In 2023, the ERO carried out a "special review of education provision at Gloriavale" - looking at the school, students doing Te Kura, and those few families who had begun homeschooling in 2022. They visited with a sampling of 3 families, did not do individual full reviews, and had positive comments in their report about the families visited, but recommended to themselves that they needed to do a full review process for each individual child. 

In 2024, the ERO reviewed every homeschooling child at Gloriavale, conducting 96 reviews across some 30 families. They found the vast majority to be being “taught at least as regularly and well as.” A few – 11 students from 7 families – did not completely meet this standard. Some were as regularly but not as well as, and some were neither. While the Chief Review Officer does have the power to decide to do reviews at their own behest, this is the first time, ever, that I'm aware of that they did this. Reviews are normally done when requested by the Ministry as the result of a complaint. 

I, in my role as a home education consultant, was invited to visit Gloriavale to work with these families, which I did, spending a week staying there, reviewing their learning programmes, discussing ways in which improvements could be made, and so on. Subsequently each of these families met with Ministry staff and were able to satisfy them regarding the changes they were making or their learning programme in general and permitted to continue homeschooling. This is a normal part of review follow up - that families have an opportunity to provide further information to the Ministry if they "failed" the review, and the Ministry decides whether they are satisfied the family is able to continue teaching the child "at least as regularly and well as."

​In July of 2025, the ERO published their latest “Special Review Report of Education Provision within the Gloriavale Community” and noted that “The large majority of children receiving education through home-schooling are taught at least as regularly and well as in a registered school.”

In September of 2025, only two months later, the Secretary of Education, at the same time as considering closing the school at Gloriavale, apparently decided she wanted to consider revoking all the exemptions of students at Gloriavale. In order to do this, she needed to consider ERO reviews of families. The reviews concluded and publicly reported on only a few months prior would not have supported such a decision. In asking ERO to conduct new reviews, the Secretary stated in her letter to Nicholas Poole “I have concerns about the quality of the home education for multiple home educating families in the Gloriavale community, specifically around the suitability of the learning environment in which home education occurs.” 

To make determinations about the home environments of home educated students is outside of the ERO’s scope – they are to determine only whether the student is TAUGHT at least as regularly and well as. Notably, the ERO has no right of entry into home educator’s homes under the law (s468 (2)), and therefore the home is not an essential part of the review. However, the Gloriavale families acted in good faith and allowed reviewers into their homes. If they had not, none of what followed would have been possible. 

Of the teams of reviewers who went to Gloriavale (3 teams of 2 people) only one individual reviewer had ever conducted a homeschooling review before. The others were completely unfamiliar, and expressed how rushed and unprepared they felt to several families. Reviewers also told families they “weren’t interested in academics” and proceeded to ask questions about bathrooms, kitchens, water etc. 

These reviews also completely skipped three normal steps in homeschooling reviews - the Ministry did not first notify families of "concerns" and provide them with an opportunity to comment, ERO did not ask the families to complete their now-usual pre-review questionnaire and provide background information or other evidence they might choose to, and ERO refused to give families post-review feedback on what the outcomes were likely to be - all normal practice in usual home education reviews. 

It’s important to note that in this review, there were 104 children from 28 families, and a good number of them do not live at Gloriavale at all. Some live at Lake Brunner in individual homes. One family has lived outside of Gloriavale for around 5 years, and in Christchurch for some time – they only occasionally visit the community because of family who are still there, and told this to ERO before the review date was confirmed, but were treated the same as everyone else. Even within the main Gloriavale complex, some of the families are in the hostels, and a number live in separate homes. 

​They also asked questions about safety plans of people both in their own homes and wider community, including those of people unconnected to the family being reviewed  – information that is again out of scope, and especially so because these are arrangements managed by Oranga Tamariki, who were satisfied with the situation. In addition, this means that the ERO was asking families to provide private information about other people, which they felt compelled to do. The ERO is not qualified to investigate or make determinations on welfare matters. There is a difference between incidentally noting something of concern and referring it on, and deliberately hunting for, and misrepresenting, anything they can manage to label “concerning.” 

Some of these families were very new to homeschooling, having been home educating for as little as 3 months at the time of the reviews. The most experienced home educators had only been homeschooling since 2022. It is inappropriate for a review to be done so early on, and indeed the ERO has come back and said they could not make a determination as a result for those children who are only newly exempt. Nevertheless, they have put families through the reviews and required detailed responses prior to informing them they could not reach a determination. 

When the ERO sent the families the draft reports in December of 2025, they found EVERY single child to be “not being taught at least as regularly and well as.” Considering the opposite was true only a year earlier, this is statistically impossible. 

Later, the ERO “proactively released” to each family their files of “evidence," which were passed on to me by the families to review. It is clear in there that most of the families should have passed the reviews – and that the findings in many of the cases by the reviewers were entirely positive,  but then the moderators have changed all findings to negative, in every case – with reasons as flimsy as, in one case “report too positive.” Or by claiming that the evidence in the file doesn’t support the findings – which if that is the case it is a failure of the reviewers to include sufficient documentation to back up their clear and considered findings, not of the families, who it should be noted, were not asked to provide anything that was missing as would normally be the case in such as situation. 

It was also clear that reviewers had added things to families’ files that had nothing to do with those families or their homeschool programmes – eg how many paper towels were in a public restroom not used by a family, or how clean the clothes of a community member they encountered within the complex was. In some instances, based upon information shared with me, they made completely false statements in the files which do not align with the facts of the family under review. 

In the case of one family, who use a former ECE centre as their personal classroom, the reviewers were so hung up on the fact that there was a home-made bow with suction-cup arrows on a shelf, and a microwave at a level reachable by children, that they couldn't seem to focus on much else, making a big deal of these "safety issues" in the review notes. 

Most of the families conduct Progressive Achievement Testing, because ERO had previously suggested to them that they do so. About half of them are using a well-recognised, structured learning programme with external moderation of assessments. Nearly all of them are using well known curriculum of various types with built in assessment. Yet no matter what the families presented, the ERO could not be satisfied, claiming in nearly every instance that they couldn’t be certain that the children were achieving at a level appropriate to their age; it was evident that this was largely because the reviewers, being unfamiliar with home education, simply didn’t, or didn't want to, understand the different assessment options or know how to compare them to state education. This is a failing of the reviewers, not the home educators. Where there were PATs, in some instances they complained that there weren’t multiple annual ones for new students, or those not old enough to have done them the previous year. 

We (Barrister Douglas Brown and I) raised concerns about the way in which the reviews had been conducted with the Secretary and Chief Review Officer and asked to meet with each of them, and were refused several times. Eventually the CRO decided to conduct an internal review, which then led to an external one, the report of which is complete hogwash. It was written by consultants who understand nothing of home education requirements or reviews, and appears to be nothing more than an attempt to justify themselves doing whatever they wanted to. Mr Brown also raised concerns personally with the Minister. 

Families put together their own evidence and information to send ERO in response to the draft reports, totalling over 3,500 pages collectively. ERO took weeks to review these, and sent reports to family claiming they had made changes to the reports in response. However, the ERO only changed, in the main, 1-4 words per report, and kept their conclusions to “not as regularly and well as” in every child’s report.

The final reports have been sent to the Ministry, who have not yet progressed to the next step of providing families with an opportunity to comment, before making any decision on the exemptions. However, under existing legislation, the Ministry has the power to revoke the exemptions of all of those children, with no right of appeal. 

My point is not to defend Gloriavale. They have their own issues, and there are multiple government agencies working closely with families there. However, this should not be about Gloriavale. It is about individual families who have chosen to home educate, and should be entitled to the same due and fair process as any other home educator, to appropriately assess whether or not their children are being "taught as regularly and well as they would be in a registered school."

Yet these reviews appear, in my view, to be nothing more than an orchestrated plan to provide the Secretary with what ERO believed she wished for – an excuse to revoke the exemptions – even though this required the ERO to act outside of the scope of their established process and the law, and to effectively "falsify" findings.

Off the back of these reviews, the Minister is now trying to ram through legislation, without consultation, that would give the Secretary unconstrained power to impose any reporting, assessment or other requirements they so choose upon all home educators in the name of "protecting children." And the power to revoke exemptions even if ERO finds the children "are being taught as regularly and well as" simply because the Secretary is not satisfied as to compliance with imposed regulations. 

​Even if it were true that Gloriavale home educators were not being taught as regularly and well as, to use them as an excuse to make assumptions about all home educating families is unconscionable. Would any reasonable person suggest that Gloriavale is an example of NZ communities in general, and the homeschooling community in particular? 

And besides, if the ERO and the Secretary can get away with doing this to one group of home educators, what is to stop them targeting any other group in the future? Whether that's a particular faith or ideologically based group, those who live in a certain area, those who live in caravans, or whatever the case may be. 

Years ago, leading home educators used to urge families not to have ERO reviews in their homes, because reviewers were known to make assumptions based upon what they see even as they walk up the garden path. Over the years, with reviews being much more infrequent, and, let's face it, it being more convenient to have them come to our homes in most instances, where we have everything at the ready to show them, most families have allowed them to do so. 

