Developing a scale to measure the diversity of motivations and practices of home-schooling

ABSTRACT

Internationally, there has been a dramatic evolution in the numbers of parents choosing to home-school their children for some, or all, of their schooling. Research to date has mainly focussed on the characteristics and motivations of parents who home-school. Little is known about the practice and implementation of home-schooling, especially for learners with disability or additional learning needs. Where research exists, it is generally qualitative, location specific, and small in scale. To address this gap, this paper investigates research regarding previously identified reactive and proactive motivations, legal requirements, and implementation processes within home-schooling family demographics. These are then utilised to develop the Parents’ Perceptions of Home-Schooling scale (PPHS), which seeks to clarify both motivations as well as implementation and practical issues associated with choosing to home-school. Discussion focuses on the design of the PPHS scale and an initial study with 21 home-schooling parents. Being created for distribution across geolocational, distinct, and international and national contexts, the PPHS will provide scope to gather large-scale quantitative data with a view to improving the supports available to home-schooling families and enhancing learner outcomes.

KEYWORDS:

• Home-schooling
• reactive and proactive motivations
• disability
• diversity
• Parents’ Perceptions of Home-Schooling scale

Introduction

Home-schooling refers to “ … the practice of educating a child or youth at home rather than at a public or private school” (Pell, 2018, p. 272). It is built on the premise of parents “ … directly controlling the education of their children within the environment of the family home” (Jolly & Mathews, 2020, p. 275). Home-schooling, nevertheless, is very diverse with parents adopting a wide range of alternative approaches (Guterman & Neuman, 2021). Increasingly, in many countries, more parents are reporting that they are unhappy with the formal schooling system and are choosing to home-school their child(ren) (English, 2016; Jolly & Matthews, 2020). In most instances, contemporary decisions to home-school a child remain in response to the child's needs not being met (Jolly & Mathews, 2020). There has been extant research aiming to identify a range of motivations leading to parental choice for home-schooling, and their sentiments or opinions (O’Donovan & Sum, 2023). There has, conversely, been very little that looks at the actual implementation issues associated with providing an effective learning outcome. Although acknowledging that there is a gap in what is known about these aspects of home-schooling (Valiente et al., 2022), researchers currently lack an appropriate measure to address this gap. This paper reports the design of a scale to measure aspects of home-schooling including issues impacting on choice, motivations for and implementation of, home-schooling. The resulting Parents’ Perceptions of Home-Schooling (PPHS) scale, is applied in an initial small study with 21 home-schooling parents to explore their experiences and reasons for home-schooling their child(ren). Consideration is given to the structure of the PPHS to identify the reasons for home-schooling and the impact on the child(ren), parents, and the family. It also pursues additional information on implementation, sources of support, and meeting government requirements.

The development of the PPHS scale was undertaken to identify a measure to consider any potential correlations between motivations for home-schooling and implementation practices. A particular focus of the scale was to be able to investigate these for home-schooling learners with specific learning needs (Banks et al., 2023). There has been a growing number of parents choosing to home-school (Neuman, 2020), especially for children with disability or additional learning needs (Bjopal & Myers, 2018). Parental dissatisfaction with schools not catering for their child's specific learning needs were most frequently cited as reasons for withdrawing them to home-school (Morse & Bell, 2018). Knowing the reasons for selecting home-schooling are key for educational systems to be able to better meet the needs of parents for including their children in the schooling system. As many parents are selecting reactive reasons for withdrawing a child from formal schooling, it is imperative for schools to understand the specific issues that are impacting these decisions so that they can aim to better support parents and all children in inclusive schools.

When focussing on the needs of the child, it is important to understand home-schooling in practice. Considerations of administrative requirements, access to support, curriculum, pedagogy, and accountability, are all highly pertinent when determining the outcomes for home-schooling. Identifying any potential correlations between parental motivation and implementation issues, could also help predict the capacity of parents to provide effective home-schooling for their child. It is intended that with this knowledge there will be an opportunity for researchers, governments, and systems to have a better understanding of the issues that are underpinning the increasing numbers of parents choosing to home-school, and to provide greater support for parents who wish to home-school.

