OTH-hovedside (Norwegian nationinal informationOn home education)

Paper to the CESE-Conference, Univ. of London 13.-19. of July 2002:

Home Education in Northern Europe

Christian W. Beck

 In some European countries, home education is currently following a negative trend. This is particularly the case in France (Petrie, 2001). In the Scandinavian countries, however, we see the opposite tendency — home education is viewed increasingly positively.

The term “education” in a modern sense in the five Scandinavian countries (Iceland, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Norway) is traditionally linked to general public literacy. From the second half of the 17^th century onwards, ordinary people were expected to learn to read and write.

By international standards, Norway was ahead of its time in terms of literacy. The earliest national education was in the context of everyday life in the family, local community and church. This kind of localised education was easily compatible with governmental regulation and control, not least because of the low population of the Scandinavian countries.  This has given Scandinavian education the special character it still retains — the state is expected to provide quality and equality in education, on a platform of public consciousness and expectations.

In the 18^th century, schools were established in Denmark, together with Norway (which at that time was a province of Denmark).  Even though teaching was still rooted in the home, the school steadily took over. In Sweden, Finland (which was then governed by Sweden) and in Iceland, literacy teaching continued for many years to be based in the home (Tveit, 1991).  Home education seems to have been an effective method of learning to read. A significantly higher proportion of the population of 18^th-century Sweden could read than was the case in Norway and Denmark.

The teaching of writing was different. Two things happened during the 19^th century. Schools were established in Sweden, Finland and Iceland, and the populations of the five countries to a large degree became able to write. By the beginning of the twentieth century, Sweden, Denmark and Norway were relatively equal in terms of writing ability. The three countries had a highly-literate population. Whether this was due to schooling or to other forms of modernisation is difficult to determine (Tveit, 1991).

In any event, home education has had considerable historical importance in the whole of Scandinavia. Home education is now associated in the five Scandinavian countries with a history of popular education — in other words, as something positive, despite the Government’s sceptical view of modern home education.

Various forms of home education have been used during the 20^th century, but its extent has been very limited. The rise of modern home education in Scandinavia dates back to about 1990.

Despite their general historical common ground in educational philosophy, the Scandinavian countries now display considerable differences in their approach to home education.

Denmark

Denmark is a geographically-small country — sixteen-and-a-half thousand square miles and five-and-a-half million inhabitants. The country’s population is highly urbanised. The Danish educational system essentially reflects the importance of home, local community, rural life and common enlightenment.

Central figures in Danish educational history include the philosopher and theologian N.F.S. Grundtvig and the educationalist Christopher Kold, both of whom were active in the 19^th century. Their goal was a school system where the children were taught by parents and others in the local community within a framework of practical enlightenment.

The fruits of this tradition can be seen in a free educational philosophy. The law is very liberal in terms of establishing independent and private schools, of which there is now a wide range. These represent about 12% of all official schools in Denmark and have influenced the state school system and made it freer.  Independent and private schools are largely state funded. All parents in modern Denmark can find am independent or private school in the area in which they live, and for which they will pay only a small parental contribution. The State contributes some 90% towards the financing of such schools. Independent and private schools can be small — down to some 25-30 pupils.

The availability of Independent and private schools has led to there being little demand for home education in Denmark. There are at present only 100-200 home educators. There is no official local or national register of home-educated children (Dept. of Education, 2000) (Statistik Danmark, 2002) and (Roskilde Kommune).

There is in Denmark a legal requirement for formal education, but no specific requirement to attend school. Parents are allowed to teach their own children at home if they wish. There is no financial support for home education. Home education is governed by the laws on independent and private primary and secondary education.

Finland

Finland has a surface area of 130 500 square miles, and about 5.5 million inhabitants. Compared with Denmark, Finland has a relatively-large rural population. About 30% of the elementary schools in Finland are small schools in rural areas with less than a hundred pupils (Statistik-Finland, 2001).  Finland did not introduce state schooling until 1866, and even in the 1930s, 15% of the population was unable to write (Tveit, 1991).

Finland’s history, with long periods of rule either by Sweden or Russia, has left a strong sense of national unity and sovereignty.  This has laid the foundations for a unified national school system for the last century. There are few private schools in Finland: only about 2% of all official schools (SSB, 2001).