But no more! The ERO have shown themselves to be untrustworthy, and should never, ever be permitted to conduct reviews in families' homes again. And, such reviews should be video recorded by families. It is also going to be very hard for families to have any faith in reviews being conducted on a fair and reasonable basis.  

Likewise, we can have no trust that the Secretary (either this or future ones) will impose only reasonable regulations. That may be the current intent, but we have no guarantees. Besides, existing legislation already provides the means to add additional, reasonable accountability for home educators. These new, sweeping powers are not needed. 

Which is why the proposed amendment (Amendment Paper 583, sections 5F and 51A) to the Education and Training (System Reform) Bill MUST be removed, or at the very least, send to Select Committee for proper consultation. 

Please continue to write to MPs about this legislation. Meet with or have a phone conversation with your local MP if you can. You would be surprised how many of them know nothing about any of this, or about homeschooling matters at all. You can help change that! 

You can sign this petition. 

There is rally at parliament being organised for this week - what out for more information in the home education Facebook groups online. 

The Bill is likely to go through its 3rd reading this week when parliament sits, between Tuesday and Thursday. So time is short. Actions need to happen NOW. And then hope and pray that this proposed amendment is defeated. 

Yesterday, the Education Minister, Erica Stanford, put out a press release about amendments to the Education and Training Reform Bill, listing matters to do with the Teaching Council. Tucked right at the bottom of the release was this statement:

Two further proposals support the learning and wellbeing of students in homeschooling and school hostels:

• Establishing clearer requirements for home education, including regulatory conditions to maintain exemptions from school enrolment.

What does that mean? Where is the information? I had to go digging, but in an Amendment Paper - which means it was made AFTER the Select Committee process on the Bill itself, bypassing public consultation - there are these two sections:

This means that the Secretary of Education can announce requirements for home educating families to produce reports at any frequency (annually? twice yearly? each term? each day? who knows), in a format and with the content that they require, AND that they can require our students to complete assessments of a nature and frequency that they determine. 

It also opens the door for this or any future government to add any other regulations they so choose. More on that below. 

AND that they can potentially revoke the exemptions of any students for whom the families refuse to comply. 

There has been chatter on and off for some time about whether or not home educators should have more accountability of some sort, and what that might look like. I have expected something to happen sooner or later. Knowing this Minister had such thoughts on her mind, I, as Government Liaison for NCHENZ, requested a meeting with her in November last year. Included in my request was this statement: "We are aware that you are considering matters such as the supervision allowance, outcomes and accountability and feel it is vital that we are able to meet with you and present relevant information for your consideration." ​ It took two months for them to tell me they were considering it, then on the 1st of April I received this email from the National Office of the Ministry:

"The Minister has forwarded your meeting request to me to respond to. I am the Senior Policy Manager of the Learning Support Policy team at the Ministry of Education, and my team has policy responsibility for home education. I understand that you were interested in meeting with Minister Stanford to discuss matters related to home education. We have started thinking about some of the topics you have raised. This work is still in development, and we are not in a position to discuss this with you at this time. We would welcome the opportunity to meet with you later in the year to hear your perspectives and feedback once our work is further developed."

Clearly this was not in the initial thinking stages as implied by the email. Both the Minister and her team and the national office have the contact details for myself and NCHENZ, and know that NCHENZ is the national representative body of home educators. Yet they did not even inform us of this massive change, let alone provide opportunity for consultation. 

And by introducing the changes via an Amendment Paper, they have bypassed the original announcement of the Education and Training (System Reform) Amendment Bill which included a Select Committee process and public consultation. 

As I was writing up this post, I received an email from the Ministry, from the same person who told me last month that they were only "started thinking" about these matters, which says that after the Bill is passed, they "will consult the home education sector on the development of the regulations to ensure the new requirements are workable." 

While I appreciate the opportunity to consult on the specifics IF this becomes law, it does not change the fact that there should have been consultation BEFORE putting it into law. 

I also have no confidence that they will consult in good-faith around the specifics, given the underhanded and undemocratic way they have introduced these amendments while refusing to meet with us, implying a lack of desire or intent to truly engage in meaningful consultation. 

Some might argue that home educators in general do not have sufficient accountability. So why are these proposed amendments an issue? Let me lay out some of the problems:

1) These changes have been introduced into Section 38 (the long-term exemptions) part of the Education and Training Act, making them mandatory conditions on all home educators in order to maintain an exemption. Under Section 566 of the Act, which is the basis upon which the MoE is able to pay home educators the Supervision Allowance, the Minister already has the right to impose whatever conditions they wish upon the allowance - currently they require the signing of a declaration, but they could have required some form of reports or similar in order to get the allowance. However, then parents would have some choice in the matter - they could not do the reports and not get the allowance, or not do the assessments and not get the allowance, if those were the conditions. By putting it in Section 38, no one can make that choice. More on that in a moment. 

2) Reports - in whatever manner, form and frequency they may dictate - take time. Time is something most home educators already lack, as we pour our efforts into raising, nurturing and educating our children. And who are these reports for? The idea of reports was already discussed in meetings with the Ministry and ERO only a very few years ago and dismissed because of the resourcing it would require for them to handle, read and store such reports. However, this Minister has said in previous comments that this isn't a problem with AI, implying that the reports will likely be scanned by AI and then handled in whatever fashion they deem fit. So, we are expected to put in our time and effort to write reports that likely will not be read by another human - meaning little effort on their end. 
​
Plus, since there has been no consultation, no discussion, not direct information, no discussion papers etc - we have no idea just what the Minister is expecting or wanting here, and how overbearing or otherwise it will be. 

3) Assessments - again, without any information, we have no idea what kind of assessments or how often will be expected. If we use what is currently required in schools as a gauge, that might look like phonics testing in the first year of school, and twice-yearly reading/writing/math assessments in primary school.  Schools can choose from e-asTTle or Progressive Assessment Tests (PATs). However, for home educators to access those currently there are costs involved. 

That does not address the fact that there are a significant number of home educating families with disabled or neurodiverse children, many of whom cannot cope with exams or assessment type pressures. Many of these (and other) families are homeschooling specifically so their children are not required to undergo these assessments. 

4) In the case of both reports and assessments, we do not know what they would do if we did do them in some fashion, but the results were not what they want to see. Would that invoke an ERO review with a view to cancelling the exemption, simply because a child is not (yet) achieving at a prescribed level or doesn't do well in a certain type of assessment which does not actually reflect their abilities? 

5) Opens the door to any other regulations - a key consideration is 640A 2(e) which says the regulations may...provide for any other matter necessary for the administration of section 38. This leaves the way entirely open for this or any future government to impose yet more regulations - for example, what's to stop them saying all home educators must follow the state curriculum? Or all home educators must have annual evaluations/reviews? Or all home educators must submit samples of their children's work to the local school principal? Minister Stanford herself suggested that last one at a public meeting before the last election. 

This one is VERY important - as it means that any additional requirements or changes can be made simply by writing a regulation, unchecked by Parliament or parliamentary process. 

6) An exemption from the requirement to be enrolled in school removes us and our children from the school system. This is very like imposing the school system upon us. 

By law, parents have a right to decide "where, and how, their child is to be educated" - and thus we have the right to choose home education. At the same time, our child has a right to an education - which is why we have exemption applications, to ensure that we have a plan to teach our child "at least as regularly and well as they would be in a registered school."

Does that mean that there should not be any follow up to ensure "as regularly and well as" is actually happening? No, I would not argue that. The majority of home educators are doing an excellent job of ensuring their children are educated, using whatever approach they have chosen. There are, however, likely to be a few families that are not doing a good job, in part because there is no accountability - the likelihood of an ERO review has been remote for many years. 

The ability to conduct ERO reviews of home educators remains in the law. Not doing them routinely has been a matter of funding/resourcing. At least with ERO reviews, one can potentially present a diverse range of approaches to home education, and still satisfy the "as regularly and well as" criteria. Imposing set assessments, however, is very much a one-size-fits-all approach that absolutely will not fit many students and families. 

7) The Supervision Allowance is a token amount paid to home educators who elect to receive it. It has not been meaningfully reviewed or adjusted since it was introduced in 1990, which means it has significantly lost value in the meantime. The Minister has not provided any information suggesting that the allowance will be adjusted to take into account both inflation over 30 plus years AND the added workload she is intending to require of home educators. After all, while teachers are required to write reports and carry out assessments, they are paid a salary to do so!

8) Perhaps most importantly, the proposed regulations are entirely inequitable, and not just financially. The ERO review system has always been inequitable - no school would have a review and potentially be closed because of one "failed" review - they would be told what needed to improve, be given time and support to improve it, and then have another review in 1,3 or 5 years. Home educators can have one ERO review that finds their child is "not being taught as regularly and well as" and have their exemptions revoked. Now they are wanting to slap on reports and assessments on the basis that if the Secretary is not satisfied that they have been complied with, the exemptions can be revoked! Again, highly inequitable. 

