To think that families who choose to home educate should receive government funding?

[PinkyU]

It costs the uk government(s) circa 75K to educate a child from 4/5-18.

AIBU to suggest that families who HE (home educate) should receive a percentage (50%-75%) of this to aid in their ability to provide learning opportunities for their child, given that it would still save the government money?

Do you think more families would HE if it seemed more financially viable?

I’m torn. I can see that part of the plethora of reasons school education exists in the format it does is to allow for (potentially) two adults to be working full time and paying tax, so the money saving aspect may fall down there.

From another perspective, accepting government involvement financially may come at the cost of government involvement concerning how and what the child should learn which is the antithesis of what HE seeks to do.

I do think that part funding HE would allow much more access to learning opportunities which would hugely benefit the child.

What do others think?

(Rambling over)

"No. The government already provides an education for every child."

That's not actually true as there are plenty of children without a school place and having little or no provision as an alternative but money needs to be spent on those children and not those who are choosing HE for ideological reasons.

@Hallyup6

No. The government already provides an education for every child. If you choose to home educate, that's on you, like choosing to send your child to private school.

No they don't. There are thousands dailydenied provision you just don't hear about it because it suits nobody , I'd urge you to do some research before making such statements

@littlebillie I think it’s very important to differentiate between hidden or unseen children and those that are HE.

HE are registered with gp’s/dentists/hospitals/opticians, they access peer groups, group activities and other social and educational opportunities.

Whilst, yes there usually is a crossover of hidden children being “HE” there are multiple safeguarding redflags that should be taken into account.

I feel for the purposes of this thread (to discuss the potential funding of genuine HE) it’s important not to conflate the two.

No, I don’t think it could work without being majorly open to abuse. But I am for a government maintained curriculum and resource website for home ed. Because that would support parents, especially those who have no choice, and provide a basic structure for learning the essentials.

I think that parents who HE because they have no other choice (children with SEND or SMHEN) should get paid extra money ,like an additional benefit to DLA .

A lot of the children that are being home educated are in that position because mainstream is not meeting their needs, special school don't either or the waiting lists are massive, or they have been managed out, left to struggle,been bullied, are self harming etc. The "choice" their parents have is keep them at home or see their child being harmed or worse.

[quote PinkyU]@paralysedbyinertia that an interesting point you make about the cost of reviews or auditing to be met from a HE budget rather than the LA, however I think that using a standardised curriculum or learning outcomes is quite diametrically opposed to the usual ethos of HE so I’m not sure that would work, but of course individualised reviews would also not work.[/quote]
I think my point is that there needs to be accountability for any public money being spent, but the cost of creating an infrastructure for regulating HE should not be an additional cost - it needs to be factored in from the outset. Individualised reviews might be ideal, but they would probably cost a lot more, which would leave less money for the parents to spend on educational activities.

I get that the ethos of HE doesn't really support the idea of standardised learning outcomes, but if public money is to be invested, I think some kind of standards would need to be met. We cannot just pay people to HE with no expectations about quality/outcomes etc.

[quote PinkyU]@paralysedbyinertia that an interesting point you make about the cost of reviews or auditing to be met from a HE budget rather than the LA, however I think that using a standardised curriculum or learning outcomes is quite diametrically opposed to the usual ethos of HE so I’m not sure that would work, but of course individualised reviews would also not work.[/quote]
I don't think reviews / oversight would need to cover the entire curriculum, but I would expect parents to ensure that the child can read, write and do maths at the expected standard for their age, as well as having an understanding of fundamental scientific concepts such as photosynthesis, how scientists prove / disprove a theory using experiments, and that the earth is indeed round before the end of primary school. That's the sort of knowledge where, without it, they're going to seriously struggle in adult life.

I'm far less concerned about whether or not they can name every one of Henry VIII's six wives, understand the formation of oxbow lakes or play the recorder.

If HE was inspected properly then there could easily be room for checking literacy, maths and science, as well as leaving room for learning about child-led topics.

Unfortunately, I fear there are quite a lot of HE children who simply don't get an adequate basic education, and it's not picked up. If they can't do the 3R's then they will have no chance of getting decent GCSEs, and that will cause serious damage to their life chances.