Motivations for home-schooling

A wide range of reasons have been proposed for the continuing trend towards home-schooling. Based on the early and somewhat narrow binary approach of ideologies and pedagogies proposed by Van Galen (1988), the movement towards home-schooling is now bolstered by a range of new reasons brought about by the sometimes-controversial educational reform. These include positive broad societal aspects related to a greater acceptance of the concept as a legitimate school choice (Jolly & Mathews, 2020); increased support through a wide range of home-schooling groups (Slater et al., 2022); and easier access to resources through the internet (Chapman, 2021). Personal choice reasons, nevertheless, continue to focus on home-schooling due to a mistrust of schooling associated with negative aspects, including disenfranchisement with current schooling options, and concerns about schools not meeting the specific academic, physical, and social/emotional, or behavioural needs of a child. The most identified reasons for choosing to home-school a child remain of a pedagogical nature, with many also being family related (Guterman & Neuman, 2017).

Rothermel (2003), identified the four most frequently cited motivations for home-schooling as (1) I wanted freedom and flexibility to do what I wanted when I wanted to; (2) I wanted my child to learn in their own style and develop naturally; (3) Close relationship and time together; and (4) Learn together about things that matter / a way of life. More recently, Gibson et al. (2022) have raised an additional issue that although yet untested, may also contribute to the motivations especially for parents in rural areas in Australia to select to home-school. Strong evidence has identified high teacher turnover, lack of curriculum specialists, and highly limited subject selection, especially in Years 11 and 12, as “ … having significant negative impacts on educational advantage and educational outcomes” (Gibson et al., 2022). Where schooling is limited and access challenging, home-schooling may provide an effective alternative to ensuring more equitable participation for rural students.

Green-Hennessy and Mariotti (2023) proposed that motivation to home-school exists within a framework of reactive vs. proactive typologies. Reactive perspectives focus on responding to what parents consider to be negative or unsuitable schooling situations. Proactive motivations reflect core beliefs of a family, irrespective of what a school offers. Such proactive motivations tend to be well planned and are more permanent (Green-Hennessy & Mariotti, 2023). Proactive reasons for home-schooling are often philosophical in nature and include economic reasons, way of life for the family, other experiences with home-schooling (self or friends/family), greater involvement, religious reasons, ideological reasons, freedom, and flexibility (Chinazzi, 2021; Valiente et al., 2022).

Reactive vs. proactive motivations

Reactive parent factors are those that are applied as motivation for removing a child from formal schooling, based on actual issues parents are dealing with. Identified factors include a lack of involvement in decision-making about the direction of their child's education (Finn, 2019), the stress of making a child attend school, the child's difficulties at school impacting on the family, personal relationships, and the decision to home-school another child (Slater et al., 2022). Specific school factors which may also be considered reactive include geolocational distance, lack of inclusion, dissatisfaction with instruction, the resources and supports offered at the school, and concerns about the environment of the school itself. Lack of flexibility and attitudes of staff are also cited as reactive motivators to move to home-schooling (Kendall & Taylor, 2016). Child factors which may be considered as reactive include a child being upset or refusing to go to school, a child who is bullied, exhibiting behavioural, or interpersonal issues (Bower, 2021), not making progress, and a child having a disability (Jolly & Matthews, 2020).

Proactive reasons for home-schooling are those that are applied according to personal beliefs or existing issues as motivation for choosing to home-school a child. These include social, pedagogical, and ideological factors. The lack of time spent daily with their children may drive parents to seek out home-schooling to improve their family relationships or so that they can spend significant time with their children, particularly while they are young (Guterman & Neuman, 2017). Along the same lines, having greater involvement in the life of the child and in decision-making about curricula may further motivate parents to be involved in home-schooling, due to the greater freedom and flexibility available (Kunzman & Gaither, 2020).

In addition, home-schooling does not restrict students to one venue (e.g. the home), rather it presents opportunity for a wide variety of teaching locations, including parks, forest areas, and urban environments, which are all rich learning options (Baidi, 2019). Some parents cite religious reasons as motivations for pursuing home-schooling (e.g. Valiente et al., 2022), so that they can provide appropriate moral and religious guidance for their children within the context of a specific faith. Other experiences parents may have with home-schooling, either through being home-schooled themselves, or knowing others who are successfully home-schooling, may also be catalysts for the decision to home-school their children (Kunzman & Gaither, 2020). Neuman and Guterman (2019) and Neuman (2020), also suggest that parents who had poor experiences at school themselves, sometimes wish to home-school to ensure their children do not experience what they did. In some places, such as Australia, children may be home-schooled simply due to the challenging geolocational issues. The role of a home educator in remote areas in Australia relies heavily on external support by way of resources. Research across four remote home sites in 2007, identified the quality of teaching by the home educator as attributed to these resources and partnerships developed with the parents and other teachers or community members (Lowrie, 2007).

