Response to the bill on the law tailored education: strong rights for children and parents are missing.

Response to the bill on the law tailored education: strong rights for children and parents are missing.

Ouders & Onderwijs supports the aim of the bill Tailored education law, but believes that the proposal still insufficiently helps parents and students. An important criticism is that children and parents need more rights and legal protection. In this article you can read our response to the bill.

What is the bill Tailored education law?

The bill Tailored education law is a proposal from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. The bill is about the possibilities for schools and Partnership Tailored Education to provide tailored support to children who (temporarily) need extra support or are at risk of dropping out.

The tailored options are worked out in four areas;

• Teaching time
• Content of education
• Location of education
• Funding of education

The foundation education is the education given to children between 4 and 18 years, from primary school to secondary education.

Why is tailored education necessary?

For many children going to school is not always obvious. Not because they do not want to learn, but because regular education does not always meet what they need or because of their specific need for support.

That need should, according to Ouders & Onderwijs, be leading and the bill could help to make sure tailored support is actually offered to the students who need it.

What are the strong points of the proposal?

The bill removes several obstacles. For example, schools will no longer have to ask permission every year to deviate from teaching time. Also, a diagnosis is not a requirement for tailored support. These are important improvements.

Moreover, the proposal contains the option to use public funds for private education when publicly funded education cannot offer a suitable solution.

Ouders & Onderwijs advocates for tailored support as an enforceable right

Still, according to Ouders & Onderwijs, a fundamental problem remains: tailored support becomes mainly a competence of schools and Partnership Tailored Education and not an enforceable right of the child.

We therefore believe the law should arrange that:

• Every child can claim tailored support when needed;
• Every child has the right to an investigation into the necessity of tailored support;
• A refusal of tailored support must be well motivated;
• A refusal can be independently reviewed.

A request for tailored support must not depend only on the willingness of a school governing body or Partnership Tailored Education.

What else do we see as a risk?

1. Description of the target group is too limited
   The bill focuses on children who threaten to drop out or already have because of a physical or psychological cause while drop out can have other causes as well.
2. Support should not depend on region
   The proposed budget ceiling of 2.5% has no minimum and can be set by Partnership Tailored Education itself. This can result in differences between regions if the budget is used up. The amount of support a child receives, according to us, should not depend on the place of residence.
3. Weak position of parents
   An important criticism of Ouders & Onderwijs is that parents cannot appeal or object against a decision on tailored support.

What would we like to add to the proposal?

1. Broadening of the description
   Ouders & Onderwijs advocates for a broadening of the description so that the child’s need for support is central.
2. National minimum framework
   To limit regional differences, a national minimum framework should be set for the budget ceiling
3. Accessible dispute resolution
   If parents and school cannot agree, there must be an accessible independent form of dispute resolution that can make a binding decision.
4. Outsourcing private education as an exception
   Knowledge about successful tailored solutions must be used to improve regular education so that the route to a private provider remains an exception.
5. Active monitoring
   There should be active monitoring of regional differences for example in allocation.
6. Independent midterm evaluation
   We would like to see a first independent midterm evaluation carried out at the latest after two years. We find the planned evaluation after five years too late.

Tailored support is necessary but more space for schools and Partnership Tailored Education must go together with strong rights and safeguards for children and parents.