No i dont think they should unless very specific need to home educate. I say that as someone who home educated at various times due to necessity

No amount of money would convince me to home educate!! 🤣

[quote PinkyU]@littlebillie I think it’s very important to differentiate between hidden or unseen children and those that are HE.

HE are registered with gp’s/dentists/hospitals/opticians, they access peer groups, group activities and other social and educational opportunities.

Whilst, yes there usually is a crossover of hidden children being “HE” there are multiple safeguarding redflags that should be taken into account.

I feel for the purposes of this thread (to discuss the potential funding of genuine HE) it’s important not to conflate the two.[/quote]
But if you add in a financial incentive to HE, do you not think there will be lot more “hidden children”, who will fall between the cracks?

people who HE are paying for school education and then also experiencing the additional costs of HE their child

Here's the problem with your idea. You don't pay (via taxes) for just your own children to be educated. You pay for everyone's children to be educated, because society needs an educated population and workforce. We need a range of people with basic skills and then other more specialised skills in varying quantities. Your taxes pay for the education of the doctors who treat you, the engineers who make and fix stuff for you, the cleaners who clean hospitals, offices etc and the supermarket staff and so on and so on.

Once you start treating it as a kind of joint bank account where you should be able to withdraw 'your' share to educate your own children at home, that undermines the system of state provided education as an investment that benefits everyone.

The only alternative would be if mass home education was possible, where the same educational goals were met and facilitated by parents. It isn't. It wouldn't be economically viable, and many parents would not be able to manage it. So while home ed is the best option for some, it will never be so for the majority, and so has to operate without detracting from state educated funding.

If we had a system where all school received some government subsidy (this is the case in Australia, or certainly in NSW) then there might be an argument for this; but all the caveats already mentioned regarding curriculum, safeguarding, incentives to actually educate, still apply.

Much better SEND funding for assessment, training, teaching, resources, would probably be my first priority for funding in education, closely followed by better funding for creative education (arts, music, etc). Properly funded support for HE for children with needs that cannot be met in school should absolutely exist, but equally remain the exception rather than the rule as these families deserve the option of respite if needed!

I agree that exam fees support should be available to HE families. Subsidising good quality online resources that can be used both to HE and to help other children at home would make a lot of sense. Some other subsidies could be appropriate but would be most appropriately decided at a very local level, eg subsidised swimming or skating or other sports sessions for HE groups to use in school time slots, or perhaps a fund that groups of HE could apply to for specific projects. Eg a group wants to employ a specialist teacher jointly for a period of time.

Schools and school funding work on economies of scale. It doesnt really save the goverment anything if a small number of children home educate - they still have to provide facilities, materials and teachers for the rest. It's also a hugely inefficient use of centralised resources to effectively fund people to move out of the tax paying work force to provide low ratio education to their own children.

The whole point is everyone pays into central taxation to fund things that benefit us collectively not that people opt out of paying for services they don't feel they use.

I home educate. When you home educate you realise that anything your child needs school wise. You have to provide. So they need a laptop. You buy it

Now. Home educating can be expensive. Like stupidly expensive. I suspect we spend on average around £500 a month for things. However it doesn’t have to be expensive at all! Nearly everything can be gained from the home educating community. Everyone helps each other out. You don’t have to follow the national curriculum (though I do. But I’m one of the rare ones)

I’m on the fence about the funding. I agree with someone above that most children do well in school. But there is a huge amount who have to send their child to school so they can work or for childcare. There’s also a real strong schooling background in the uk I feel and people have it drummed into them.

Covid saw an absolute influx of people who started to HE. Some people felt it wasn’t for them. But the majority have stayed HE. Even if you do work the community is really great. Most would help out in a shot. There’s also forest schools. Depending on the type of HE. I thought there was just HE. But there’s unschooling. Montessori schooling. Steiner schooling. Forest schooling. We’re one of the really rare ones who stick to the national curriculum and we love it.

I cannot stress how much I LOVE HE. I feel really privileged to be able to impart knowledge onto my children. It’s not right for everyone but for us. We had no choice. My eldest was suffering and school wasn’t for them. The change in them is beyond anything we even imagined and I really really love doing it. It’s hard because I’m with my kids 24/7. I never get time away as such. That took w bit of getting used too. But other than that it’s been the best thing we ever did. So should we get compensated as such? I don’t think I’ve ever given it some thought. I don’t think that families should get funding. But it would be great if some of the HE community got funded for lessons or groups etc. That would be amazing. Not a lot. But some would be good.