Home-schooling a child with a disability or additional learning needs

Recent data obtained from a study of home-educators in the UK revealed that just under one-third of parents were educating a child with a disability or additional learning needs (Maxwell et al., 2020). These parents reported reactive decisions to remove their child from the local school due to their child having negative experiences. Issues included the lack of suitability of a school system which focussed heavily on assessment and attainment, and a failure of the school to provide adequate support. They also reported that there was a lack of understanding in schools about how best to support their child's specific learning needs and that this had led to increasing levels of anxiety for the child.

These findings confirmed similar results in a study of 309 children being home-educated in the US, where 60% of the children had a special learning need (Morse & Bell, 2018). Approximately half had been attending a regular school and had been withdrawn, as parents perceived their child's needs were not being met. These parents’ desire to be more involved in their child's education was deemed the most important motivation factor to home-school. Significant differences have also been found between parents whose child had an additional learning need and was attending a formal school prior to home-schooling (60%), and those who had always home-schooled (40%).

The most cited supports for families home-schooling a child with a disability or additional learning needs were home-education websites, groups, family, and local libraries (Parsons & Lewis, 2010). Home-education groups were considered the most supportive, with local authorities and other professionals as the least supportive. Gaither (2008), referred to this trend as the “hybridising” of home-schooling (p. 211), where parents seek out like-minded families to share and participate in various activities. Arrangements within home-schooling groups are varied, ranging from casual encounters and support networks to organised and structured co-operatives, which in many instances act like a traditional school. In some groups, experts may be hired to fill content-knowledge gaps, most particularly at the high-school level (Gaither, 2008).

Legal requirements for home-schooling

The legal requirements for home-schooling vary considerably between jurisdictions. In Australia, for example, it is a legal requirement that all children from the age of six years through to 16 years need to be enrolled in school or registered and approved to home-school their child in the state or territory in which they live. Home-schooling laws require parents to follow a state education department-approved curriculum; and adhere to reporting guidelines as specified by the state. Similarly in Ireland, compulsory education is from six to 16 years of age and can be completed by attendance in a recognised mainstream or special school or through unrecognised or alternative educational settings including the family home (Forlin & Chambers, 2023). Home-schooling is legal in Ireland and is governed by two elements of law including the Constitution of Ireland (Bunreacht na hE´ireann), and the Education (Welfare) Act 2000 (Governmnet of Ireland, 2000).

In some countries, such as Germany and Hong Kong, home-schooling is prohibited or is not clearly specified in law and families who wish to home-school their children must find ways to bypass the legal requirements or face prosecution (Erlings, 2019; Kreh, 2015). In other countries, such as Denmark, there are no limitations or restrictions on home-schooling, and the government does not monitor the progress of the students which is left to the parents (Kreh, 2015). Within the literature on legal requirements, there are also arguments based on the rights of the child and the parent and how these may not always intersect, with the power being held mainly by the parent/s (Bartholet, 2019). Bartholet (2019) and Kreh (2015), propose that formal law in the USA is insufficient to protect the rights of the students and protect them from potential harms, through a lack of appropriate regulation and monitoring.

Many educational jurisdictions which have regulations in place to support home-schooling, also provide a mechanism for monitoring the home-schooling that is delivered by parents (Brabant, 2022). In some instances, such as in Australia, this is undertaken by the Education Department. In others, such as Ireland, home-schooling is regulated by the Child and Family Agency, Tusla, who operate the Alternative Assessment and Registration Service within the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth (DCEDIY). Families wishing to home-school their children must register with Tusla, who keep a record of children and young people being home-schooled.

The actual person responsible for monitoring the process and activities of individual families may have a variety of titles, including a resource person, a consultant, a facilitator, a supervisor, or home-school monitor or moderator. The role undertaken by the moderator may be complex and require them to balance the interests of both parents and children throughout the process (Brabant, 2022). Brabant (2022) describes the role of monitoring home-schooling as a new profession which is still evolving. Staff taking on the role often receive little training and are not always in agreement with the variety of teaching approaches taken by parents, which is cause for potential conflict.

