Please sign our flexischooling petition!

[flexischoolingUK]

Flexischooling is an arrangement where a child of compulsory school age is registered at school full time, but the school agrees the child can be educated at home for part of the week. Flexischooling is a full time education, just like full time school or full time home education. This is a legal option in England, Scotland and Wales, but isn’t very well known (even in schools).

In England and Wales, flexischooling, if agreed, is marked as Code C, authorised absence. The trouble with this is that code C still
affects the school’s attendance data, which can put schools off agreeing. Before 2019, Code B (educated offsite) was allowed and this code did not negatively impact attendance data.

In December 2024, the head of Ofsted, Sir Martyn Oliver, voiced the concern in his end of year report, that we have no way of knowing how many children are being flexischooled, as Code C is a generic authorised absence code, and it is impossible to differentiate between flexischooling absences and other authorised absences.

The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill proposes that flexischooling be managed by LAs. This seems like an inefficient and costly duplication of oversight and data retention, as flexischooling children are already registered at school full time, seen in school on a weekly basis, and schools are already recording attendance of flexischooling pupils on a twice daily basis!

We believe our proposal makes more sense logistically and financially. For schools to continue to manage flexischooling arrangements, but for a specific flexischooling code to be used (Code F) giving the government quantifiable data on the number of flexischooling children. Ideally, this code would not impact attendance data, as flexischooling pupils are legally receiving a full time education and it seems unnecessary for schools to be penalised for agreeing to a flexischooling arrangement in the best interests of a child. This is the current system in Scotland, flexischooling has no negative impact on attendance data.

We are aiming to reach 10,000 signatures to get a response from the government, but more than 10,000 would be a fantastic testament to the interest in flexischooling. We currently have at least 1 signature in all but 5 constituencies in the whole of the UK! It would be absolutely amazing to be able to say that every constituency in the UK had signed.

We are currently missing a signature in Nah-Eileanan an lar in Scotland, and 4 constituencies in Northern Ireland:

Mid Ulster - Mr Cathal Mallaghan MP

East Antrim - Rt Hon Sammy Wilson MP

Lagan Valley - Sorcha Eastwood MP

Belfast West - Paul Maskey MP

Whilst this petition isn’t directly aimed at Northern Ireland, Scotland or Wales, signatures from these countries do count and the petition data will be available even after the petition ends, and could be used to demonstrate the high levels of interest in flexischooling in these countries.

And of course, if every single constituency signs, that’s a statement everyone in the UK can use, that this petition demonstrates the universal support for flexischooling in the UK, with every single constituency having signed! 🤞

Please consider taking 2 minutes to sign and verify your email (please check your junk/spam folder) as unverified emails do not count.

Thank you!

Happy to answer any question regarding flexischooling 🙂

Flexischooling petition link

Flexischooling for children with additional needs should be the barest minimum especially for those that have Asd because it will make them worst in the long run and it won't work because they would just end up not going at all and then there is all the messing around for the school so no not a good idea.

No. That’s not what I’m saying at all.

I think the entire education system needs to be overhauled so that appropriate schools that meet the needs of different children are available for all children.

However, I can see how arrangements such as these may be very beneficial for some children, especially while appropriate schools for them are still not available (e.g. schools with much smaller class sizes and individual support but that are still academic).

A PP had stated that the problem is that there is a lot of variability with flexi-schooling arrangements currently: that some are not monitored properly; that there aren’t clear learning objectives set and children aren’t learning much during their time at home and so teachers are left with learning gaps to catch up because, presumably, either the arrangement isn’t appropriate for the child or the parent isn’t capable of delivering it or the teachers are not communicating with the parent properly and providing their lesson plans (that the teacher has to prepare anyway) to the parent to enable them to deliver the learning at home or there is a lack of communication generally etc; or that children are being granted these flexi-school arrangements simply to make teachers’ lives easier where they find a child hard to manage in class so are relieved they are not there some of the time as it makes teaching the rest of the class easier, rather than the arrangement being because flexi-schooling will actually work for the child in question (as well as most likely benefiting the teacher and other classmates, as few people would suggest this for their child if it wasn’t needed)… etc.

So my suggestion was that if there is a lack of a framework around in what circumstances such an arrangement is appropriate and how it should be operated, then such a framework should be established. Variability in how successful it is may well be down to the lack of a Code setting out how it should operate if it is approved and in what circumstances it should be considered based on that PP’s comments.

