Monday 30 August 2010

On Liberty

Time to celebrate the life and opinions of one of the greatest home educated people ever, a man whose name became a byword for freedom and the right to do pretty much as you please. Step forward John Stuart Mill, perhaps the greatest intellect of the Victorian Age. His father was a proponent of what we would now call Hothousing, where a child's intellectual development is deliberately stimulated and accelerated with the intention or at least hope, of producing a genius. James Mill accordingly taught his son at home from infancy. By three, the child was learning Greek. By eight, he had read Xenophon in the original and was learning Latin. He was carefully shielded from the influence of other children, meeting in general only adults. His academic achievements throughout adolescence were outstanding until, at the age of twenty, he suffered a nervous breakdown. Some autonomous types are probably shaking their heads at this point, muttering that this is the sort of thing one would expect with such a structured education!

Mill's most famous book is On Liberty. In it, he sets out the framework for the liberal society where anybody should be able to do what they please, as long as it does not hurt others. This was radical stuff in Victorian Britain. He argued that sexual conduct was a private matter and that if a man wished to harm himself, that was his own business. These principles have become embedded in our modern world to such an extent that we tend to take them for granted.

I have in some quarters a reputation for being the sort of person who wants everybody to be compelled to educate their children just as I did my own child. Some even seem to think that I am a fan of the intrusive state, a state which meddles in the private lives of its citizens and wishes to involve itself in private affairs such as childrearing. This is sheer nonsense. Let us look at what John Stuart Mill had to say about home education in On Liberty. He must surely be the last person one would accuse of having a statist mindset.

'A state education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another:'

'An education established and controlled by the state should only exist, if it exist at all, as one among many competing experiments'

I am sure that all home educating parents will cheer such opinions. Remarkable that they were written a hundred and fifty years ago. Mill was a great supporter of home education. It had worked for him and he thought that it could work for most people. He was not at all a fan of schools, especially state schools. He believed that the law should grant to every child the right to an education, but that, 'it might leave to parents to obtain the education where and how they pleased'. Mill believed that the legal situation with children and the idea of freedom in relation to children was misunderstood. He said;

'It is in the case of children that misapplied notions of liberty are a real obstacle to the fulfilment by the state of its duties.'

He believed that the law should not only allow parents to educate their children, but that they should be compelled to do so, because;

'to bring a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able, not only to provide food for its body, but instruction and training for its mind is a moral crime, both against the unfortunate offspring and against society; and that if the parent does not fulfil this obligation, the State ought to see it fulfilled'

In other words; he was all in favour of home education, did not love the idea of state schools and thought that all parents should be able to educate their children as they wished. So far, so good and I doubt that anybody will disagree with his views on the matter, at least among home educators. He was however concerned that some parents might shirk their duties and ignore the child's right to an education. How could one ensure that this did not happen?

'The instrument for enforcing the law could be no other than public examinations, extending to all children and starting at an early age. An age might be fixed at which every child must be examined, to ascertain if he (or she) is able to read. If a child proves unable, the father might be subjected to a moderate fine and the child put to school'

He goes on to outline a system for checking regularly that the child is receiving an education; his idea being that the freedom of the parents had to give way in this matter to the rights of the child. This is such a lucid exposition of the theoretical underpinning for the notion of regular monitoring of home education, that I urge all readers to track down a copy of On Liberty and read it, or at least the bits about education. they are to be found at the end in the section called Applications.

That one of the most famous of all home educated men, who was also the architect of many of the freedoms which we today enjoy, should take such a position is heartening in the extreme. I cannot do better than recommend that any parent who sees any sort of contradiction between the rights and freedom of citizens and the duty of the State to monitor home education regularly, should read this very useful book.

78 comments:

  1. Do you think he'd also have been in favour of compulsory sterilisation of those below a certain IQ? This quote makes me wonder:

    'to bring a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able, not only to provide food for its body, but instruction and training for its mind is a moral crime.'

    Not everything that comes out of a great thinker's mouth is necessarily a pearl of wisdom.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'Do you think he'd also have been in favour of compulsory sterilisation of those below a certain IQ? This quote makes me wonder:'

    'to bring a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able, not only to provide food for its body, but instruction and training for its mind is a moral crime.'

    It sound more to me like a call for abstinence and self-control. However neither of these virtues being conspicuously present in this country today, perhaps it is easier to portray Mill as a eugenicist and hint that his ideas had more in common with the Nazis. Good try, Mrs Anon, but I'm afraid it won't really wash.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "I am sure that all home educating parents will cheer such opinions. Remarkable that they were written a hundred and fifty years ago."

    Why was it remarkable? Plenty of other people had already dealt at length with the concept of liberty - Hobbes, Milton, Hume... The whole point of an education in the classics, such as the one Mill had, is the hope that the reader will learn from the Greeks and Romans; from their errors as well as their achievements. Would it be 'remarkable' that the Greeks, Romans and other civilisations had considered such issues thousands of years ago?

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Why was it remarkable? Plenty of other people had already dealt at length with the concept of liberty - Hobbes, Milton, Hume..."

    What was remarkable was the frank way that Mill dealt with such controversial subjects at the height of the Victorian mania for prudery and euphemism. He spoke bluntly about things that most respectable people didn't mention;

    'Fornication, for example, must be tolerated, and so must gambling; but should a person be free to be a pimp or keep a gambling house?'