Finland’s educational policy has been very concerned with raising the standard of Finnish education to an internationally-acceptable level (Utbildingsstyrelsen, 1997). This has largely been successful. Pupils from Finland score highly on international comparative tests in core subjects (OECD, 1998 and 2001).

Education, but not school attendance, is a legal requirement in Finland. The new Education Act of 1998 (skollagen, 1998) does not include any definition of home education. Opportunities for home education are however provided by sections 25, 26 and 45 of the Act, which are used for this purpose. Pupils can use other means than official schooling to acquire the equivalent skills.

There is no legally-defined regulation for home education, but the Law states that the local authority is required to oversee the progress of pupils.  No financial support is provided for home education. Home-educated pupils in Finland are required to sit tests to demonstrate the amount they have learned. If parents do not take care to fulfil the educational requirements for their children they risk being fined.

Finnish educational statistics provide an account of the number of children in each local authority district who do not attend school. Finland’s published statistics (Statistik-Finland) assumes that the great majority of such children are home educated. In the year 2000 there were 300 home-educated children in Finland (Statistik-Finland, 2002). This figure has been fairly stable for several years. No increase in home education has been registered during the past few years.

The Finnish Ministry of Education (Utdanningsdepartmentet, 2002) reports that there is little debate or conflict about home education in the country. According to the Ministry, the majority of home-educated children re-join school education because it is difficult for parents to sustain home education over a longer period.

Iceland

Iceland has a population of 0.3 million distributed over 40 000 square miles. A little country with a sparse population, which did not establish a truly effective state education system until into the 20^th century (Tveit, 1991).

According to the Icelandic Education Act (grundskoleloven, 1995), school attendance is compulsory. Home education is not mentioned in the law. Nevertheless, in 2001 an Icelandic family started to educate their children at home. According to the parents, they are involved in discussions with the Ministry of Education about the premises for home education in Iceland (Hjemmeundervisere på Island, 2002).

The Icelandic Ministry of Education states that the law does not give the right to home education, but neither does it forbid it. The Ministry has confirmed that it is involved in discussions with two families about the premises for home education, and that applications from these families to educate at home are being considered.

Sweden

Sweden is the definitively largest country in Scandinavia, with a population of about 10 million and an area of 174 000 square miles. In many ways, Sweden has been Scandinavia’s most influential country. Both Norway and Finland were ruled by Sweden for long periods.

After the introduction of public literacy, Sweden experienced a rapid growth in state education during the 19^th century. Right up until 1992 there were few private schools in Sweden. An alternation to the law in 1992 led however to the growth of independent and private schools, which by 2001 accounted for 5% of all official schools in Sweden. Such schools are 90% financed by the State.

School attendance is normally compulsory in Sweden (skollagen 1995). There is provision for home education, but permission for this must be applied for and will be granted only for one year at a time. The local authority oversees home education, and usually performs two inspections a year (Stiftelsen Hemundervisning.nu, 2002).

The framework for home education is formulated in sections 4 and 5 of the Education Act (Skollagen, 1995). Home education must offer an “equally good” alternative to state schooling. Home education must be assessed after each school year before an application to continue home education for the following year can be considered. If the child has a handicap, the social services department is to be consulted before permission for home education can be granted. Financial aid is not given for home education. If parents neglect to comply with educational requirements they can be fined.

Sweden has Scandinavia’s strictest official regulation of home education. The number of families exercising this option has, according to the authorities, remained at about 100 for the past years, including in the school year 2000/2001 (Swedish Official Statistics, 2002).

In the past few years there has been a great deal of conflict around home education in Sweden. A number of families have had their applications for home education refused. Several cases have been taken to the courts. The Brandt family won such a case against the local authority in the Länsretten (the lowest level of court in Sweden). The authorities had the case re-examined in the same court, and the family has appealed to the Kammarretten (the medium level of court). (Aftonbladet, 2002). Other home educators have been through similar processes.

According to a Swedish home educator there is considerable disparity between local authority districts. Some follow a liberal line, while others are stricter. She adds that educational politics views the home education phenomenon with disfavour (Svensk hjemmeunderviser, 2002).

The authorities’ refusal of applications for home education is often on the basis that home education cannot give the same opportunities for learning social interaction that the pupil would have had in school. Home educators themselves find this argument remarkable since home education is frequently in the context of a quite different social life than that of school, and this can be the reason for choosing home education.