This places enormous, unreasonable pressure on families, not just to comply with the requirements, but to "get it right" under threat of having their children being forced to attend school instead.  

They would not be able to revoke exemptions because of one missed report or assessment - but they could use that as grounds to invoke an ERO review, and on the basis of how the proposed law is written, even if ERO finds the student "is being taught as regularly and well as", the Secretary could still revoke the exemption on the basis of non-compliance!!

The Education and Training (System Reform) Amendment Bill (the Bill) passed its Second Reading on 14 May and is now due to progress to the Committee of the whole House stage. 

Today, ahead of the Committee of the whole House debate, the Government introduced an Amendment Paper which proposes further changes to the Bill for consideration by the House. The Amendment Paper proposes strengthening the oversight of home education by requiring home educating families to meet specific requirements prescribed in regulations to maintain their exemption from enrolment in a registered school.

The proposed changes include a new power to make regulations that will set out what needs to be done to maintain an exemption. The regulations will provide specific requirements around the regularity and content of reporting and may also include other requirements such as assessment. These changes are proposed to come into effect on 1 July 2027.

At this stage, there are no changes to home education requirements until the Bill is passed. The Bill must be considered by the Committee of the whole House (due to take place this week) and then will need to pass Third Reading before it receives Royal Assent, at which point the Bill becomes law.

After that, the Ministry would work on deciding what the specific requirements are, which would become regulations to be put into effect in July next year. The Amendment alone does not introduce these regulations - but opens the way for them to be introduced. 

That means that TODAY and THIS WEEK are the time to take action if you are opposed to these amendments!

This Bill is being put forth by the National Party. It is already being opposed by the Greens and Labour. If ACT oppose it in Parliament, then I understand the whole Bill will go nowhere. Or if ACT opposes certain sections or amendments, they will not go through. 

Each family should write to following people, in order of importance:

• Their geographically nearest National MP (if your MP is not a National one, write to the closest one)
• Laura McClure - ACT list MP and Education Spokesperson - Laura.McClure@parliament.govt.nz​
• Andy Foster - NZ First list MP and Education Spokesperson - Andy.Foster@parliament.govt.nz
• The Minister of Education - E.Stanford@ministers.govt.nz
• Their local MP (if not already covered by above)
• The Ministry of Education - enquiries.national@education.govt.nz

The list of current MPs is here: Members of Parliament - New Zealand Parliament - when you click on one you'll be taken to a page which includes their info and contact details. 

Things to cover in your letters:

• That you are writing in regard to Amendment Paper 583 on the Education and Training (System Reform) Amendment Bill, in particular parts 5F and 51A
• That you OPPOSE the Amendment and why
• That you object to the lack of consultation
• That the method of introducing the Amendment was undemocratic because it bypassed the Select Committee completely.
• Concern that the amendment opens the way for the introduction of any unchecked, un-consulted additional regulations which may burden families and interfere with their day-to-day homeschooling. 
• If you wish, share the effect that such requirements for reporting and/or assessment would have on your family and children
• That you urge the MP (if applicable) to oppose the Amendment in Parliament

My own draft letter may serve as a template - be sure to personalise. You can download it here:
Draft example MP letter 
​
If you have family and friends who are supportive of or interested in home education, or who are no longer home educating so may not see this post, please share it with them and urge them to also write letters to the above people. 

I also urge the leaders or representatives of groups to write on behalf of those groups. In addition to writing to the people set out above, for groups only, please also write to:

• Dr Parmjeet Parmar - ACT List MP who is on the Education and Workforce Select Committee (and is former Chairperson of the Select Committee)
• Katie Nimon - National MP and current chairperson of the Education and Workforce Select Committee

In addition to the points above, groups can also write about:

• The reason there have been few reviews is because homeschooling has generally been so successful that there has been little need for widespread reviews. 
• Home educators are successful and contributing members of society who overwhelmingly have successful outcomes in their education, especially when compared to state or private schools. 
• If the government believes they do not have data to support this, they should do what the Ministry did in the 2013-2015 review of homeschooling, and that is have NZQA collate data on cohorts of now adult former home educators, and see how many have achieved each possible level of qualification on the framework, and compare it to parallel cohorts of state educated students. Numbers for Levels 1-3 may be lower as they don't take into account alternative qualification options that home educators often pursue for university entrance, but numbers for higher levels should paint a useful picture of the overall success of home education. 

It is up to each individual and group to decide if they will respond to this call to action. If we do nothing, then we must accept the consequences. The last time I put out such a call to action was upon the introducing of the Education and Training Bill in 2020 - where they had left out a right of appeal if applications are declined. Home educators took action, and the result was that a very large proportion of all submissions on that Bill was from home educators, with a successful outcome! 

They have skipped the opportunity to submit, so writing letters is our main option to urge the dropping of these amendments. And if we don't act NOW, the opportunity will be gone. 

Should the Amendments end up in law, then that will be the time to work with the Ministry around the particulars, but right now is the time to oppose it in its entirety. 

* Data for 2024 & 2025 from the Ministry combined declined and withdrawn applications, but did not include lapsed ones. In previous years, this data was separated out. For example, in 2016 there were 15 withdrawn applications, 14 declined and 56 lapsed. Only the declined ones are shown above. 
** These figures include 96 reviews in 2024 and 104 reviews in 2025 of homeschooling students at or connected in some way with Gloriavale. 
<5 - where a number is between 1 and 4, the Ministry does not usually give exact numbers, to protect privacy. They just give "less than 5" as the figure. 
? While I have not yet asked the Ministry for the number of exemptions revoked in 2024 and 2025, the Minister said in answer to a Parliamentary Question in October of 2025 that since 1st Jan 2024 there had been 5 exemptions revoked. 

Notes:
The number of exempt students as of 1st July is taken from the Education Counts website, where figures are recorded for as of 1st July each year for the previous 12 months. 
All other data is for the calendar year from 1st Jan to 31st December and is sourced from the Ministry of Education or the Education Review Office. 
Data as shown is compiled from various OIA request responses I have received over the years, and may be subject to change as additional information is received. 

See previous posts for more detailed annual summary figures HERE
​

From time to time, a home educating family may be informed that ERO is to conduct a review. Under current policy (since 2009), this usually only happens as the result of a complaint. (For more on the history and statistics of ERO reviews see HERE and HERE.). However, it can also happen because ERO choose to do a review of their own initiative, or because the Minister directs them to do reviews. The Ministry might also initiate a review process due to concerns arising from reading a new exemption application for a family that is already homeschooling, or based on "other relevant and verified sources of information." 

In this article I will outline each of the steps that are supposed* to occur in the process. 

*Sometimes things don't happen the way they are supposed to - if you need help, contact me. 

I strongly recommend that you are contacted about a review, that you get support from someone knowledgeable IMMEDIATELY. A review can be a positive and encouraging process, but it is also innately stressful and has the potential for serious repercussions. Your exemptions are at stake! So, first, get support. You can Contact Me if needed. 

If any person (they can be anonymous) contacts the Ministry of Education and expresses concern that a home educated (exempt) student is not being taught as well or as regularly as they should be, then the regional office make note of this complaint, and conduct an "initial investigation" which should involve two parts:

​1) Asking the complainant some questions to ascertain the grounds for the complaint – do they actually know the family/child, do they have specific educational concerns (or do they just need to be given some information about how homeschooling actually works) etc. You'd be amazed how often "complaints" happen that are either made out of ignorance or by people who don't actually know anything about the child and their learning. 

Some (experienced) staff are very good at doing the above. Others skip right over this step and move on to....

​2) Write to the family concerned, notify them that a complaint has been received, give the specific educational concerns mentioned and provide them with the opportunity to comment. Families are informed in the letter that an ERO review may occur, but that the Ministry is first seeking information from them before determining whether this is necessary.

Things to note:

• You have a right to see a copy of the complaint (if it was by phone, then the notes made by staff). You can request this from the Ministry, and it will be treated as a Privacy Act or OIA request - which means they have up to 20 business days to respond. The name of the person making the complaint will be redacted. You can tell the Ministry that you wish to see the complaint before responding, and thus ask for an appropriate extension if they gave you a set date to respond by. 
• While the Ministry usually doesn't tell you exactly what they're looking for in your response (though if they describe specific concerns you obviously need to speak to those) but usually what you need to do is give them a brief update on your children's learning programme and regularity. It may be wise to seek some guidance in doing this, to make sure you cover what is needed. If you provide the Ministry with sufficient information to satisfy them that your child continues to be taught as regularly and well as, then they will close the file and notify you (and the complainant) that they will be taking no further action. 
• However, if you are in a situation such as a split family where the matter of homeschooling is likely to end up in court, then I advise you to consider politely declining to provide any information, forcing them to proceed with an ERO review. A positive ERO review can be useful evidence in a court case to show that your child is being "taught as regularly and well as" as ERO are the only ones tasked with making this call, and you can't just request an ERO review. 
• If the complaint is deemed "serious" or if there has previously been a complaint which didn't result in an ERO review, then the Ministry might skip asking families for info and go straight to the next step. 
• They cannot review a student who has turned 16.
• Ministry policy states that if they become aware, in the course of their investigations, that a child has special learning needs, they should seek specialist input from Learning Support. If it is determined that the family could meet s38 requirements with appropriate and available learning support, then an ERO review should not be conducted. 

