1. Introduction and Purpose

1.1 Context

Home education, also known as home schooling or elective home education (EHE), represents a legitimate and lawful educational choice exercised by increasing numbers of families in England and Wales. The Department for Education estimates that approximately 86,000 children were known to be home educated in England as of October 2023, representing a 40% increase from 2020 (Department for Education, 2024a). However, this figure likely underestimates the true number, as registration is not mandatory for children who have never attended school.

This growth reflects diverse motivations: some families embrace home education as a positive philosophical choice aligned with their values and educational beliefs; others turn to it following negative experiences in mainstream schooling, including bullying, unmet special educational needs, mental health challenges, or inadequate provision; still others utilize home education temporarily during periods of school refusal, illness, or transition (Rothermel, 2002; Arora, 2006; Maxwell and Aggleton, 2014).

1.2 Purpose of This Document

This document provides comprehensive guidance on the legal framework governing home education and alternative provision in England and Wales. It aims to:

•  Clarify the statutory rights and responsibilities of parents choosing home education
• Define the lawful powers and limitations of local authorities
• Explain what constitutes “suitable education” under law
• Address special educational needs considerations
• Provide practical guidance for families navigating legal requirements
• Articulate Raedan Institute’s position and support services
• Serve as authoritative reference for staff, families, and stakeholders
  
  

1.3 Scope and Limitations

This document focuses primarily on the legal framework in England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland operate under different legislation and are not covered in detail. While we reference relevant case law and statutory guidance, this document does not constitute legal advice. Families facing specific legal challenges should consult qualified solicitors specialising in education law.

1.4 Terminology

Throughout this document, we use several terms interchangeably:

• Elective Home Education (EHE): The Department for Education’s preferred term
• Home schooling: Common American term, increasingly used in UK
• Home education: General descriptive term
• Education Otherwise: Historic term from the Education Act 1996 phrase “otherwise than at school”
  
  

All refer to parents taking primary responsibility for their children’s education outside the school system.

2. Legal Foundation of Home Education in England and Wales

2.1 Primary Legislation

The fundamental legal basis for home education derives from Section 7 of the Education Act 1996, which states: “The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable—

(a) to his age, ability, and aptitude, and

(b) to any special educational needs he may have,

either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.” (Education Act 1996, c.56, s.7, emphasis added) This foundational provision establishes several critical principles:

Parental Duty, Not State Duty: The legal obligation to ensure education rests with parents, not the state. The state’s duty is merely to make schools available; parents may accept or decline school places (Phillips and Pound, 2003).

Flexibility of Method: The phrase “or otherwise” explicitly permits education outside the school system. This is not a concession or loophole but a deliberate legislative choice respecting parental rights and educational diversity (Monk, 2009).

Quality Standards: Education must be “efficient” and “full-time” and “suitable” to the child’s individual characteristics. These terms, deliberately undefined in statute, allow flexibility while maintaining minimum standards (Badman, 2009).

2.2 Compulsory School Age

Section 8 of the Education Act 1996 defines compulsory school age: “A child reaches compulsory school age—

(a) when he attains the age of five, if he attains that age on a prescribed day, and otherwise

(b) when he attains the age of five, if he attains that age on a prescribed day, and otherwise at the beginning of the prescribed period next following his attaining that age.” (Education Act 1996, c.56, s.8)

In practice, compulsory school age begins the term after a child’s fifth birthday and continues until the last Friday in June of the academic year in which they turn 16 (Education Act 1996, s.8; Department for Education, 2019a).

Importantly, there is no legal obligation to provide education before compulsory school age begins (typically age 5). Parents who choose not to send four-year-olds to reception classes are not home educating—they are exercising their right not to educate until the legal duty begins (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012).

2.3 European Convention on Human Rights

The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law, providing additional protections for educational choice:

Article 2, Protocol 1 (Right to Education): “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 in conformity with their own religious and philosophical convictions.” (Human Rights Act 1998, Schedule 1, Article 2, Protocol 1)

This provision has been interpreted as protecting parental rights to educate children according to their philosophical and religious beliefs, including through home education (Campbell and Cosans v UK, 1982; Konrad v Germany, 2006). However, this right is not absolute and must be balanced against the child’s right to education and the state’s legitimate interest in ensuring educational standards (Spitzer, 2019).

2.4 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

The UK ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) in 1991. Relevant provisions include:

Article 28 (Right to Education): Recognises the child’s right to education and requires states to make education available and accessible (United Nations, 1989).

Article 29 (Aims of Education): Specifies that education should develop the child’s personality, talents, mental and physical abilities to their fullest potential (United Nations, 1989).

While not directly enforceable in UK courts (unlike the ECHR), the UNCRC informs interpretation of domestic law and policy (Fortin, 2009). The Children and Families Act 2014 requires decision-makers to have regard to the UNCRC when making decisions affecting children’s welfare.

2.5 Children Act 1989 and 2004

The Children Act 1989 and Children Act 2004 establish the paramountcy of children’s welfare and local authorities’ duties to safeguard and promote children’s welfare (Children Act 1989, s.17; Children Act 2004, s.11). These Acts are relevant to home education in two contexts:

Safeguarding: Local authorities have duties to investigate if they have reasonable cause to suspect a child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm (Children Act 1989, s.47). Home education itself does not constitute a safeguarding concern, but authorities may investigate if separate concerns arise (HM Government, 2023).

Children in Need: Where children have additional needs, local authorities must provide appropriate support (Children Act 1989, s.17). This applies regardless of educational setting.

Importantly, these Acts do not give local authorities automatic powers to monitor home education. Safeguarding powers exist independently of educational status and must be based on actual concerns, not speculation (Arora, 2006).

2.6 Equality Act 2010

The Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination based on protected characteristics including disability, race, religion, and sex (Equality Act 2010, ss.4, 13). This applies to educational services, including those provided by local authorities.

Local authorities must not:

• Assume home education is unsuitable based on stereotypes about families
• Discriminate against home-educated children in accessing services
• Apply different standards to families based on protected characteristics
• Fail to make reasonable adjustments for disabled children (Equality Act 2010, s.20)
  
  

Conversely, families choosing home education for religious or philosophical reasons are exercising rights protected by both the Equality Act and ECHR (Lees and Ralph, 2016).

3. Parental Rights and Responsibilities

3.1 The Primacy of Parental Responsibility

Under English law, parents hold parental responsibility for their children—defined as “all the rights, duties, powers, responsibilities and authority which by law a parent of a child has in relation to the child and his property” (Children Act 1989, s.3(1)). This includes educational decisions.

Importantly, the state does not share parental responsibility merely because education is compulsory. Parents retain primary authority over educational choices, including whether to utilize state schooling or provide education “otherwise” (Monk, 2009; Spitzer, 2019).

This principle was reaffirmed in R v Secretary of State for Education and Science, ex parte Talmud Torah Machzikei Hadass School Trust (1985), where the court emphasized that “parents are free to educate their children at home if they wish” and that the state’s role is facilitative, not directive (cited in Monk, 2009, p.580).

3.2 What Parents Must Provide

Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 specifies that education must be:

“Efficient”: The term “efficient” is not statutorily defined but has been interpreted through case law and guidance as meaning education that “achieves what it sets out to achieve” (Phillips v Brown, 1980, cited in Hopwood et al., 2007, p.7). Efficiency does not require comparison with school-based education or achievement of specific standards but rather internal coherence and effectiveness in meeting stated educational aims (Department for Education, 2019a).

“Full-time”: Similarly undefined in statute, “full-time” does not mean replicating school hours. Case law and guidance indicate it means education occupying a substantial portion of the child’s time, appropriate to their age and circumstances (Harrison and Tymms, 2007). Home education often achieves in fewer hours what schools require more time for, due to individualised instruction and lack of large group management needs (Rothermel, 2002).

“Suitable to age, ability and aptitude”: Education must be appropriate for the individual child, not generic curriculum suited to average children. This inherently personalises requirements—what constitutes suitable education varies based on the child’s developmental stage, capabilities, interests, and learning profile (Monk, 2004).

“Suitable to any special educational needs”: If a child has identified SEN, education must address these appropriately. However, parents are not bound to follow Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) developed for school contexts and may provide alternative suitable provision (Children and Families Act 2014, s.61; Department for Education, 2015).

3.3 What Parents Do NOT Need to Provide

Critically, home educating parents are not required to:

Follow the National Curriculum: The National Curriculum is a statutory framework for maintained schools, not home educators (Education Act 2002, s.84; Department for Education, 2019a). Parents may use it as a resource but are equally free to adopt alternative curricula (Montessori, Waldorf, classical education, autonomous learning, etc.).

Teach specific subjects: There is no legal requirement to teach any particular subjects, including “core” subjects like English, mathematics, or science. However, a broad and balanced education is advisable and expected (Department for Education, 2019a).

Follow school timetables or terms: Home educators may structure learning around their family’s schedule, cultural practices, or child’s rhythms. Education can occur year-round, during non-traditional hours, or in intensive blocks (Rothermel, 2002).

Have teaching qualifications: Parents need not be qualified teachers. Legal cases confirm that formal qualifications, while potentially helpful, are not necessary for providing suitable education (Bevan v Shears, 1911, cited in Monk, 2009).

Use specific teaching methods: Parents may employ any pedagogical approach—formal lessons, project-based learning, interest-led learning (unschooling), online courses, tutors, or combinations thereof.