One reason why the authorities place such importance on the social aspect of home education may be a recent judgement in the European Court of Human Rights in a Swedish home-education case; the so-called BN/SN case. The Swedish court’s verdict enforcing school attendance was appealed against in the European Court of Human Rights (EMK-kommisjonen). The Swedish verdict was on the basis that the parents were not qualified to give the child a satisfactory education and that home education could not give the child necessary social training (Aamodt, 2001).  The BN/SN case gave the Swedish authorities a legal judgement at European level which justified using pupils’ social training as an argument for regulation of home education.

At the moment there is a good deal of disquiet and debate about home education in Sweden. Information from home educators can suggest that there is a certain amount of home educating in Sweden which is not registered with the authorities. Some Swedish educators have also moved to neighbouring countries, such as Norway, where the climate for home education is more liberal.

Norway

Norway has 4.5 million inhabitants and a surface area of 150 000 square miles. A considerable proportion of the population is still rural. A third of the 3000 official schools are small schools in rural areas with fewer than 100 pupils. For the past century, Norwegian education has taken the form of a national unified school system.  Only 1.7% of schools are private.  These are 85% funded by the state.

Modern home education started in Norway in the first half of the 1990s. The pioneering family came into conflict with the authorities. They were reported to the police and the child protection authority. There were several court cases (Beck, 2000).  Conflicts surrounding home education in Norway have since then turned in a more constructive direction.

For the academic year 2001/2002 the authorities’ educational data system GSI has registered 109 home educators. According to GSI, the number of home educators has been fairly stable for the last five years. A research survey of home-educated children carried out in 2002 in respect of the same academic year (2001/2002) and including 44 out of the country’s 436 local authority districts, estimated that some 400 children are educated at home (Beck, 2002).  This is 3-4 times the number of children registered by the authorities. The Department of Education has admitted possible sources of error in its own reckoning (Aftenposten, 2002).

During the period 1994-1999 the authorities’ treatment of home education cases ran parallel with work on a new Education Act (Opplærinsloven, 1998) (Act no.46, 1997/98 from the Upper House). A home-education case in the little district Mosvik in the North of Norway took on considerable significance. The authorities used the Mosvik case as a test case in relation to educational policy for the new Education Act. Should “equivalent education” in private schools or home education imply exemption from standard educational requirements, or should it imply that these forms of education represented a parallel system of equal validity to official schools (Vestre, 1999).

In November 1998, the Herredsrett (the lowest-level courts in Norway) ruled on the Mosvik case. By two votes to one, the parents were fined 10 000 kroner for illegally keeping their children off school. The parents were accused of hindering the local authority’s supervision.

This case developed into two cases in one. The authorities wanted it to be a case about supervision. When the local authority was unable to oversee or assess the children in the way that they wished, they could not determine whether or not the home education was good enough and so demanded that the children be returned to school. The parents had however organised private assessment by a person who also was responsible for assessing home-educated children in other local authority districts.

The defence proposed that as home education was fully legal and the parents could demonstrate that they were providing education of a high enough quality, they had done nothing punishable. On the basis of the draft Act no.46 of 1997-98 The authorities argued that home education was to be seen as an exception from the requirement for school attendance. The defence argued on the basis of the existing Education Act and of the new Act passed in parliament in June 1998 and to take effect in August 1999, that the legal requirement was for education, and that home education was an elementary school education which was comparable with that offered by the school sector.

The family later lost the case (2 votes against 1) in the High Court. Shortly afterwards the authorities surprisingly dropped the case due to “lack of concrete evidence”.

After the Mosvik case the climate for home education became easier. The rights of parents in school and in home education became a matter of public debate and were supported by national politicians. The principle of compulsory education rather than compulsory school attendance was incorporated in to the new Education Act (section 2-1).

Today, parents can give their children home education if they first notify the local authority by letter. The local authority is obliged to oversee this education and can summon home-educated pupils to sit tests.

In some respects Norway has become the leading country in Scandinavia so far as home education is concerned. Norway has probably the greatest number of home educators, and the number is increasing — a tenfold increase in 8 years (Beck, 2002). There has been national debate about home education, which in recent years has also been an important theme in national educational policy and has also influenced schooling in general. This has had a positive effect on home education, which is no longer unfamiliar for people in general.