Important: The Ministry does NOT have the power or authority to review a family themselves. If they tell you they want to visit (or you come to them) so they can conduct a "review" or "informal review", this is a red flag. It's ok if they ask you for information in an email and you tell them you'd prefer to meet in person to go over things - that's your choice. But they should not in any way imply this is required. 

If the Ministry is not satisfied with the response provided by families to their inquiry, the family refuses to respond, or if the complaint was deemed "serious" and they skipped asking for info, then they move on to Step 2.

Other than a complaint about your homeschooling programme, the Ministry might also decide to conduct a review on the basis of concerns they have after reading a new exemption application submitted for an additional child in your family, or based on other "relevant and verified sources of information." A Judge or Oranga Tamariki might also ask the Ministry to arrange a review. In these cases, they are still bound to follow due process. 

As noted above, ERO can initiate reviews independently, or at the direction of the Minister. In those cases, they start from Step 3 below. These situations are rare however, so if you're contacted directly by ERO as your first knowledge of a review, don't assume this is the case - find out why the review is happening. 

Your local regional office cannot just directly ask ERO to do a review - they must put the request to the National Office, who should independently review the request and related evidence to make sure the regional office has done its due diligence. If they concur, then they will put the request to ERO to do a review. 

Things to note:

• Legally, the Secretary of Education (aka "the Ministry") cannot order ERO to do a review. They can only make the request. ERO are only bound to conduct a review when directed to do so by the Minister of Education, who is not involved in the situations I am describing in this article. 
• ERO should consider the evidence provided to them by the Ministry and independently conclude that a review is appropriate in the circumstances. This, in theory, provides an additional layer of checks and balances so that families are not subject to reviews unnecessarily. However, I have never heard of a situation where the MoE made the request and ERO said no. The language ERO uses is "The Secretary asked us to conduct a review." which implies a "they asked, we do" approach. When reviews changed from routine to being conducted on a complaints basis, the then-Chief Review Officer announced "ERO will carry out reviews only when requested by the Secretary for Education, or in other particular circumstances."
• If the Ministry decides to request a review on the basis of complaint about one child's education, they will request ERO review all exempt students in the family at the same time. 
• The information that the Ministry supplies to ERO includes your original exemption application/s (and any related extra information if you were asked for some at the time), and the details of the complaint. 
• The Ministry should write to the family informing them of the decision to ask ERO to conduct a review (but only after the National Office have agreed to this). This is policy. 

ERO emails the family advising they have been asked to conduct the review and setting out a proposed date and time. They should include the following:

• A form to complete and return, confirming the details of exempt students, whether or not you will have the review at your home, and whether or not the proposed date/time is acceptable. ("Confirmation of Review of Exempted Students")
• A document which outlines particulars of the review interview. ("Education Review: Exempted Students (Homeschooling)")
• A pre-review questionnaire, which asks some questions about your children's learning programme and which they would like you to complete and send back to them along with any evidence you wish to supply. 
• A link to the Evaluative Questions which guide the review (these are the points that they are seeking information on). 
• A link to their Code of Conduct. 
• They may also tell you, as it says on their website, that "Our reviewers may use sections of our School Evaluation Indicators in reaching judgements about your homeschooling programme. The indicators provide examples of evidence for good quality and effective programmes and practice."

They will tell you that at the review, the reviewer will speak to your child/ren, and that when they do, you or another person must be present. 

Things to note:

• It is highly recommended that you have a support person present - ideally someone with homeschooling experience. This person cannot answer for you in the review, but they can remind you of things you planned to talk about but may have gone blank on in the moment (if you've prepped with them), be available to assist with a child who needs attention while you're focused on the review, be present with a child who is being interviewed, and, perhaps most importantly, serve as a neutral witness to what goes on if needed. 
• Also give thought to whether or not to allow ERO into your home. They have no right of entry to your home, (this is explicit in law), and therefore they do not need to see your home in order to conduct a review. Years ago, leaders in the homeschooling community used to recommend NOT having them in your home, but for some years now we have been more relaxed about it. However, recent events, which I will write about separately soon, lead me to strongly recommend you do NOT allow the review at your home. Instead, negotiate with ERO a suitable neutral local place (it needs to be private). The downside of this is that you will need to pack up and lug all your records and other resources you wish to show them to the location of the review (and may wish to print some photos of broader resources etc that they would have seen if they visited the home). However, the upside is that it avoids ERO passing judgements based on people's homes and prevents them from making completely out of scope comments in this regards. 

ERO takes an "evidence-based approach." This means that while you can answer questions and make statements - and need to - it's highly important that you can show evidence to support this. Ahead of the review, you need to collect and collate the evidence that you will present. 

It is also important at the time of the review that you do not assume that ERO will ask for what they want to see - often they will not. YOU need to be prepared and present things to them. (You can also have sent them some good evidence in advance with the pre-review questionnaire, which I recommend you take advantage of).  

Evidence you might want to have ready includes:

• Samples of writing done by the children
• Current and completed workbooks, worksheets or similar
• Photos of projects completed and activities they take part in. ERO will not want to scroll through photos on a device. Print off the photos you want to show them, and suitably collate/present them. 
• Any earned certificates, awards or similar. 
• Any standardised testing you may have chosen to use AND evidence of how you use this to inform your planning and teaching. 
• Other evidence of assessment and record keeping of learning outcomes AND how you use this to inform your planning and teaching
• Term reports if used
• Your reflections or notes, diary or what have you of work completion, activities and learning
• Resources available
• Learning environment - where do the children do most of their learning at home? What other places do they do learning activities?  What places do you go to that serve to enhance or support their learning experiences?
• Documentation of any testing or diagnosis of learning difficulties or disabilities, as well as recommendations for support AND evidence of how you are putting these into practice. 
• Evidence of their participation in/access to social and/or sporting opportunities, clubs, homeschool groups etc.
• Evidence of regularity - timetable, diary showing achieved work and activities or similar
• Portfolios for each child showing much of the above

ERO are going to be looking for information and evidence that enables them to make "findings" on each of the following points:

• ​<Name of child> (is progressing and achieving OR is not progressing or achieving) at a rate and level appropriate to what could be expected for age and stage of learning.
• The homeschooling programme is (effective OR needs improvement) in meeting the learning needs.
• The teaching and management of the homeschooling programme is (effective OR needs improvement).
• Assessment and planning information (is OR is not) used well to monitor progress and inform future learning.
• Achievement information (is OR is not) valid and shows progress over time.
• The home learning environment (supports/does not support) engagement and success in learning.

Their findings on the above points will each be listed in the review report, with a conclusion as to whether or not the child "is being taught as regularly and well as" they would be in a registered school. 

So, you need to prepare information and evidence to allow you to speak to each of the above points (and taking into consideration the Evaluative Questions). 

Two reviewers arrive at the appointed time to conduct the review. Typically, one will do most of the talking, and the other will take notes. 

• They MUST (by law) begin the review by showing you their designation - that is, proof of their appointment as review officers. They will ask you to sign a form to say that you've seen these. If they do not show you this, they cannot conduct the review; if they do not comply with this, the entire review is void. 
• Some reviewers will fairly closely follow the Evaluative Questions document in guiding the review. Others don't so much but cover the main areas in their own way. 
• Do NOT assume that reviewers will ask you for everything that they need. YOU need to be prepared and present information and evidence to them to show your children are being "taught at least as regularly and well as."
• The reviewers will take photos of various things to record as "evidence" to support their report. Make sure you present them with the things you want them to see. 
• The reviewers will speak to each child. They are not to "test" the children, but they will ask them questions to encourage responses. Prepare your children by ensuring they have things they can talk comfortably about with the reviewers - such as a project they enjoyed, a model or some artwork they are proud of, a story they wrote that they'd like to read to the reviewers or similar. Another adult must be present with the child. If reviewers cannot speak to a child, they will stop the review. 
• If YOU do not provide them with evidence of your child's current learning abilities, particularly in literacy and math, they may try to gauge this by asking the child to read aloud, or asking a math question etc. No, they're not supposed to test the child, but they will be looking for evidence of some sort of current abilities. 

The review will likely take several hours. At the end of the review, the reviewers will leave for a period of time (usually a couple of hours) and go somewhere to discuss together your review. They will then return to you, and give you an indication of what they expect the outcome of the review to be, as well as share any pointers they may have that they think will help you improve your home education programme. They will give the caveat that they still have to return to the office and put everything together, have it checked by a manager etc, but usually they are able to tell you what the outcome of their report is going to be. 