Home-school families

Even though several generic motivations are reported for families choosing to home-school, Rothermel (2003), identified that home-schooling families were not homogenous. Based on analysis of questionnaires received from 419 home-education families in the UK (N = 1099 children), it was found that the majority of home-school coordinators were mothers and that almost half of them had attended university (Rothermel, 2003). In addition, 67% of fathers had attended university and at least 40% of all families contained one trained teacher. Although the role of home educator has been primarily held by mothers, the way they approach this has diversified, as has the demographics of families choosing home-schooling (Jolly & Mathews, 2020). More recent research across England and Wales, similarly, found that 95% of the 134 coordinators who participated were mothers (Maxwell et al., 2020). While some families had chosen to belong to a group such as a religious affiliation, or a home-education organisation, others chose to be affiliated with other local or national groups. Even within groups, there was little homogeneity, and often evidence of friction within immediate and extended families. Problems with grandparents and parents’ siblings were identified who criticised the family's decision to home-educate. Not being accepted by others was noted as one of the disadvantages of home-schooling, causing considerable upset in some instances (Maxwell et al., 2020).

According to Valiente et al. (2022), little is known about how parents educate their children at home. They suggest that many families do not want to allow access to their homes to be observed for a range of reasons, including being concerned about criticism and potentially being restricted in their pedagogical practices. Even though home-schooling has risen in popularity and is accepted in most countries, data on how parents teach their children are limited. What is known is that there is a continuum of practice that ranges from unschooling, where the children's interests drive what is learnt, through to more highly structured approaches where a set curriculum and structured lessons are undertaken (Slater et al., 2022; Valiente et al., 2022).

Although the literature is extant it tends to focus on the motivations for home-schooling with little research on the implications of decision-making on parents' perceptions of home-schooling and the way in which it is implemented. Further detail about instructional practices, and the implementation of home-schooling is warranted. The next section outlines the development of a measuring instrument specifically designed to gain insights into these home-schooling practices across different international contexts.

Method

Based on the information gleaned from published research regarding motivations for home-schooling and implementation processes, the PPHS scale was developed to measure the motivations for parents to home-school and identify issues associated with implementation. It was constructed to include items related to a range of reasons for home-schooling and implementation processes. A key focus on motivations was the binary approach of proactive vs. reactive decision-making proposed by Green-Hennessy and Mariotti (2023).

Demographic data were collected on parents’ geolocation, the number and ages of children being home-schooled in their family, and some personal issues related to their beliefs, and own education. To overcome the expectation that parents were likely to be home-schooling more than one child, a hierarchical option was provided to select the child to focus on when completing the questionnaire. To identify potential different motivations and implementation styles depending upon the needs of individual children, the following order was requested:

As you may be home-schooling more than one child, please complete the following survey for ONE child: A child with a formal diagnosed disability, or if this does not apply to you, a child with specific learning needs, or if this does not apply to you, then your eldest child being home-schooled.

These demographics and different child perspectives were designed to be applied as independent variables when analysing the data.

To classify motivations for home-schooling, the framework proposed by Green-Hennessy and Mariotti (2023) was applied. Reactive reasons (what parents consider to be negative or unsuitable schooling situations) and proactive reasons (core beliefs of a family, irrespective of what a school offers) were used as typologies to classify parental motivations for home-schooling. The reactive items required responses from parents when their child was withdrawn from formal schooling to be home-schooled. These included three Likert style scales involving parental perceptions of the degree to which a set of nine reactive school factors (e.g. school was inflexible, negative attitudes of staff, lack of support, or inclusion opportunities); 10 child factors (e.g. bullying, behavioural issues, truancy); and five parent factors (e.g. not involved in decision-making, stressed) impacted on their decision to withdraw their child from formal schooling and home-school.

The second of the binary typologies included proactive items that involved the impact on parental decision to home-school by asking two sets of questions related to philosophical reasons and the needs of the child. Examples included the most frequently cited motivations for home-schooling by Rothermel (2003), together with a range of other proactive reasons from a range of literature. The 15 philosophical items included ideological, religious, family, and freedom to educate their child in a way that met their family's lifestyle. The needs of the child question revolved around 19 items about medical, behavioural, and emotional issues, with a need for an alternative curriculum or pedagogy.