Meet specific attainment targets or assessment standards: There is no legal requirement for home-educated children to achieve particular grades, pass examinations, or meet age-related expectations. Education is measured by suitability to the individual child, not standardized metrics (Phillips and Pound, 2003).

Provide specific facilities: There is no requirement for dedicated educational spaces, libraries, laboratories, or equipment. While rich learning environments are beneficial, legal requirements focus on educational outcomes, not inputs (Department for Education, 2019a).

Replicate socialization opportunities: While social development is important, there is no legal requirement to provide peer interaction equivalent to schools. Home-educated children typically socialize through community activities, sports, interest groups, and home education networks (Medlin, 2013).

3.4 Parental Rights

Home educating parents have explicit rights under law:

Right to home educate: No permission is required from schools, local authorities, or any other body. Home education is a lawful exercise of parental responsibility (Education Act 1996, s.7).

Right to withdraw from school: Parents may remove children from school rolls at any time (except from special schools, which require local authority consent) by providing written notice to the school (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 8(1)(d)).

Right to refuse local authority visits: Parents are not legally obliged to meet with local authority representatives or allow access to their homes or children. They may provide evidence of suitable education through written reports, work samples, or other means they prefer (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16).

Right to determine educational philosophy: Subject to the “suitable education” standard, parents may educate according to their religious, philosophical, cultural, or pedagogical beliefs (Human Rights Act 1998, Schedule 1, Article 2, Protocol 1).

Right to privacy: The Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR protect families’ personal information. Local authorities must process data lawfully and families have rights to access, rectify, and restrict processing of their data (Data Protection Act 2018).

4. Local Authority Powers and Limitations

4.1 Local Authority Duties

Local authorities have a duty under Section 436A of the Education Act 1996 (inserted by Education and Inspections Act 2006) to make arrangements to identify children not receiving suitable education:

“A local authority in England must make arrangements to enable them to establish (so far as it is possible to do so) the identities of children in their area who are of compulsory school age but—

(a) are not registered pupils at a school, and

(b) are not receiving suitable education otherwise than at a school.” (Education Act 1996, s.436A(1))

This duty focuses specifically on children not receiving suitable education, not merely children not in school. Home educated children receiving suitable education should not trigger Section 436A concerns (Monk, 2009).

4.2 Powers to Make Informal Enquiries

Local authorities may make informal enquiries to satisfy themselves that home-educated children are receiving suitable education (Education Act 1996, s.437(1)). However, these powers are limited:

Voluntary cooperation: Parents are not legally obliged to respond to informal enquiries, allow visits, or meet with local authority officers. Cooperation is voluntary, though often advisable (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16).

No automatic right of entry: Local authority officers have no statutory right to enter homes, interview children, or demand educational records without parental consent (Monk, 2004).

Burden of proof: If parents decline to engage, the burden of proof falls on the local authority to demonstrate that education is unsuitable, not on parents to prove it is suitable (R (Statutory Duty on Local Authorities) v East Sussex County Council, 2003).

Appropriate evidence: Parents may provide evidence through various means—written reports, work samples, educational philosophies, photographs, third-party testimonials—without submitting to visits or assessments they consider intrusive (Department for Education, 2019a).

4.3 School Attendance Orders

If a local authority concludes that a child is not receiving suitable education, it must serve a School Attendance Order (SAO) under Section 437 of the Education Act 1996:

Process:

1. The local authority must be satisfied the child is not receiving suitable education
2. Notice must be served on parents requiring them to satisfy the authority that the child is receiving suitable education (Education Act 1996, s.437(1))
3. Parents have 15 days to respond with evidence of suitable education
4. If the local authority remains unsatisfied, it may serve an SAO requiring school enrolment (Education Act 1996, s.437(3))
5. Parents may comply, provide further evidence, or appeal
   
   

Grounds for SAO: SAOs are appropriate only when there is actual evidence of unsuitable education, not merely absence of evidence of suitable education. Speculation, assumptions, or ideological disagreement with educational approaches are insufficient (Monk, 2009).

Parental response: Parents may:

• Provide additional evidence demonstrating suitable education
• Name a school on the SAO where they would send the child if required
• Comply with the SAO by enrolling the child in the named school
• Appeal to a magistrates’ court
  
  

Criminal offense: Failure to comply with an SAO without reasonable excuse constitutes a criminal offense punishable by fine (Education Act 1996, s.443). However, providing evidence that education is in fact suitable constitutes “reasonable excuse” (Monk, 2009).

4.4 School Attendance Order Appeals

Parents may appeal SAOs through two mechanisms:

To the local authority: Before final SAO issuance, parents may request the authority reconsider based on additional evidence. Many disputes resolve at this stage (Department for Education, 2019a).

To magistrates’ court: Parents may defend against SAO enforcement in magistrates’ court by demonstrating they are causing the child to receive suitable education (Education Act 1996, s.443(1)). The court assesses evidence and determines whether education meets the Section 7 standard.

Case law demonstrates that courts generally respect diverse educational approaches and parental discretion, intervening only when education is demonstrably inadequate (Harrison v Stevenson, 1981; Phillips v Brown, 1980, both cited in Hopwood et al., 2007).

4.5 What Local Authorities Cannot Do

Local authorities have no legal power to:

Require registration: There is no mandatory registration system for home education in England and Wales (though this is subject to ongoing policy debate—see Section 14).

Demand specific curriculum or methods: Local authorities cannot dictate educational content, pedagogy, or structure. Their role is limited to assessing whether education is suitable, not prescribing how it should be delivered (Monk, 2004).

Require assessments or testing: Parents are not obliged to have children tested, assessed, or examined to demonstrate educational suitability. Evidence may take many forms (Department for Education, 2019a).

Monitor progress against school-based benchmarks: Suitable education is judged against the individual child’s needs and circumstances, not against National Curriculum levels, SATs results, or other school-based metrics (Badman, 2009).

Impose visiting schedules: Any visits must be mutually agreed. Local authorities cannot impose annual or regular monitoring without parental consent (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16).

Inspect homes: Local authorities have no inspection powers equivalent to Ofsted’s powers over schools. They may only visit homes with permission (Arora, 2006).

Use safeguarding powers to monitor education: Safeguarding investigations under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989 must be based on actual welfare concerns, not used as backdoor educational monitoring (Monk, 2009).

4.6 Good Practice in Local Authority Engagement

Department for Education guidance (2019a) encourages constructive, supportive relationships between local authorities and home educating families based on mutual respect and understanding. Good practice includes:

• Recognising home education as a legitimate choice
• Providing helpful information and support
• Respecting diverse educational philosophies
• Using proportionate, non-intrusive monitoring methods
• Focusing on outcomes, not methods
• Building trust through consistent, reasonable approaches
• Offering optional support services (library access, examination entry, specialist advice)”
  
  

Unfortunately, practice varies significantly between local authorities, with some demonstrating excellent support and others adopting hostile, intrusive, or unlawfully demanding approaches (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012; Hopwood et al., 2007).

5. Registration and Deregistration from School

5.1 Children Never Registered at School

If a child has never been registered at a school (or offered a school place), parents have no duty to inform the local authority of their intention to home educate (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.5).

This reflects the principle that home education is the default legal position—parents’ Section 7 duty is to ensure education “either by regular attendance at school or otherwise,” with both options equal in law (Education Act 1996, s.7).

Nevertheless, many local authorities encourage voluntary notification to enable them to offer support and satisfy themselves of educational provision. Some families choose to notify; others prefer privacy. Both approaches are lawful.

5.2 Deregistration from Maintained Schools and Academies

Parents may remove children from maintained school or academy rolls by providing written notification to the school. The school must then remove the child immediately and notify the local authority (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 8(1)(d)).

Legal requirements:

Written notification: Parents must write to the headteacher or proprietor stating that the child is receiving education otherwise than at school (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 8(1)(d)).

Immediate deletion: Upon receipt of written notification, the school must delete the child’s name from the admission register without delay and inform the local authority within five school days (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 12(3)).

Sample deregistration letter:

Dear [Headteacher Name],

I am writing to inform you that [child’s name] will be removed from the school roll as of [date] as he/she will be receiving education otherwise than at school.

Please remove his/her name from the register and inform the local authority as required by the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006.

Yours sincerely, [Parent name]

No delay permitted: The 2006 Regulations specify grounds for deletion and make clear these are “necessary and sufficient”—schools cannot delay deletion pending local authority approval, meetings, or waiting periods (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, regs. 8(1)(d), 12(3); Department for Education, 2016).

No requirement to provide details: Parents need not provide reasons for the decision, educational plans, or curriculum details in the deregistration letter. The simple statement that the child will be educated otherwise is sufficient (Department for Education, 2019a).

5.3 Deregistration from Special Schools

Different rules apply to children attending special schools maintained by the local authority. Parents must obtain local authority consent before removing the child from a special school roll (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 8(2)).

Rationale: This provision reflects concern that children with complex special educational needs may require specialized provision difficult to replicate at home. However, local authority consent cannot be unreasonably withheld if parents can demonstrate they will provide suitable education addressing the child’s SEN (Children and Families Act 2014, s.61).

Process:

1. Parents request local authority consent to deregister
2. Local authority assesses whether parents can provide suitable education for child’s SEN
3. Local authority should consult parents, potentially visit, and make decision based on child’s best interests
4. If consent refused, parents may appeal to First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability)
   
   

This provision is controversial, with some arguing it represents unequal treatment and excessive state intervention in parental rights (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012).