Back at the office, the ERO officers will type up their notes, compile and annotate evidence, complete worksheets, and draft the official report. A manager will go over all this and either agree with the outcomes, or make amendments if they deem it appropriate. 

ERO will then send the draft report (only) to you, along with a response form. You will have up to 10 working days to respond. 

The draft report will include the following:

• Child's name, date of birth, parents' names, your address, date of review and the names of the reviewers.
• A few short paragraphs describing the homeschooling programme, child's particular interests etc. 
• "Findings" where they state each of the following:​

1. ​<Name of child> (is progressing and achieving OR is not progressing or achieving) at a rate and level appropriate to what could be expected for age and stage of learning.
2. The homeschooling programme is (effective OR needs improvement) in meeting the learning needs..
3. The teaching and management of the homeschooling programme is (effective OR needs improvement).
4. Assessment and planning information (is OR is not) used well to monitor progress and inform future learning.
5. Achievement information (is OR is not) valid and shows progress over time.
6. The home learning environment (supports OR does not support) engagement and success in learning.

• Possibly "Next Steps" or "Areas for Improvement" if they want to put any recommendations.
• Conclusion: which will state that the child is or is not being "taught as regularly and well as". Note that "as regularly" and "as well" are two separate things, and are judged separately. So the judgement, could, for example, state that the child is being taught as regularly as but not as well as or vice versa. 

If you're happy with the report, you can simply use the response form to confirm that there are no errors of fact, and send it back. 

If, however, you believe there are errors in the report, or you disagree with the findings, then you will want to respond by listing what you consider to be the errors, explaining what the issue is, as well as providing evidence to support your position. ERO operate on an evidence-based approach, so just saying you disagree won't work. You need to provide evidence. 

This may be where you end up sending scans/photos of things you have already shown them, but they didn't take photos of, or things you had ready to show them, but they didn't look at. 

In theory, if you can show them evidence and speak suitably to a point, they will make changes to the report. Experience, however, has shown that while they may amend or add a sentence or two as a result of your response, ERO has never been known to change their "bottom line" (ie conclusion) no matter what you send them. Don't let that discourage you from sending a meaty response when needed. I'm just pointing it out so you are prepared. Regardless, it is never a waste of time to properly respond - because what you send will become part of the file, which may come in handy later. 

Particularly if you think the findings of the report are unfair, or if what is in the report seems at odds with what the reviewers told you at the time, it can be useful to request a copy of your file from ERO under the Privacy and/or Official Information Act. You would do this by asking for a copy of all notes, evidence, information and documents held by ERO that form part of or were considered in your review. You can also request that the timeframe for you to respond to the review report be extended to allow you to receive and consider this information. A typical such file can be around 200 pages (will vary depending on the number of children). When I review such a file, here's what I focus on, in this order:

• The typed worksheets completed by the reviewers. This will have remarks for each section, their judgements on each point, and ultimately conclusions for each child. 
• The Peer Review Attestation (aka moderator reports) which is usually about 2 pages. Here you will see if the moderator has disagreed with any of the reviewers' findings, and why, and if they have changed judgements, and why. 
• The photos of evidence and the annotations (or notes) written about them. 
• The handwritten sheets of notes the reviewers took during the review. 

For both of those last two things, they are likely to have highlighted various things in one of three colours - green means "good", yellow means "to note" and purple means "of concern". The highlighted points as well as handwritten red notes next to their original notes will be the main things that have led to their ultimate conclusions. 

If reviewers have come to a positive judgement on a point, and then the moderator has changed it, speaking to this in your response will be important. The same applies if the reviewers have reached a negative judgement on a point, for reasons you believe to be in error. 

After considering your response, ERO will finalise the report and send a copy to both you and the Ministry's National Office. The N.O will then forward it on to your regional office for follow up. 

If the outcome of your finalised report is that the child "is being taught as regularly and well as" then the Ministry will send you a letter which states that they have received the report, are satisfied, and will be taking no further action. 

If the report included suggested next steps, then the Ministry will consider whether there is any action they need to take on their end (eg if it suggested the Ministry should provide learning support to the child), however the parent is under no obligation to take any further action. (This is stated in the Ministry's Policies and Procedures manual). 

If the outcome of your finalised report is that the child is NOT being taught either as regularly or as well as (or both), then the Ministry will send you a letter that states this and giving you the opportunity to comment before they make any decisions. 

It is important to understand here that the Ministry has the right to revoke your exemption on the basis of a negative review report, but only after they have made reasonable effort to obtain all relevant information, which is why they are giving you the opportunity to comment. 

This is your opportunity to either:

• ​Acknowledge the findings of the report (if they were fair) and explain what improvements you plan to make in order to ensure your child WILL be taught at least as regularly and well as. OR
• Otherwise show the Ministry evidence that you are or will be ensuring your children are "taught at least as regularly and well as..."

Keep in mind that the ONLY thing that the Ministry will have received from ERO is your final report, all 1-1/2 pages of it. They see NONE of the evidence collected, internal worksheets, your response etc. This means that it can be very helpful for you to send them these things yourself, where they support your position. This is where the work you have done both before and after the review pays off. 

If you are able to provide information and evidence that satisfies the Ministry that you will teach your children as regularly and well as going forward, in most instances they will allow you to continue home educating, and will send a letter confirming this. 

Otherwise, they will revoke the exemption, and send you a letter informing you of this, and giving you 14 days to enroll your child in school. There is no appeals process for revoked exemptions. Should this happen to you, please do contact me. 

If you or someone you know has had a review in the last 5 years, whether or not the exemptions were revoked, I'd love to hear from you/them - please Contact Me. 

Homeschooling turnover

Between 1 July 2024 and 1 July 2025 there was an overall net increase of 253 students; 2,025 students entered into homeschooling and 1,772 students finished homeschooling.
The most common age at entry (the mode) was 6, with 39.4% of those starting being 6 years old. The mean average age at entry was 9 years old, with 64.1% aged 9 or under, and 1.0% were aged 16 or above.
Of the students entering homeschooling during the year ending 1 July 2025, 66.4% identified as European/Pākehā (down from 73.8% in 2015), 18.1% identified as Māori (up from 9.9% in 2015), 4.3% identified as Pacific peoples (up from 3.3% in 2015), and 4.5% identified as Asian (up from 2.9% in 2015). Ethnicity is unknown for 0.2% of homeschoolers.
The most common age at finishing (the mode) was 15, with 16.8% of those finishing being 15 years old. The mean average age at finishing was 12.9 years old, with 66.5% aged 12 or over, and 23.6% were aged 16 or above.
Of the students finishing homeschooling during the year ending 1 July 2025, 24.3% had been in homeschooling less than a year, 52.5% had been in homeschooling for 1 to 5 years, and 9.9% had been in homeschooling for 10 years or more.

The above information is taken from Education Counts, where you can also download spreadsheets of homeschool data from 1998 to the present. 

🏡 Key Points for Home Educators:
1️⃣ Homeschooling is valid and growing.
The UN now includes home education in global discussions about learning. Every country does it differently — from full legal recognition (like NZ, Canada, and SA) to restrictions (like France or Germany).
2️⃣ Parents’ rights are real — but not absolute.
Parents have the freedom to choose how their children learn, but also the duty to ensure a full, high-quality education that supports the child’s wellbeing and rights.
3️⃣ Quality matters more than method.
UNESCO doesn’t prescribe a model — structured, unschooling, faith-based, hybrid — all can work, as long as children are learning, thriving, and gaining the skills to live in a diverse world.
4️⃣ Oversight is part of accountability, not control.
Registration, evaluations, and basic checks are seen as ways to protect children’s rights, not to restrict parents. The report urges respectful partnerships between families and governments.
5️⃣ Inclusion and diversity count.
Children should have opportunities to connect with others, encounter different cultures and ideas, and learn respect and empathy — key goals of education everywhere.

💬 In Their Words:
“Safeguarding the right to education in every setting remains a core responsibility of the State.”
“Home-schooling may therefore be considered part of educational freedom… nevertheless, the same guarantees must apply to the right to education in all dimensions.”

💡 Takeaway:
Homeschooling is recognized internationally — but it comes with shared responsibility.
UNESCO’s message is: freedom + quality + inclusion = a rights-respecting education.

I've spent many hours pouring over this report, making notes, etc. As you may have seen, a number of people/organisations have written strongly worded posts about the report, claiming it "targets homeschooling" etc. Naturally, in a report such as this, there will always be points we do not agree with. Overall, however, I consider the report to be rather positive. It's important to keep in mind that the report is looking at global homeschooling, not specifically New Zealand. Some of the examples are therefore very different to what is expected in NZ, and some of the ideas or recommendations may be more or less potentially applicable. While there are some points in the document to which I might think "I hope our government doesn't look at that" there are significantly more points where I think "I wish our government WOULD look at that!"

