Questo è un paragrafo. Fai clic qui per modificarlo e aggiungere il tuo testo.
Compulsory education or compulsory schooling?
An examination of the current school situation
in the Republic of Slovenia and beyond
The Author
Klavdija Hočevar Kastelic
My life is coloured by a series of events, each of which adds a unique hue. I enjoy reading current news in the fields of accounting, finance and politics. Thanks to my active lifestyle, I am also involved in gardening, alternative education and independent learning, health and other important topics. I fill my days playing guitar, mentoring young firefighters and leading members in various activities. I have several years of experience volunteering for children through various organisations.
Here the link to the website:
www.self-directed.org/tp/ spotlighting - the - issues - with - schooling - in Slovenia /
This article addresses a number of points concerning homeschooling in Slovenia, in particular:
1.Problems concerning the interpretation of the terms ‘education’ and ‘schooling’ and how this can influence families' choices.
2.The highlighting of organisations working towards a vision of education that can be - if citizens so wish - ‘a lifelong opportunity for growth’.
3. Reflection on the ‘corporate nature’ of the current school system and whether it can actually serve the interests of individual students.
4. Financial support for families who prioritise the rights of their children.
5. Questioning the harmful normalisation of negative aspects of school culture, such as bullying, drug use, repeated violations of autonomy, forced socialisation and more.
6. Highlight the fact that often, for various reasons, families are forced to enrol their children in a school system that is not in line with their needs.
Unfortunately, in my country, Slovenia, we are not there yet. Some countries have implemented grammatically incorrect statements in their primary education legislation. They have legislated ‘compulsory schooling’ instead of ‘compulsory education’.
The two concepts are not identical.
We can illustrate this with some examples:
there are parents who choose not to enrol their child because the institution in question cannot guarantee that the curriculum will be planned in advance so that the child can become familiar with it.
Suppose the child and parents prefer their offspring to be educated naturally, guided by the parents through various projects.
In this case, they also want support that assists families by coordinating activities, offering advice and providing other forms of support.
This could lead to disputes between parents, headmasters and the Centre for Social Work for non-enrolment in the primary school education system.
A further problem may be the processing of personal data, for which parents should seek assistance from the system through the Information Commissioner.
Again, there should be certainty that data processing is done with the consent of the data subject, especially when it comes to possible violations of children's rights.
Another practical example: what happens if a child has no interest or aptitude for certain subjects, such as physics or chemistry?
Instead of being able to work on personally meaningful projects, the pupil or student has to be assessed in subjects that do not interest him/her, potentially hindering his/her development.
If the assessment is poor, the blame is often placed on the child rather than on the compulsory nature of the school education system.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) enshrines the importance and the right to free choice in education (Article 26). In some countries, such as Slovenia, there are problems with the interpretation and implementation of this right, wrongly labelling ‘compulsory education’ as ‘compulsory schooling’.
But these are two different concepts.
Parents who opt for alternative educational methods, such as self-directed education, may face legal repercussions for not enrolling their children in state-approved schools.
It is important to note that this means that the child has not been able to devote himself to the subjects he is most interested in and would like to improve in all the time it was known that he was not interested in physics/chemistry (just for example).
This significantly limits the child's right to education. And it damages the right of parents to be parents committed to their children's rights-based education.
This is a widespread problem in the Republic of Slovenia.
It is recognised and felt as a real public interest; it indicates that a large part of the population supports self-education and questions the current education system.
Farida Shaheed, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to education, stated in her report to the Human Rights Council last year that it is ‘primary education, not school, that is compulsory’.
Education, however, must not be reduced to schooling.
Learning must be recognised regardless of where and how it is achieved. Many other spaces, including cultural centres, libraries, families and communities participate in education and need support.
As reported by the International Commission on the Future of Education, an important task ‘is to broaden thinking about the places and modes of education, extending it to more times, spaces and stages of life,’ based on what can be called ‘educational ecosystems’ that connect natural, built and virtual learning places.
The United Nations defines compulsory schooling (synonym for compulsory education) as follows:
Compulsory schooling refers to a compulsory period of education that every child is required to complete and the legal age from which children are no longer obliged to attend school (e.g. 15).
The age of the end of compulsory education is thus different from the age of the end of an educational programme'.
They also define home education as:
‘the education of children at home, typically by parents or guardians, rather than in a public or state school’.
It should be noted that prior to the introduction of compulsory education laws in the 19th century, most of the world's child education took place within the family or community, and only a small fraction of the population attended schools or had guardians. Today, most children in developed countries receive formal education in a public institution.
Homeschooling can refer to education at home under the supervision of correspondence schools or colleges. A homeschooling philosophy without a curriculum can be called unschooling, a term coined in 1977 by American educator John Holt in his journal Growing Without Schooling.
With the introduction of new legislation, the terminology shifted from ‘homeschooling’ to ‘home education’.