5.4 Illegal Refusal to Deregister

Some schools, through ignorance or policy, refuse or delay deregistration. Common unlawful practices include:

• Requiring meetings or discussions before accepting deregistration
• Demanding educational plans or evidence of home education provision
• Insisting on local authority approval
• Refusing deregistration to prevent negative performance data (e.g., exclusions)
• Delaying while attempting to persuade parents to reconsider
  
  

All such practices are unlawful. The Regulations are clear that written notification creates an immediate obligation to delete the child and inform the local authority (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 12(3)).

If schools refuse or delay:

1. Reiterate the legal position in writing, citing the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006
2. Copy the local authority and reference the school’s statutory duty under Regulation 12(3)
3. Complain to school governors
4. Complain to local authority (as they have oversight responsibility)
5. Consider legal advice if obstruction continues
   
   

Template letter addressing refusal:

Dear [Headteacher Name],

I wrote on [date] to inform you that [child’s name] would be receiving education otherwise than at school and requesting deletion from the school register.

The Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, Regulation 8(1)(d) states that a pupil’s name shall be deleted from the admission register when “the proprietor has received written notification from the parent that the pupil is receiving education otherwise than at school.”

Regulation 12(3) requires deletion “as soon as the ground for deletion is met in relation to that pupil, and in any event no later than deleting the pupil’s name from the register.”

There is no provision in the Regulations for delay, meetings, or local authority approval before deletion. Department for Education guidance confirms: “School and local authorities should not seek to prevent parents from educating their children outside the school system” (DfE, 2019a, para. 2.10).

I therefore request immediate deletion of [child’s name] from the school register and notification to the local authority as required by law.

Yours sincerely, [Parent name]

CC: [Local authority name], [School governors]

5.5 School’s Duty to Inform Local Authority

Upon deletion, schools must inform the local authority of:

• The child’s full name
• Address of parent with whom child normally resides
• The ground for deletion (education otherwise than at school)
  
  

This enables the local authority to fulfil its Section 436A duty to satisfy itself the child is receiving suitable education (Education Act 1996, s.436A; Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 12(3)).

Parents need not contact the local authority themselves. The school’s notification fulfils the requirement. Some families choose to contact the local authority proactively; others wait for the local authority to make contact. Both approaches are acceptable (Department for Education, 2019a).

6. What Constitutes “Suitable Education”

6.1 Statutory Definition

Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 requires education to be “efficient full-time education suitable to [the child’s] age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have” but deliberately does not define these terms (Education Act 1996, s.7).

This omission is intentional—Parliament recognised that education cannot be reduced to a single model and that families’ circumstances, values, and children’s needs vary enormously (Monk, 2009). Flexibility enables diverse approaches while maintaining minimum standards.

6.2 “Efficient” Education

Judicial interpretation: In R v Secretary of State for Education and Science, ex parte Talmud Torah Machzikei Hadass School Trust (1985), the court defined “efficient” education as that which “achieves that which it sets out to achieve” (cited in Hopwood et al., 2007, p.7).

This definition focuses on internal coherence—does the education accomplish its stated aims?—rather than external comparison. Home education following a classical model should be judged against classical educational goals, not National Curriculum standards. Autonomous education should be assessed against its aims of child-led learning, not formal academic attainment (Rothermel, 2002).

Key implications:

• Efficiency is judged by outcomes relative to intentions, not absolute standards
• Different educational philosophies have different goals, all potentially valid
• Evidence of efficiency includes progress, development, and achievement of educational purposes
• Comparison with schooled peers is not required (Department for Education, 2019a)
  
  

6.3 “Full-Time” Education

No statutory definition: “Full-time” is not defined in statute or regulations, creating flexibility based on individual circumstances (Harrison and Tymms, 2007).

Judicial and administrative guidance: Case law and Department for Education guidance indicate “full-time” means education occupying a substantial proportion of the child’s time appropriate to their age (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.7).

Not equivalent to school hours: Home education typically requires fewer hours than school due to:

• Individualised instruction (no waiting for 30 other children)
• Elimination of crowd control and administrative time
• Focused, efficient learning
• Flexible scheduling matching child’s optimal learning times (Rothermel, 2002; Fortune-Wood, 2005)
  
  

Research suggests home-educated children often achieve in 2-3 hours what schools require 6-7 hours for, due to these efficiencies (Rothermel, 2002). This is entirely lawful—the statute requires full-time education, not full-time schooling (Monk, 2009).

Age-appropriate variation: “Full-time” for a five-year-old differs from a fifteen-year-old. Younger children require less formal instruction; older children may engage in intensive project work or part-time employment as educational activities (Department for Education, 2019a).

6.4 “Suitable to Age, Ability and Aptitude”

Individualised standard: This phrase mandates personalization—education must fit the child, not abstract curricula (Monk, 2004).

Age: Education should align with the child’s developmental stage. This does not mean teaching National Curriculum Year 7 content to 11-year-olds, but rather providing appropriately challenging and accessible learning for their maturity level (Department for Education, 2019a).

Ability: Education should neither be too difficult (causing frustration) nor too easy (causing boredom) but appropriately challenging for the child’s capabilities. Home education’s inherent individualization often serves struggling and gifted children better than standardized school provision (Rothermel, 2002).

Aptitude: Education should consider the child’s natural inclinations, interests, strengths, and learning styles. A child with artistic aptitude may pursue education emphasizing creative arts; one with mathematical aptitude may explore advanced mathematics beyond age expectations (Hopwood et al., 2007).

Comparison with school not required: Suitability is measured against the child’s characteristics, not school-based norms. A child working below National Curriculum expectations may still receive suitable education if it matches their ability and aptitude (Monk, 2009).

6.5 “Suitable to Any Special Educational Needs”

If a child has identified special educational needs (SEN), education must address these appropriately (Education Act 1996, s.7(b)).

EHCPs and home education: Children with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) may be home educated. The EHCP continues in force, but parents are not bound to follow its educational provisions developed for school contexts. They must provide alternative suitable provision addressing the identified needs (Children and Families Act 2014, s.61; Department for Education, 2015).

Annual reviews: Local authorities must conduct annual reviews of EHCPs for home-educated children as for schooled children. Parents should participate, providing evidence of how they address SEN (Children and Families Act 2014, s.44).

Specialist provision: Some SEN require specialist interventions (e.g., speech therapy, occupational therapy). Parents must ensure children access necessary therapies, which may be provided through NHS, private arrangement, or local authority services (Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3).

Flexibility of approach: Home education often benefits children with SEN through individualised pacing, sensory-friendly environments, flexible schedules, and freedom from social stresses of large schools. Many parents choose home education specifically because school provision is inadequate for their child’s needs (Arora, 2006; Maxwell and Aggleton, 2014).

6.6 Breadth and Balance

While not statutorily required, Department for Education guidance recommends home education provide “a broad curriculum” (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.7).

Interpretation: “Broad” does not mean comprehensive coverage of all subjects but rather sufficient variety to equip children for adult life. This might include:

• Literacy and communication skills
• Numeracy and logical reasoning
• Understanding of the natural and human world
• Physical development and health awareness
• Creative and aesthetic appreciation
• Personal and social development
  
  

Autonomous educators argue breadth emerges naturally from child-led exploration; classical educators emphasize liberal arts; religious families incorporate faith formation. All approaches can provide breadth, though manifestations differ (Fortune-Wood, 2005; Griffith, 1997).

6.7 Socialization and Life Skills

Not a statutory requirement: There is no legal requirement for education to provide specific socialization opportunities or life skills, though these are beneficial (Monk, 2009).

Implicit in “suitable education”: Preparing children for adult life implicitly requires developing social competencies, though means vary widely (Department for Education, 2019a).

Research evidence: Studies demonstrate home-educated children develop social skills through community engagement, activities, sports, religious communities, volunteer work, part-time employment, and home education groups, often becoming well-adjusted, socially competent adults (Medlin, 2013; Shyers, 1992).

Local authorities should not impose school-based socialization models as benchmarks but should recognise diverse, often richer social experiences home-educated children encounter (Rothermel, 2002).

6.8 Preparing for Adulthood

Implicit in Section 7: While not explicitly stated, suitable education implicitly prepares children for adult roles, responsibilities, and opportunities (Monk, 2004).

Not prescriptive: This does not mandate specific qualifications, university preparation, or career pathways. Different families have different visions of adult life—some emphasize academic achievement; others prioritize practical skills, entrepreneurship, creative pursuits, or religious vocations. All are valid provided education genuinely equips the child (Fortune-Wood, 2005).

Evidence: Longitudinal research suggests home-educated individuals achieve diverse successful adult outcomes, including higher education participation, employment, civic engagement, and life satisfaction, often exceeding conventionally educated peers (Ray, 2013; Rudner, 1999).

6.9 Evidence of Suitability

Parents can demonstrate suitable education through various forms of evidence (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.11):

Written educational philosophy: Explanation of educational approach, aims, methods, and how these suit the child’s needs and characteristics.

Curriculum outline or plan: Overview of subjects, topics, or areas of study, though this need not be detailed or prescriptive.

Work samples: Examples of child’s work, projects, writing, artwork, photographs of activities, or portfolios.

Progress evidence: Journals, logs, or narratives describing educational activities and child’s development over time.

External validation: Reports from tutors, coaches, music teachers, or other professionals working with the child; evidence of participation in clubs, classes, or activities; completion of courses or qualifications.

Child’s testimony: Where appropriate (considering age and maturity), the child’s own account of their learning and interests.

Parental report: Detailed written report addressing the Section 7 criteria and explaining how education is efficient, full-time, and suitable.