Ultimately, this is a discussion document - intended to facilitate or encourage further research, discussion and consultation. It is not a directive. Even within this document, where various examples are given of other documents and past directives to which States are signatories, it is evident that many of these have not been put into practice in various countries, including our own. Therefore, no-one should read this and worry that the government is going to immediately put into effect any suggestions that we might consider undesirable.

I admit, the full document is not particularly light or easy reading, however I could encourage every home educator to take the time to do so. The following, however, serves as a summary.

​Short Summary (pp. 1–2)
Purpose:
The report explores homeschooling within the international human rights framework, focusing on balancing parental freedom with children’s right to quality education.
Key quote:
“Safeguarding the right to education in every setting remains a core responsibility of the State.”
Main ideas:

• Homeschooling must uphold children’s right to education and well-being.
• States should develop oversight mechanisms (registration, evaluation) while supporting parents.
• Policies should be grounded in research and consultation.

Takeaway for home educators:
UNESCO acknowledges homeschooling as a legitimate educational path but insists it must align with human rights standards — particularly regarding quality, accountability, and inclusion.

​Introduction (pp. 6–7)
Context:
Homeschooling is growing globally but remains under-examined in terms of human rights.
Governments vary widely in how they permit or regulate it.
Key quote:
“International human rights law does not explicitly refer to homeschooling, yet the right to education applies to all educational forms.”
Takeaway:
The UN sees homeschooling as part of the education landscape and subject to human rights interpretation — especially around the State’s duty to ensure access and quality.

​1. Overview of Homeschooling (pp. 8-11)
1.1 Defining homeschooling
Describes homeschooling as education primarily delivered by parents or guardians in the home, distinct from distance learning or private tutoring.
1.2 Difference from COVID-19 school closures
Clarifies that pandemic-era “home learning” was temporary and State-directed, unlike homeschooling, which is family-initiated and long-term.
1.3 History and current trends
Notes its historical roots in parental autonomy and alternative pedagogy.
Mentions rapid growth, particularly in North America, Europe, and parts of Africa and Asia.
Key quote:
“Even though many activities take place in the home, homeschooling parents can use community resources and surroundings, as well as public facilities, to enrich children's learning.”
Takeaway:
Homeschooling is not a fringe movement; it’s part of a diverse global trend shaped by differing motivations — philosophical, religious, academic, or practical.

2. Human Rights as Applied to Homeschooling
The heart of the report — applying eight human rights principles to homeschooling.

2.1 Freedom of Choice (pp. 12-13)
Key quote:
“Home-schooling may therefore be considered as part of educational freedom… Nevertheless, the same guarantees must apply to the right to education in all dimensions... therefore this right is not absolute.”

• Parents have the right to choose education “in conformity with their convictions,” but this right is not absolute.
• Legislation must ensure that the exercise of this freedom does not endanger children’s other rights.

Motivations for homeschooling:

• Religious/moral values (“ideologues”)
• Dissatisfaction with pedagogy (“pedagogues”)
• Concerns over school quality, safety, racial injustice, or mobility

Key Quote: "...in the context of homeschooling, it is necessary to guarantee that parental freedom of choice does not weaken children’s access to various other rights, such as the right to freedom from violence or the right to be protected from work that interferes with the child’s education. Consequently, legislation concerning homeschooling must be aligned with the internationally agreed standards."

Takeaway:
The UN recognizes diverse homeschooling motivations but stresses that freedom of choice carries responsibilities toward the child’s rights and welfare.

​2.2 Free and Compulsory Education (pp 14-15)

• States must ensure 12 years of free education, of which at least 9 years are compulsory (including primary education).
• Regulations should clarify how homeschooling satisfies compulsory education laws.

Key quote: "As stated in General Comment No. 11 of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, “the element of compulsion serves to highlight the fact that neither parents, nor guardians, nor the State are entitled to treat as optional the decision as to whether the child should have access to primary education” (para. 6)."

Takeaway:
Homeschooling is valid if it fulfills the same right-to-education obligations as school attendance.

​2.3 Quality Education (pp 15-23)

Quote: "Quality is an intrinsic component of the right to education......This shift in the global agenda emerged from the recognition that, in many contexts, school access often did not translate into students mastering basic literacy and numeracy skills......In complying with their obligations, States need to guarantee both that public education is of good quality and that separate educational systems and private-education institutions conform to minimum education standards laid down by the State. These standards serve as benchmarks for quality, ensuring consistency across different education providers.....While not explicitly mentioned, if the freedom to choose homeschooling is protected by the right to education, then the obligation to protect the right to education should be interpreted as extending to homeschooling, that is, the obligation entails ensuring that the quality of education provided by homeschooling is of an appropriate standard."

Quote: "What constitutes quality education is, however, much more challenging to define....Learning outcomes are among the most common indicators for assessing the quality of education, as they are supposed to measure whether learners are actually learning.....It is also necessary to take into consideration current discussions on assessment, which consider that, beyond the foundational skills (including literacy and numeracy skills) which are at the core of the right to education, “much important learning cannot be measured or counted”.....​homeschooling success is often evaluated using the same criteria used for traditional schooling; instead, the focus should be on whether homeschool environments are meeting their intended goals. 
​Yet, while assessment should adapt to account for the homeschooling setting, it should nonetheless also determine whether the standards laid down by the State are met. An additional layer of difficulty lies in that the decision to homeschool is not necessarily a permanent one, making it increasingly challenging to examine which setting had what effect on a student. Furthermore, the profiles of homeschooled children (e.g., children with disabilities, those who experience bullying, those who live a nomadic lifestyle) and the diverse approaches to homeschooling make it difficult to have a comprehensive assessment."

​2.3.1 Aims of Education (pp 17-18)
Education should promote full human development, civic responsibility, and respect for diversity — not just academic achievement.

Key quote: “Education must also be aimed at ensuring that essential life skills are learnt by every child and that no child leaves school without being equipped to face the challenges that he or she can expect to be confronted with in life. Basic skills include not only literacy and numeracy but also life skills such as the ability to make well-balanced decisions; to resolve conflicts in a non-violent manner; and to develop a healthy lifestyle, good social relationships and responsibility, critical thinking, creative talents, and other abilities which give children the tools needed to pursue their options in life”
​
Some concerns are expressed that some homeschooled children may have limited wider exposure, but also notes that "school attendance does not automatically translate to developing all life skills."

2.3.2 Minimum Education Standards (pp 18-19)
Countries vary considerably in how they define what constitutes a “certain minimum education” (e.g., literacy, numeracy, personal development).

Discussion of whether parents need to hold minimum qualifications in order to teach effectively. 
Key quote:
“While parental autonomy should allow for flexibility, minimum qualification thresholds could be necessary to safeguarding children’s right to a quality education, ensuring that parents are equipped to teach and provide an education which is in line with human rights standards. Mechanisms such as mandatory training could therefore be envisioned."

2.3.3 Learning Process and Environment (pp 19-21)
Describes structured (curriculum-based) and unstructured/unschooling approaches.
Acknowledges diverse methods but emphasizes parent competence as crucial.
Discusses rise in digital learning options, concerns about lack of regulation and potential down sides.

2.3.4 Content of Education (pp 22-23)
Curriculum should include human rights education and core subjects.
Flexibility is fine, but learning outcomes must align with national standards.

Key quote: human rights education is both one of the aims of education (see section 2.3.1) and a right in itself; it must be provided for as part of educational content, including that of homeschooling...As noted in the Right to Education Handbook (UNESCO, 2019): “Human rights education is not only about building knowledge on human rights standards and instruments. Through the human rights education process, learners must also be able to act upon the knowledge, acquire the confidence to exercise their rights, and have the attitude to respect the rights of others...People need to know their rights, the norms and values that underpin them, and the mechanisms for their protection in order to enjoy and exercise them and respect and uphold those of others” (p.119)."

​Takeaway:
UNESCO urges homeschoolers to ensure their programs foster broad intellectual, social, and moral development — including exposure to human rights and global citizenship values.

​2.4 Equality, Non-Discrimination and Inclusion (pp 23-25)

• Discusses some of the reasons families choose to homeschool, and identifies the State's legal obligation to ensure schools are inclusive and safe places.
• Homeschooling should not result in gender or cultural exclusion.
• Warns that removing children from diverse social settings can limit socialization and tolerance.
• Expresses concern that removing children from school may result in less diversity within schools.
• Homeschooling may disproportionately affect mothers’ employment and income.

Takeaway:
Homeschooling should nurture inclusion, not isolation — families are encouraged to create opportunities for diverse interaction.

2.5 Duty of Parents and/or Legal Guardians (pp 25-26)

Key quote:
“Parents have the duty to ensure the child’s right to quality education in alignment with human rights standards.”

• Parents are “duty bearers,” responsible for both academic and human rights outcomes.
• States should support rather than undermine parental roles — eg this could be through guidance, training, periodic home visits, forums for peer-to-peer support and access to resources.