However, despite this change in wording, the essence of the educational approach remains the same. The curriculum and methodology are often not in line with the educational principles outlined in the aforementioned documents. The business model persists, with little consideration for the preferences or rights of the individual student.
As a result, children's rights continue to be ignored and violated.
In the 1999 General Comment No. 11 ‘Action Plans for Primary Education’ (Art. 14 of the Covenant), an important explanation of the term ‘compulsory’ can be found:
'Compulsory. The element of compulsoriness serves to emphasise the fact that neither parents, guardians nor the state have the right to consider the decision whether a child should have access to primary education optional.
Likewise, the prohibition of gender discrimination in access to education, also required by Articles 2 and 3 of the Covenant, is further underlined by this requirement. It must be emphasised, however, that the education offered must be of appropriate quality, relevant to the child and must promote the realisation of the child's other rights'.
It is also crucial that the State, through budget implementation and decision-making, does not engage in discriminatory acts.
Unfortunately, there is discrimination against children in Slovenia who seek education based on a rights-centred and self-directed approach.
The right to lifelong learning is not an explicit right under international human rights law, but has been cemented into the vocabulary of the right to education by Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4), which in its title urges states to ‘promote lifelong learning opportunities for all’.
It is imperative to strengthen the human rights framework to ensure equal opportunities at all levels of education.
Governments should prioritise and allocate adequate resources to the lifelong learning process and ensure that different contexts and types of learning - formal, non-formal and informal - are better connected.
UNESCO strives to ensure equal opportunities by closing the gap in access to learning after formal school age through support for skills training, including technological skills, literacy and decent work and beyond.
International human rights law establishes obligations that states are bound to respect. By becoming party to international treaties, states assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, protect and fulfil human rights.
The obligation to protect requires states to protect individuals and groups from human rights violations. The obligation to fulfil means that states must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of fundamental human rights.
It is also useful to know the differences between Self-Directed Education and Progressive Education, as explained by Peter Gray, Ph.D.
An examination of terminology reveals that although a distinction is made between ‘schooling’ and ‘education’, the UN often uses these terms interchangeably.
Despite changes in the understanding and definitions of some terms, the way legislation is implemented is slow to change and often does not align with educational principles, leading to violations of children's rights.
I see education as the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing skills of reasoning and judgement, and preparing oneself or others intellectually for a mature life.
It takes place continuously, within a safe environment, where parents are educated first, fostering circumstances in which the child can explore and providing spiritual, emotional and material support. The concept of self-directed education facilitated my understanding of educational principles in line with the Resolution.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) is working to adapt rights to the evolution of education.
Rights to lifelong learning
UNESCO believes that the traditional view of education for children and young people is outdated. Education is not separate from life, but extends throughout life. With longer life expectancy and a rapidly changing world, early learning, technical and vocational training and education are a different matter.
Education can be defined as the process of imparting knowledge, developing reasoning and judgement and preparing for mature life. This process is continuous and takes place throughout life.
UNESCO is adapting to changing educational needs by recognising that education goes beyond childhood and encompasses different learning paths throughout life.
Although lifelong learning is not explicitly stated as a right in international human rights law, it is emphasised in Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG4), which urges states to promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.
Investment is made in training, buildings, research, programmes and materials such as books and computers, often left unused in the basement due to the push for digital initiatives.
Courses are designed and models changed before children even arrive at school or before parents choose to study at home, often without any certainty that the programme is in line with the child's needs.
Money flows into these initiatives, but parents sign contracts without a clear understanding of what the school and headmaster are offering at any given time.
Prior to the start of the school year, no effort is made to inquire about the interests of individual children and no personalised offers are provided.
How can each child's needs be met if it is never consulted or presented with options before enrolment?
To what extent does this ‘ideal’ school support the individual development of the pupils?
We are only at the beginning of the journey that will lead us to recognise the need to become proactive guardians in the defence of our offspring.
Equally crucial is identifying the essential education needed by parents who assume the role of guardian to effectively safeguard their children.
We are aware of cases where the authorities resort to drastic measures, such as removing children from their parents'care, judges reprimanding guardians in courtrooms, or the involvement of various professionals, all under the aegis of social welfare centres, who oversee proceedings from their comfortable offices. These actions occur because parents fight for their children's right to be heard and supported.
No one may be denied the right to education. In exercising the functions it assumes in matters of education and teaching, the State must respect the right of parents to provide such education and teaching in accordance with their religious and philosophical convictions.
(European Court of Human Rights-Council of Europe 1952)
The current education system (limited only to the registered school system) is often designed in advance without taking into account the individual needs of the young people who will be immersed in it for years to come.
Parents often sign commitments without a clear understanding of what schools offer. This lack of personalisation raises doubts as to whether the current education system truly serves the public interest.
A proactive approach to education that respects children's voices, nurtures their talents, prioritises their happiness and enables personal development is essential.
