Isle of Man
Isle of Man is a UK crown dependency with its own government and laws
Letter from IOM
Following a review of the Education Act 2001, the Department of Education(Isle of Man) has published a draft Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill which has been put out for consultation.
The bill covers areas such as a requirement for parents to let the department know if their children are not attending a state school and what alternative provision they are making for them.
Copy in depth can be found here - see clause 5
What can we do???
~~~~~
Island Education Law
Island education law is very like Education law in areas of the UK, the main section affecting home education options being section 24:
24. Duty of parents of children of compulsory school age
(1) It is the duty of the parent of every child of compulsory school age to cause him to receive suitable education, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.
(2) The Department shall enforce the duty imposed by subsection (1).
(3) In this Part —
"school", in relation to a child of compulsory school age who has attained the age of 14 years and for whom education is provided at a college, includes a college; "suitable education", in relation to a child, means efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have.
http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/infocentre/acts/ea2001.pdf
~~~~~
Proposed Changes
**After section 24 of the Education Act 2001 insert —
"24A. Duty to notify Department of arrangements for child's education
(1) Where a child of compulsory school age is not a registered pupil at a provided school, maintained school or special school, the parent of the child must notify the Department in writing of the arrangements made for the child to receive education.
(2) A notification under subsection (1) must state —
(a) the full name, address and date of birth of the child;
(b) the full name and address of the parent;
(c) whether the child is receiving or is to receive education by regular attendance at school (in the Island or elsewhere);
(d) if so, the name and address of the school; and
(e) if not, the address where he or she is receiving or is to receive education and the person or persons by whom it is being or is to be given.
(3) The parent of a child must give a notification under subsection (1) —
(a) within 3 months after the child —
(i) attains the compulsory school age;
(ii) becomes resident in the Island; or
(iii) ceases to be a registered pupil at a provided school, maintained school or special school; or
(b) at any time, within 21 days after being required by the Department to do so by notice in writing.
(4) The Department may at any time by notice in writing to —
(a) a parent who has given a notification under subsection (1),
or
(b) a person specified in such a notification as the person by whom education is being or is to be given, require him or her within the period specified in the notice (not being less than 15 days beginning with the day on which the notice is served) to give such particulars of the child's education as are specified in the notice and as receiving or will receive suitable education.
(5) A parent who, without reasonable excuse, fails to give a notification under subsection (1) within the time allowed by subsection (3)(a) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,000.
(6) A person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with a notice under subsection (3)(b) or (4) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,000.
(7) Proceedings for an offence under subsection (5) or (6) shall not be brought otherwise than by the Department.
(8) Proceedings for an offence under subsection (5) may be commenced at any time within —
(a) the period of 6 months from the date on which evidence, sufficient in the opinion of the Department to justify a prosecution for the offence, comes to its knowledge, or
(b) 2 years after the commission of the offence, whichever period last expires.
(9) For the purpose of subsection (8), a certificate signed on behalf of the Department as to the date on which such evidence as is mentioned in subsection (8)(a) came to its knowledge shall be conclusive evidence thereof; and a certificate purporting to be so signed shall be deemed to be so signed until the contrary is proved."
~~~~~
Comments:
This seems to me a fairly rigorous compulsory registration and monitoring proposal that undermines the principle of parental responsibility for the education of their children. Pretty horrific.
~~~~~
AHEd Response:
16 May 2008
Dear Mr Gill,
With reference to the Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2008; as I wrote earlier, members of AHEd have asked for assistance in putting forward concerns about the said Bill. The consultation period for this Bill has been quite short and it has also only come to our notice very recently so we apologise for presenting our concerns on the closing date. We hope that this will not prevent the Department from giving them due consideration as we consider them to be extremely important given the potential for damage that we believe this Bill to have. Please find below a copy of the sections of the Bill that are causing us concern along with our inserted comments in the relevant places, followed by some more general comments.