    He advocated freedom to get drunk, kill one's self, home educate and a whole list of other things which were hardly mentioned in polite society. You are right, others in ancient times had talked of such things, but it would be easier to discuss fornication in Classical Greece than it would be in Victorian England.

    ReplyDelete
  5. 'It sound more to me like a call for abstinence and self-control.'

    Ah yes, lack of self-control. Something the middle classes 150 year ago always seemed to blame the poor for.

    Something about that quote makes my skin crawl.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  6. Oh yes, I know what it reminds me of now. Back during the Miners' Strike, when the Thatcher government threatened to withdraw benefits from striking miners' families and at the same time to remove children from those families whose welfare was being harmed as a result of their poverty. {shudder!}

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  7. 'Ah yes, lack of self-control. Something the middle classes 150 year ago always seemed to blame the poor for.'

    Nothing at all to do with being poor! Go on to the HE-UK list and you will find plenty of middle calls parents who, in Mill's words, have brought a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able to provide training and instruction for its mind. They're called autonomous educators and I have no reason to believe that poverty is at the root of their problems.

    'Thatcher government threatened to withdraw benefits from striking miners' families and at the same time to remove children from those families whose welfare was being harmed as a result of their poverty.'

    Presumably this was in 1984/1985. Any chance of a little more detail? I honestly can't remember this, but find it intriguing.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'Something about that quote makes my skin crawl.'

    Which quote would that be, Mrs Anon? The one by John Stuart Mill or the one by me immediately above your mention of crawling skin?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Simon, I remember this very, very clearly. I was involved in collecting food for such families and taking it to collection centres. Whether it actually happened or remained a threat, I can't remember however.

    I have to say that I am NOT prepared to spend my time researching this to find newspaper articles etc of the day, because the last time I did such a thing (spent a couple of hours phoning, emailing, reading about FE course resquirements) in order to contribute facts to a discussion here you DELETED the whole post plus comments the next day.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  10. whats you daughter going to do Webb when Balls losers out in the leardership election for the labour party?

    ReplyDelete
  11. "Go on to the HE-UK list and you will find plenty of middle calls parents who, in Mill's words, have brought a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able to provide training and instruction for its mind. They're called autonomous educators and I have no reason to believe that poverty is at the root of their problems."

    Speaking as an autonomous educator:

    1. We have no problems, thank you! and
    2. Just because I choose not to train my child like a performing monkey, this doesn't mean I don't "have a fair prospect of being able to". I'm perfectly able to, it just so happens that I'm sufficiently evolved to elect not to. I do hope you can grasp this subtle point, because I think it's quite important in relation to what you're trying to say.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "What was remarkable was the frank way that Mill dealt with such controversial subjects at the height of the Victorian mania for prudery and euphemism. He spoke bluntly about things that most respectable people didn't mention..."

    Are you sure you're right about that? Mill was born a couple of decades before Byron died, and not long after the French revolution. The country was in a state of social upheaval for most of his life. I thought the Victorian 'mania for prudery and euphemism' came a lot later, at around the time of his death, in fact.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 'I have to say that I am NOT prepared to spend my time researching this to find newspaper articles etc of the day, because the last time I did such a thing (spent a couple of hours phoning, emailing, reading about FE course resquirements) in order to contribute facts to a discussion here you DELETED the whole post plus comments the next day."

    I wasn't asking you to do any research. I just wondered if you could remember who had said this or made the threat. I am sorry if I have deleted a post, it might have been one of the ones that people were moaning about and I did it simply to avoid further trouble. There is a bit of problem with blogspot at the moment with vanishing posts anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  14. 'Back during the Miners' Strike, when the Thatcher government threatened to withdraw benefits from striking miners' families and at the same time to remove children from those families whose welfare was being harmed as a result of their poverty. '

    The 1980 Social Security Act withdrew unemployment benefits from strikers, but not to their families. This was four years before the miners strike though. I have just been emailing a friend in South Wales who was heavily involved in this at the time and he does not remember the threat to remove the children from poor people's families. I'll look into this a bit further and see what I can come up with.

    ReplyDelete
  15. ' Just because I choose not to train my child like a performing monkey, this doesn't mean I don't "have a fair prospect of being able to". I'm perfectly able to, it just so happens that I'm sufficiently evolved to elect not to.'

    As Mill said;

    'One would almost think that a man's children were supposed to be literally a part of himself, so jealous is opinion of the smallest interference of law with his absolute and exclusive control over them, more jealous than of almost any interference with his own freedom of action: so much less do the generality of mankind value liberty than power.'

    What you are talking about is, as Mill said, your power over your children and not their liberty to be educated.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "What you are talking about is, as Mill said, your power over your children and not their liberty to be educated."

    On the contrary, I'm talking about allowing my child to have power over his own decisions and - by extension - over me. The voluntary abdication of power over other people is a natural outcome of intellectual development.

    In other words, my child is more capable of directing himself to his optimal education than I or anyone else can, because he knows himself best. This is the freedom afforded to him by his parents' choice to protect him from those who would override it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Just because I choose not to train my child like a performing monkey"

    Well I suppose that is slightly better than coersive...or then again....maybe not.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "Well I suppose that is slightly better than coersive...or then again....maybe not."

