Every time I think that I have dealt finally with the story of how I lied to get onto various home education Internet lists and then abused their trust by publishing newspaper articles containing information taken from these lists, I find that after a month or two somebody tries to start it up again. Yesterday, somebody who comments here regularly said;
'if my memory serves me correctly, you were barred from HE-UK because you put material from the site in the public domain without the permission of the poster or the list owner.'
This is of course absolute nonsense. I joined the HE-UK list in 2007. I joined using my real name and personal email address, although it would have saved me a lot of trouble had I done what everybody else there seems to do and used a false name. At the end of July 2009 I had a couple of articles published in the Independent and the Times Educational Supplement about home education. here is the one from the Independent;
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/schools/simon-webb-we-must-get-tough-on-home-schooling-1764348.html
There is nothing at all in this article apart from what is freely available to any member of the public on open websites. I was keenly aware that I should not use anything which I had learned from the lists and so restricted what I wrote to information from the public domain. I quoted from an account of autonomous education found on the Education Otherwise site. It is here;
http://www.education-otherwise.org/HE/LS5.htm
Soon after this was published Mike Fortune-Wood, the owner of the HE-UK site, posted a comment on the online version of the article in which he claimed that I had lied to gain admission to his list. This was not true of course and he was too ashamed to sign his own name to this comment, preferring to use the pseudonym Maesk123. He also included a post which I had made on the list. Up until that point, I had assumed that all comments which people posted on this list were private and meant only to be read by those on the list. Other members of this list then began to publish my comments from the list in various places, including writing to the editors of national newspapers with quotes from them. Later on, things which I had posted on this list began to appear on blogs and websites across the world! On October 7th 2009 Wendy Crickard posted a message on the HE-UK list asking for details of previous posts of mine made to the list. She explained that she wished to show these to Linda Waltho MP, who was sitting on the select committee.
One might have thought that if anybody on this list was really concerned about the privacy of messages which were posted there, then at least one person would have raised an objection to this. In fact Janet Ford, another of those who seems to be ashamed of her own name, posting as Mehetabel, started a new thread called, '[HE-UK] Simon Webbs previous posts for Wendy :-' She then listed every post of mine that she could find, so that others could pass them on to MPs and anywhere else.
It was at this point that I realised that the posts which people made on the HE-UK list were not really regarded as being private at all. It was clear from the fact that nobody objected on the list to all this, that all the members found this it quite acceptable to use posts in this way and to publish them anywhere. From that time on I have not bothered at all about the privacy of this list.
I hope that it is now plain that I did not put anything in my two articles from any of the home education lists to which I belonged when I wrote them. I hope it is also clear that when one finds that all those on a private list, from the list owner downwards, are perfectly content to publish private messages across the Internet, in national newspapers and even submit them as evidence to a select committee, then the idea of a 'private' list is no longer really possible. It is clear that private messages on such a list are really regarded as public property. I have behaved accordingly ever since this happened. I do hope that this will be the last I have to write about this topic.
'I do hope that this will be the last I have to write about this topic.'
ReplyDeleteYou don't have to write anything about it. In fact, if you hadn't written anything about it in the first place, you would probably still happily be having heated debates with autonomous home educators on home education lists.
Many members of those lists saw your newspaper articles as a breach of good faith. The response of some people to what happened does not mean that you should follow suit. As I have frequently had to remind my children - they are not obliged to mimic each other's behaviour.
Actually I found it irritating that at the same time that all this original fuss happened (and Simon got the boot off the lists for supposedly betraying private info etc) some people were also complaining that Simon had't used the info in his articles that he had been given in answers on the same lists about the success of some AE young people etc.
ReplyDeleteIt is also true that Simon has been much more of a pain since being booted off because he has referred to subsequent list posts about individuals on this blog; but I do accept he has been provoked by the campaign against him in the news/on lists/complaining to the Select Comm/publishers etc. It seems to me that it could have all been better managed at the time by people taking their frustrations out on him on lists, rather than in public. As I said during the Badman campaign that home educators need to be seen acting as adults rather than complete lunatics; there seem to be plenty of them already who jump into print (at least on the internet) without encouraging any more idiocy.