But what actually happens?
One might assume that social care providers support families and, consequently, children in their educational choices, as stated in the Resolution.
However, this is not the reality.
Parents often find themselves involved in procedures initiated by the Social Welfare Centre, leading to non-contentious proceedings in the District Court aimed at restricting parental rights. In this legal framework, parents are pressurised to accept a court-appointed guardian (known as guardian ad litem).
In addition, there are perplexing interventions by police and doctors who subject parents to suspicious interrogations, trying to portray them as the current education system really serves the public interest.
My family was personally sent a statement saying that if we did not enrol our child in their school or if we did not provide proof that the child is enrolled in such a programme, they would refer the matter to the Centre for Social Welfare, the police station and the Education Inspectorate of the Republic of Slovenia.
The director is aware that the child is enrolled in a public school and will be educated according to an adapted, above-standard programme customised to his needs, similar to the self-directed learning practices known in America.
This is because no existing institutional school approach can meet the child's needs and align with our family values.
The main problem is that the public school in question is not on the list of approved public schools and is therefore not considered acceptable.
Non-formal education can be an important means of realising the right to education. It can provide a ‘second chance’ of education to out-of-school children and adults, expanding educational opportunities beyond the traditional public school systems and could provide multiple other benefits. In the context of lifelong learning, it is essential to recognise, validate and accredit learning wherever it has taken place.
Does all this really reflect the essence of liberal education?
From the recording of the session, it is clear that Janja ZUPANČIČ (Ministry of Education, as Secretary of State) requires that school students who are home-schooled (only curriculum-based education, not the self-directed education approach) must achieve an educational standard at least equivalent to that of the compulsory public primary school curriculum.
Therefore, the amendment introduces individual knowledge assessments in all subjects.
It continues: ‘In short, we teach children to learn, to know and plan their own learning, to think about their goals and to think about how to acquire and construct this knowledge’. And again: ‘If we summarise everything we touch on the national knowledge test - the compulsory knowledge test in third, sixth and ninth grade means regular monitoring and allows us to have a feedback system for students, teachers and the school. A child who has this experience in third grade will certainly be less stressed, as is often said, when they take the test in sixth and ninth grade, when they are familiar with it'.
How does this fit in with the commitment made through international treaties (to which the country is a party) and the Constitution?
How can it be said that children's rights are respected?
How can this concept of education be reconciled with ensuring that children are taught how to learn and how to organise their learning, especially when they may not initially understand how a topic relates to their interests and will before tackling it?
Dear reader, as you delve into this topic, remember to start by reading the Convention on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 17 (2013): “to rest, leisure, play, recreation, cultural life and the arts” (art. 31) ’Convention on the Rights of the Child and Adolescent’”
28. Access to education
Every child has the right to education. Primary education should be free. Secondary and higher education should be available to every child. Children should be encouraged to attend school to the highest possible level. Discipline in schools should respect the rights of children and never use violence.
29. Goals of education
Children's education must help them to fully develop their personalities, talents and abilities. It must teach them to understand their own rights and to respect the rights, cultures and differences of others. It must help them to live peacefully and protect the environment.
Also, keep in mind that international complaint mechanisms are available in case of rights violations.
The Optional Protocol III (OP3) serves as a complaint mechanism, allowing children to make complaints to the Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC) if their rights under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) have been violated.
School legislation essentially views participants as components of a business model for implementing educational activities.
This approach aims to generate a specific amount of knowledge in a predetermined time frame, either through traditional classroom instruction or through homeschooling that adheres to a standardised curriculum (curriculum-based schooling without customised content).
Ultimately, the child is expected to produce knowledge subject to evaluation by an authority figure, regardless of his or her agreement or interpretation of the content.
In line with the teacher's expectations, the child, acting as a participant, strives to meet certain performance criteria in order to achieve specific class placements. There are instances in which students suffer repercussions for failing to meet grade level expectations, leading to feelings of shame, anger and ridicule from peers.
Although these incidents are common in our school system, should they be considered normal?
Is it really in the public interest to maintain an environment where students always have to listen to the teacher's assessment of their work and where they have no say in how they are assessed?
For some, being involved in the assessment process might have a positive impact. Perhaps the student is not interested in the subject, but is forced to master it, otherwise he or she is punished with a lower grade.
What does this mean for the students?
Does it suggest that they did not learn because of an inherent inability or simply a lack of interest in the subject?
What leads a student to fail, resulting in lower grades?
And what do they learn from this experience?
Is it justifiable and, if so, to whom does it benefit?
Current school legislation treats education as a business model, focusing on standardised curricula and assessments that do not take into account individual needs and interests.
This system can lead to negative consequences for students who do not meet school level expectations, including feelings of shame and punishment.
Does this system really serve the public interest?
The failure lies in the design of the system, not in the students. What is needed is an educational approach that involves students in the learning process and respects their interests and motivations.