To classify implementation of home-schooling, three key areas emerged from the literature related to practical application, curriculum and pedagogy, and parental satisfaction. Two Likert scales were developed regarding the practical implementation of home-schooling. The first scale had nine items which sought responses regarding preparing for home-schooling in general, such as finding and locating resources, identifying online courses, and planning the daily programme. A further scale related to the frequency of using 12 support sources including family, community, and home-schooling groups.

The second key area of curriculum and pedagogy focussed on time spent by the child during their home-school day with nine items related to structured and unstructured curriculum activities, excursions, peer interactions, and online activities. A further scale considered how easy it has been for the parent to satisfy the government requirements for home-schooling. Responses were sought from 11 items regarding accessing, understanding, and meeting government requirements, and measuring and reporting on their child's learning.

The third area of parental satisfaction focussed on a question with nine items about their satisfaction with government support provided by the nominated moderator/supervisor (or similar). A final question with eight items explored overall satisfaction and how positive the home-schooling experience had been for the parent and all members of their family.

The final draft questionnaire consisted of demographic data and 11 Likert-style scales with items ranging from five to 19 items in each. This initial draft was reviewed by a small number of people with experience in this area. A second iteration was developed based on this feedback and piloted online with responses received from 21 parents involved in home-schooling. Following this, a penultimate version of the PPHS questionnaire was confirmed.

Results

The first draft of the PPHS was reviewed by three university academics in Australia and Ireland working in educational research, and five home-schooling parents, who tested for initial suitability, clarity, construct, and content validity. During this preliminary stage, the families responded to question acceptance, indicating the need to refine five of the questionnaire items and delete a further three, as they considered that they may be seen as too judgemental. Some respondents highlighted the need for caution in phrasing which suggested that their choice to home-school was being challenged. To avoid parents being disheartened from completing the questionnaire, greater sensitivity was necessary when framing the questions. It was also recommended by the parents that the language to be used needed to reflect the different socio-economic status of parents, avoiding any technical terms or the use of acronyms. Based on this feedback a second draft of the PPHS was developed.

Following ethics clearance from the Universities in Western Australia and Ireland, a pilot test of this revised draft PPHS questionnaire was undertaken through the online management platform Qualtrics, by 21 home-schooling parents. Consent was obtained through an initial response (yes, no) to the statement that asked, “I have read the information provided and consent to undertaking the survey.” Negative responses to this consent were directed to the end of the questionnaire and participants were unable to complete it.

To ensure anonymity of responses the automatic recording of IP address, location data, and contact information, within Qualtrics, were removed. Participants were asked to provide feedback on the questionnaire itself when asked “As this is the first time, we have used this survey, we would really appreciate any feedback you may have on the appropriateness of the questions and on whether you think we have missed out on asking any important ones.” Completed useable responses were received from 10 parents. Of these, eight were from Australia and two from Ireland, where the first administrations of the PPHS were planned to be undertaken. Eight parents were from an urban region and two from a rural one.

During the pilot process, the time to complete the questionnaire varied considerably, with some parents having the web page open for longer than two hours and then not completing. Most questionnaires were finalised in less than 30 minutes with the average completed ones being between 15 and 20 minutes. This time issue raised concern regarding the potential reasons why many questionnaires were not completed. As data were unidentified and it was not possible to allow participants to return to complete the questionnaire in more than one sitting, it was not feasible to directly address this. To help to clarify expectations, though, the next version includes a statement that it should on average take between 15 and 20 minutes to complete, and a timeline showing progress.

As the draft scale was completed by a very small number of parents, with not all questions being answered by all participants, only general descriptive data are included regarding parental responses. For such a small cohort the data did not meet the statistical assumptions for in-depth analysis. Detailed analysis of the findings is provided that relates to the design of the scale and the process for developing and finalising it. Further application of the scale on a larger data set will provide sufficient responses to undertake a useful analysis of the responses to the items, and to consider a range of demographic differences.

