Every young person struggling with long-term absenteeism is one too many. Yet the Netherlands has an estimated 70,000 children and young people who do not receive the education they are entitled to. We call on everyone who is committed to better education to take action on the concrete target areas from our 11-point plan.
The right to (tailored) education is currently fully linked to the Compulsory Education Law. If a student receives a compulsory education exemption, then the possibility of enforcing (appropriate) education also disappears; no one is then responsible for the education of this child.
Despite various laws, agreements and international treaties, the right to education turns out to be difficult to enforce in practice. Do students or parents want to end a compulsory education exemption? Then this often turns out to be extremely difficult, while the application is sometimes completed within a week. It is not for nothing that this is the first spearhead of our plan.
We want politics to legislate the right to learn/develop as a supplement to compulsory education. With the right to learn, education is independent of place, time and school enrollment. Education does not have to take place strictly within the walls of a school building, but can also take place, for example, at a (health)care facility, online or through a teacher at home.
There is an initiative bill from the House of Representatives which the advisory board contributed to. Although the authors adopted many of our recommendations, the content remains somewhat non-committal. The right to learn only makes sense if governments actually enforce the duty of care and professionals know what we expect from them.
Schools, samenwerkingsverbanden and municipalities do not listen sufficiently to young people. This applies not only to students with long-term absenteeism. Adults often do not take the opinion of young people seriously: they listen, but do not really hear the young people. We advocate an inclusive and broad right to be heard for students, in which institutions not only listen, but also actually act according to the needs of the young person. A student does not always have to get his or her way, but it is necessary that the school does something with the input and actively feedback on this.
Depression, burnout and other psychological complaints can happen to anyone. They are not always visible, but the consequences are. Too often people do not or hardly speak about it, while the psychological state of both teachers and students directly affects the learning climate and school safety. Students can face bullying behavior by fellow students or teachers, which makes going to school an unprecedented burden and they get stuck. Everyone needs to feel safe to discuss mental health. We see in practice that just talking about this 11-point plan contributes to breaking this taboo.
Each student must be able to follow and complete subjects at different levels. Now schools always punish you as a student for your worst subject. Because you take all classes at that level, you get bored with other subjects, don't feel taken seriously, and drop out faster. There is not enough room to develop yourself at your own pace. In addition, this lack of customization makes it virtually impossible to successfully return to education after a long period of absence.
Compulsory education officials and school administrators have too many powers. In an attempt to cut down on ‘expensive students’, they sometimes send for a compulsory education exemption. Do parents refuse to sign this? Then compulsory education officials put pressure on them relatively easily, for example with a threat to a safe home notification (VT-melding) or even an eviction placement (UHP). Students and parents have nowhere to report these abuses. We demand a mandatory written justification for the use of these means of force and a fixed possibility of objection. In the event of incorrect use, harsh consequences must follow, so that authorities deal more carefully with these drastic measures.
Thinking in learning outcomes dominates Dutch education. Do you not meet the expectations? Then you get in trouble and drop out. The early selection creates unnecessary pressure on performance. Pupils in the upper secondary school, in particular, lose far too much time on tests and exams; moments when they hardly learn anything new. Without this Test culture, students can receive almost a whole year of extra real education.
Due to the cloud of responsibilities between involved parties, the search for support is often an endless struggle. Municipalities, regional partnerships and schools constantly point to each other and too often no one takes responsibility. Regional partnerships often have financial interests and are therefore not independent. Strong, independent support points for pupils are therefore urgently needed. At the same time, the provision of information must be in order: parents and pupils must know that these support points exist in order to be able to make use of them.
School administrators use public funding to defend themselves in education lawsuits. Students and parents don't have that luxury. By definition, this creates an uneven playing field: students are less likely to get equal treatment before the disputes committee or the court and therefore defend their right to education much more difficult. Politics must rectify this.
Schools often cannot provide the support that inclusive education requires. Broader support - such as more teaching support staff and the active sharing of expertise between schools – offers pupils more opportunities in mainstream education and makes the work more feasible for teachers. More flexibility in class size offers room for appropriate care. This reduces the workload, prevents teacher absenteeism, and ultimately also prevents student absenteeism.
A quick referral to special education is often the easiest option for schools to fulfill their duty of care, without always properly examining whether this is really appropriate for the student. Schools request the necessary declaration of admissibility (TLV) from the Regional partnerships (samenwerkingsverband), which by definition is not an independent institution. Often, the school's inability to act is the basis for the referral, not the child's interest. As a result, students can end up in a place where they cannot develop sufficiently and still drop out. Therefore, we require that students or parents can always submit a referral to an independent expert.
Schools receive funding per student enrolled, including supplemental funding for students with additional support needs. Yet they often do not offer this support sufficiently. In fact, if a student is at home for months but is registered, the school continues to receive money. This creates a businessmodel based on ghost students. In addition, a whole market has emerged around support needs, with agencies competing with each other for contracts. The funding that we reserve for the student must go to the student and must not serve the market. We have to break through the many perverse incentives in the current system.
It is an illusion to think that an 11-point plan like this solves a complex problem immediately, but we see it as our task to continue to identify pain points and act as a watchdog when the situation around specific issues really gets out of hand.
Our 11-point plan is not a list set in stone, but a living document that continuously grows with the times. We constantly evaluate and update our objectives in order to stay sharp and respond immediately to new developments. Because we make the best plans together, we cordially invite everyone to think along with us. Do you see new opportunities or do you have smart ideas to achieve our goals even better? Let your voice be heard and share your input with us!