I have set out, as an example, some information about my children and how - if I was able to faciliate such an arrangement (which I’m not) it would be enormously beneficial to them (as well as their classmates and teachers). So it seems counterproductive to say nobody should be allowed to do this when there are clearly some circumstances in which it would benefit the child, their classmates and the teacher, just because it isn’t appropriate or viable for everyone.

In such a situation the appropriate thing to do would be to a) campaign for the school system to be fundamentally reformed so that it meets the needs of all children (EVERYONE who cares about children or the future of this country should be doing this anyway); but also b) allow flexi-schooling arrangements where this is a viable option for the family and would benefit the child, when clearly in appropriate circumstances it would benefit not only the child but also their teacher and classmates as well.

It may be an option only appropriate in a limited number of cases but I’m surprised at the illogical responses on the thread stating that this is a reason it shouldn’t be allowed even in cases where it is viable and would be beneficial, just because it wouldn’t work in all cases. Again, this is the one-size-fits all mentality, which is exactly what has led us to an education system that is so dysfunctional in the first place and is letting the vast majority of children down and failing to enable them to meet their potential.

If a flexi-schooling system would help some children to manage school and their parents can facilitate this, why would the reaction be to say that because in some cases it would be inappropriate it should be banned entirely? That’s nonsensical.

What you do in such a situation is set out a clear framework for school of what kinds of circumstances would mean this was appropriate, the responsibilities of both parents and teachers so that roles are clearly defined and there are checks and balances and the arrangement is reviewed regularly to ensure it is effective and no undue burdens are placed on anyone and children’s rights are properly protected, and then operate a properly functioning system to make it work in the cases where it’s appropriate and the parent is fulfilling their responsibility properly. This will also make things far better for teachers than having children who should not be in a mainstream school for five days a week and cannot cope with it given the totally insufficient support available to enable them to sustain this.

The PP I was responding to highlighted variability in practice and cited this as a reason to disallow any child from having such an arrangement. That’s an invalid logical inference. The logical solution is to fix that problem with a framework for it specifying factors to consider when deciding whether approving such a plan is appropriate, safeguards to be put in place, procedures, when it would be appropriate to cease such a plan if it is not delivering the intended outcomes, etc. Not deny the opportunity to the children who need this who can benefit from it because in some cases it has been approved inappropriately for the wrong reasons/ not worked etc.

Fundamentally, though, children shouldn’t need this, if appropriate provision was made to ensure they can access state education. Parents shouldn’t need to provide the education for them instead of schools, hence me stating repeatedly that the whole system needs rebuilding with a far larger variety of schools available. I am sad I couldn’t offer this flexi-schooling option to my children even if their school agreed due to our personal circumstances, but until a functional education system is put in place I wouldn’t be against other children like mine being denied it out of spite simply because it’s not an option for me to facilitate this. It seems like a very sensible option for children with specific kinds of needs and the right family support in place to make it work but clearly needs some regularity and framework around how it is managed. However, again, everybody who cares at all about the future of our country would be campaigning very hard for the Government to overhaul the education system entirely, and in precisely the opposite manner to which our extremely misguided Education Secretary seems to be minded to take it which will compound, not remedy, the current deficiencies and cause immense harm to the educations of all children in state schools if she pursues her current stated intentions.

@InsomniacSloth wow that was a very long response but I disagree entirely that the flexibility should be removed from flexi-schooling arrangements, especially based on stories from posters that haven't been directly involved. The current ability to tailor arrangements to individual schools and pupils is a strength of the system in my experience. Headteachers should retain that autonomy.

I’m not saying flexibility about what is agreed should be removed!

I’m saying that there should be a framework setting out factors to consider when agreeing arrangements: the respective roles and responsibilities of the parents and teachers, a framework for agreeing appropriate outcomes to be achieved (given the needs and capabilities of the specific pupil); regular meetings between school and home to discuss the work completed; issues with learning or any areas to focus on; what has gone well or not and adapt so teachers have some termly input (for example) into what the parent is focusing on at home. If a parent can voluntarily take on the teacher’s role for a proportion of the week then a short meeting half-termly or termly to discuss progress and monitor isn’t an undue burden on schools. A framework setting out the circumstances in which such arrangements are appropriate and how they should work is just common sense, and would ensure more consistent decisions on whether to agree such an arrangement rather than leaving it to the whim or personal opinions or biases of head teachers because the need and pros/ cons of it would be assessed based on a rational framework of relevant considerations.