Yours sincerely,
(Chair, AHEd.) For the committee and membership of AHEd
AHEd Consultation Response
pg 5 line 35
School Attendance
Clause 5 Duty to notify Department of arrangements for child's education
After section 24 of the Education Act 2001 insert —
24A. Duty to notify Department of arrangements for child's education
(1) Where a child of compulsory school age is not a registered pupil at a provided school, maintained school or special school, the parent of the child must notify the Department in writing of the arrangements made for the child to receive education.
(2) A notification under subsection (1) must state —
(a) the full name, address and date of birth of the child;
(b) the full name and address of the parent;
(c) whether the child is receiving or is to receive education by regular attendance at school (in the Island or elsewhere);
(d) if so, the name and address of the school; and
(e) if not, the address where he or she is receiving or is to receive education and the person or persons by whom it is being or is to be given.
AHEd Comment:
This appears to be a completely arbitrary and discriminatory suggestion whereby a small minority group are being pressed by law into positively identifying themselves when they choose not to avail themselves of a particular public or private service. It cannot be appropriate and amounts to discrimination and harrassment to insist that this group of people explain how they are fulfilling one of their legal duties when other legal duties do not require such declarations.
Education otherwise than at a school is an equally valid choice to schooling and Section 24 of the Education Act 2001 clearly makes this the legal responsibility of the parent. Under Island law it is not the responsibility of the Department to ensure the education of children; parents are not required to seek permission to educate their children otherwise than at a school. It is therefore unreasonable to require parents to register their lawful choice about the education of their children with the Department or to register where or from whom a child will receive their education.
The enforcement duties of the Department (Section 25, Education Act 2001) are predicated on an appearance of a child not receiving a suitable education. There is no legal obligation upon the Department to record the education status of every child. Therefore this change to the Act is not legally justifiable or necessary. The rationale for these proposals has not been substantiated and should not be imposed without a firm evidence base. The law as it stands allows for the Department to make enquiries where there are genuine concerns about a child's education and to remedy failures of compliance with Section 24, without the need to enforce unnecessary duties on parents. In accordance with the fundamental legal principle of assumed innocence, the Department must take the position, as governments must in other circumstances, that people (in this case parents choosing not to use provided, maintained or special schools) are (in the absence of information to the contrary) acting legally and that therefore if a child is not a registered pupil that they are in receipt of a suitable education otherwise than at a school. And, as that education is entirely independent and therefore not subject to government supervision or inspection, the Department has no need to register, monitor or keep details of those children.
Re requirement (c): How could a note about a child who is defined in part 1 as a child "not registered as a pupil ..." be receiving education at an Island school?
(3) The parent of a child must give a notification under subsection (1) —
(a) within 3 months after the child —
(i) attains the compulsory school age;
(ii) becomes resident in the Island; or
(iii) ceases to be a registered pupil at a provided school, maintained school or special school; or
This section is unclear; it either does not account for children who are already educated otherwise than at a school or it immediately makes all those who have been educating a child of compulsory school age otherwise than at a school for more than 3 months, guilty of an offence under the proposed section 5.
(b) at any time, within 21 days after being required by the Department to do so by notice in writing.
As mentioned above, the Department is not primarily responsible for the education of children educated otherwise than at school and therefore there is no justification in asking at any time for certain details such as the place of education or person delivering that education. If however the Department has genuine cause for concern over a particular child's education, Section 25 already allows for enquiries as to the suitability of the educational provision so this section is redundant. To put it into the Act would serve to allow for harrassment of parents of whom there is no good reason to suspect a failure of duty under Section 24.
(4) The Department may at any time by notice in writing to —
(a) a parent who has given a notification under subsection (1),
or
(b) a person specified in such a notification as the person by whom education is being or is to be given,
require him or her within the period specified in the notice (not being less than 15 days beginning with the day on which the notice is served) to give such particulars of the child's education as are specified in the notice and as receiving or will receive suitable education.