The effect of pressure from the home-education sector in respect of individual cases over the years has been visible and has caused positive results, including:

-    It has been established that parents only need to notify the local authority of their intention     to educate at home (as opposed to applying for permission).

-    The administrative apparatus for the Education Act gives parents influence over the arrangements for the supervision of home education

-    The requirement for home-educating parents to have specific formal academic qualifications has been removed

-     Legal ambiguities about the home-educated pupil’s right to free educational materials and text books have been resolved in the favour of the home educator

-     Legal ambiguities about the home-educated pupil’s right to special teaching have been resolved in the favour of the home educator (Aamodt, 2001).

-     Individual cases have strengthened the right of the home-educated pupil to a graded certificate of results if desired at the end of their elementary education.

Home education has been successfully used as a vehicle for local communities to preserve small village schools. Parents have continued to teach in villages where

the school has been closed under a “home education” umbrella. Many have applied for and been granted

independent school status (Beck, 2001).

The next major issues for Norwegian home education can be: the opportunity for a divided solution with some home education and some school attendance, and the

right for financial compensation for parents who give their children a home education.

Comparison and conclusion

There is a divided view of home education in Scandinavia. Freedom is a motivating force in the local community, and many see home education as an extension of

this freedom of spirit.  Others see home education as a threat to national unity and to the control that the state must exercise in order to secure equality in education.

This divided opinion applies to Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway. But the democratic human right to home education is strongly defended and is a basis of

the Scandinavian view of home education.

There are however clear differences between the countries. I will describe to important differences:

1.         Differences in educational ideology and in the extent of conflict over home education.

2.         Differences in the proportion of pupils educated at home

The differences of proportion and of conflict are presented in Table 1:

Table 1

                         Degree of conflict

Sweden	Norway
Denmark	Fin-land

   High

   Low 

    Low              High               Propotion in home education

Equal right to education can have several contradictory implications:

a)         Equal individual right to make a personal choice about education

b)         Equal right for a local community to decide its education system

c)         The State should provide equal treatment for all, in the same school system

All these three interpretations have some validity within a democratic national educational system.  In the course of development, tensions have sprung up in the Scandinavian lands between these different democratic ideals. These tensions have shown themselves in different ways and in differing degrees between the various countries. This has had varying effects on home education:

In Denmark there is little conflict over home education. There are also very few home educators. The country has a strong popular and liberal educational culture, rooted in Grundvig and Kold. This has led to the establishment of many independent and private schools, which are financially accessible to most people. As Denmark is a small and urbanised country, independent and private schools are geographically accessible in all parts of the country. Parents wanting an alternative education for their children can find it in these schools, thus fulfilling the educational expectations of freedom and local democratic culture. Home education has therefore not been a significant issue. Demand has been low and there has been little conflict about it.

Sweden has also had little home education, but the question has caused a great deal of conflict resulting in court cases and in the emigration of home educators. Historically Sweden has had few independent and private schools. This has changed to some extent during the last few years but still only represents 5% of pupils, as against 12% in Denmark. Sweden is physically larger than Denmark, and while independent and private schools are financially as accessible as they are in Denmark, they are largely not geographically accessible. In rural areas in particular, home education is the alternative to state schools. Due to legally-enforced school attendance, Sweden imposes a stricter regime on home education. The demand for home education is higher than in Denmark. The number of home educators is kept low because it is difficult to be allowed to begin with home education, and a tighter control is exercised over it than is the case in Denmark.

A relatively-large proportion of Finland’s population is rural and there are many small schools, but the educational ideology is little influenced by popular local-democratic thinking. Finland has a relatively-uniform state education. This policy is generally accepted because a priority has been made of quality and equality in education, interpreted in terms of good academic results. A major cause of this philosophy was the low level of educational achievement in the country until well into the 20^th century. Education is compulsory, so home education is relatively accessible. There are few private schools. In Scandinavian terms there is a relatively high proportion of home-educated pupils, but this does not appear to have challenged the state’s control over education. There is little conflict over home education, according to the Finnish educational authorities.