    I'm sorry, I don't understand what you mean.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "and you will find plenty of middle calls parents who, in Mill's words, have brought a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able to provide training and instruction for its mind. They're called autonomous educators and I have no reason to believe that poverty is at the root of their problems."
    "

    You can't lay failure to provide training and instruction in HEing circles exclusively at the door of AHE. It's just a tool, it is the parents that colour it successful or a big, fat mess.


    You'll find no lack of parents who fail their children in the educational sense by hurling workbook after workbook at them as per the bought in curriculum box. Refusing or not knowing how to help them learn and resorting to screaming and threats when the kids doesn't progress by osmosis, on demand. And that is just one other approach, in all of the others you’ll find abject failure present there too. For the same reason - bad fit meets bad practise.

    The issue is not any individual educational philosophy, the issue it is the mindset of parents who pick one cos it suits them rather than being the one that best serves their children. Making a single philosophy the root cause of all "evil" distracts from the real problem and does nothing to solve it.


    AHE can be as successful as any other approach if it is the right choice for the individual kid/parent combo, just like all the other approaches on the spectrum.


    AHE can be as deeply unsuccessful as any other approach if it is used as a cover up for educational neglect or inadequacies, just like all the other approaches on the spectrum.


    So maybe we need to focus less on the labels people chose to stick on themselves and more on the underlying mindset a minority of people (using a wide range of approaches) are bring to the table when it comes to their children's education.


    This label war really is a distraction from a decent examination of what can go wrong in HE and how groups and communities can be aware of what to look for in struggling members and how to help people who have unwittingly fallen face first into a self made trap without massacring their self confidence to the point of making the kid's situation ten times worse.

    ReplyDelete
  20. "You can't lay failure to provide training and instruction in HEing circles exclusively at the door of AHE. It's just a tool, it is the parents that colour it successful or a big, fat mess.

    You'll find no lack of parents who fail their children in the educational sense by hurling workbook after workbook at them as per the bought in curriculum box." etc.

    All beautifully put and I quite agree. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "you DELETED the whole post plus comments the next day."

    Is this the post Simon deleted that contained your comments?

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:do5V7oB_wacJ:homeeducationheretic.blogspot.com/2010/08/struggling-uphill.html+home+education+heretic+struggling&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk&client=firefox-a

    If so, I was disappointed to see those comments go too. I suspect the comments had as much to do with the deleting of the article as the article itself.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "This label war really is a distraction from a decent examination of what can go wrong in HE and how groups and communities can be aware of what to look for in struggling members.."

    In my defence, I have to say: "He started it!" ;)

    ReplyDelete
  23. But what gives Mill's (or any individual) the right to impose his view of a suitable education on the world? How can 'one way' be suitable for all children? Wouldn't you expect to see a normal distribution/bell curve for efficiency even if we ever find 'the best way'?

    ReplyDelete
  24. stupid spell checker

    NOT

    "I learned a new phrase this week "unschooled than thou",

    IS

    I learned..... "unschoolier than thou".

    ReplyDelete
  25. ' How can 'one way' be suitable for all children?'

    The whole point is that he did not think this. He wanted a variety of educational methods; state schools, private schools, home education and so on.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Third REPOST (in bits, cos maybe it is the length)

    1 of 3

    "In my defence, I have to say: "He started it!" ;)"

    On this post, on this day, probably. But the "slap you round the chops with my words" tussle between points on the spectrum goes well beyond this blog, this (well...your, I mean its mine too, but I’m not there, so can’t say this) country, this continent and this time….it dates back to well beyond any of us started HEing as far as I can gather.

    I learned a new phrase this week "unschooled than thou", which relates to the reality that it isn't even confined to bitchslappin' between distinctions as wide as say "non AHE" and "AHE".

    ReplyDelete
  27. 2 of 3

    I've seen people on the same speck of the spectrum beating each other up over micro issues and according all ills to the millimeter to the right of where they stand as "X" type of homeschooler. Which sets a fire under the bum of the people on said millimeter to the right of them, who then retaliate in kind.

    The daft thing is that parents using very different overarching methodologies\philosophies may find themselves broadly on the same page on certain issues, whereas some of “their own tribe” may be singing from a different hymn sheet when it comes to that topic. But everybody tends to play the debate along party lines so ultimately it is isn’t the issue being discussed but the typical bitchslappin’ in “label defense”. Thus cementing the false premise that most issues can be defined as X HEing parents getting it right, Z HEing parents getting it wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 3 of 3

    Truth is no philosophy has exclusive ownership of benefits or fuck ups. What you get as an outcome with the flavor you pick is going to be down to who is walking the walk, (rather than just talking the talk) in conjunction with keeping their kid’s needs as the ultimate priority (or not), on a very individual level.
    IMO.


    If AHE didn't exist I bet you'd still get loads of parents forcing a fag paper in the gap between them and other parents, in an effort to prove that they had picked "better".

    ReplyDelete
  29. So that is the problem then, blogger thinks I bang on about things in far too many words. and eats my comments as punishment for being verbose.

    ReplyDelete
  30. 'If so, I was disappointed to see those comments go too.'

    I remember the article well enough, but was not aware that I had deleted it. I have an idea that it might have happened at the same time that I was using moderation in order to curb a chess player from Hampshire. I'm afraid that stuff on the Internet is sometimes a little ephemeral, but I apologise if anybody else's comments were deleted, apart from Mr Williams. I think that I have the hange of blogpot's system now, so even if I do start moderating, this shouldn't mean inadvertently losing a chunk of stuff in this way.