Comment:
AHEd members believe in principle that parents must not be expected to inform the Department if they choose to educate their children otherwise than at a school. An explanation is given above.
Section 4 of Clause 5 of the Bill examples why such a stance is potentially dangerous; as currently drafted this section could lead to open ended enquiries or enquiries repeated at fifteen day intervals, amounting to harassment. Such enquiries would undermine the principle of parental responsibility established in Section 24 of the Act. They would also interfere in the right to privacy and respect for family life which would be against the principle of the Department, reported to the committee of the UNCRC, that all policy is carried out in the best interest of the child; it is not in the interest of a child to have their education disrupted by legal procedures for continual or minute enquiry or to have their parents defined in this manner as high-risk law breakers.
As drafted, Section 4 also gives the Department a free hand to demand any kind and/or any amount of information from the parent or education provider, which risks excessive intrusion where prejudices and preferences are allowed to define an enquiry rather than legal necessity. This is discrimination against those educating otherwise than at school. There is no legal duty placed upon the Department to monitor the education of children who are not registered at a school except where the Department are providing that education under Section 17 (2) Education Act 2001. The Department is only required to act where it appears to them that a suitable education is not being provided as stated in Section 25 (1) Education Act 2001.
Section 24 of the Act requires that parents ensure their child receives suitable education. "Suitable" education is defined only as in Section 24 (3) as "efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have". The principle of parental choice is paramount. Families are entitled to choose what they feel to be the most suitable educational approach. The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 2 of protocal No 1 states:
"No person shall be denied the right to education. In the exercise of any functions which it assumes in relation to education and to teaching, the State shall respect the right of parents to ensure such education and teaching is in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions."
In seeking information from parents therefore, the Department may not dictate what constitutes suitable education by demanding of parents that they "give such particulars of the child's education as are specified in the notice." The Department must allow parents to formulate any reply to Departmental enquiries with information of their own choosing to indicate the suitability of the education provided and without requirement to answer in a specified form.
By way of example, where a parent is prosecuted for failure to comply with a School Attendance Order, the court will receive evidence about the suitability of the education in any reasonable form and this need be sufficient to convince a reasonable person on the balance of probabilities. Therefore, when making enquiries of a parent, the Department should not attempt to dictate the form of the information provided or impose a higher standard of proof than the courts demand.
Section 4 (b) states that information must be provided about the education that a child is receiving or "will receive". This is contrary to Section 24 of the Act that requires that a child of compulsory school age is caused to receive a suitable education. This is expressed in terms of the present not the future and therefore information about a child's education must be about their present situation not their future situation.
(5) A parent who, without reasonable excuse, fails to give a notification under subsection (1) within the time allowed by subsection (3)(a) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,000.
AHEd feel strongly that this is an unfair and unjust provision for the compulsory registration and monitoring of a law abiding minority. It is not illegal to opt to educate one's child otherwise than at a school. In addition, the law places the responsibility for this decision entirely in the hands of parents. It is a discriminatory injustice to make an offence, punishable by fine, of not informing the Department of a legally valid option.
(6) A person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with a notice under subsection (3)(b) or (4) is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,000.
The Education Act 2001, Section 25, (Enforcement of parents' duty) subsection (1) states:
"If it appears to the Department that a child of compulsory school age in the Island is not receiving suitable education, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise, it shall serve a notice in writing on a parent of the child requiring him to satisfy it within the period specified in the notice (not being less than 15 days beginning with the day on which the notice is served) that the child is receiving such education."
That is, that if it already appears to the Department that a child is not receiving suitable education, they must serve a notice requiring parents to satisfy the Department that the child is receiving a suitable education. If such an appearance does not exist, there are no grounds for suspicion and the Department is not required to act. This is in accordance with the fundamental principle of assumed innocence, afforded to all other Islanders and in all other situations. The proposed insertion of subsection 4 replaces this principle and procedes without the need for the appearance of failure, straight to a formalised legal enquiry at the whim of the Department and "at any time" and without limit. This is entirely unjust and unacceptable.