I wasn’t saying, at all, that the specific arrangements agreed shouldn’t be tailored to the needs of the child in question, because that’s surely the entire point of the school or parents considering doing this in the first place!

I can assure you that Head Teachers “retaining autonomy” is not a universal good. My own children have direct experience of that, so I can speak about that through “direct involvement”. The Head Teacher of my children’s school refused to continue the provision my daughter had at nursery despite this being agreed in a multi-disciplinary meeting prior to her starting school, resulting in her becoming suicidal in Reception and missing over a term of it. Meanwhile, I was threatened with prosecution by the Local Authority for not sending a suicidal 5 year-old to school because the “Head of Pupil Entitlement” said “the provision at school is effective because the Head Teachers says it is”, even though her neurodevelopmental paediatrician, educational psychologist, SALT, OT, psychiatrist, and child psychologist all disagreed, and said Head Teacher refused to discuss the situation with me, SENDIAS or SOSSIEN or my children’s advocate at all for three months, to put any plans in place for her to return to school safely, causing immense unnecessary additional harm to her education and mental health.

Head Teachers are certainly not infallible and shouldn’t be left to their own devices with no framework or rules around how they make their decisions.

This is clearly a hotly debated topic, with strong feelings on both sides.

I’m not well at the moment, but I will endeavour to come back and answer individual questions and address the many misconceptions when I am able. Apologies in advance if this takes a while - there’s a lot of comments.

Here are a few key points it’s important to know:

1. Flexischooling will never be the universal model of education, nor is it intended to replace full time school for all.
2. Flexischooling is not right for all children, but may be very helpful for some. The current education system is not working. Teachers are leaving the profession in record numbers, children are out of school in record numbers, with a huge increase in mental health issues and EBSA. There is a SEND crisis with councils not having enough money to meet the rising costs of SEND provision. There are children and families who feel they have no choice but to move to full time Elective Home Education because the school system cannot meet their needs and will not agree to reasonable adjustments, such as flexischooling. Flexischooling would enable these children to access some school, which is surely better than an all or nothing system?
3. Flexischooling is discretionary, it is not being forced on schools against their will. Not all headteachers will agree to flexischooling, especially if they have any safeguarding concerns. They can also end the arrangement at any point should they have any concerns about safeguarding or the quality of the education provided at home.
4. Flexischooling is not an ad hoc arrangement, with children popping in and out whenever they want, it is a clearly defined, structured and pre-agreed arrangement. In order to be successful it is carefully planned between the school and family, and this includes discussion on how to minimise the impact on teachers.

If you would like to learn more about flexischooling, please consider joining our facebook group Flexischooling Families UK to learn more.

If you are an education professional and would like to connect with other teachers and headteachers who have embraced flexischooling, please join our facebook group for professionals, Flexischooling Practitioners UK.

As this is a parenting forum, I am assuming all those commenting are parents. If your child has attended school full time and had a positive experience, I am absolutely delighted! This is not an attack on families who choose full time school or full time home education. Parents know their children best, and should be supported in making decisions for ensuring their child of compulsory school age receives a full time education suitable to the child’s age, ability, aptitude and adapted for any special educational needs the child might have. We all want what is best for our children, for them to be happy and healthy and to thrive. Sadly, not all families have this experience, so it is important for those who need it to have a range of education options, to help find the right education for them.

If you do not agree with the concept of flexischooling and do not wish to sign our petition, then that is absolutely your prerogative. I find it sad that many of the comments are founded on assumptions and misconceptions, rather than curiosity, but I am happy to try to address those misconceptions for those who would be interested - as soon as I feel physically able to.

Thank you for showing an interest in the concept of flexischooling!

That was a really fun time, caring for a distressed 5 year-old all day and having to do my full-time job at night and sleep for two hours per day for three months.

