Present
ERO : Jenny Clark, National Manager Public Affairs
Rob Williamson, Senior Review Officer
NCHENZ : Stewart Andrews (AHE)
Kay & Marlon Besuyen, (CHEF)
Craig Smith(Hefnet)
Penny Bilton
Apologies
Dr. Graham Stoop (Chief Review Officer)
Erena Fussell (NCHENZ)
Christchurch Home Educators (CHE)
Statistics of reviews pre/post changes
These should be available in MOE annual reports. ERO doesn’t keep statistic any more.
Results of homeschooling reviews
NCHENZ – assume that the decrease in homeschooling reviews was due to a cut back on review funding.
ERO cuts decided by government not ERO. Over the years it has been seen that, with few exceptions, homeschooling is low risk and carried out in accordance with the terms of the exemption. The exemption and review processes are separate. It is the MOE who approve, decline or cancel an exemption, not the ERO’s role.
ERO funded to undertake reviews of around 35 homeschooling programmes a year these may be within one family. These reviews result from a request from the MOE or from complaints directly to the Chief Review officer (CRO) Dr. Graham Stoop he has the prerogative to undertake such reviews if he thinks they are feasible and viable.
If an exemption is declined the applicant has the right under the Education Act to request the CRO to review the exemption application the MOE’s decision can be overturned. It can be only a paper exercise if the discrepancies are clear, or may require a visit to the family. Not a formal review. The criterion for the ERO decision is that the child be taught as regularly and as well as in a registered school. ERO is aware that the programme doesn’t need to follow the national curriculum, but they look for aspects of numeracy and literacy, essential learning areas. The regularity issue can cause problems. Rob’s experience is that homeschooling applicants are resilient and tenacious in how they satisfy the requirements in this area. ERO takes into account the one-to-one small group situation of learning.
NCHENZ in a recent meeting with MOE in Auckland the emphasis was on more information required rather than a straight up rejection of application. Impression from MOE is that since blanket reviews have ceased MOE sees a responsibility to make sure exemptions are suitable.
ERO previously only around 600 reviews (10%) were conducted each year. Some of these were 1st home reviews, others return reviews. Follow up reviews for fairness ERO employs a different reviewer. ERO is concerned most with the cases of risk. Of the 600+ cases per year less than 3% were identified as at risk. The decreased risk results of better exemption applications? No reviews in 1994 for a couple of years at request of Minster of Education, Lockwood Smith asked homeschoolers to self-review.
Risk in 2007/08 found to be very low indicated the quality of homeschooling had improved result of improvements in technology, support groups, access to resources.
NCHENZ concern that with only complaint reviews the statistics in the future will reflect badly on homeschooling.
ERO should look at this as 35/6000+ exemptions being at risk, a very small percentage (about 0.6%). HE numbers stay stable over the years. When stopped the general reviews were up to the 12000th homeschooling family including attrition.
ERO no longer maintains a database, now gets such information from the MOE. The 35 reviews per year can include 5 in one family. Contact Ralph Lane for statistics Ralph.Lane@minedu.govt.nz.
ERO continues the same process for reviews. Outcomes for the current reviews have been a mixture. The process is to verify that a child is taught “as regularly and as well 3 cases not passed. A draft report is then sent to the families, giving them the opportunity to comment. If no response from the family then the review outcome is confirmed as not passed. If there is a response then the ERO enters into discussion. Usually no discussion. To date 3/12 reviews for this year not passed.
ERO considers the present situation more beneficial to homeschoolers since all complaints are examined, more accurately representing the risk, rather than being accidentally found by ERO in the 10% reviewed previously.
Complaints to ERO if no name given Rob won’t follow up. He points them to Ralph Lane as the conduit at the MOE. A letter may then come from a senior manager at the MOE requesting ERO to undertake a review. These are not sent at a whim, the MOE goes into each situation carefully to ascertain if a review is warranted.
Craig indicated he has had many phone calls regarding reviews as a result of a complaint. One family in particular didn’t know who the complainant was. The review was very successful but the process was very stressful for the family.
ERO Rob’s comments that he gets calls about e.g. homeschoolers playing on the road when they should be inside homeschooling. His comment is that he tries to stymie these because such situations give homeschoolers a bad rap, where the people making the complaints don’t understand the process of homeschooling. He never agrees with what is said so that he can’t be quoted. He talks about regularity, and how this operates in a homeschooling situation.
Of the 35 complaints reviews half may be fine.
Jenny in a school situation if the school gets a bad review this reflects on all the students in that school. But because the homeschoolers are individual, and in control of their own learning situation then the fault in one family doesn’t reflect on the other families.
ERO - The most important aspect is the welfare of the child taking a child out of school takes it out of the more controlled environment of the state.
Significant regional differences are not apparent no apparent difference between different areas in the standard of homeschooling. Craig’s comments that at times in the past there have been problems with a particular ERO officer in one part of the country. This also happens with specific MOE officers in the granting of applications. With 35 reviews the numbers are too small to detect any regional differences.
Discussion about dearth of NZ research on the follow-up to homeschooling. During reviews ERO would ask about other children in the family who had finished homeschooling mostly good stories. This triangulates the belief that homeschooling is low risk.
Rob finds reviews interesting because he doesn’t know what he is going to find. Socio-economic circumstances do not reflect the quality of homeschooling. When a person gives up so much to homeschool then why would they not do a good job have chosen a lifestyle.
ERO doesn’t see a significant risk to HE based on the current reviews, and on the results of past reviews. If they did see a risk they would put a strong case to keep the reviews.