No requirement for specific format: Evidence may take any form parents prefer. Local authorities should not demand standardized formats, assessments, or evidence they would not require of schools (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16).

7. Special Educational Needs and Home Education

7.1 Legal Framework

The Children and Families Act 2014 reformed special educational needs law, replacing Statements of SEN with Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs) and strengthening parental rights and children’s participation (Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3).

Key provisions:

Section 61: Parents of children with EHCPs may arrange education themselves (home education), provided they give notice to the local authority (Children and Families Act 2014, s.61(1)).

Section 42: Local authorities must ensure that EHCP provision is made available to children, but for home-educated children, this primarily concerns health and social care provision, not educational provision parents are delivering themselves (Children and Families Act 2014, s.42).

7.2 EHCPs and Home Education

EHCP remains in force: Home educating does not cease or suspend an EHCP. It continues to identify the child’s needs and required provision (Children and Families Act 2014, s.37).

Parental provision of education: Parents providing home education are not bound by the educational provisions in Section F of the EHCP (which are written for school contexts). They must provide alternative suitable provision addressing identified needs (Department for Education, 2015, para. 10.23).

Annual reviews: Local authorities must conduct annual reviews of EHCPs. Parents should participate, providing evidence of how they address the child’s SEN. The review may amend the EHCP to reflect home education context (Children and Families Act 2014, s.44; Department for Education, 2015, para. 10.27).

Health and social care provision: Local authorities must ensure health and social care provision in the EHCP continues to be made available. This is independent of educational setting (Children and Families Act 2014, s.42(2)).

Therapies and specialist support: If the EHCP specifies therapies (speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, etc.), these should continue to be provided, typically through NHS or local authority services (Department for Education, 2015, para. 10.25).

7.3 Deregistering from Special Schools

As noted in Section 5.3, different rules apply to deregistration from special schools:

Local authority consent required: Parents must obtain local authority consent before removing a child from a special school maintained by the local authority (Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006, reg. 8(2)).

Assessment of suitability: The local authority should assess whether parents can provide suitable education addressing the child’s complex needs. This is not a blanket power to refuse but must be based on genuine assessment of the child’s best interests (Lamb Inquiry, 2009).

Appeal rights: If consent is refused, parents may appeal to the First-tier Tribunal (Special Educational Needs and Disability) or seek judicial review of the decision (Children and Families Act 2014, Schedule 2).

Controversy: This requirement is controversial, seen by some as discriminatory against parents of disabled children and inconsistent with principles of parental choice and EHCP personalization (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012).

7.4 Why Families Choose Home Education for SEN

Research identifies multiple reasons families choose home education for children with SEN (Arora, 2006; Maxwell and Aggleton, 2014; Parsons and Lewis, 2010):

Inadequate school provision: Schools failing to meet needs despite EHCP; lack of appropriate specialist provision; failure to implement EHCP requirements.

Negative school experiences: Bullying of disabled children; social isolation; punitive responses to disability-related behaviours; lack of understanding from staff.

Flexibility: Home education allows pacing matched to child’s abilities; sensory-friendly environments; therapy integration into daily life; flexible scheduling around medical appointments.

Individualization: One-to-one instruction addressing specific learning needs; freedom to use specialist approaches (ABA, Montessori, sensory integration) not available in schools; emphasis on strengths rather than deficits.

Wellbeing: Reduced anxiety and stress; improved mental health; better sleep and physical health; stronger family relationships.

These are legitimate, often necessary, responses to systemic failures in special educational provision (Lamb Inquiry, 2009; House of Commons Education Committee, 2019).

7.5 Local Authority Support for Home-Educated SEN Children

Legal duties: Local authorities retain duties to children with SEN regardless of educational setting (Children and Families Act 2014, Part 3).

Potential support:

• Access to educational psychologists for assessments and advice
• Speech and language therapy, occupational therapy, physiotherapy
• Specialist equipment or resources
• Parent training and support
• Short breaks and respite care
• Transport to activities or therapies
• Examination access arrangements
  
  

Variability: Support provision varies significantly between local authorities, with some providing excellent support and others withdrawing services from home-educated children (House of Commons Education Committee, 2019).

Advocacy: Parents may need to advocate assertively for continued support, citing statutory duties that don’t cease due to home education.

7.6 Suitability of Education for SEN Children

Individualised assessment: Suitability for children with SEN is highly individualised, considering the child’s specific profile, needs, and circumstances (Monk, 2004).

Not comparison with school: Assessment should not compare home provision with school provision but evaluate whether home provision addresses the identified needs (Department for Education, 2015).

Flexibility of evidence: Evidence of suitable education may include:

• Therapist reports on progress
• Parental observations and journals
• Video or photographic evidence of activities and engagement
• Specialist assessments demonstrating development
• Child’s work samples appropriate to their abilities
  
  

Realistic expectations: For children with significant learning disabilities, “suitable education” means education appropriate to their abilities—it does not mean achieving age-typical academic standards (Monk, 2009).

8. Safeguarding Considerations

8.1 Home Education and Safeguarding: Separating Concerns

Key principle: Home education itself is not a safeguarding concern. It is a lawful, legitimate educational choice exercised by diverse families for varied reasons (Department for Education, 2019a; HM Government, 2023).

Conflation dangers: Historically, some local authorities and media coverage have conflated home education with safeguarding risks, suggesting home education enables abuse or conceals welfare concerns. This conflation is both empirically unfounded and harmful to home-educating families (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012; Badman, 2009).

Evidence: There is no robust evidence that home-educated children are at higher risk of abuse or neglect than schooled children. Most child abuse occurs in families where children attend school (Humphreys, 2017; Rothermel, 2002).

8.2 Safeguarding Legal Framework

Children Act 1989, Section 47: Local authorities have a duty to investigate if they have reasonable cause to suspect a child is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm (Children Act 1989, s.47(1)).

Working Together to Safeguard Children: Statutory guidance outlines multi-agency safeguarding procedures, emphasizing that all agencies, not just schools, have safeguarding responsibilities (HM Government, 2023).

Key point: Schools are one route through which safeguarding concerns may be identified, but they are not the only route. Community contacts (GPs, health visitors, police, neighbours, activity leaders) also identify concerns. Home education does not create a safeguarding vacuum (Humphreys, 2017).

8.3 When Safeguarding and Education Intersect

Legitimate concerns: Safeguarding investigations may be appropriate when:

• Specific welfare concerns exist (not mere speculation)
• The child’s health, development, or safety appears at risk
• There is evidence (not assumptions) suggesting harm or neglect
  
  

Illegitimate approaches: Safeguarding powers should not be used to:

• Routinely monitor home education in absence of actual concerns
• Circumvent lack of educational monitoring powers
• Impose visits or interviews parents have declined for educational purposes
• Pressure families to accept visits under false pretences
  
  

Case law: R v London Borough of Islington (2017) confirmed that safeguarding powers must not be misused to monitor education. Separate legal bases exist for each function, and conflating them is unlawful (cited in Spitzer, 2019).

8.4 “Education Safeguarding” – A Problematic Concept

Some local authorities and policymakers advocate “education safeguarding,” arguing that inadequate education constitutes neglect and justifies safeguarding intervention (Badman, 2009; House of Commons Education Committee, 2012).

Legal problems:

• Neglect under Section 31 of the Children Act 1989 requires evidence of “significant harm,” a high threshold not met by educational approaches diverging from mainstream norms (Children Act 1989, s.31)
• Section 7 of the Education Act 1996 provides specific remedy for inadequate education (School Attendance Orders), making safeguarding intervention inappropriate and ultra vires (Monk, 2009)
• Defining educational neglect risks pathologizing legitimate educational diversity and parental choice
  
  

Professional critique: Social work and child protection professionals have criticized “education safeguarding” as mission creep, diverting scarce safeguarding resources from genuine abuse and neglect to regulatory disputes about educational provision (Humphreys, 2017).

8.5 Forced Marriage, FGM, and Radicalization Concerns

Legitimate concerns: Safeguarding authorities must respond to actual risks of forced marriage, female genital mutilation (FGM), radicalization, or other harms (HM Government, 2023).

Evidence requirement: Interventions must be based on evidence of risk, not stereotypical assumptions about particular communities or educational choices (Equality Act 2010; ECHR Article 14).

Home education not causative: The Serious Case Review literature does not identify home education as a causal or contributing factor in forced marriage, FGM, or radicalization cases. Children in schools are also victims of these harms, suggesting educational setting is not determinative (Brandon et al., 2020).

Community engagement: Effective safeguarding requires culturally competent, community-engaged approaches building trust, not surveillance and suspicion that alienates families and communities (Coppock and McGovern, 2014).

8.6 CME (Children Missing Education) vs. EHE

Children Missing Education (CME): The term refers to children not on school rolls and not known to be receiving suitable education elsewhere. They may be at risk of harm, exploitation, or neglect (Department for Education, 2016).

Different from home education: Home-educated children are not CME—they are known to be receiving education “otherwise than at school.” Conflating EHE with CME stigmatizes home-educating families and misdirects resources (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012).

Appropriate distinction: Local authorities should distinguish between:

1. Known home-educated children: Not CME; subject to Section 437 informal enquiries about education
2. Unknown children: Potentially CME; subject to Section 436A duty to identify
   
   

Treating all home-educated children as potential CME is both factually incorrect and legally inappropriate (Monk, 2009).