The completed questionnaires covered a range of different home-schooling situations. Similar to previous findings (Maxwell et al., 2020; Rothermel, 2003), except for one father, they were all completed by mothers as the primary home educator. The highest level of education among respondents varied with two parents listing secondary education as their highest educational achievement, three stating undergraduate, and five postgraduate, levels. Responses to children were selected by three parents for a child with a formal diagnosis of a disability, three with additional learning needs, and four being the eldest child they were home-schooling. Only one parent indicated that they had been home-schooled themselves. Most parents were home-schooling two children. Four of the children being reported on had attended a mainstream government school before being home-schooled, while the others had always been educated at home. Half were boys and half girls. One parent identified their child as being gifted. Three quarters received no government funding. The variety of responses comprised almost every situation listed in the questionnaire, which confirmed content and construct validity and its usefulness as a measure for the diverse families likely to be home-schooling. Comments provided on the questionnaire structure during the pilot, led to the revision of several items. These included the request for additional information to clarify responses, e.g. after asking whether the parent was home-schooled themselves, a request for how long was added. Drop-down options were requested and added for questions in the demographic items, whenever suitable. Examples were requested of how the terms “disability” and “additional learning needs” were to be interpreted and these were included as: “A child with a formal diagnosed disability (for example, diagnosis by a psychiatrist or paediatrician) OR if this does not apply to you, a child with specific learning needs (for example, academic, social/emotional).” It was also suggested that when requesting information about time spent by children on various activities that this should include more community activities, therefore, the following Community activities (e.g. dance, music, sport, etc.) were added.

Concern was raised regarding the sensitivity of some items. As stated by one parent

Social interaction is always the “big” question in “home schooled” surveys – many parents resent this question, as schools are not the only places for children to socialise. We don't lock our kids up and prevent them from meeting children/people. Every day we would interact with people, so our children speak to people.

These items were reviewed in greater depth and reframed with a more sensitive lens to adjust them.

Finalising the PPHS scale

This research aimed to identify key aspects of motivation and implementation of home-schooling and to develop a focussed online questionnaire that could easily identify the reasons parents choose to home-school their child/ren and the impact of associated implementation issues on this decision. A comprehensive range of motivations were identified from previous research (e.g. Guterman & Neuman, 2017; Jolly & Mathews, 2020; Rothermel, 2003; Slater et al., 2022). These were extrapolated from published research data and categorised using the binary typography of reactive and proactive reasons proposed by Green-Hennessy and Mariotti (2023). Implementation issues were categorised into the emerging three key areas of practical application, curriculum and pedagogy, and parental satisfaction.

Following two iterations of the questionnaire created from a consultative representative sample of knowledgeable participants in home-schooling, and a pilot study of the initial draft of the PPHS, content and construct validity of the scale were confirmed.

The final PPHS scale consists of an introduction requesting demographic data (8 items), and background information about the focus child (14 items). This section is followed by two distinct sections. The first section addresses decision-making surrounding motivations for choosing to home-school. Three Likert scales identify the specific impact of reactive motivations related to school (9 items), child (10 items), and parent (5 items) issues on decision-making. Two further Likert scales consider proactive motivations based on philosophical (15 items) or child issues (19 items) (Table 1).

Table 1. The Parents’ Perceptions of Home-Schooling (PPHS) scale.

Question	Area	Measure	N of Items
Demographics	Introduction	Nominal / binary	8
Background of Child	Introduction	Nominal / binary	14
To what degree did the following school factors impact your decision to home-school this child?	Reactive motivations	Scale	9
To what degree did the following child factors impact your decision to home-school this child?	Reactive motivations	Scale	10
To what degree did the following parent factors impact your decision to home-school this child?	Reactive motivations	Scale	5
To what degree did the following philosophical reasons impact on your decision to home-school this child?	Proactive philosophical motivations	Scale	15
To what degree did the following needs of this child impact on your decision to home-school this child?	Proactive needs of child motivations	Scale	19
Please respond to the following aspects of home-schooling	Practical implementation	Scale	8
How frequently would you use the following sources of support for home-schooling?	Practical implementation	Scale	12
How many hours per week is currently spent on average by this child on the following aspects of home-schooling?	Curriculum and pedagogy implementation	Nominal	9
How easy has it been to satisfy the government requirements for home-schooling?	Curriculum and pedagogy implementation	Scale	11
How satisfied are you with the following support from your government-nominated moderator/supervisor (or similar)?	Parental satisfaction	Scale	9
How positive overall, has home-schooling been for you and your family?	Parental satisfaction	Scale	8

The second section of the questionnaire considers implementation issues associated with home-schooling. Practical implementation of home-schooling is reviewed using two Likert-type questions. The first question has eight items which seeks responses regarding preparing for home-schooling in general, such as finding and locating resources, identifying online courses, and planning the daily programme. The second practical implementation question contains 12 items related to the frequency of using a range of support sources including family, community, and home-schooling groups.

