Thursday, June 11, 2009

[State] schooling 'does not work for us'

Some home education stories from the BCC.

The Today Programme also reported that 20 000 children are registered with their local authority as home educated whereas it is thought that over 40 000 are taught at home.

Presently parents have a duty to educate their children and local authorities can intervene if it is thought a child is at risk. This seems to me to be an adequate system.

There have been calls to require parents to register as homeschoolers and to be subeject to inspections at home.

Education is essentially the responsibility of parents, not the state. Parents may choose to band together with other parents, even to form a school, or to make use of a pre-existing school but their responsibility is inalienable.

I would question both the right and the competence of the state to intervene. State education, the health service, in fact, all public services, MPs expenses and the nation's finances hardly suggest that one should trust Gordon with the most precious thing we have: our children.

2 comments:

Gerv said...

The logic is incredible. From the Today program: "The report found no link between home education and child abuse. Nevertheless, it recommends that councils should have powers to inspect..." So now the "think of the children!" argument applies even when there's no additional risk to the children.

Furthermore, the next two items on the news were a) a CRB-checked female nursery teacher in a state school who had been abusing children and b) the government has run out of money and future governments will have to make cuts.

Can no-one add 2 and 2 and 2 to make 6?

I also detest the way the Today program reports on "reports that are due to come out today". Well, why not flipping well report on it tomorrow, when people have had a chance to read it?

Marc Lloyd said...

Thanks, Gerv.

Very excellent points.

I reckon the Today programme rather fancies itself and wants to set the agenda for the news day. I don't mind the heads up in the AM but you're right in that the interviewee can always say, "Well, we'll just have to wait to see the report in full" and they are never brought back the next say to be asked, "So, read it then? What now?!"