Key quote: "Article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) entrusts parents with primary responsibility and authority in a child’s upbringing, recognizing their rights and obligations with regard to guiding their children’s development. This principle of trust is particularly relevant in the context of homeschooling, where parents take on a direct educational role. Legislative and policy measures related to homeschooling should thus aim to support, rather than undermine, parental responsibility by establishing frameworks that empower parents in this role."
​
Takeaway:
UNESCO affirms parental rights but frames them as responsibilities tied to the child’s welfare and international standards.

2.6 Children’s Well-Being and Rights (pp 27-29)
Children's rights include, as outlined in the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989):

• The right to development (art. 6)
• The right to be heard (art. 12)
• The right to freedom of expression (art. 13)
• The right to access to information and material from a diversity of sources (art. 17)
• The right to freedom from violence (art. 19)
• The right to health (art. 24)
• The right to be protected from work that interferes with the child’s education (art. 32)
• The right to play, recreational activities and participation in cultural and artistic life (art. 31).

The report looks further at:

• Freedom from violence "States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child."
• Best interests and right to be heard (children’s voices should be heard when making homeschooling decisions)
• Access to diverse materials "Homeschooling parents should have both the responsibility and the possibility to ensure that their children engage with a broad array of educational resources, including digital tools, libraries and educational platforms. This access supports a well-rounded education that includes global viewpoints and modern knowledge, which should also uphold the right to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress."

Key quote:
“Homeschooling decisions must prioritize the child’s best interests and consider the child’s views.”

​Takeaway:
Children are independent rights holders — parents must balance authority with respect for their autonomy and protection.

​2.7 Freedom of Thought, Conscience, Religion, and Cultural Diversity (pp 29-30)

• Homeschooling should respect family beliefs and expose children to multiple perspectives.
• Education should foster empathy, intercultural understanding, and respect for diversity.

Takeaway:
Faith-based homeschooling is valid but should not isolate children from pluralistic learning experiences.

​2.8 Accountability and Monitoring (pp 30-32)
Mechanisms discussed:

• Registration with authorities
• Inspections and evaluations to ensure quality and safety (different countries take different approaches)
• Emphasis on proportional oversight — not “harassment”

Notes that the development of homeschooling regulations involves not only elaboration of laws and policy guidelines, but also the capacity to enforce these...requiring adequate financing to ensure that sufficient officers are hired and well-trained.
​
Key quote:
“Regulation, if not arbitrary, remains legitimate and necessary to safeguarding children’s rights.”

​Takeaway:
Accountability systems are not inherently anti-homeschool; UNESCO views them as tools to ensure equity, safety, and transparency.

​3. Implications of Homeschooling and Socialization

• Education is both private and public — essential for democracy, empathy, and civic participation.

Key quote: "The CRC (Convention on the Rights of the Child) explains that education serves not only to provide “literacy and numeracy but also life skills such as the ability to make well-balanced decisions; to resolve conflicts in a non-violent manner; and to develop a healthy lifestyle, good social relationships and responsibility, critical thinking, creative talents, and other abilities which give children the tools needed to pursue their options in life."

Takeaway:
Education is a common good, not merely a family commodity.

• Acknowledges debate about whether homeschoolers miss social opportunities.

Cites ECHR concerns about limited integration but notes research showing homeschoolers often do develop strong social skills through clubs, sports, and community life.

“Homeschoolers are not in fact socially deprived… they are regularly engaged in social activities outside the home.” — Watson (2019)

Takeaway:
Socialisation depends on context — most homeschoolers thrive when families seek diverse social outlets.

• UNESCO cautions against isolation or echo chambers that may fragment societies.

“Homeschooling, but also certain homogeneous private and religious schools, may involve the risk of individuals being exposed only to information and opinions that reinforce their own beliefs.”

​Takeaway:
Homeschooling should connect children to the wider community and shared democratic values, helping strengthen — not separate from — the public good.

Conclusion (pp. 36–39)
Main themes:

• Education is a public good essential for social cohesion.
• Homeschooling should not create “parallel societies.”
• Policies should balance individual rights and societal needs.

Highlighted tensions:

• Quality education: balancing freedom with shared standards.
• Inclusion: avoiding polarization and isolation.

Policy recommendations:

• Develop clear registration and oversight frameworks.
• Train officials and support parents with open-access materials.
• Collect disaggregated data on homeschooling to inform evidence-based policy.

Takeaway for homeschoolers:
UNESCO sees homeschooling as legitimate but expects families to uphold the same human rights commitments as schools — ensuring education is inclusive, high-quality, and child-centered.

As at 1 July 2024, there were 10,757 homeschooled students. These students belong to 6,327 families and represent 1.3% of total school enrolments.

Out of the 10,757 homeschoolers 63.2% were aged 12 or under, 76.1% had been home-schooled for less than 5 years, and only 3.5% had been home-schooled for 10 years or more.

European/Pākehā students are more likely to be homeschooled than any other ethnic group with 71.7% of all homeschoolers, compared to 41.8% of the total school population (this is based on prioritised ethnicity statistics). Only 15.7% of homeschoolers identify as Māori compared to 24.5% of the total school population, 3.3% of homeschoolers identify as Pacific compared to 10% of the total school population, and 3.0% of homeschoolers identify as Asian compared to 18.9% of the total school population. The ethnicity of 0.7% of homeschoolers is unknown.

Homeschooling Turnover
Between 1 July 2023 and 1 July 2024 there was an overall net decrease of 20 students; 1,969 students entered into homeschooling and 1,989 students finished homeschooling.

The most common age at entry (the mode) was 6, with 37.9% of those starting being 6 years old. The mean average age at entry was 9.0 years old, with 61.3% aged 9 or under, and 0.8% were aged 16 or above.

Of the students entering homeschooling during the year ending 1 July 2024, 64.4% identified as European/Pākehā (down from 78.4% in 2014), 20.4% identified as Māori (up from 8.3% in 2014), 4.0% identified as Pacific peoples (up from 2.9% in 2014), and 3.3% identified as Asian (up from 1.6% in 2014). Ethnicity is unknown for 0.1% of homeschoolers.

The most common age at finishing (the mode) was 15, with 17.4% of those finishing being 15 years old. The mean average age at finishing was 12.5 years old, with 61.6% aged 12 or over, and 20.2% were aged 16 or above.

Of the students finishing homeschooling during the year ending 1 July 2024, 24.5% had been in homeschooling less than a year, 54.4% had been in homeschooling for 1 to 5 years, and 7.4% had been in homeschooling for 10 years or more.

Section 38 of the Education and Training Act 2020 is the part which describes the basis on which an exemption may be granted, or revoked, and how long it continues in force. Notably, there is NO mention of on-going reporting or declarations in that section, which means that technically they are not required in order to home educate.

HOWEVER...

The Ministry considers itself responsible to have some way of checking whether any given student, including those who are homeschooling, are being adequately educated. They use ERO reviews of schools, along with the collection of various data such as test results etc, to do that with school children. With home educators, they have the right to do ERO reviews, but not the funding to do them routinely (due to govt policy, see HERE for more). As an alternative, they came up with 6 monthly declarations, as a way of "checking in" with families. These used to be statutory declarations - meaning you had to sign them in front of a JP or similar, attesting to the fact your child had been and would continue to be "taught at least as regularly and well as." They removed the need for the witness of the signature a few years ago, but the declarations remain. 

If you choose not to sign and return them, this does not allow the Ministry to revoke your exemption immediately, as this is not permitted in the law. However, they can instead initiate further investigation, such as getting in touch with you to ask for an update on your learning programme, or ordering an ERO review to satisfy them that your child is being educated "at least as regularly and well as they would be in a registered school." Returning the declaration is considerably less work/stress! If the outcome of their investigations are not satisfactory, then they can move to revoke the exemption under Section 38.

AND, if you don't return the declaration, they will not pay you the allowance, should you wish to receive it - as the allowance is paid under Section 556 of the Act "Grants to Educational Bodies", which does allow the Ministry to set such conditions as the Minister thinks fit. The Ministry use the allowance as the "carrot" to get folk to return the declarations, and they are legally allowed to do so. 

For students whose exemptions are already in force before the current six month period, or whose exemptions begin before the "print run date" of the declarations, these will be sent to you by the national office as part of the mass-mailing of declarations to all such families, usually in about February and August (though the date is up to the MoE and may vary - they used to be later but have moved forward over the last few years). These declarations and attached allowance forms will be for the full period of either 1st Jan-30th June or 1st July- 31st Dec, as appropriate, or slightly less if an exemption starts a bit later, but before the print run. 

In 2024, the print run dates were 15th February and 11th July. 

For students whose exemptions start after the print run dates, a part-period declaration and allowance forms need to be sent to you by the regional office who granted your exemption. If you do not receive these with your certificate of exemption or shortly afterwards (they may email them together or separately), then follow up with your regional office. 