    ReplyDelete
  31. "If AHE didn't exist I bet you'd still get loads of parents forcing a fag paper in the gap between them and other parents, in an effort to prove that they had picked "better"."

    Glad you solved the Blogger issue Sarah. It's a shame you ended some great comments on this kind of note though. It rather demeans what could be a useful and helpful debate, doesn't it? More generous to give us the benefit of the doubt, and assume we're merely being defensive of our respective choices when we feel that they're under attack.

    If I thought this was just a "my HE method is better than your HE method" bout of oneupmanship, I personally would go and find something better to do with my time.

    ReplyDelete
  32. You might not have deleted it. There is an ongoing "disappearing post" as well as "disappearing comments" issue.

    I've lost three and I never delete blogposts

    ReplyDelete
  33. 'You might not have deleted it.'

    I don't think that I did. I have had comments vanishing from other blogs and I have seen posts going too. However, the HE world thrives on conspiracy theories and so I think that a sinister deletion is more attractive than just current blogpot technical glitches!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Oh well you'll love the "black helicopters" flying over the music blogs then LOL, they think the diappearing posts issue is to do with a dark plot between google and the music industry.

    ReplyDelete
  35. No, this wasn't a question of odd vanishing comments. This was the whole post disappearing. I'm pretty sure the post mentioned Paula Rothermel, so perhaps you were threatened with legal action over it again or something? People asked you the next day what had happened to it and I don't think you answered.

    Anyway, it just makes me less inclined to spend much time ferreting out the truth here. Others may do so if they wish.

    You may well know someone in South Wales. My father's family are all from the Rhondda. However, I remember what I remember, no more and no less. That was so outrageous that it was indeed memorable.

    I wish I could remember where I put my reading glasses today, though.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  36. ' I'm pretty sure the post mentioned Paula Rothermel, so perhaps you were threatened with legal action over it again or something?'

    No, I don't think the threat of legal action would cause me to delete a post! the last time anybody did that, it just encouraged me to post even more. As I say, I might have deleted it. If so, I would guess that it was around the time that I was deleting comments like mad and didn't really have the hang of the thing.

    I wasn't asking you to do any research, mrs Anon. It was just odd that I didn't remember anything about poor people being threatened with having their children removed from them. I wasn't suggesting that you had invented it, more curious to know which member of the cabinet might have said this. I remember keith Joseph saying some pretty loopy things about Social Classes IV and V. but that was in 1974, long before the 1984 miners' strike. I didn't know that your family were from Wales. I somehow had the impression that you were Northern Irish Catholics! You are not the only one who gets a little forgetful.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Simon wrote,
    "' How can 'one way' be suitable for all children?'

    The whole point is that he did not think this. He wanted a variety of educational methods; state schools, private schools, home education and so on."

    But you quote him as saying,
    'The instrument for enforcing the law could be no other than public examinations, extending to all children and starting at an early age.'

    Which immediately rules out autonomous education, doesn't it? Unless the subjects the child autonomously chooses to study happen to coincide with the pre-determined knowledge being tested in public examinations. If pre-determined bodies of knowledge are to be tested, the style of education is automatically limited.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Mill believed, as do most parents today, that children should learn to read and write. He also thought, as again to most parents, that it would be a good thing if all children had a stock of knowledge about science, history and so on. What he suggested was that it be left to the parents how this education was delivered, whether by school or at home, but that the only way to check if it was actually being delivered was by testing the children annually.

    ReplyDelete
  39. 'I remember keith Joseph saying some pretty loopy things about Social Classes IV and V. but that was in 1974, long before the 1984 miners' strike. I didn't know that your family were from Wales. I somehow had the impression that you were Northern Irish Catholics!'

    Well remembered. There's all that and even more in my immediate family. We're mongrels.

    No, this was something specifically threatened during the Strike. Strike pay ran out? Or slowed to a trickle? Welfare benefits to miners were removed or reduced, therefore the families were heavily dependent on food parcels. You may remember the food collection and runs to mines being organised at the time.

    After the strike had gone on for some time, many families were threatened by local SS depts that if their kids looked like they were suffering as a result of the family's poverty (which was obviously a result of the loss of benefits/strike pay) then they wouldn't hesitate to remove the children.

    I don't know if this was something the Thatcher government orchestrated or whether news of the threats appeared anywhere other than local strike news-sheets but families were not unreasonably very upset and afraid.

    I only mentioned it because the whole idea of the 'moral crime' of people not able to measure up to an externally imposed standard of 'good parenting' (but producing children anyway - how dare they?) reminded me a little of that.

    I'm fond of disappearing down such rabbit holes.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  40. Simon wrote,
    "What you are talking about is, as Mill said, your power over your children and not their liberty to be educated. "

    It's not my power over my children that it is at stake. It's the government trying to usurp their own power over their own lives. Autonomous education is self directed education. Both parent-led and state-led education must, by definition, take power away from the child.

    Autonomously educated children have liberty to choose their own education. You seem to think this means a liberty not to be educated. I believe that the drive to be educated is inbuilt in every child, as long as it is not damaged by excessive coercion (nobody can claim to be completely non-coercive, the best we can claim is that we try to be non-coercive) and this has been my experience.

