Talk:Homeschooling international status and statistics

Map, summary table and description

There seems to be unacceptable discrepancies between the different sections. E.g. Norway and Denmark is marked as red, while homeschooling is said to be legal in the summary and in the description. Finland is orange ("Legal under restricting conditions, like a teaching certificate or permit"), while the summary text is more or less identical to the label of yellow ("Legal under regulating conditions, such as mandatory tests and checks"). --LPfi (talk) 23:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

On the map, Italy is red, but in the table below, Italy's map color is given as Green, consistent with the description given that in Italy homeschooling is legal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.40.34 (talk) 02:39, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I removed the map now. It would be nice, but an incorrect map cannot be used. --LPfi (talk) 20:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

So what do you propose to do about the column in the table which refers to the map? StAnselm (talk) 05:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

There are now two sections duplicating information: Homeschooling status tables and Legality by country. The former looks like a summary, but is very long and has sources of its own, which means doubled work in maintaining them. What is lost by deleting the former, merging any additional information found? The colour codes are good on a map, but the codes can very well be explained in a caption (and the map has to be maintained). They should probably correspond to the one-line summaries about individual countries, i.e. the wording should obviously relate to that used for explaining a colour code (but colours are not needed there). --LPfi (talk) 08:27, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Brazil

"Brazil has a law project in process." What in the world is that supposed to mean and why isn't it described more thoroughly in Brazil's section? also where is the source for that information? is it even credible?Freddo63 (talk) 11:38, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Hong Kong

This section needs reworking since it is both misleading and inaccurate. There is a small but flourishing home educating community in Hong Kong. The existing reference to the 'Written reply' in Legco [17] makes it clear that 'If parents persistently do not send their children to school without valid reasons, the Director of Education (DE) may issue an attendance order under the Education Ordinance, requiring the parents to send their children to school. It is an offence if parents do not comply with an attendance order.' i.e. parents are only punished if they refuse to comply with an attendance order - the same situation as in the UK, in fact. I have made a first edit in the right direction. DigHK (talk) 08:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Homescholling is illegal in Portugal

The statment that homescholling is legal in Portugal is wrong and the source used to prove it says, in fact the other way around, that every child between the ages of 6 and 18 must be in a public or private school recognized by the government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.153.32.38 (talk) 22:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

What the user above me posted is exactly right, the law linked in the note makes homeschooling expressly illegal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.154.96.77 (talk) 23:52, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

That Homescholling is legal in Portugal should be somewhere on this page: http://www.educacaolivre.pt/mel/recursos/legislacao/ but I can't read Portuguese. --Egel _Reaction? 07:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Germany

On 08:28, 26 January 2013, a statement was added " German state education censured by UN as in violation of human rights.". There is footnote reference for this specific claim. None of the three references mentions this. I challenge this claim as unsourced. 75.210.226.254 (talk) 09:31, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough - I have removed it. It can be added back in if reliable sourcing can be found. StAnselm (talk) 10:09, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at page 54-57 of the Goldbecher report for more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.240.251.79 (talk) 00:47, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

This article is a mess!

I couldn't help but notice that this article is a bit of a mess. Inconsistencies everywhere, and there was even a question "what do the map colors mean" in the article! I'd be wiling to work with someone to help clean this up--I'm not good with lists yet, so I can't do it myself. Contact me on my talk page if you'd like to work with me. Thanks, AFisch99 (talk) 14:05, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Sweden

Could someone look into the sources for Sweden, it seems extremely one sided. It seems to be mostly homeschooling advocacy groups, who are unsatisfied with the new, more restrictive, homeschooling law. Furthermore, there is a blog listed as a source. And it states, incorrectly, that it is illegal. No, it is not illegal. It is explicitly legal, but you require permission from your local municipality, as to guarantee the rights of the child. 81.224.203.236 (talk) 07:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

The internet discussion of the Johansson case quoted is certainly extremely one-sided. A translation of the District Court judgement from June 2012 (http://hef.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Translation-Verdict-Case-no.-T-1058-111.pdf) - the judgement inaccurately/simplistically cited by HSLDA as supporting the parents - summarises the history of the case and the positions of social services and other professionals (though does not include their detailed reports - social services, if not the parents and their backers, have maintained confidentiality) as well as the parents and family members. What is clear from the judgement - which rejected (by 2 to 1) the social services request for permanent transfer of responsibility from the parents, but did not oppose continued social care for Domenic - and the summary is that the case is only partially, and perhaps marginally, related to home schooling. Social services had an involvement with the family two years prior to Domenic being of school age due to concerns of neglect. After being taken into care (triggered by the attempt to leave the country), Domenic was assessed to be suffering mental health and developmental problems, as well as indicators of poor physical/health care provision (cavities, missing of scheduled health checks etc). It also notes that at the time authorities investigated non-attendance at school, Domenic was not infact *being* home schooled, but that the parents stated (contradictorily), that he *would* be homeschooled, or *would* be educated in India.--Redmark (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Sources

I came across this resource, which seems to have pretty well researched legality information for most countries. In the cases that I checked it is at odds with the article. I feel it is stronger than the current sources used. Can someone validate? Truther2012 (talk) 20:01, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) is extreme pro homeschooling and Christian right. It is well researched but strongly biased. It might be smart to use it only as a way to find sources and avoid using it as a the sole source. --Egel _Reaction? 09:27, 6 December 2013 (UTC)