(7) Proceedings for an offence under subsection (5) or (6) shall not be brought otherwise than by the Department.
(8) Proceedings for an offence under subsection (5) may be commenced at any time within —
(a) the period of 6 months from the date on which evidence, sufficient in the opinion of the Department to justify a prosecution for the offence, comes to its knowledge, or
(b) 2 years after the commission of the offence, whichever period last expires.
This unreasonably allows for prosecution of a parent years after the commission of an offence.
(9) For the purpose of subsection (8), a certificate signed on behalf of the Department as to the date on which such evidence as is mentioned in subsection (8)(a) came to its knowledge shall be conclusive evidence thereof; and a certificate purporting to be so signed shall be deemed to be so signed until the contrary is proved."
Subsection 9 allows for a parent to be prosecuted on the whim of the Department where information has been mislaid or maladministered by the Department and does not appear to require notification to the parent of the certificate being signed. It also appears to suggest that the word of the Department is more trustworthy than the word of a parent.
page 8 line 1
29B. Removal of truants
(1) This section applies where a constable has reasonable cause to believe that a child found by the constable in a highway or other place to which the public has access —
(a) is of compulsory school age; and
(b) is absent from school without leave.
(2) The constable may remove the child to —
(a) the school at which it appears to the constable that the child is a registered pupil; or
(b) premises notified by the Department to the Chief Constable as premises to which children of compulsory school age may be removed under this section.".
(3) In section 58 of that Act (subordinate legislation) —
(a) in subsection (1), after "under this Act," insert "orders made by the Department under section 29A(5),"; 15
(b) in subsection (2), after "orders under sections" insert "29A(5),".
This section is intended to be inserted in the Act under the heading "Failure to secure regular attendance of registered pupil". AHEd are concerned that the Island gain from the experience in England where sloppy wording in government documents has caused harrassment by truancy patrol officers of children educated otherwise than at a school. The process of detaining children is clearly aimed only at children registered as pupils at a provided, maintained or special school. The legislation should make clear by direct mention that a child who declares him or her self as not being a registered pupil, or whose parent does the same, must be left to go about their business unhindered by any constable or other person. School registers serve as adequate records of those who should be in school so children not on those registers should be left unhindered.
Further points
Changes to primary legislation must not be made without proof of necessity and safeguards against abuse, neither of which appear to have happened in this instance.
The Duty of the Department to ensure all children receive a suitable education:
In a press statement 4/04/2008 and during a meeting with home educators reported within the home educating community, Anne Craine has expressed opinions based on the idea that the Department has a duty to ensure that all children receive an education. However, the Department does not have such a duty, only an enforcement duty where there is an appearance of failure of parenal duty. It is the duty of parents to ensure the suitable education of their children. If the Department changes the primary legislation to make themselves responsible for ensuring the suitable education of all children, they will expose themselves to legal charges of failure to ensure the same from those parents and/or children who feel that they have been let down by the education system on the Island and to possible claims for compensation on this basis.
The powers of the Department in the case of parental failure to provide a suitable education:
Anne Craine expressed the belief that current legislation is insufficient to deal with cases where parents are not discharging their duty to educate their children. Where there is such an appearance the duty of the Department is clearly set out in section 25 of the Education Act 2001. If failing parents are not being dealt with it is most likely due to inadequate use of the current legislation rather than inadequacies in that legislation.