Notes: 

• Regional offices also need to send the first declaration if, for example, they issued the exemption after the print run date but back dated the start date to before the print run date. This can happen, for example, where an exemption is granted during the July school holidays and back dated to 1st July per MoE policy. 
• In years parts, part periods were added to the next full declaration. This changed in 2022, and will not be done. So, if you missed the part period declaration, you can't just add the dates to the next form (also applies to any missing forms) - you need to ask for a copy of the missed one and complete/send it in. 
• If a child is missing from your declaration form, contact your regional office. There may be an issue with their exemption status which needs to be sorted out first, or they've overlooked sending the part-period form. 
• When regional offices issues part-period forms, sometimes they do a separate form for a newly exempt child only, other times they reissue the declaration for all exempt children in the family. Don't worry either way - sign and return it even if you've already sent in a declaration for the older children. 
• I recommend you keep a copy of your declaration form for your records (and the covering letter). It may come in handy if something goes awry, as well as being useful for having your Family Reference Number and Student NSNs on them. Always quote the family reference number when contacting the Ministry. (It's also on your exemption certificates). Once a payment had been received for a period, and you have a more recent declaration to keep on file, you can discard the older ones. 

You can find an up-to-date list of Regional Office contact details HERE. National office (Resourcing) info is near the bottom of the list. 

With the declaration, you will receive forms asking if you wish to receive the allowance, and if so, confirming your bank account details. The first time you do this, you need to send proof of account (and also if it's been longer than 18 months since your last declaration/allowance forms were filed). This proof of account needs to show your bank's logo, your name and account number, but does not need to be certified. You can usually print off something suitable from internet banking (delete or hide transactions/balances - they don't need to see those).​ 

The allowance was first paid in 1990. There's a while history to it which I won't go into here, but from 1990 until 2022, the allowance was never increased by a single cent. Thanks to lobbying by NCHENZ and Homeschooling NZ, it began to be increased by a small percentage in line with annual increases in funding to schools from 2023. The 2024 allowance amounts are:

• $796 for your first child
• $677 for your second child
• $557 for your third child
• $398 for each subsequent child.

These are annual amounts, and so each six months you receive half of the above, or a pro-rata amount if anything has affected your entitlement during the period. 

A few things can affect your allowance:

• If you don't return a declaration form, you will not receive the allowance. (However, if you return it late, you'll still get the allowance - see below)
• If your child's exemption starts (or ends) during the 6 month period, you will receive a pro-rata amount for the period, based on the days in which you were eligible for the allowance. 
• If you go overseas for more than 28 days, you will only be entitled to the allowance for the days in which you were in New Zealand. If less than 28 days, you get the allowance for the whole period. 
• If your child begins a school trial and is enrolled in school for more than 28 days, then you will be entitled to the allowance only for the days in which they were not enrolled in school (ie had an active exemption). If the school trial ends within 28 days, then the allowance is paid for the entire period. 
• If your 16+ student enrolls in Te Kura under the free Young Adult gateway, you will still get the allowance if they enroll in 1-2 subjects, but if 3 or more subjects it's considered "full time" and the allowance (and exemption) will cease. 
• If your 16+ student enrolls in a full time funded course (eg something funded under Youth Guarantees) their exemption and allowance will also end. 
• If your 16+ student stops home educating, then you need to declare this on your declaration forms. 
  
  

If none of the above affect you, and/or you have a valid exemption in force at the time your child turns 16, then you can continue to receive the homeschooling supervision allowance until the end of the year in which the student turns 19, if they continue to be home educated and you continue to return the declarations and allowance forms. 

If you returned the declaration forms by the date specified on the covering letter, you should receive the payment in the week indicated on the letter (it may be any day of that week, depending on the bank). If you haven't received it a week later, then follow up with Resourcing. These dates can vary - in 2024 they were late June and late November. 

Likewise, if the amount seems wrong, you can follow up with Resourcing about this, but first ask yourself:

• Was my exemption in force for the entire 6 month period (1st Jan to 30th June or 1st July to 31st Dec), and not affected by overseas travel, a school trial etc? If the answer is yes, then you should have received the full amount listed above. 
• Did your exemption start part way through a 6 month period? You can use a calendar to count how many weeks it was in effect for out of the 6 months (or how many days) and then calculate how much you should have received. Eg, Mary's exemption starts on 2nd October. That means it will be in force from 2nd Oct to 31st Dec, which is 11 weeks. The full allowance is for 26 weeks (half the year - using rounded/rough figures). So Mary's parent is eligible for 11/26 x $398 (if she's the eldest/only exempt child) = $168.39
• Was your child enrolled in school for a school trial or out of the country for more than 28 days during the payment period? Then like the above point, you would only be eligible for a pro-rata amount. 

The allowance is not taxable income - it's an educational grant. You don't need to declare it to WINZ or IRD. 

You can spend it on whatever you like! Most families spend it on homeschooling resources or extracurricular activities, but you are not limited to that. I've known some families over the years who didn't want to be "dependent" on the allowance in order to home educate, so made a point of spending it on something special which benefitted them but was not directly homeschooling related (eg a dishwasher or a holiday trip). 

If you have missed sending in any declaration and allowance forms by the deadline (or even from past years), all you need to do is catch them up. If you still have the forms, complete and return them. If they are missing, then contact Resourcing and ask for copies. Once you complete and return them, the MoE will catch up missed payments to you, adding them to their next payment schedule (usually run every 2-4 weeks). The Ministry still wants your missing forms. There is no specific time limit on this. 

You will see above where I said that they can initiate investigations if you don't return the forms. First, they would send a reminder. Then they can take further action. However, they don't always do this. Getting things sorted/caught up yourself is unlikely to cause you any issues. 

Note: YOU are responsible for ensuring the Ministry has your up-to-date contact details. If you've moved, then email your regional office (the one for where you now live) and give them your new details. If you've shifted regions, your family's file will be sent to the new office, and your details for declarations etc will be updated. 

Signing and returning the 6 monthly declarations (and ensuring the Ministry has your up to date contact details) is the responsibility of each home educating family. While doing this is not required by law, not doing it can initiate other investigations into whether or not your child is "being taught as regularly and well as..". Along with the declaration, is an optional allowance. Payment of the allowance is dependent on you returning the forms, confirming your bank account details, and may be affected by various specific circumstances outlined above. The allowance is non-taxable and can be spent however you like. 

If you have missed any forms, contact your regional office (if the exemption is new) or the national Resourcing department for new forms. 

Here is the breakdown of the total number of exempt students by region, and the percentage of all the student population they represent, as of 1st July 2023:

The above statistics show a slight dip in home education numbers as of 1st July 2023, compared to a year earlier. This was to be expected, as numbers had dramatically increased over several previous years (2019:6,573 exempt students, 2020: 7,192, 2021:7,749, 2022: 10,945). In every year since homeschooling stats have been recorded, it's normal to see a certain number exit homeschooling (for various reasons) as well as a certain number enter - with the difference being (usually) the net gain. This year the result is a small net loss. 

Children exit home education for a multitude of reasons - aging out of the system, moving on to employment, alternative education (including Te Kura for NCEA), leaving the country, or returning to learning in a school environment. Of the latter, some parents intended homeschooling as a shorter-term solution from the beginning, again for many different reasons, while others' circumstances may have changed, or home education may have turned out not to suit them. Of course, currently we have an unprecedented additional reason - some families chose home education for pandemic related reasons, and now the pandemic has (in effect) passed, they will choose either to carry on home education (it may well have turned out to be the best thing for their family, regardless of the initial impetus), or to return their children to school.

So, a small dip in numbers is nothing really. Especially as the Ministry (and the politicians) seemed very convinced at the time that all those "flocking" to home education would return their children to school as soon as the mandates, masks etc passed. Clearly that hasn't happened, as our numbers are still 164% what they were before the pandemic!

Also, the statistics are just a snapshot in time - taken on the annual date of 1st July. Even during that day, numbers can vary, so these reflect whatever they were on the database at the time it was taken. (Last year I asked for more detailed numbers, and the totals varied from the official ones, for the same day, by about 1700 students, with the only explanation being that "it depends when on the day this was taken"). 

Since that date, the number of exempt students overall has again increased. On the 1st of November, they were 11,072. 

​Homeschooling Turnover

​Between 1 July 2021 and 1 July 2022 there was an overall net increase of 3,196 students; 4,330 students entered into homeschooling and 1,134 students finished homeschooling.

The average age of the 4,330 students entering into homeschooling was 9 years old, 81.7% were aged 12 or under and 0.9% were age 16 or above. Of the students entering homeschooling during the year ending 1 July 2022, 64.0% identified as European/Pākehā, 19.0% identified as Māori, 3.5% identified as Pacific, 2.9% identified as Asian, and for 0.5% of homeschoolers ethnicity is unknown.

The average age of the 1,134 students finishing homeschooling was 14 years old, 43.7% were aged 12 or under, and 23.6% were 16-years old or above. Of the students finishing homeschooling during the year ending 1 July 2022, 29.9% had been in homeschooling less than a year, 42.5% had been in homeschooling for 1 – 5 years, and 11.1% had been in homeschooling for 10 years or more.