Curriculum and pedagogical issues related to implementation are then considered. This area consists of two Likert scales which measure time spent by the child during their school day (nine items related to structured and unstructured curriculum activities, excursions, peer interactions, and online activities); and how easy it has been for the parent to satisfy the government requirements for home-schooling (11 items regarding accessing, understanding, and meeting government requirements, and measuring and reporting on their child's learning).

The final area of the PPHS scale focusses on nine items regarding government support provided by the nominated moderator/supervisor, and eight items exploring parents’ overall satisfaction and the impact of the home-schooling experience for them and all members of their family. For each of the scale questions, 4-point Likert calibrations are applied to avoid the midway neutral point, with an additional not applicable to me option. Point terms are very/not (1), somewhat (2), quite (3) and very/a lot (4); or little, easy, satisfied, and positive.

At the end of the PPHS scale, parents are invited to register to participate in an online focus group to discuss their home-schooling experiences in greater depth. A link will take them to a different survey page which explains this in more detail and ensures that their survey data remain confidential.

The next stage in the development of this questionnaire is to administer it to one state in Australia (Western Australia) and in Ireland. These data will be used to undertake an extensive empirical validation procedure to compare the motivations for, and the implementation and practice of, home-schooling based on parents’ perspectives, across different education systems. To further validate the construct validity of the questionnaire and identify any factors within each section, a two-stage exploratory factor analysis (EFA) followed by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) will be applied. To investigate differences between demographics and individual item responses generalised linear modelling will be used. Binomial probability distribution with logit link function and Bonferroni corrected pairwise binomial probability distribution will be employed. The data gathered may then be used to contextualise the questionnaire within the different national contexts considering the different social and legal basis of home-schooling.

Findings from the PPHS will provide a dual purpose. Initially, it will enable researchers and schools to gain a better understanding of the reasons why inclusive schools may not be meeting the diverse needs of learners, especially for those with disability or other specific needs (Forlin & Chambers, 2020). Currently, there is no interim data available for schools to understand why parents are withdrawing their child from school. Popular press, however, continues to expound on how parents’ perceptions of insufficient support from government schools is resulting in them choosing to home-school (e.g. ABC News, 2018).

All schools in Australia are expected be inclusive, and to align themselves with the holistic approach to education as promoted in the Western Australian 2020–2021, 10-year national workforce strategy (Department of Education, Annual Report, 2020–2021). Yet many parents are increasingly selecting to home-school their child with a specific educational need, as they suggest that schools are not being inclusive of their child and it is, consequently, their only option (e.g. Chapman, 2021; Forlin & Chambers, 2023; Jolly & Mathews, 2020; Kendall & Taylor, 2016; Neuman, 2020). Data from the PPHS scale will provide evidence-based information regarding the specific concerns of parents who are withdrawing their children from formal schooling, thus enabling more proactive and effective collaborative decision-making to determine necessary support to meet a child's individual needs when attending school. This information is critical for supporting parents who are choosing to home-school based on reactive rather than proactive reasons, and who may otherwise want to keep their children at school.

In addition, for parents who are selecting proactive reasons for home-schooling, they perceive that there is a lack of government support to ensure they can implement an effective and equitable curriculum for their child. Data obtained from the PPHS scale will assist governments in identifying the needs of parents when home-schooling to assist them in its implementation. Developing a more equitable educational option for children who are home-schooled, should be a priority for the government. This cannot be achieved, though, without a more structured approach that genuinely accepts home-schooling as a viable alternative educational option, and that supports home-schooling families rather than just acting in a monitoring role. By validating the PPHS, evidence-based data can be collected from a wide range of home-schooling families and stakeholders can begin to understand the growing interest in home-schooling. This information will provide impetus for unpacking key issues surrounding the implementation of home-schooling, thus enabling more effective supports for those wishing to educate their children and young people at home.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).