We are aware that Island home educators have said that the proposed Bill appears to be drafted by those who do not understand home education. This coincides with the experience of AHEd members in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and members of the Scottish organisation, 'Schoolhouse', that it is sometimes claimed by authorities who do not understand home education that parents are not fulfilling their duty and authorities do not have sufficient powers to act. This lack of understanding is also reflected in the response from John Gill that the DOE has procedures targeting particular subjects that will be required of home educators which must be signed off by a teaching professional once a year. However, it is not currently the duty of the state to prescribe the form or content of education provided to home educated children; on the contrary there is a specific requirement on parents to ensure that the education provided is suited to the age, ability and aptitude, including any special need the child may have and not to any outside prescription.
In addition the Human Rights Act places a requirement on State's parties to respect the right of parents to have their children educated in accordance with their own religious and philosophical convictions. On this basis some parents employ methodology which is very different from that employed in schools and which cannot be judged by school criteria. For example, it has been shown and is our common experience that a child who is educated by autonomous methods, in which the internal motivations of the child are paramount, may acquire reading skills at any time from the age of three to eleven years and that the results are excellent in terms of exam success and future employment. Schools on the other hand use age related criteria and norms to judge the standard of education and this cannot be applied to all home education where children learn their prefered subjects at their own pace.
Truancy:
John Gill stated that registration of home educated children would permit the DOE to provide home educators with a card to prevent children being wrongly identified as truants.
It has been argued that a register of home educated children is needed to identify truants. The registers of children in school could be used to the same effect. For example, government do not keep a record of people who do not have a driving licence, they keep records of those that do. It is also argued that truants use being home educated as an excuse to avoid being detected as a truant. A check of whether the child is registered in school solves this problem. If the child is a registered pupil, they may be truanting and appropriate steps should be taken, but if they are not registered and they claim to be home educated, there is no reason to suspect otherwise. However, a child who claims that they are home educated should not be further questioned unless the constable has reason to believe that this is not the case. It is important to recognise that truancy measures are not aimed at identifying home educated children and they are not the target of this legislation.
Government can use the data they already have to deal with truants and do not need further information about home educated children. AHEd believe this is a disingenuos way of collecting data on home educated children.
Employment:
AHEd are also concerned about the insertion of parts of clause 10 which require notification to the Department of employment of children. Home educated children are the sole responsibility of their parents and it is for them to decide whether particular employment is suitable and to ensure that they adhere to employment legal restrictions and requirements. Notification of home educated children's employment would appear to unnecessarily register those children with the Department.
This concludes the response of AHEd. AHEd would be more than happy to liaise further with the Department on any of the issues we raise or any other issues which affect home educators.
END
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Update October 31st 2008
IOM home educators have alerted AHEd that this Bill has been revised and was presented to the Council of Ministers at Tynwald on 21st October, yet Clause 5 remains largely unaltered.
There were 45 reponses to the public consultation but they have not been made public and the results of the consultation have not been made public. The results have not been sent to IOM home educators who have specifically asked for them.
The Education Department has failed to keep home educators updated on the progress of the Bill or the consultation analysis despite repeated enquiries.
The Bill is to be read on Tuesday 4th Novemeber in the House of Keys (IOM's equivalent to the House of Commons).
The Bill has to be read 3 times in the House of Keys; these readings can be in the same day.
The Bill then needs to be approved by the Legislative Council which consists of 8 unelected members whose job it is to scrutinise legislation.
IOM home educators are working on possible changes to Clause 5. If you have suggestions please contact AHEd
Update January 2009
As a result of our campaign against the proposed changes in the Education (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, the Education Minister has agreed to remove subsection 4. However, a compulsary register of all those educating otherwise will be created. Thank you to all who helped with this campaign.
The government is currently pursuing a policy of introducing the Every Child Matters agenda here, including Contactpoint, the 5 outcomes, CAF, etc. If anyone has any thoughts on how we can effectively oppose this, please contact Dawn Sewell - see below.
~~~~~
Home Ed contacts:
if you know of any home ed contacts for the Isle of Man, please add to this page.
Dawn Sewell sewellbunch@yahoo.co.uk
Or contact AHEd with info for the page.
~~~~~
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.