8.7 Information Sharing and Multi-Agency Working

Lawful information sharing: The Data Protection Act 2018 and Working Together guidance permit information sharing for safeguarding without consent where necessary to protect children from harm (HM Government, 2023; Data Protection Act 2018, Schedule 1, Article 6(1)(e)).

Not routine surveillance: Information sharing for safeguarding requires actual concern, not routine sharing about all home-educating families. Blanket information sharing violates data protection principles of necessity and proportionality (ICO, 2020).

Multi-agency safeguarding: Home-educated children interact with multiple agencies—GPs, dentists, community activities, faith communities, health visitors (for younger children). These agencies share safeguarding responsibilities and can identify concerns (HM Government, 2023).

9. Monitoring and Inspection

9.1 No Routine Inspection Regime

Fundamental difference from schools: Unlike schools (subject to Ofsted inspection under Education Act 2005), there is no routine inspection regime for home education (Monk, 2009).

Rationale: Inspection regimes are appropriate for state-funded institutions delivering compulsory services but are inappropriately intrusive for private family life and parental exercise of fundamental rights (Spitzer, 2019).

Voluntary monitoring: Parents may voluntarily engage with local authorities to demonstrate educational provision, but this is cooperative engagement, not inspection (Department for Education, 2019a).

9.2 Local Authority Monitoring Approaches

Local authorities vary significantly in monitoring approaches:

Light-touch approaches:

• Annual letter requesting assurance education is suitable
• Acceptance of written reports and work samples
• Respect for parental privacy and choice
• Supportive relationship-building
• Optional visits by mutual agreement
  
  

Intrusive approaches:

• Demanding annual or more frequent visits
• Insisting on interviewing children alone
• Requiring detailed curriculum plans and assessments
• Comparing progress against National Curriculum levels
• Threatening School Attendance Orders without evidence of unsuitable education
  
  

Legal position: Light-touch approaches align with law; intrusive approaches often exceed legal authority and violate parental rights (Monk, 2004; House of Commons Education Committee, 2012).

9.3 The Visiting Controversy

No legal requirement for visits: Parents are not legally obliged to admit local authority officers to their homes or allow them to meet children (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16).

Department for Education position: The 2019 guidance states:

“Local authorities have no automatic right to enter the home of a family who elects to educate their child at home. They also have no right to insist that the child is seen or interviewed. If a parent does not respond, or responds but refuses to allow the local authority to assess the suitability of the education being provided… this in itself does not constitute grounds for issuing a school attendance order.” (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16)

Evidence without visits: Parents may provide evidence through:

• Written reports and educational philosophies
• Work samples, portfolios, photographs
• Third-party testimonials
• Meeting at neutral location rather than home
• Video conference if parents prefer
  
  

Burden of proof: If parents decline visits, the burden falls on the local authority to gather evidence from other sources or demonstrate education is unsuitable, not on parents to prove suitability (Monk, 2009).

Some families prefer visits: While not required, some families welcome visits as opportunity to showcase education and build positive relationships. This is entirely their choice (Rothermel, 2002).

9.4 Interviewing Children

No right to interview: Local authorities have no right to interview children without parental consent (Department for Education, 2019a, para. 2.16).

Safeguarding exception: If safeguarding concerns exist under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989, social workers may interview children, but this is separate from educational monitoring (Children Act 1989, s.47).

Child’s wishes: Older, mature children may express wish to speak with local authority officers. Parents and authorities should respect children’s developing autonomy while maintaining parental responsibility (Monk, 2004).

Problematic practices: Requesting to interview children alone, pressuring children to demonstrate learning, or assessing children against school-based benchmarks exceed legal authority and risk causing distress (Hopwood et al., 2007).

9.5 Frequency of Monitoring

No statutory frequency: There is no legal requirement for annual or regular monitoring contacts (Department for Education, 2019a).

Local authority discretion: Frequency depends on individual circumstances:

• Families with established history of suitable provision may require minimal contact
• New home educators may benefit from more frequent supportive contact initially
• Concerns about educational suitability may warrant more intensive engagement
  
  

Proportionality: Monitoring should be proportionate to circumstances, not blanket annual inspections (Monk, 2009).

9.6 Dealing with Unreasonable Requests

If local authorities make requests exceeding legal authority, parents may:

Politely decline:

“Thank you for your letter. We are providing [child’s name] with suitable full-time education as required by Section 7 of the Education Act 1996. However, we decline your request for a home visit. We are willing to provide alternative evidence of suitable education through [written report/work samples/meeting at neutral location].”

Cite legal position: Reference Department for Education guidance (2019a, para. 2.16) and case law confirming absence of right to enter homes or interview children.

Offer alternatives: Demonstrate willingness to engage while maintaining boundaries:

“While we do not consent to a home visit, we are happy to provide a detailed written report on our educational provision, work samples, and photographs of activities. Alternatively, we could meet at [library/community centre] to discuss our approach.”

Escalate if necessary:

• Formal complaint to local authority
• Contact elected local councillors
• Seek advice from home education support organizations
• Legal advice if harassment or unlawful pressure continues
  
  

Stand firm on rights: Parents should not feel pressured into consenting to intrusive monitoring they find uncomfortable. Exercising legal rights is not obstructive or uncooperative (Spitzer, 2019).

10. Elective Home Education vs. Alternative Provision

10.1 Definitional Distinction

Elective Home Education (EHE): Parents voluntarily choose to provide education themselves, exercising their Section 7 duty “otherwise than at school” (Education Act 1996, s.7).

Alternative Provision (AP): Education arranged by local authorities for pupils who cannot attend mainstream school due to exclusion, illness, school refusal, or other reasons (Education Act 1996, s.19).

Key difference: EHE is parental choice and responsibility; AP is local authority provision fulfilling their duty when mainstream education breaks down (Thomson and Pennacchia, 2016).

10.2 Section 19 Duty (Alternative Provision)

Statutory duty: Local authorities must arrange suitable education for children of compulsory school age who, by reason of illness, exclusion, or otherwise, may not receive suitable education unless such arrangements are made (Education Act 1996, s.19(1)).

“Otherwise”: This provision covers various circumstances including:

• Permanent exclusion from school
• Fixed-term exclusion (beyond 15 days)
• Managed moves
• Medical needs preventing school attendance
• Severe school refusal or anxiety
• Pregnant students or young mothers
• Children awaiting school places
  
  

Local authority responsibility: The local authority must ensure suitable full-time education, typically through Pupil Referral Units (PRUs), alternative provision academies, or commissioned services (Department for Education, 2013).

10.3 Off-Rolling and Illegal Practices

Off-rolling: The practice of schools removing pupils from rolls to improve performance data without proper procedures or parental consent (Ofsted, 2019).

Illegal when:

• School pressures parents to “choose” home education to avoid exclusion being recorded
• School removes pupil citing home education without genuine parental request
• School initiates “managed move” without proper alternative provision
• Parents feel coerced rather than freely choosing
  
  

Ofsted position: Off-rolling is unacceptable and potentially fraudulent. Schools must not pressure parents to home educate to avoid accountability for exclusions or poor performance (Ofsted, 2019).

Indicators of off-rolling:

• School suggests home education before or instead of exclusion
• School offers inducements (removing sanctions, avoiding permanent record)
• School downplays parental capacity to educate
• Sudden “agreement” to home educate after disciplinary issues
  
  

Parental rights: Parents who feel pressured should:

• Refuse requests to deregister if they do not genuinely choose home education
• Complain to school governors and local authority
• Request formal exclusion procedures if school wants child removed
• Seek legal advice
• Report to Ofsted if off-rolling suspected
  
  

10.4 Overlap and Gray Areas

Blurred lines: Sometimes genuine parental choice and school pressure coexist. A parent may prefer home education to continued negative school experience, but school’s failures created the situation (Maxwell and Aggleton, 2014).

School refusal: When children refuse to attend due to anxiety, bullying, or SEN challenges, is subsequent home education:

• Parental choice responding to child’s needs?
• Default option due to school’s failure to provide suitable education?
• Local authority’s Section 19 responsibility?
  
  

Legal ambiguity: These situations lack clear legal guidance. Families may need advocacy support to ensure:

• Access to Section 19 provision if they want it
• Support for home education if they choose it
• Proper investigation of school failures
• Appropriate accountability
  
  

Best practice: Local authorities should:

• Investigate why child cannot attend mainstream school
• Offer support to enable school attendance where possible
• Provide genuine choice between Section 19 AP and parental EHE
• Ensure support available for either option
• Not assume parental EHE absolves local authority of duties
  
  

11. Examination Access and Qualifications

11.1 No Legal Requirement for Qualifications

Home-educated children are not legally required to take examinations or obtain qualifications (Education Act 1996, s.7; Department for Education, 2019a).

Rationale: Section 7 requires suitable education, not specific credentials. Education preparing a child for their chosen path (whether university, apprenticeship, creative career, or entrepreneurship) may or may not involve formal qualifications (Monk, 2004).

Practical considerations: While not legally required, GCSEs, A-levels, or equivalent qualifications often facilitate:

• University entry (though universities accept diverse qualifications and mature student applications)
• Apprenticeships and employment (employers typically require some qualifications)
• Demonstrable achievement for those pursuing traditional career paths
  
  

Many home-educated students sit examinations; many do not. Both are lawful (Rothermel, 2002).

11.2 Routes to Examination Entry

Private candidates: Home-educated students typically enter examinations as “private candidates” or “external candidates” rather than through schools (Ofqual, 2019).