Head Teachers certainly do not always act in the best interests of the child, or indeed the school. Or even comply with the law in some cases. So clearly when there are decisions to be made a framework for making those decisions is necessary, just like professional and ethical standards (and a regulator and professional body that enforces them, in which education is an anomaly because all other sectors have such professional bodies and regulators - flawed as they inevitably are - whereas the ones in education do not fulfil their roles even to the most basic extent).

A competent, decent, moral Head Teacher might well be able to operate such a system effectively if given total flexibility to make decisions entirely at their own discretion. However, there’s a very good reason that no professionals in any sector should be given such power without any framework or oversight because some of them, unfortunately, won’t be competent, decent or moral or will be lacking a combination of those characteristics. That is why regulation (and enforcement) is necessary in all sectors.

For flexi-schooling, it sounds like an appropriate framework is not yet well-established, and it should be. Some posters have argued that it should be banned because there isn’t a proper framework. Some, like you @legoplaybook , seem to be arguing that there should be no framework because some Head Teachers operate it effectively without one, ignoring the fact that many will either operate it ineffectively or refuse to operate it at all.

Most education-related matters (unlike this one, it seems) are subject to a lot of laws and regulations but a severe lack of enforcement and oversight. OFSTED are a joke, as is the TRA, as is the Local Government Ombudsman. It is left to individual parents to enforce education law in individual cases, with no action taken by tribunals or any of the relevant regulators of professional bodies to apply sanctions, fines, stripping of professional qualifications, prison sentences, etc for the harms caused, like is the case in every other profession e.g. law, finance, medicine.

People working in education seem to find the idea of this unfathomable because they have got so used to this being the case and it’s become the wild west, the rotten apples have spread their mould to most of the bucket now and convinced them that this is the norm so that even those not actively engaged in this turn a blind eye to it and accept it, but that is how properly regulation works: laws and statutory requirements are enforceable and there are severe penalities (personal and organisational) for breaching them, particularly in cases of deliberate or repeated breaches. There are sanctions, consequences. And knowing that there will also be consequences for you if you go along with it somewhat focuses the mind and encourages whistle-blowing. That is how compliance with the law and regulations is maintained because there’s no point in having a law or regulations if they’re ignored with impunity: it is essential that they are enforced robustly.

To suggest in any sector that total trust should be vested in one individual with no effective oversight or even framework to follow (in the case of flexi-schooling, it seems) and just “trust their professional judgement” is frankly - as someone who works in regulation and law - completely bonkers and naive and not how any effective system would ever be designed.

It took me a year to qualify as a teacher. A huge chunk of my PGCE was devoted to classroom management - behaviour, mostly - and differentiation - taking what needs to be taught and making it accessible to learners of different abilities in the same class.

I haven't needed either of those skills as a home educating parent, because there's only one child in the "classroom" and I can tailor her learning to her ability. You don't need a PGCE or QTS to educate a child.

Re: lesson plans.

The problem is that lesson plans aren't always written out step by step, because there is an assumption that anyone taking over has professional knowledge. Very often, there's simply an outline.

No but you need a thorough understanding of a broad range of subjects, plus knowing the exam syllabus, assessment objectives …. Also tricky with subjects like science where many exam courses require a practical lab element and you’ll be very limited in the exam they can take without this

IGCSE sciences are popular among home educators for this reason; they are fully exam based. Candidates are required to understand a list of practicals, but there's no requirement to complete this within a centre or evidence that they've been completed.

I've developed my knowledge of the full range of subjects my daughter wants to study in the same way I developed my knowledge of English to become a teacher - lots of reading and research. The same goes for the exam syllabus and AOs.

By GCSE age most home educators will be using some kind of outside provider.
Home educating parents mostly facilitate their child's learning rather than attempt to be their teacher - it's very different to school.

It sounds like you are describing secondary education here. Flexischooling is far more common in primary, though still a legal option in secondary. It is common for schools that agree to flexischooling to say that they will not agree for exam years (year 6 or Primary and GCSE years).

In secondary school, flexischooling is far more likely to be used as an adjustment for SEN pupils. Parents may be bringing their child in for certain lessons, e.g Maths, English and Science, and covering other subjects at home, whether they are being entered for those exams or not, that would depend on the individual circumstances.

I’m not sure where you’ve got the idea from that teachers don’t know how many children they would have coming in.

Flexischooling is not an ad hoc arrangement. It is a pre agreed arrangement where everyone involved would know when the child is being educated in school and when the child is being educated at home. This would be an agreed weekly pattern of attendance that would end at the request of the parents/child or school.