If anyone has any questions about HE I’d be more than happy to help.

@pointythings

I think providing funding for HE would be OK - if it came with a rigorous inspection regime. Just to make sure that those children were learning the things they need in later life and of course to ensure that the small % of people who HE for religious nutjob/abuse reasons don't get away with it.

For children who don't thrive in mainstream I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea.

How much of what you learned at school have you used in later life? i.e. outside of education? All I've ever used is literacy and basic maths.

Schools don't teach how to run a home, they may touch on home ed but they don't teach anything worthwhile. They don't teach how to submit a tax return or how to work for yourself, and that is their problem. They are there to churn out unquestioning worker bees.

They have convinced the majority of people that exams are the be all and end all. And for what? To go to uni, get in debt and still end up with a shitty job.

I'd rather home educate any children I have and teach them to learn a skill or trade and to work for themselves. Who's really doing well at the moment? It's plumbers and cabbies and electricians etc. I know what I'd rather teach my kids.

[quote PinkyU]@littlebillie I think it’s very important to differentiate between hidden or unseen children and those that are HE.

HE are registered with gp’s/dentists/hospitals/opticians, they access peer groups, group activities and other social and educational opportunities.

Whilst, yes there usually is a crossover of hidden children being “HE” there are multiple safeguarding redflags that should be taken into account.

I feel for the purposes of this thread (to discuss the potential funding of genuine HE) it’s important not to conflate the two.[/quote]
I think the discussion on funding is irrelevant if you are not serving the best interests of children in general. My concerns are relevant and this is not a conflation of two separate issues, education to provide a safe stable environment for learning a curriculum. Why pay a group of unqualified people to double up on provision that has already been planned and funded for, where it would be very expensive to regulate and would launch thousands of HE.

The majority of home educators I know would not touch state funding for simply educating their children. The cost was factored into their decision and they understood the responsibilities that came with it.

Some councils will fund exam costs for home educated but most do not. Parents I know plan and save for years to provide the children with the money (roughly £200 per subject) to sit exams externally. If there was a way to help them with those specific costs I'd support it.

Its certainly open to abuse. Parents claiming the extra £5k a year and just sticking the kids in front of the TV all day. It would have to be subject to inspections and a curriculum, so the government could see that the money was being used correctly. Many home educators would not welcome this.

"Actually SEND children with an EHCP are funded. Schools receive funds via a very detailed legal document."

When you have a non verbal, non understanding speech, non toilet trained child starting mainstream school with '10 hours' of funding and no speech and language provision, adequate funding is clearly not happening. And as much as I am not a fan of local authorities part of this is because they do not receive enough funding either.

I think that’s fine as long as parents Privately Educating their Dc get the same (which I don’t think should happen by the way)

@Ihopeyourcakeisshit

I would wonder why anyone would object to home educated children having their GCSEs and A level exams funded? As for anything else I don't think it's a good idea.

I think that would be a good idea. I believe gcse are some £1000 each to pay for yourself.

@3Britnee but what if your DC wanted to be a scientist rather than a plumber?
Education is about giving DCs a foundation and choices, sure it's not perfect but neither is pushing someone down a specific career path because their DP believes it's the right one for them.

I’m thoroughly enjoying this discussion and will rejoin it in a bit, I apologise if anyone is commenting to me, I’ll try to respond later.

(I’ve just been called to pick up my autistic dd from her mainstream school as she’s just ripped a handful of her hair out, her scalp is bleeding and her school can’t manage to calm her).

Home education is an astonishingly expensive option (1 parent not working outside the home, teaching maybe 2 or 3 kids, vs a teacher in a school teaching 30). I don't believe HE is shown to produce better outcomes for most either. Why on earth would we want to encourage it? Schools are short enough on funding as it is. If you want state financed education for your children it is available. At school, in classes of 30 with efficiently shared resource.

Those people who think that HE is a "choice" clearly know very little about the reasons why the majority of HE parents are in that position.
In my opinion any extra funding should go towards schools being more inclusive to children who are so distressed by the school environment that they physically can't go.