work of their long-standing EHE adviser, whose work has had a “significant impact” and who has a “fantastic rapport” with many of “our families.” (Note the unnerving use of the word ‘our’ there – shades of Bridget Phillipson’s ‘our children.’) She told councillors that the recently appointed EHE assistant was going to do “engagement opportunities” and try to “get the families together to provide a support network.” Perhaps EWS are unaware of the thriving informal support network which already exists in many regions.
In response to a question about whether there had been a need to put in place any Education Supervision Orders or School Attendance Orders [SAOs] as a result of this work, Hamid replied, “Unfortunately we have got a minority that aren’t engaging, so therefore SAOs are looked at. We have several on the go at the moment, but parents are working very well and closely with us, and some are in support of what we have provided to date.”
Perhaps the most worrying aspect of her input though was in response to a query about children not known to the authority. Referring to the LA’s CME database, she went on to say:
“what we are seeing is an increase in members of the public identifying children that don’t attend school so we’re having a marked increase in members of the public contact[ing] us, which then prompts our inquiries to go out and conduct a home visit, a welfare check, and to find out exactly where those children are academically or what they’re doing, are they home educating, and then we discuss that. Sometimes it prompts the parent then to go on to our elective home education database so we can support them by offering an EHE advisor. And then we work really closely with other agencies such as the Police, Health and they identify children for us.” [Emphasis added]
And finally, there are moments when unspoken but underlying agendas inadvertently find their way into written text, with paragraph 9.3 of the EHE report being a classic example. Under the heading Next Steps, we find a clear acknowledgement of the desire to lower the numbers of families participating in EHE.
“The increase in staffing levels will now support the EWS to reduce the size of the EHE cohort over time, as we will now have the capacity to intervene earlier to resolve issues before a parent makes the decision to EHE, and also broker more returns to school from EHE.”
Here we see that the space for making a proactive decision to home educate stands in great need of protection, as this ‘cohort’ consists of more than refugees from a broken school system, though this is often forgotten by the authorities.
What can I do?
Listen to the whole item if you have time. If not, each contributor’s segment can be referenced separately from the webcast of this section of the meeting.
Be thankful for the opportunity for such meaningful input from a home educating parent, that councillors appreciated the first-hand opportunity to learn more about HE and that some were sympathetic and willing to listen.
It’s also worth reading the report which was presented to the councillors. Many of these issues are common to other local councils, so it is instructive to see how officials frame them and how councillors perceive their responsibilities in light of them. It is the overstatement of facts, such as those in the report, which highlight the importance of HE families everywhere engaging with their local councillors.
The importance of doing so cannot be over-emphasised, as a significant majority of councillors have very little knowledge about a niche area like home education. They depend almost entirely on local authority specialists for information. It is vital therefore that they hear other points of view. A first step would be to try and build a connection with your local councillor.
Hopefully, recognising the benefits of HE families proactively engaging with their local councillors will motivate you to think seriously about what you could do in your own area. Take steps to keep an eye on your local Council’s education agenda. Check the relevant agendas so you know when HE is coming up for discussion. Be aware that members of the public are able to have input into council Scrutiny meetings. For example here is Pembrokeshire’s information on how to do so. Be prepared to make it an opportunity for input from real-life home educators.
None of us feel adequate, but the ground will be eroded when families stand back and let it happen. On the other hand, if parents proactively seek to defend their historic educational responsibilities, we may even see that which has been lost beginning to be restored.