@gattocattivo many sit IGCSE sciences, but if private candidates want to sit GCSE sciences rather than IGCSE, there are centres who can facilitate that.

I’m not sure you’ve fully grasped the concept and logistics of flexischooling.

Flexischooling is discretionary. There are no teachers or headteachers being forced to have flexischooling pupils against their will.

Although that may be the case if we do not challenge The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which suggests that local authorities decide whether to agree to flexischooling requests. It is unclear from the bill whether headteachers would still be involved in the decision making process.

Our petition puts flexischooling firmly in the school’s hands, and they are best placed to say whether flexischooling is in the best interests of the child, and also the school.

A number of small schools, at risk of closure, have utilised flexischooling, saving the schools and teacher’s jobs in the process. These schools love flexischooling, and a great many teachers are interested in doing it for their own children.

I completely agree, that the current system is broken. I am an ex teacher and have witnessed the pressures breaking children and adults alike.

Flexischooling has been legal since the 1980s, but little known about. If flexischooling was as logistically disastrous as you fear, we would not be seeing an increase in schools adopting this model. We would not be seeing teachers wanting to do this with their own children at the expense of other teachers.

You are absolutely correct, that schools are overstretched, and underfunded. It is often impossible for teachers to give some pupils the 1-1 attention and support they need. Parents who are willing to do this, get no financial support to do so, but may reduce the cost to schools if pupils need additional support. Schools get 100% of the normal funding for flexischooling pupils, plus the free support from parents.

Headteachers will decide during the application process, whether those parents are suitable candidates for flexischooling.

Whilst flexischooling pupils are not at school, teachers have the benefit of smaller class sizes and can focus more of their attention to the other pupils.

Patents that have successfully flexischooling arrangements are incredibly appreciative to the school, head and teachers, and may go above and beyond to maintain a strong and positive relationship.

Flexischooling is not a universal solution to the problems within the school system, but may help to alleviate some of the pressures in some situations.

Some secondary schools that have agreed to flexischooling, say that the arrangement must end during exam years. In secondary, it is more likely that pupils attend only for specific subjects, meaning their timetable would be based on attending certain lessons, rather than certain days. This is more complicated for parents, but as flexischooling as most commonly agreed for SEN pupils at secondary, this reasonable adjustment allows a pupil to access some school, which may be better than nothing.

Thank you for your questions.

Flexischooling is a legal arrangement for a child of compulsory school age. Compulsory school age is from the term after a child turns 5, until the last Friday in June of the academic year a child turns 16.

Children below compulsory school age are not legally required to be in full time education and can therefore attend school part time. This is not legally flexischooling, but part time attendance before compulsory school age.

Flexischooling pupils are receiving a full time education. That full time education may not look exactly the same as their full time peers in school, but differences not necessarily equate to inferior. Whilst the National Curriculum does not ‘necessarily’ apply to the home part of flexischooling, that may be a stipulation of the headteacher agreeing to the arrangement. If so, it would be the parent’s responsibility to research, plan and deliver content to the child whilst they are learning out of school, though they can liaise with the school.

Flexischooling children will move up with their peers in the normal way each year, and yes, they have to sit all statutory tests and exams like their full time peers.

Fears regarding academic progress is common, both from parents and schools. It is recommended that parents and schools review the arrangements periodically (this can be through a meeting with the headteacher or included in parents evening meetings), and if there were concerns that the child was falling behind academically, then the arrangement can be changed or ended.

Parents choosing flexischooling, take the responsibility very seriously. Many are teachers or ex teachers themselves. Many perhaps want to home educate full time, but for various reasons this may not be possible.

I am aware of lots of flexischoolers who are excelling academically thanks to the arrangement and receiving tailored 1-1 support. Of course, these families reflect well on the school and are allowed to continue. If a child is not thriving academically on a flexischooling arrangement (and where there is no SEN involved) the headteacher is unlikely to allow the arrangement to continue. Some headteachers allow flexischooling during certain year groups, e.g EYFS and KS1 of primary, but do not agree to the arrangement continuing in other year groups.

I hope that has helped to answer your questions 🙂

Great question!