ERO provided no advice to MOE regarding the deskfile update which called for stronger criteria in granting application due to the reduction in reviews.
NCHENZ. The wording (AHE) indicates there was consultation with ERO. (Not an ERO suggestion.) The deskfile says applications of homeschooling must be more rigorously investigated by local officers to be sure that the programme fully meets the legislation. If there are any doubts the application should be declined. Cases have occurred recently in Auckland of declined exemptions, requiring more information. Part of the problem is the language used by MOE officers, as ex-teachers, coming from a classroom perspective, require homeschooling parents to produce the semantics which satisfies their criteria. There are vagaries around what is meant by a programme etc. Applicants were given only 10 days to resubmit an application.
ERO suggests writing to MOE and asking that the wording to be changed, and indicating particular parts which give applicants difficulties.
NCHENZ (Craig) commented that the letter asking for more information was very unfriendly and negatively sounding. The deskfile comes from Ralph Lane’s office. ERO - we should approach MOE on the basis of plain language in the official documents they send out.
NCHENZ (CHEF) asked if MOE officers were familiar with homeschooling or only with schools would they prefer we send our children to school.
ERO didn’t think so, cited example of a former HE/er who has worked for ERO and MOE.
Special needs children
ERO Special needs children are homeschooled under Section 21(1)(b)(ii) of the Act, also as regularly and as well as in a special class or a clinic or by a special service. ERO reviews under the criteria but still according to the exemption application. These children will not necessarily be reviewed because they are special needs, but only if they fall within the criteria for the 35 yearly reviews.
AHE meeting with MOE recently highlighted that special needs children being home schooled are not eligible for some teaching-related funding, but applications are not viewed any more stringently than other homeschooling exemption.
Conduction of reviews
ERO parents write an application before they start homeschooling, and very often adapt/change the programme from that described in the application. ERO is fine with that. They see the review process as a conversation between themselves and the parents. Parents can ring the ERO before a review and talk to them beforehand.
Like a job interview, show what you can do. Good to have a support person. With formal programme like ACE ERO likes to see what else the child has done.
NCHENZ – the review process can be intimidating, ERO has the power to “kill our dream” is how some see the review.
Craig commended the ERO (especially Rob) for their relaxed and understanding approach to reviewing – that the ERO has a sophisticated and good grip on what home education is all about and what it can achieve, the benefits etc. The MOE appears to be lagging behind is this area, which causes problems.
AHE sees the difference being that MOE are involved at the paper end, whilst ERO come into the homes, meet the family.
Curriculum requirements for schools
ERO Jenny produced a booklet of curriculum requirements for schools. It is very permissive and schools make their own particular curriculum from this booklet. ERO assesses this individual school curriculum. Schools have a statutory obligation under the Education Act 1989 to deliver a national curriculum and comply with the national education rules and guidelines. The New Zealand curriculum is a statement of official policy relating to teaching and learning.
The Education Act and the curriculum page 43.
Emphasis is on requirement to teach, not the child to learn. Private schools don’t need to follow the national curriculum.
National Standards.
ERO - these are administered by the MOE but homeschoolers can have access to these. They are on the MOE website. ERO report on progress of national standards monitoring is on their website.
AHE - one of the factors affecting HE exemptions is that whilst once every child was taught the same thing now teachers are required to customize and personalize learning for each child. There is now an emphasis on different programmes for different homeschooled children in the family. MOE now requires a different application for each child. The message was don’t cut and paste for a new exemption application.
ERO – schools have robust assessment procedures to ascertain children’s levels. For homeschoolers assessment is done in a one-to-one situation, talking and listening. Rob asks if homeschoolers understand the use of tests such as PAT, these are diagnostic tools to pinpoint areas for development. This is the whole purpose of assessment.
Meetings with MOE
ERO encourages homeschooling groups to have regular meetings with MOE to further understanding.
AHE - would like to MOE and ERO together at a meeting.
ERO - suggested that for next year’s meeting Ralph lane from MOE could be asked to participate.
ERO staff
CHE - commends ERO on their care in who is appointed and trained to review HE families, does ERO have still have special staff to conduct HE reviews?
ERO – yes, generally Rob chooses the HE reviewers. Alan Watkins has also undertaken HE reviews under the new regime. Rob tries to do these himself, but takes 2 people. For a complaint this is done for fairness for all concerned. One reviewer takes notes while the other listens. He tries to use people who have homeschooling experience.
Work requirements for single homeschoolers on the DPB
CHE – asks whether there has been any discussion of a review becoming a condition of DPB payment in lieu of work testing requirements for single homeschooling parents. They have written to Paula Bennett on this.
ERO – knows of no such suggestion. As a government department ERO can have no opinion on such an issue but if they are asked to review they will.
Reinstatement of blanket reviews
ERO – blanket reviews suggests that everyone gets reviewed, which has never been the case. The former regime of reviewing 10% per year was a government decision and not likely to been reinstated. It is not for ERO to make efforts to reinstate these. They can give advice to MOE, if they have concerns.
NCHENZ – does ERO initiate reviews or only respond to government policy and MOE requirements?
ERO – out of the 35, these can be initiated by MOE or the Chief Review Officer, Dr. Graham Stoop. Mostly it is from the MOE. Some cases may be from people who come to ERO with overwhelming evidence and CRO can take the decision to review and inform MOE.
Craig – Education Amendment Bill 1998 gave ERO the powers to initiate reviews, previously only the MOE could.
———————————————–
The homeschooling delegates involved felt that this was a very positive meeting, and wished that a representative from the MOE could have been present.
Penny Bilton,
Co-ordinator NCHENZ.