Norway embraces some of Grundvig and Kold’s popular educational ideology, but to a lesser degree than Denmark. There are few private schools. Like Finland, Norway is a long, drawn-out country, and a relatively-high proportion of its population is rural. Outside the larger cities and conurbations, independent and private schools are rare. Equality and national unity are traditionally important values in Norwegian education.

In this country we find a popular anti-culture with long historical roots. This is particularly evident in the rural coastal areas. It is here that modern home education has enjoyed the greatest growth (Beck, 2002). Traditional anti-culture appears to have been modernised and revitalised through home education. The community basis for home education is strong. Despite strong conflicts, it is Norway that has the highest proportion of home educated children in Scandinavia.  The state is ambivalent towards home education. It supports the democratic human right to home education, but at the same time sees home education as a threat to the state’s control of education.

The conflicts and debate have in the course of time had a positive effect on home education.

The conclusion must be:

1.         The Scandinavian countries’ view of home education has become more positive during the last few years

2.         The prerequisites for growth in home education appear to be: (a) a popular-community basis for this kind of alternative education (b) few independent and private schools available to the majority of people, and (c) a legal framework which makes home education a relatively-straightforward proposition.

3.         A low level of conflict about home education appears to be the consequence of (a) a positive community concept of freedom in education, (b) home education being relatively accessible and (c) general accept and support to the national educational system.

Possibilities for home education

National state politics effects the possibilities for home education in two ways. First, by law it can be decided whether home education in a country should be an

exception from obligation to schooling, which has to be asked for and given permission to. Or the national state authorities can be more liberate and let home

education be a ordinary way to give primary and lower secondary education. Then home education is a right you don’t need to asked for. Second the national state

can use different sorts of threats and sanctions against home education. The most common sanctions are:

a) Making home education more difficult by a rather restrictive use of laws and bureaucratic practice.

b) Denying certification and marks for done home education.

c) Threat and use of police, court and social service taking the home educated child away from the family.

Comparing different countries all over the world, there is no clear cut relation between the right to home educate and the use of sanctions against home education.

Some countries like Sweden permit home education inside a law of obligation to school, but at the same time  practice rigid control with home education. Norway

and Finland both have a relative liberate home education-law, inside a obligation to education. Finland has no specific control with home education. In Norway

there is in law a responsibility for local school authorities  to supervise and control home education,.

 In Germany home education is forbidden. Then the authorities doesn’t  need to control a home education that doesn’t excite. England, Denmark and Ireland are

the most liberal  home education countries in Europe. England and Ireland have almost no supervision and control with home education. In Denmark the local

authorities have some sort of supervision with home education.

An overview of the relation between The Right to home education and The control with home education in different countries is given in table 2.

Table 2  -  The relation between the right to home education and the control with home education in different countries.

                                                                          The right to

                                                                          Home education

X England, Ireland

                                              X  Denmark

                                                   X Norway

                           X Finland

                                   X Italy France X

Sweden  X

                   X Greece, Spain

     X Netherlands

 X Germany

Liberal

Restrictive

Weak                                                 strong               Control with

Home education

Point Zero in table 2, has to be discussed. First,  zero here means:   The right to home educate is closed or demands for practicing home education is extremely difficult to fulfil , as in Germany, Netherlands and Sweden. However Zero also can mean that home education neither directly or indirectly is mentioned in the law at all. In spite of that, there can be practiced home education in such countries, as in France before 1999 and still in Ireland, with moderate or little control Under such conditions home education has been successful without political noise.

 In some countries we can observe new politics on home education. from being absent in the law, home education now has its own law-paragraphs. The right to home education are underlined and clarified. At the same time there is in the law constructed a platform for detailed and massive control with home education. France with a new educational law in 1999 is a good example (Petrie, 2000). Now control with home education is so strong, that it could be more precise to talk about state-school in homes than home education as a human right for parents to give their children an education otherwise. Same sort of changes in the law is no discussed in Ireland.

Parents right to home education and national states demand for control is all over the world in conflict. Not only in France, but also in Ireland, Scotland, England and other countries the political issues on home education is increasing. Political, home educators now to a greater extend is seen as a social alien group, which need to be reintegrated in society (Dolphin, 2001).

Also home education is well anchored in human rights and international conventions. (Vestre, 1999). From a human right point of view it is difficult to argue that home educators have to defend their innocence, here, the right to home educate. Do home educators at all need to inform the school authorities about their home education? They only practice a  a common human right. It is also difficult to admit that such a right should be under permanent control.  On the other side it is unreasonable that society and authorities should have no possibilities to sanction and control home education at all.