    If I had found through experience that my autonomously educated children were not progressing and gaining an education I would have thought again, but this was never an issue. They would not have passed state prescribed tests from an early age, as recommended by Mills because their learning happened in a different order to that prescribed by the state. This doesn't mean that they are not as educated (or better) than state or parent-led educated children now that they are young adults.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Simon wrote,
    "I don't think that I did. I have had comments vanishing from other blogs and I have seen posts going too. However, the HE world thrives on conspiracy theories and so I think that a sinister deletion is more attractive than just current blogpot technical glitches! "

    You do have a history of deleting aggressive posts about which you have had second thoughts though, so maybe your actions encourage conspiracy theories. I can remember about three that you acknowledged deleting yourself at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Simon wrote,
    "Mill believed, as do most parents today, that children should learn to read and write. He also thought, as again to most parents, that it would be a good thing if all children had a stock of knowledge about science, history and so on"

    So you've changed your mind and agree now that Mill's wanted to impose his definition of a suitable education on all children? He may have been happy for the location and/or teacher to vary, but apart from that, there would not be much room to move.

    ReplyDelete
  43. old Webb says-was that it be left to the parents how this education was delivered, whether by school or at home, but that the only way to check if it was actually being delivered was by testing the children annually.

    no tests here Webb never only way your test here is if we dead LOL but i plan to be around for quite a long time!
    Will it be the good old box ticking tests Webb? cos thats about all those LA officers can do is put a tick or a cross in a box LOL

    ReplyDelete
  44. 'I can remember about three that you acknowledged deleting yourself at the time.'

    I would not describe them as aggressive. There have been one or two posts that some people have asked me to remove because they have upset somebody. I have usually done this if asked. As far as the post from August 8th is concerned, I hae re-read it and can see nothing at all objectionable about it, nor can I imagine why I would have deleted it. It was, as I said, around the time that I was moderating and I certainly deleted comments at that time which I did not intend to. There is a link in a comment above to the post, so anybody who has been upset at missing the August 8th post can now catch up. However, if anybody wishes to belive that I deleted it deiberately, they are of course free to think that. If it was a sin, it was perhaps one of the lesser ones!

    ReplyDelete
  45. 'So you've changed your mind and agree now that Mill's wanted to impose his definition of a suitable education on all children?'

    No, he believed that there should be a variety of educational techniques operating throughout the country. I don't think that expecting children to be literate is imposing a definition of education upon anybody.

    ReplyDelete
  46. "No, he believed that there should be a variety of educational techniques operating throughout the country. I don't think that expecting children to be literate is imposing a definition of education upon anybody."

    Testing them from a young age assumes that they will have acquired a pre-defined body of knowledge by that point. This automatically prevents autonomous education. I expect children to be literate by the end of their childhood (I cannot imagine any child choosing not to be in today's world) so you are imposing a definition of education on me and my children if you expect them be be literate by a particular age during their childhood (and enforce it in some way).

    ReplyDelete
  47. 'Go on to the HE-UK list and you will find plenty of middle calls parents who, in Mill's words, have brought a child into existence without a fair prospect of being able to provide training and instruction for its mind. They're called autonomous educators and I have no reason to believe that poverty is at the root of their problems.'

    What a shame that you insist on demeaning yourself by making statements like this. Haven't you got anything better to do?

    ReplyDelete
  48. 'Haven't you got anything better to do? '

    It would, I suppose, sound churlish if I were to ask you whether you had nothing better to do than cruise round cyberspace making anonymous comments?

    ReplyDelete
  49. "More generous to give us the benefit of the doubt, and assume we're merely being defensive of our respective choices when we feel that they're under attack"

    There always has been and always will be plenty of people who, no matter how small the difference between themselves and others when you look at the bigger picture, will seek to magnify that difference so they can feel good about themselves in comparison with said others. It doesn’t matter how small or large the area of spectrum represented is. You see it on a grand scale in the “mummy Olympics” in general and the same again in a titchy sub group that has formed a tightly defined tribe within a tribe within a tribe.

    If people who “like to feel good in comparison” didn’t exist to any particular degree…hardly any of us would feel the need to “merely be defensive of our respective choices when we feel they are under attack”…cos there wouldn’t be a whole lot of attacking going on in the first place to get all defensive about.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Ooh - go out for day and war breaks out...

    1) The (valid) point in all this is that if we use anothers writings/words to support our particular point of view on anything, we may discover that they have other less paletable views as well. Simon has of course pointed this out before in other contexts. I was (amused/shocked) to find that some home educators recently applauding David Icke's website for supporting some home educators on the run from the social services.... I mean really, are we reduced to needing David Icke on our side?

    2) Simon, -you though seem in a particularly beligerent mood today... it does spoil the force of any argument if you either keep repeating yourself (I mean we all know your views on AE) or you make too many snide remarks...

    ReplyDelete
  51. 'or you make too many snide remarks... '

    Snide remarks, Julie? Me? I can't for the life of me imagine what you are talking about.....

    ReplyDelete
  52. "If I thought this was just a "my HE method is better than your HE method" bout of oneupmanship, I personally would go and find something better to do with my time."

