|
Memorandum submitted by Peter Phillips
Summary: · No evidence found of child-protection issues · Proposals in the report are not justified by the evidence collated · Responses from home-educating organizations and the public were not given sufficient consideration · Sources were used selectively. Existing research was ignored. · The expert committee had limited experience of home-education.
1. The review set out to examine whether there
were any concerns about home-education relating to child protection or forced
marriage. The review found no evidence that home-educated children are any more
at risk than the general population in this regard. 2. Despite finding no evidence, the review
proposed a number of significant changes to the regulatory environment for
home-education. None of these proposals are justified by the evidence collated
during the review. 3. The review invited responses from interested
organizations and the public, but these responses were used very selectively in
the report. In particular, very little attention was given to the responses
from home-education support organizations, and almost none to home-educating
parents, or to home-educated children who responded. Overall the responses are
not fairly represented in the final report. 4. Sources have been quoted very selectively in
the report. The existing academic research on home education in the
5. The review was conducted by an 'expert
committee', only one of whom had any direct experience of home-education. This
was not a balanced committee. September 2009 |