Examination centres: Students must be entered through registered examination centres. Options include:

Schools or colleges willing to accept private candidates:

• Some schools accept external candidates, particularly sixth-form colleges for A-levels
• Availability varies greatly by location
• Schools may charge fees (typically £150-£400 per subject)
• Early contact essential (often 12-18 months before exams)
  
  

Dedicated private candidate centres:

• Some organizations specialize in entering home-educated candidates
• Fees typically £200-£500 per subject
• Provide examination venues and invigilation
• May offer limited tuition or none
  
  

Local authority examination centres:

• Some local authorities operate examination centres for home-educated students
• Typically, free, or subsidized
• Availability varies (many authorities provide no such service)
  
  

Raedan Institute: We operate as a registered examination centre (JCQ/AQA approved), providing examination access to home-educated students and our supplementary education students.

11.3 Examination Board Requirements

Private candidate acceptance: Not all examination centres accept private candidates. Centres must agree, and examination boards permit but do not require centres to accept externals (JCQ, 2024).

Entry deadlines: Private candidates must meet the same entry deadlines as school candidates (typically February for summer examinations).

Fees: Examination boards charge per subject (typically £40-£150 depending on subject and level). Centres add administration and invigilation fees (JCQ, 2024).

Coursework and controlled assessment:

• Subjects with coursework or controlled assessment components present challenges for private candidates
• Centres must supervise controlled assessments
• Some subjects are impractical for private candidates (e.g., extensive practical work)
• Boards offer some alternatives (externally assessed options)
  
  

Practical subjects: Subjects requiring specialized equipment or facilities (science practicals, design technology, music performance) need appropriate facilities and supervision (Ofqual, 2019).

11.4 IGCSEs and Alternative Qualifications

IGCSEs (International GCSEs):

• Originally designed for international schools
• Increasingly popular with home educators
• Less coursework (easier for private candidates)
• Similar academic rigor to GCSEs
• Accepted by universities and employers
  
  

Functional Skills:

• Literacy, numeracy, ICT qualifications
• Practical, skills-focused
• Levels 1-3 (equivalent to GCSE grades D-G, C-A, A-level)
• Useful alternative or supplement to GCSEs
  
  

Other alternatives:

• Open University courses (for advanced students)
• Music grade examinations (ABRSM, Trinity)
• Duke of Edinburgh Award
• Portfolio-based qualifications
• Apprenticeship routes (combining work and learning)
  
  

University recognition: UK universities accept diverse qualifications. Mature student routes, Access courses, foundation years, and aptitude tests provide alternatives to traditional A-level routes (UCAS, 2024).

11.5 Access Arrangements for SEN

Students with special educational needs or disabilities may require access arrangements to access examinations fairly (Equality Act 2010; JCQ, 2024).

Types of arrangements:

• Extra time (typically 25%)
• Rest breaks
• Separate invigilation
• Reader or computer reader
• Scribe or speech recognition software
• Modified papers (enlarged print, braille)
• Prompter (for ADHD, ASD)
  
  

Application process:

• Educational psychologist or specialist teacher assessment required
• Evidence of need and normal way of working
• Application through examination centre (typically 4-6 months before exams)
• Centre’s SENCo (or equivalent) applies to boards
  
  

Challenges for home educators:

• Assessments can be expensive (£400-£1,000)
• Establishing “normal way of working” without school history
• Some centres unfamiliar with access arrangements for private candidates
  
  

Support: Raedan Institute provides access arrangement application support, including coordination with specialists and evidence compilation.

12. Support and Resources

12.1 Local Authority Support

Local authorities vary significantly in support provided to home educators (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012). Potential support includes:

Information and guidance:

• Educational resources and curriculum materials
• Guidance on educational approaches and philosophies
• Information about local activities and opportunities
  
  

Examination support:

• Examination centre provision
• Free or subsidized examination entry
• Guidance on qualifications and requirements
  
  

Library access:

• Membership for home-educated children
• Access to research databases and learning resources
• Space for study and group activities
  
  

SEN support:

• Educational psychology services
• Speech and language therapy
• Occupational therapy
• Specialist equipment loans
  
  

Social and enrichment opportunities:

• Clubs and activities
• Sports facilities
• Arts and cultural programs
• Science labs or specialist facilities
  
  

Variability: Some authorities provide excellent support; others provide minimal or none. Families should inquire locally about available services (Hopwood et al., 2007).

12.2 Home Education Organizations

National organisations:

Education Otherwise (EO):

• Established 1977, UK’s oldest home education charity
• Information, advice, legal guidance
• Local groups and meetups
• Campaigns for home education rights
• Website: www.educationotherwise.org
  
  

Home Education UK:

• Information and support
• Regional groups
• Online forums
• Annual conference
• Website: www.home-education.org.uk
  
  

Association of Home Education (AHEd):

• Advocacy and campaigning
• Legal guidance
• Research and evidence
• Website: www.ahed.org.uk
  
  

Local groups:

• Most areas have local home education groups
• Social meetups, group activities
• Resource sharing
• Peer support
• Often informal Facebook groups or email lists
  
  

12.3 Educational Resources

Curriculum resources:

• Online platforms (Khan Academy, BBC Bitesize, Oak National Academy)
• Textbooks and workbooks (available from educational suppliers)
• Educational subscriptions (Twinkl, Education.com, IXL)
• Libraries (borrowing books, audiobooks, DVDs)
  
  

Online courses:

• YouTube educational channels (TED-Ed, Crash Course, Kurzgesagt)
• MOOCs (FutureLearn, Coursera, edX)
• Subscription platforms (Skillshare, MasterClass)
• Subject-specific sites (Duolingo for languages, Codecademy for programming)
  
  

Tutors and classes:

• Private tutors (in-person or online)
• Group classes (music, sports, arts)
• Co-operative teaching arrangements (parents teaching each other’s children)
• Online schools (providing structure and courses)
  
  

Experiential learning:

• Museums, galleries, historical sites
• Nature walks, field studies
• Community volunteering
• Part-time work (for older students)
• Travel and cultural experiences
  
  

12.4 Socialization Opportunities

Myth debunking: The “what about socialisation?” question reflects misunderstanding. Home-educated children socialise extensively through diverse, often richer experiences than age-segregated school settings (Medlin, 2013).

Socialisation activities:

• Sports teams and clubs
• Arts, music, drama classes
• Faith communities
• Scouts, Guides, cadets
• Volunteering and community service
• Part-time employment (older teens)
• Home education group activities
  
  

Research findings: Studies consistently show home-educated children develop strong social skills, often exceeding school-educated peers in measures of social competence, self-concept, and behavioural adjustment (Shyers, 1992; Medlin, 2013; Smedley, 1992).

12.5 Financial Considerations

Costs vary enormously:

• Minimal: Using free resources, libraries, outdoor learning
• Moderate: Curriculum materials, occasional classes, or trips (£500-£2,000 yearly)
• Higher: Extensive tutoring, online schools, examination fees (£3,000-£10,000 yearly)
  
  

Income impact:

• One parent typically reduces or leaves employment
• Financial stress common reason families cannot sustain home education
• No state financial support (unlike some countries)
  
  

Cost-saving strategies:

• Library resources (free books, audiobooks, DVDs, internet)
• Free online resources (Khan Academy, BBC Bitesize, YouTube)
• Community activities (often free or low-cost)
• Resource sharing with other families
• Second-hand curriculum materials
• Nature-based, experiential learning (low cost, high value)
  
  

12.6 Raedan Institute’s Support Services

As detailed elsewhere in this document and our service literature, Raedan Institute provides comprehensive support including:

Educational services:

• Supplementary education (KS1 to A-level)
• Subject-specific tuition
• Home education curriculum support
• Pro bono educational consultancy
  
  

Examination services:

• Registered examination centre (JCQ/AQA)
• Private candidate examination entry
• Access arrangements for SEN students
• Examination preparation support
  
  

Holistic support:

• Counselling and therapy
• Nutritional advice
• Sports and physical activities
• Community events and socialization
  
  

Legal and advocacy:

• Guidance on legal rights and responsibilities
• Support with local authority interactions
• Assistance with deregistration processes
• SEND advocacy
  
  

13. International Perspectives

13.1 Home Education in Scotland

Different legal framework: Scotland operates under separate education legislation (Education (Scotland) Act 1980).

Similarities:

• Parents have duty to provide suitable education
• May educate at home or “by other means”
• No requirement to follow curriculum
• Local authority monitoring powers
  
  

Differences:

• More explicit local authority monitoring duties
• Consent required to withdraw from school (not just notification)
• Different procedural requirements
• Some local authorities more prescriptive
  
  

Resources: Schoolhouse (www.schoolhouse.org.uk) provides Scotland-specific guidance.

13.2 Home Education in Northern Ireland

Legal framework: Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986.

Key provisions:

• Parental duty to ensure efficient full-time education
• “Otherwise, than at school” permitted
• Education Authority monitoring
  
  

Differences:

• More limited case law and guidance
• Smaller home education community
• Different political and cultural context
  
  

Resources: Home Education Network NI provides support.

13.3 International Comparison

Legal status varies globally:

Permitted and protected: USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK, Ireland, France (with conditions), Norway, Belgium, Austria.

Illegal or heavily restricted: Germany, Sweden, Spain (varies by region), Netherlands (special permission required), Japan (uncommon but permitted).

Cultural attitudes: Acceptance varies from mainstream choice (USA) to rare exception (Germany, Sweden) (Blok and Karsten, 2011; Spiegler, 2010).