    I have come to believe that the biggest stumbling block for a growing HE community is the one-upmanship issue and it is most certainly the most pressing one in my little community, both for the original group that is disintegrating and the new one being formed to try and create a more inclusive environment.

    So I'll live with failing to meet your personal standard in terms of going to find a better use for my time, because working out for myself firsthand …what the issues are, how they occur, what they do to a dynamic of a group, how that affects the ability of a group to provide support and advice to all members, what the concrete and abstract costs of alienation are, how it affects the perception of the concept to “outsiders” and what solutions are available as a "cure" or better yet as a "preventative measure"… is something I wish to examine and think about in both HE and human terms. From my perspective it is interesting, exciting and useful, cos I am learning and growing and may well yet come up with a tangible idea that might prove useful in some small way.

    I would have made the above a list, but am trying to “squash” my posts into less space to avoid posting issues.

    ReplyDelete
  53. "If people who “like to feel good in comparison” didn’t exist to any particular degree…hardly any of us would feel the need to “merely be defensive of our respective choices when we feel they are under attack”…cos there wouldn’t be a whole lot of attacking going on in the first place to get all defensive about."

    I'm not concerned about people thinking that their methods are better than mine. I would hope they do believe their method is better than mine, or why are they doing it that way? However, Simon brings another aspect to things in that he actively campaigns against our families choices. He writes newspaper articles against autonomous education and argues with politicians for measures that will end our choices. I suspect his new book aimed at Local Authorities will also push this agenda. If this were just the blog of someone who thought a parent-led, structured approach is better than autonomous education I doubt I would be here as I wouldn't feel the need to defend AE there.

    I believe that autonomous education is better for my children. I also trust other parents to know their children and know what's best for them. I'm sure this is true for lots of choices made in the raising of children. But how many people attempt to ban the methods chosen by other parents without any evidence that the choices are wrong or harmful?

    ReplyDelete
  54. 'He writes newspaper articles against autonomous education'

    That would be two short pieces over a year ago!

    ' argues with politicians for measures that will end our choices.'

    Can't actually remember arguing with any politicians. More details needed about this claim.

    ' I suspect his new book aimed at Local Authorities will also push this agenda.'

    Unfounded suspicion! It is an objective survery of the situation today, except that in the final chapter, I suggest my own ideas on the subject.

    'If this were just the blog of someone who thought a parent-led, structured approach is better than autonomous education '

    You got that right anonymous, that's precisely what this is. There are a number of blogs which have the opposite point of view, that's democracy.

    '

    ReplyDelete
  55. 'Can't actually remember arguing with any politicians. More details needed about this claim.'

    Going to the select committee (politicians) and arguing for monitoring and testing of HE children?

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  56. "I would hope they do believe their method is better than mine, or why are they doing it that way?"
    __

    I'm not doing it this way cos I think my way is better than your way.

    I'm doing it this way cos I think my way it is the best fit for my kid\parent combo and I know I can aim for good practice because I am at ease with it and have a ton of experience to lean on when the very new and sometimes scary aspects make me jumpy.

    I stole the term and the main thrust of my way from my field, (think of it like somebody taking their teddy bear with them when they go on their first sleep over, security blanket R Us) and I love it to bits, but it is an overarching methodology that has massive inbuilt pitfalls in the wrong hands, when it is a bad fit its potential to lead to bad practice has few rivals. So no, it can’t be intrinsically “better than yours” given its weak spots.

    Bottom line, my way is better than your way doesn’t make sense. Philosophies, methodologies are tools.

    A plumber’s snake is the best choice for a plumber to clear pipes and a Black and Decker is the best choice for a builder who needs to hang a picture. We all just pick the one that suits the job in hand.

    If the plumber tries to hit the pipe with the snake and the pipe stays blocked it doesn’t mean the snake is a crappy tool, it means he didn’t do his homework in depth and has gaps in his knowledge that prevent him from attaining good practice.

    If the builder leaves his Black and Decker in the rain and destroys the motor it doesn’t mean that B’n’D sell shoddy goods, it means he got sloppy and forgot that no tool can compensate for a half arsed effort by the person using it.
    It all comes back to good fit for the parent\kid combo and aiming for good practice.

    Nothing to do with my way is better than your way.

    ReplyDelete
  57. "I'm not doing it this way cos I think my way is better than your way.

    I'm doing it this way cos I think my way it is the best fit for my kid\parent combo and I know I can aim for good practice because I am at ease with it and have a ton of experience to lean on when the very new and sometimes scary aspects make me jumpy."

    That's what I meant. I don't think there is 'one way' that is the best and only way children should be educated. That's my main objection to Simon and his views on home education. I know from experience that parent-led education does not work for my children. I didn't just pluck autonomous education out of a book and run with it. We tried various approaches and autonomous education evolved from our experiences.

    ReplyDelete
  58. I realise that I am a figure of almost mythological hatred among certain home educators, but feel that I do need to squash some of the more ludicrous myths which people are spreading. Presumably because the select committee was almost a year ago, everybody feels that they can tell any lies about what I said there and it will pass unnoticed. Not so.

    Mrs Anon claims that I argued in favour of testing and monitoring when I gave evidence to the select committee. Let's look at the transcript. I said that I could see no possible objection to a registration scheme. This was hardly radical; even Fiona Nicholson was undecided about the idea of compulsory registration at that time, the Chair put her down as a 'Don't know'.

