The legislation of the Republic of Slovenia also permits pupils with special educational needs (SEN) to be educated at home. However, the monitoring and evaluation of these pupils’ academic achievement remains under-researched, and the relevant regulations do not specify certain aspects in detail. The Basic School Act stipulates that these pupils’ knowledge is assessed through examinations before a committee, but more detailed professional guidelines for monitoring progress and assessment are not clearly defined. Publicly available data do not provide a comprehensive picture of these pupils’ academic achievement, even though between 54 and 59 pupils with SEN have been educated at home each year in recent years. The aim of the study is to analyse how the monitoring and evaluation of the academic achievement of pupils with SEN in home education is regulated legally and organisationally in Slovenia, and how this framework is implemented in practice, in order to identify key challenges and formulate professionally grounded proposals for improvement.
The study adopts a qualitative research approach and a descriptive method of educational research. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, mostly conducted in writing via email, with ten participants (four teachers from enrolling schools, four parents and two home education teachers) and were analysed using qualitative content analysis. The results show that the regulations mainly address final assessment in detail, whereas ongoing process monitoring is not regulated in comparable detail. Participants' responses suggest that how well informed they are often depends on their own initiative, and that the roles of individual stakeholders are not clearly delineated. Participants' experiences point to differences between schools in cooperation, organisation and the adaptation of assessment. According to the participants, the home education teacher often has no significant role in the final evaluation, despite knowing the pupil well. Ongoing progress monitoring and cooperation between stakeholders are not regulated in detail, and information about the pupil's work throughout the school year is not directly incorporated into the final grade.
The participants’ proposals and the comparison with practices abroad point to a combined evaluation model. In this model, the final examination would remain a means of assessing whether prescribed knowledge standards have been achieved, supplemented by documented monitoring of progress, greater involvement of the home education teacher, and alternative ways of demonstrating knowledge. The findings indicate that, in the cases examined, regulatory ambiguity is associated with differing evaluation practices and a greater dependence of evaluation quality on the practices of individual schools and professionals. The results suggest a need for clearer systemic regulation and more consistent application of existing good practices.
|