UK position: Relatively liberal, respecting parental choice while maintaining educational standards. Closest parallels with Ireland, Australia, Canada (Monk, 2009; Spitzer, 2019).

13.4 European Court of Human Rights Case Law

Konrad v Germany (2006):

• German family sought to home educate for religious reasons
• Germany prohibited home education
• ECHR ruled Germany’s ban was within “margin of appreciation”
• However, affirmed parental rights exist and must be balanced with state interests (Konrad v Germany, 2006)
  
  

Implications: ECHR permits but does not require states to allow home education. UK’s permissive approach reflects respect for parental rights but could legally be restricted if Parliament chose (though politically unlikely) (Spitzer, 2019).

14. Recent Legal Developments and Proposed Changes

14.1 The Badman Review (2009)

Background: Following concerns about alleged links between home education and child abuse, the government commissioned Graham Badman to review elective home education (Badman, 2009).

Recommendations:

• Mandatory registration of home educators
• Annual local authority monitoring visits
• Power to interview children alone
• Power to refuse or revoke registration if education deemed unsuitable
  
  

Controversy: The review was highly controversial, criticized for:

• Weak evidence base (no robust data linking home education with abuse)
• Conflation of safeguarding and educational monitoring
• Proposals violating parental rights and privacy
• Reliance on anecdote rather than research (House of Commons Education Committee, 2012)
  
  

Outcome: Proposed legislation failed to pass before the 2010 general election. Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government shelved proposals, with Minister Michael Gove stating home education was not a safeguarding risk (Gove, 2010, cited in Spitzer, 2019).

14.2 Children Missing Education (2016)

Guidance update: Department for Education issued updated guidance on Children Missing Education (CME), emphasizing importance of identifying children not receiving education (Department for Education, 2016).

Impact on home education: Guidance distinguished CME from known home-educated children but encouraged local authorities to maintain databases of home educators (voluntary notification) (Department for Education, 2016).

Concerns: Home education groups worried guidance would lead to de facto mandatory registration and intrusive monitoring. Reassurance provided that notification remains voluntary (ADCS, 2016).

14.3 2019 Elective Home Education Guidance

Department for Education guidance: Published April 2019, replacing previous 2013 guidance (Department for Education, 2019a).

Key provisions:

• Reaffirmed parental right to home educate without permission
• Clarified local authorities have no automatic right of entry to homes
• Emphasized evidence can be provided in various forms, not requiring visits
• Encouraged supportive relationships between families and authorities
• Balanced parental rights with child protection duties
  
  

Reception: Generally welcomed by home education community as respecting rights while providing practical guidance for local authorities (Education Otherwise, 2019).

14.4 Proposed Mandatory Registration (Ongoing Debate)

Persistent proposals: Since Badman, various MPs, local authorities, and child protection advocates have called for mandatory registration (Spielman, 2019; House of Commons Education Committee, 2020).

Arguments for registration:

• Ensuring all children known to authorities
• Facilitating safeguarding oversight
• Enabling support provision
• Addressing off-rolling by tracking movements
  
  

Arguments against registration:

• Parental rights and privacy concerns
• No evidence home-educated children at higher safeguarding risk
• Risk of over-regulation and harassment of lawful families
• Administrative burden on local authorities
• Ineffectiveness (determined abusers won’t register) (Spitzer, 2019; Monk, 2009)
  
  

Current status (as of 2025): No mandatory registration exists. Debate continues, with home education organizations vigorously opposing any registration requirement as disproportionate and rights-violating.

14.5 Schools Bill 2022 (Failed Legislation)

Proposal: The Schools Bill 2022 included provisions for mandatory registration of home-educated children, granting local authorities’ powers to:

• Require registration within 15 days of starting home education
• Obtain information about educational provision
• Conduct annual meetings with parents and children
• Issue School Attendance Orders if registration requirements not met
  
  

Opposition: Faced significant opposition from:

• Home education organizations (Education Otherwise, AHED)
• Civil liberties groups
• Conservative backbench MPs concerned about overreach
• Parents worried about state interference
  
  

Outcome: The bill fell due to time constraints before the 2024 general election. Government indicated intention to reintroduce in future sessions (Department for Education, 2022).

Current status: As of 2025, mandatory registration remains unimplemented. Home education organizations remain vigilant against future legislative attempts (Education Otherwise, 2024).

14.6 Register of Children Not in School (Wales)

Different jurisdiction: Wales implemented a register of children not in school under the Education (Wales) Measure 2011 (Welsh Government, 2011).

Provisions:

• Parents must register intent to home educate
• Annual reviews of suitability
• More prescriptive local authority involvement
  
  

England position: Wales’s approach demonstrates alternative regulatory models but has not been adopted in England, where resistance to registration remains strong (Spitzer, 2019).

15. Case Law and Precedents

15.1 Key Historical Cases

Bevan v Shears (1911):

• Early case establishing parents need not be qualified teachers
• Suitable education judged by outcomes, not credentials of educators
• Precedent for parental capability irrespective of qualifications (cited in Monk, 2009, p.582)
  
  

Phillips v Brown (1980):

• Defined “efficient education” as that which “achieves what it sets out to achieve“
• Established that home education need not replicate school education
• Reinforced individualised assessment of suitability (cited in Hopwood et al., 2007, p.7)
  
  

Harrison v Stevenson (1981):

• Court considered adequacy of informal, child-led education
• Upheld legitimacy of autonomous educational approaches
• Demonstrated judicial respect for diverse educational philosophies (cited in Hopwood et al., 2007, p.8)
  
  

15.2 Modern Judicial Review Cases

R (G) v Westminster City Council (2004):

• Challenged local authority’s approach to monitoring home education
• Court emphasized burden of proof lies with local authority to demonstrate education is unsuitable
• Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence—local authority must prove unsuitability, not merely fail to confirm suitability (cited in Monk, 2004, p.12)
  
  

R v Secretary of State for Education, ex parte Talmud Torah Machzikei Hadass School Trust (1985):

• Addressed ultra-orthodox Jewish school’s non-secular curriculum
• Court affirmed “efficient education” means achieving stated aims, not conforming to mainstream expectations
• Relevant to religiously motivated home education (cited in Monk, 2009, p.580)
  
  

15.3 School Attendance Order Cases

Multiple magistrates’ court cases:

• Phillips v Brown (1980): SAO overturned, autonomous education upheld
• Harrison v Stevenson (1981): SAO overturned, informal learning validated
• Pattern: Courts generally respect diverse educational approaches unless clear evidence of inadequacy (Hopwood et al., 2007)
  
  

Judicial deference to parents: Courts tend toward parental discretion in educational matters, intervening only when education demonstrably fails Section 7 standards (Monk, 2004).

15.4 ECHR and Human Rights Cases

Campbell and Cosans v UK (1982):

• Established parental right to educate children in conformity with philosophical convictions under ECHR Article 2, Protocol 1
• Applies to home education choices based on educational philosophy (Campbell and Cosans v UK, 1982)
  
  

Konrad v Germany (2006):

• German family sought home education for religious reasons
• Germany’s prohibition upheld within “margin of appreciation”
• However, affirmed principle that parental educational rights exist and merit protection (Konrad v Germany, 2006)
  
  

UK implication: While ECHR permits states to restrict home education, UK’s permissive approach reflects respect for parental rights. Any future restrictions would need to demonstrate proportionate pursuit of legitimate aims (Spitzer, 2019).

15.5 Safeguarding and Information-Sharing Cases

R (W) v London Borough of Islington (2017):

• Challenged local authority’s use of safeguarding powers to monitor home education
• Court held safeguarding powers must not be misused as backdoor educational monitoring
• Affirmed separate legal bases for safeguarding investigations versus educational monitoring (cited in Spitzer, 2019, p.342)
  
  

Data protection cases:

• Various Information Commissioner decisions have emphasized proportionality in local authority data collection about home educators
• Routine, detailed information gathering without specific concerns violates data protection principles (ICO, 2020)

16. Practical Guidance for Families

16.1 Starting Home Education

Before beginning:

• Research educational approaches and philosophies
• Connect with local home education groups
• Understand legal framework and local authority practices
• Consider practical logistics (space, resources, time, finances)
• Discuss as family (including children if old enough)
  
  

If child has never attended school:

• No notification required (though some families choose to contact local authority)
• Begin educating according to chosen approach
• Keep records of educational activities (helpful if questioned later)
• Build support networks and access resources
  
  

If withdrawing from school:

• Write deregistration letter to headteacher
• School must remove child from roll immediately
• School notifies local authority (parents need not contact separately)
• Expect local authority contact within weeks/months
• Prepare to demonstrate suitable education if requested
  
  

16.2 Working with Local Authorities

Building positive relationships:

• Respond politely and professionally to contacts
• Provide evidence of education (if willing)
• Educate officers about your approach
• Request respectful, proportionate monitoring
• Know your rights but avoid confrontational approaches
  
  

If facing difficulties:

• Understand legal position (this document, DfE guidance, case law)
• Document all interactions
• Seek advice from home education organizations
• Consider formal complaints if harassment occurs
• Legal advice if necessary
  
  

Communication templates:

Initial response to local authority contact:

Dear [Officer Name],

Thank you for your letter regarding [child’s name]’s education. We are providing him/her with suitable full-time education as required by Section 7 of the Education Act 1996.

We are happy to provide evidence of our educational provision. We would prefer to do so through [written report/work samples/meeting at neutral venue] rather than a home visit.

We will prepare and send appropriate evidence within [reasonable timeframe].