During the initial meetings with the headteacher to discuss the request, the head will look at the weekly timetable of the class and discuss with the parent the days or times of the week that would work best for the school, and what might be missed. This gives the parent a general idea of the subjects that they may need to cover.

The National Curriculum does not necessarily apply to the home part of flexischooling, but it may if that is a stipulation of the headteacher.

Most Primary schools have a curriculum overview on the school website and the National Curriculum and EYFS curriculum can easily be found online. Parents can try to find out specialist information, such as what phonics scheme the school uses, either by asking the headteacher during the initial meetings, asking the class teacher, or this information is commonly available on school’s websites.

Flexischooling is most commonly agreed in Primary schools. Of the 731 schools on our flexischooling map that have agreed to flexischooling requests, only 43 are state secondaries. Though we know our map will never be 100% accurate as it relies on parents informing us and not all parents that Flexischool are necessarily in our facebook group.

This is another reason, why a specific flexischooling code would be so beneficial. To have clear data representing the numbers of flexischooling pupils at primary and secondary.

Some examples of how a parent may liaise with a teacher in a primary school, without adding to their workload:

1. Parents (or teachers) may catch the other for a quick word at the end of the school day. This is a common way for parents and teachers to communicate any general information or concerns and could also be used for flexischooling, such as passing on the phonics sounds covered the next day.
2. Many schools have communication apps now which parents can use to upload evidence of learning for the schools records, but also to facilitate communication between the parent and teacher.
3. Parents and teachers can discuss flexischooling arrangements during regular parents evenings.
4. Schools often update all parents of upcoming topics and the skills and knowledge to be covered in an upcoming half term, which parents can use as a guide.

So there are several ways to gain information about what is happening in school and key learning that might be ‘missed’ to cover at home.

I have not had personal experience of flexischooling in Secondary, which is more commonly agreed for SEND pupils, so I have not given examples of that here.

Surely that’s precisely what a flexible approach is designed to enable? Children could be in school for the practical subjects that require equipment, labs etc and could learn in peace on their own (often at a much faster pace as well as not being subjected to an overwhelming, busy, noisy environment for 30 hours per week) for some of the rest of the time when there is no need for them to be in a classroom with others to learn.

Surely that’s precisely what a flexible approach is designed to enable? Children could be in school for the practical subjects that require equipment, labs etc and could learn in peace on their own (often at a much faster pace as well as not being subjected to an overwhelming, busy, noisy environment for 30 hours per week) for some of the rest of the time when there is no need for them to be in a classroom with others to learn.

Funnily enough I ended up effectively inventing flexi-schooling for myself during YR11 in the ‘90s because there was no other option. I was living independently by then (not through choice) so had to work because I had rent to pay, but wanted to do my GCSEs. I read textbooks at home, mostly, in the evenings. Some nicer teachers gave me some outline of what to read/ cover. It was far, far more peaceful actually than going to school. My attendance in YR11 was 12%. All of my GCSEs were A*s and As (and I later did similar with my A levels, then did a degree and professional qualification and now earn a six figure salary).

In fact I believe I dragged up the school’s average grade quite a bit because it was closed down entirely several years later as it was a failing school and came very close to the bottom of the national league table that year. I am living proof that it’s certainly not the case that no child can achieve anything without being in the school environment. I had no parental help or adult input at all, was living alone after a very traumatic childhood and learned far, far better like this than if I’d been at school every day.

Not all children are the same and schools (and the idiotic Education Secretary) need to accept this.

I also actually doubt if I’d have achieved those grades by not self-teaching and attending the school, if I’d lived a life without childhood trauma and not been forced to provide for myself as a 16 year old. Certainly not in that school, anyway.

I remember reading about children learning through online lessons and then doing their work at home during Covid and thinking that would have been heaven!

Children are different, just like adults. The sooner the education sector accepts this fact and that no amount of pretending will make them all able to conform and pretend they are clones no matter how hard they try, the better it will be for society in general because we will end up with far more functional and productive, happy, well-balanced adults who can contribute to their potential if we put a system in place that caters for individual needs: it will pay back the cost of itself in the long term many times over.

Not everyone actually educates their children though, some just take them out and do nothing or the bare minimum.

Not every child gets an education in school. Many children with SEN especially get the bare minimum.
A huge number of children don't even pass their maths and English GCSEs after 12 years in school.