    As far as monitoring and testing were concerned, I said:

    'I am against an over-prescriptive approach. ...If I met a child of 14 who could not work out in his head the change from a £10 note, I could be reasonably sure of guessing that he was not receiving a proper education'. (I had already made it clear that I was not talking here about children with special educational needs.) I finished by saying of local authorities, 'They should not be testing children in a formal way, but it is fairly easy to guess wheter a child is recaeiving an education'.

    Does this really sound like somebody arguing with politicians for the monitoring and testing of HE children? As I say, I am getting a little tired of the myths which seem to attach themselves to me, but when the myths turn into downright lies, iIfeel that I must speak out!

    ReplyDelete
  59. "That's what I meant."

    I get that, but given the sensitivities and war wounds that are out there, a bald statement containing "my way better than your way" does not communicate the whole picture and can lead to the wrong (cos it is not complete) message being heard.

    Then people get snippy, so the people on the receiving end of what they see as unprovoked snippy get snarky, the snark escalates the original snippy into outright stroppy, stroppy begets sneers...and so on and so forth till there are loggerheads abound with everybody, on every side yelling, "well I'm entitled to be rude and dismissive of that lot, cos THEY started it". They aren't lying, most people are highly sensitive to careless words thwacking their feelings, but lean towards being utterly oblivious when they do the same to others, so the “first stone thrown" was probably a bit of grit flying off a tyre taking a bend a bit fast, rather than slowing down and painting a more complete picture of what they meant. Unfortunately it dinged off the windshield of somebody else...and so it starts.

    All of us are perfectly capable of walking somebody through the pitfalls one can hurtle through in our own educational choices. Most of us are capable of doing the same when it comes to educational options that we didn't choose. Very few have achieved a fantastic level of competency in terms of being linguistically sensitive enough to avoid raising the hackles of another when doing either. Self included.

    Your objections to Simon's views on your style of HE are valid. You are right. He chooses loaded terms and makes blanket statements that do not take into account the variables and the gaps in his knowledge about AHE. But he is not alone. There is no lack of provocative statements, loaded language, sweeping statements about negative outcomes\processes and assumptions to fill gaps where intimate knowledge does not exist …from any point of the spectrum in reference to another point on the spectrum.

    So I don't see the point in making the point all about Simon all of the time, when he is displaying a symptom that many other sufferers are displaying too. I think it is more useful, more relevant and more interesting to look at the primary "disease" that causes the symptom in so many of us and think about ways to get a cure in the short term and a measure of prevention in the longer term.

    I recognize that I might be alone in this “interest group”, that might be cos my "HE community" is very small so I don't have the option of retreating to "my tribe" and only playing in the big pool when I’m feeling punchy. My tribe is microbe sized . It's a bit lonely in this Tee Pee. I want to play in the mid pool and the big pool when I'm looking for chats and giggles as well as when I fancy a debate, but the crabs keep nibbling my toes and making me all irritable when I see who I am and what I do causally maligned and misrepresented by other peoples’ self-representation . Likewise (see last night for examples) I manage to be a crab myself without ever noticing that I'm scuttling sideways waving my nippers about until somebody gets snippy in response and I get all "Cheeky git ! SNARKTASTIC mode, engage and FIRE !!!!!"

    Ahh blogger is going to eat this comment for length issues. No matter how hard I try it’s clear that the succinct fairy decided not to sprinkle me with "short and sweet" dust.

    ReplyDelete
  60. "Mrs Anon claims that I argued in favour of testing and monitoring when I gave evidence to the select committee. Let's look at the transcript."

    What about your written submission?

    You say:

    As a home educating parent myself, I have long had doubts about the standard of education being provided by many parents who have withdrawn their children from school. I was accordingly pleased when the DCSF decided to commission Graham Badman to conduct a review of elective home education...


    My worries about home education centre largely around the practice of autonomous education, in which children decide for themselves what they should learn. This is the most popular educational technique adopted by those who withdraw their children from school. I believe this to be an extremely inefficient method of education...


    As a home educator I agree fully with the Recommendations of the Badman Review, particularly with regard to LEAs having new powers to monitor and inspect families who do not send their children to school. Without such regular inspections it seems very likely to me, based upon my own experience, that many children would not receive a suitable education at home

    ReplyDelete
  61. 'What about your written submission?'

    Yes, the written submission of one home educating parent giving a personal opinion. This hardly counts as 'arguing with politicians'.

    ReplyDelete
  62. "So I don't see the point in making the point all about Simon all of the time, when he is displaying a symptom that many other sufferers are displaying too."

    As has been mentioned, it's his active campaigning to end AE that makes Simon different to others who think a parent-led approach is best.

    ReplyDelete
  63. "So I don't see the point in making the point all about Simon all of the time, when he is displaying a symptom that many other sufferers are displaying too."

    Do you know any autonomous educators who are attempting to end parent-led education in the UK by writing to MPs, consultations, newspapers and probably in his book?

    ReplyDelete
  64. "Yes, the written submission of one home educating parent giving a personal opinion. This hardly counts as 'arguing with politicians'."

    Of course it is.

    ReplyDelete
  65. 'As has been mentioned, it's his active campaigning to end AE that makes Simon different to others who think a parent-led approach is best.'