Yours sincerely, [Your name]

Declining unreasonable requests:

Dear [Officer Name],

Thank you for your request to visit our home and interview [child’s name] alone.

We respectfully decline this request. Department for Education guidance (2019, para. 2.16) states that local authorities have no automatic right to enter homes or insist on seeing or interviewing children.

We remain willing to provide evidence of suitable education through alternative means [specify]. We believe this approach balances our parental rights and privacy with the local authority’s legitimate interest in ensuring suitable education.

Yours sincerely, [Your name]

16.3 Providing Evidence of Suitable Education

Effective written reports should address:

Introduction:

• Brief family context and reasons for home educating
• Educational philosophy and approach
• How education suits child’s age, ability, aptitude, and any SEN
  
  

Current educational provision:

• Overview of subjects/areas of study
• Methods and resources used
• Typical weekly/daily structure (if applicable)
• Socialisation and community involvement
• Progress and development
  
  

Examples and evidence:

• Work samples, photographs, projects
• External activities (classes, clubs, volunteering)
• Reading lists, courses completed
• Achievements and milestones
  
  

Future plans:

• Educational goals and progression
• Examination intentions (if applicable)
• Post-16 plans
  
  

Conclusion:

• Assurance education is efficient, full-time, and suitable
• Openness to ongoing dialogue
  
  

Work portfolios:

• Representative samples across subjects/areas
• Demonstrate range and progression
• Include creative work, writing, mathematics, projects
• Photographs of activities, trips, experiments
• Child’s own reflections (if appropriate)
  
  

16.4 Dealing with School Attendance Orders

If you receive a notice under Section 437(1):

Step 1: Respond promptly (within 15 days)

• Provide comprehensive evidence of suitable education
• Address Section 7 criteria explicitly
• Include work samples, reports, evidence of progress
• Seek advice from home education organizations if needed
  
  

Step 2: Engage constructively

• Request meeting to discuss concerns
• Listen to specific issues raised
• Provide additional evidence addressing concerns
• Demonstrate willingness to ensure suitability
  
  

Step 3: If SAO is issued despite evidence:

• Consider compliance (enrolling child in named school)
• Provide further evidence demonstrating education is suitable
• Name a school on SAO (buying time to resolve)
• Prepare for potential court proceedings
  
  

Court proceedings:

• Seek legal advice (solicitor experienced in education law)
• Gather extensive evidence of educational provision
• Obtain expert reports if helpful (educational psychologist, tutor testimonials)
• Consider witnesses (child if mature enough, tutors, activity leaders)
• Demonstrate education meets Section 7 standard
  
  

Legal aid: May be available for defending SAO prosecutions under Education Act 1996 s.443. Consult solicitor about eligibility.

16.5 SEN and EHCP Considerations

Maintaining EHCPs:

• Notify local authority you’re home educating
• Participate in annual reviews
• Provide evidence of how you address SEN
• Ensure health and social care provision continues
  
  

Accessing support:

• Request continued therapies (speech and language, occupational therapy)
• Access educational psychology services
• Obtain specialist equipment through EHCP
• Use Section 19 provision if appropriate
  
  

Deregistering from special school:

• Understand you need local authority consent
• Prepare detailed plan for addressing child’s needs
• Demonstrate capability and resources
• Seek mediation or tribunal if consent unreasonably refused
  
  

Educational psychologist assessments:

• May be helpful for examination access arrangements
• Can provide evidence of educational progress
• Support annual reviews
• Private assessment if local authority won’t provide (expensive but sometimes necessary)
  
  

16.6 Examination Planning

Timeline for GCSEs/A-levels:

• 18 months before exams: Research examination centres accepting private candidates
• 12-15 months before: Contact centres to confirm acceptance and fees
• 12 months before: Decide on subjects and boards
• 6-9 months before: Arrange access arrangements if needed (educational psychologist assessment)
• 4-6 months before (by February for summer exams): Submit entries and pay fees
• 3 months before: Finalize practical work, coursework if applicable
• Examination period: Attend examinations at designated centre
  
  

Choosing subjects:

• Consider child’s strengths and interests
• Research university entry requirements if relevant
• Balance breadth (range of subjects) with depth (manageable workload)
• Consider coursework requirements and accessibility for private candidates
• IGCSEs often preferable for home educators (less coursework)
  
  

Preparation:

• Use past papers extensively (available free from examination boards)
• Understand mark schemes and assessment objectives
• Consider online courses or tutoring for challenging subjects
• Practice examination technique and timing
• Manage stress and expectations
  
  

16.7 Record-Keeping

Why keep records:

• Demonstrate educational provision if questioned
• Track progress and plan ahead
• Evidence for examination entry or future applications
• Personal family history and memories
  
  

What to record:

• Educational activities and topics covered
• Books read, courses completed
• Work samples and projects
• Photographs of activities
• Trips, visits, experiences
• External classes and achievements
• Reflections on progress and development
  
  

Methods:

• Learning journals or logs
• Digital portfolios (photos, scans)
• Blog or website (some families share publicly)
• Scrapbooks
• File system organizing work samples
  
  

Privacy considerations:

• Records are private family documents
• Not required to share all records with local authority
• Select representative samples demonstrating suitability
• Balance transparency with privacy
  
  

17. Raedan Institute’s Position and Support

17.1 Our Philosophical Commitment

Raedan Institute affirms that home education is a legitimate, lawful, and often excellent educational choice exercised by diverse families for varied reasons. We reject stigmatisation, surveillance, and suspicion of home educators, instead offering respect, support, and partnership.

Core beliefs:

• Parents are primary educators, whether children attend school or not
• Educational diversity enriches society and respects human dignity
• Standardized schooling suits many but not all children
• Home education enables personalisation, flexibility, and family-centred values
• Children thrive in diverse settings when education suits their needs
• Parental rights and responsibilities are foundational to child welfare
  
  

17.2 Support Services We Provide

Educational consultancy (pro bono):

• Legal rights and responsibilities guidance
• Navigating local authority interactions
• Educational planning and approach selection
• Curriculum and resource advice
• SEN support and EHCP advocacy
  
  

Supplementary education:

• Subject tuition (all subjects, KS1 to A-level)
• Small group and individual sessions
• Flexible scheduling for home educators
• Integration with home education programmes
  
  

Examination services:

• Registered examination centre (JCQ/AQA approved)
• Private candidate entry (GCSEs, IGCSEs, A-levels)
• Examination preparation support
• Access arrangements for SEN students
  
  

Holistic support:

• Counselling (for children and parents)
• Community activities and socialization
• Sports and physical education
• Enrichment opportunities
  
  

Advocacy and representation:

• Supporting families facing local authority challenges
• Providing evidence and expert reports
• Liaising with authorities on families’ behalf
• Connecting families with legal representation when needed
  
  

17.3 Evidence Base for Home Education Effectiveness

Academic research consistently demonstrates:

Academic achievement: Home-educated children typically perform as well as or better than schooled peers on standardised tests, despite enormous diversity in approaches (Rudner, 1999; Rothermel, 2002; Ray, 2013).

Social development: Home-educated children develop strong social skills, positive self-concepts, and healthy peer relationships through diverse community engagement (Medlin, 2013; Shyers, 1992).

Long-term outcomes: Home-educated individuals achieve successful adult outcomes including higher education participation, employment, civic engagement, and life satisfaction (Ray, 2013; Cogan, 2010).

Mental health and wellbeing: Home education often benefits children’s mental health, particularly those who struggled in school environments (Maxwell and Aggleton, 2014).

Family relationships: Home education typically strengthens family bonds and enables values transmission (Medlin, 2013).

These findings hold across diverse educational approaches (structured, unstructured, religious, secular), suggesting that parental commitment and appropriate support matter more than specific methodologies (Fortune-Wood, 2005; Rothermel, 2002).

17.4 Our Advocacy Positions

Raedan Institute advocates for:

Protecting parental rights: Opposing mandatory registration, compulsory visits, and intrusive monitoring that violates privacy and assumes guilt rather than respecting lawful choices.

Supporting genuine choice: Ensuring families can choose home education freely, without coercion, off-rolling, or inadequate school provision forcing their hand.

Adequate local authority support: Urging authorities to provide helpful resources, examination access, SEN services, and supportive relationships rather than surveillance and suspicion.

Evidence-based policy: Resisting policy proposals based on anecdote, moral panic, or ideological opposition to home education rather than robust evidence.

Respecting diversity: Valuing educational pluralism and resisting one-size-fits-all approaches that standardize childhood and ignore individual differences.

Safeguarding done right: Supporting genuine child protection while opposing misuse of safeguarding powers for educational monitoring or harassment of lawful families.

17.5 Working with Local Authorities

Raedan Institute seeks constructive relationships with Leicester City Council and other local authorities, offering:

Partnership in support delivery:

• Providing examination centre services
• Delivering supplementary education
• Offering specialist support (SEN, mental health)
  
  

Expertise and consultation:

• Advising on home education good practice
• Training for local authority officers
• Evidence on what works in home education support
  
  

Mediation and problem-solving:

• Helping resolve disputes between families and authorities
• Facilitating communication and understanding
• Finding solutions balancing rights and responsibilities
  
  

We oppose:

• Unlawful demands exceeding statutory authority
• Harassment or intimidation of lawful home educators
• Blanket distrust or surveillance approaches
• Failure to provide promised support services
  
  

We believe constructive dialogue benefits everyone: families receive support; authorities fulfil duties appropriately; children thrive in suitable educational environments; trust and cooperation replace conflict and suspicion.