 New state control with home education is obviously related to a general fear of religious and other sorts of fundamentalism. When control with home education goes to far, the threshold for intervention in homes can be lowered, to make such control possible. The result can be a new-totalitarian practice for state-authorities in family- and educational matters; and that home education get underground.

In the Tasmania region in Australia there is now established a National Advisory Council for Home Education, where both national state school authorities and home educators are represented. None of the groups have majority. This Council will have authority in home education conflicts. This could perhaps be a good idea also for other countries?

REFERENCES

Aftenposten [Norwegian newspaper] 2002 18 April

Aftonbladet [Swedish newspaper] 2002. De flyr från den svenske skolan. 2 May

Beck, C.W. 2000.  Kodenavn skole - kampen om norsk utdannings framtid. Oplandske bokforlag. Vallset

Beck, C.W. “Small-scale Education - Residual or Frontline?” Paper to EERA Congress 5-8 September 2001. Lille, France.

Beck, C.W. “Telling av hjemmeunderviste elever i Norge 2001/2002". Article in the press.

Department of Education, Denmark (telephone conversations)

Department of Education, Finland (telephone conversations)

Department of Education, Iceland (telephone conversations)

Department of Education, Norway

Dolphin Part C. 2001. Description of contribution to EC-policies, economical development, management and participation) – A call for financial support for a research-project on home education.

Forening av danske hjemmeundervisere (Association of Danish Home Educators) - Internet

Grundloven [constitution], Denmark

Grundskoleloven [Education Act], 1995, Iceland

GSI - elementary school computer data system in Norway

Hjemmeundervisere på Island [Home educators in Iceland] - several emails, 2002

Hjemmeundervisning.no (Norwegian commercial service company for home educators)

Hjemmeundervisningen i Norge - HUN. Web site published by one of the founders of modern home education in Norway.

Home Eduction in Tasmania,  Internett 2002.

Lag om grundläggande utbilding [Elementary Education Act], 1998 (Finland)

Lov om friskoler og privategrundskoler [Independent and Private Elementary Schools Act], 2001 (Denmark)

MADS - Organisation for home education in Sweden - Internet

Norske offentlig utredning (NOU) [Norwegian Public Information] no. 46 (1997/98)

OECD, 1998 and 2001.  Education at a glance (Reports)

Opplysningstjenesten for hjemmeundervisning (OTH) [Information service for home education] - has a website including regulations and rights relating to home education in Norway

Opplæringsloven [Education Act], 1998 (Norway)

Petrie, A. 2001 Home Education in Europe, and the Implementation of Changes in the Law

Rørth, Charlotte, 1998 “Hjemmeskoler OK i Danmark” [Home schools OK in Denmark], Jyllandsposten [Danish newspaper] 21/12

Skollagen, 1995 (Sweden)

Skolestyrelsen [Education Office] Roskilde Local Authority, Denmark

Stiftelsen av Hemundervisning.nu [Home Educators Foundation] (Sweden) - Internet

Statistik-Danmark (Danish Official Statistics)

Statistik-Finland (Finnish Official Statistics)

Svensk hjemmeunderviser [A Swedish home educator], email, May 2002

Swedish Official Statistics

Statistisk sentralbyrå (SSB) [Central Statistical Office]

Tveit, K. 1991 “The Development of Popular Literacy in the Nordic Countries: a comparative historical study”, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research XXXV no.4

Utbildingsstyrelsen 1997.  Utbildingens principer og allmänna mål - Finlands utbildingssystem

Utdanningsdepartementet [Finland Department of Education] (telephone conversations, May 2002) (Finland)

Vestre, S.E. 1999 “Spørsmål om skoleplikt/opplæringsplikt” [Questions on compulsory school/education]. Note. Education Research Institute, University of Oslo.

Aamodt, Ø. 2001.  Retten til hjemmeundervisning. Inst. for offentligretts skriftserie no. 9/2001

Vestre S.E. 1999. Foreldrerett og brukerorientering. In Bredal, D. (red): Frihetens kår 1999 – en bedre skole.. Liberalt forskningsinstitutt. Oslo.