    By which, presumably, you mean that I am a home educating parent with strong views on home education and who is not shy of expressing those views? How very different from some parents who favour different methods! Do get a grip Anonymous. There are plenty of home educating parents like me all over the Internet. We shoot our mouths off about all sorts of things. I doubt if anybody other than other home educating parents ever take a blind bit of notice. Or are you saying that it would be better if only those parents who were opposed to the recommendations made in the Badman report who should be allowed to shoot their mouths off like this?

    ReplyDelete
  66. "By which, presumably, you mean that I am a home educating parent with strong views on home education and who is not shy of expressing those views?"

    That may well be all you are (though you do make money from some of your efforts so not really 'just' a HE parent with strong views), I'm just explaining why some people might make an effort to comment here when they wouldn't bother on another blog where someone just says how good parent-led education is. The difference is that you have gone out of your way to express your views against autonomous education. You campaign for measures that will end AE. I don't know of anyone other home educating parent who does this. I know many who promote their own methods, but none who actively campaign to end the methods used by others. If you cannot see the difference, well...

    ReplyDelete
  67. 'Mrs Anon claims that I argued in favour of testing and monitoring when I gave evidence to the select committee. Let's look at the transcript. I said that I could see no possible objection to a registration scheme.'

    Okay...Thank you for correcting my mistake.

    'Does this really sound like somebody arguing with politicians for the monitoring and testing of HE children? As I say, I am getting a little tired of the myths which seem to attach themselves to me, but when the myths turn into downright lies, iIfeel that I must speak out!'

    When a person lies, do they need to actually know they are not telling the exact truth? I saw the hearings on tv and thought I'd remembered that you had argued in favour of the Badman proposals on registration and monitoring.

    I apparently misremembered the gist of what you said (amazingly, I don't have a copy of the transcript at my fingertips) so I am sorry that you think I am myth-creating or downright lying.

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  68. Just seen this quote, from you, re your select committee evidence, in the comments section of your next blog post.

    'I agree fully with the Recommendations of the Badman Review, particularly with regard to LEAs having new powers to monitor and inspect families who do not send their children to school. Without such regular inspections it seems very likely to me, based upon my own experience, that many children would not receive a suitable education at home.'

    So, you DID argue for the inspection/monitoring proposals in the Badman Report.

    And you had me thinking I was having a senior moment. Tsk Tsk

    Mrs Anon

    ReplyDelete
  69. "I apparently misremembered the gist of what you said (amazingly, I don't have a copy of the transcript at my fingertips) so I am sorry that you think I am myth-creating or downright lying."

    Mrs Anon, maybe you confused his written evidence with his oral evidence to the same committee? He does argue for monitoring in his written evidence. An easy mistake to make but is it a significant mistake? Either way he argued for monitoring, whether it was in person or in writing.

    ReplyDelete
  70. ""Do you know any autonomous educators who are attempting to end parent-led education in the UK by writing to MPs, consultations, newspapers and probably in his book?""

    No, I think there is rather a lack of opportunity for that kind of mirror image.

    How about an individual in my HE community that believes regs that would squeeze other HEing parents out need to be introduced, because they don’t think “forrins” should be allowed to HE mini Italian nationals and they would certainly use their political affiliations to promote the introduction of said regs.

    Will that do ?

    ReplyDelete
  71. 'so I am sorry that you think I am myth-creating or downright lying.'

    Don't be so touchy, Mrs Anon! I wasn't accusing you of anything worse than helping to perpetuate myths. I don't generally mind, but I have noticed lately that more and more extravagant stories seem to be going the rounds. This is a popular one; that I advocated testing children when I gave evidence for the select committee. if I seemed a little sharp, I apologise. it is just that I want to put this particular rumour to death now.

    ReplyDelete
  72. "Will that do?"

    Yes, that will do fine. Do you argue against their views, or just let them get on with promoting them?

    If you argue against their views, is it because you believe you can do it better than them because your 'forrin', the one-upmanship issue you mention above, or because you just want to be left alone to home educate as you know/think is best for your HE mini Italian national?

    ReplyDelete
  73. "I wasn't accusing you of anything worse than helping to perpetuate myths."

    But it isn't a myth. You argued with MPs (in writing) for monitoring/home inspections.

    ReplyDelete
  74. because your 'forrin',

    or even, because you're 'forrin',

    ReplyDelete
  75. "'The instrument for enforcing the law could be no other than public examinations, extending to all children and starting at an early age. An age might be fixed at which every child must be examined, to ascertain if he (or she) is able to read. If a child proves unable, the father might be subjected to a moderate fine and the child put to school'"

    Mills also advocated the principle that people should only be able vote in General Elections if they had passed these examinations. Great way to create an underclass, only about half of the UK population would be able to vote!

    ReplyDelete
  76. ' Great way to create an underclass, only about half of the UK population would be able to vote!'

    And your problem with this is?

    ReplyDelete
  77. Why would you think it's OK? What would be the advantage of having a disenfranchised underclass? Isn't that the sort of situation that results in riots and civil disturbance?

    ReplyDelete
  78. "As far as the post from August 8th is concerned, I hae re-read it and can see nothing at all objectionable about it, nor can I imagine why I would have deleted it."

    It was comments from you and others under the article that may have led to you choosing to delete it. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) Google cache recorded your article before the comments were posted so they have been lost.

    ReplyDelete