Tacher Julie says-As I said during the Badman campaign that home educators need to be seen acting as adults rather than complete lunatics; there seem to be plenty of them already who jump into print (at least on the internet) without encouraging any more idiocy.
ReplyDeleteWe act how we like to defend home education against Webb/Balls and Crazy old Badman who is a lunatic!
who cares what you think?(we dont) when we know you really only want just a few people doing home education the Badman/Webb way!
"I was keenly aware that I should not use anything which I had learned from the lists and so restricted what I wrote to information from the public domain."
ReplyDeleteI think part of the problem, is that you ignored all of the information you had been given on the lists! Obviously you should not have quoted personal examples but there is no reason to ignore all of the general information about autonomous education you were given and go with your imaginary version of autonomous education. In the article you say:
The most popular educational method used by those who withdraw their children from school in this country is known as autonomous education and involves nobody teaching children anything at all!
Yet you had been told repeatedly that this is not the case. Autonomous education can of course involve teaching children if they ask to be taught. I'm sure there are lots more examples like that but I'm sure you get my drift. You lied about autonomous education so that your dislike of it made more sense.
"(and Simon got the boot off the lists for supposedly betraying private info etc) some people were also complaining that Simon had't used the info in his articles that he had been given in answers on the same lists about the success of some AE young people etc."
ReplyDeleteDo we know the actual stated reason for barring? I've just had a quick look back and the main feeling seems to be a feeling of betrayal - that Simon ignored all the information and examples given to him about AE on the lists and just re-stated his original misunderstandings about it in his articles.
Julie, I see your point, but bear in mind how betrayed people felt by Simon's articles. Many people shared their experience of successful AE with him, at his request, and he completely ignored all of it. At the time, HEors were feeling very frightened and vulnerable because of Badman, and I don't think it's at all surprising that they reacted the way they did. The surprising thing is that Simon appears to enjoy provoking them so much.
ReplyDeleteI've just managed to post a series of comments on Simon's previous post, after wrestling with the google monster for some time.
ReplyDelete'You don't have to write anything about it.'
ReplyDeleteWell suzyg, the problem is that when somebody tries to set a hare running, as you did yesterday by saying, 'you were barred from HE-UK because you put material from the site in the public domain without the permission of the poster', I feel that I must set the record straight.
'they are not obliged to mimic each other's behaviour.'
I wouldn't say that I was mimicing anybody's behaviour. If I join an Internet list or club or any other social group, then I will abide by the accepted rules of that group. If the group rules change suddenly and dramatically, as happened in this case, then I shall adapt to the new situation.
'Julie, I see your point, but bear in mind how betrayed people felt by Simon's articles. Many people shared their experience of successful AE with him, at his request, and he completely ignored all of it. '
ReplyDeleteThis is quite untrue. I certainly asked about some of the seemingly bizarre things that I saw people posting about on the HE-UK list. But just because somebody gives me what they see as an adequate explanation, I am under no obligation to accept this and change my own views. If that were the case then all the people who come on here would by now have started following my methods; after all I have, as you put it, 'shared my successful experience of HE' with them! The fools! They still think I am wrong.
Do you take my point? People did indeed tell me why they were behaving as they were, but I found the reasoning faulty do not accept that this is good for children. As a result, I felt the need to state my own views publicly. Lord knows enough autonomous educators have stated their own views on structured education often enough! I have not become upset about this. Are you really saying that I should feel 'betrayed' about this? If so, why? Those people simply hold a different opinion about education to me, it's no reason for me to fall out with them.
'Do we know the actual stated reason for barring'
ReplyDeleteThere was none. Mike Fortune-Wood simply blocked me without any explanation. The EO moderator sent me an email saying,'Dear Simon
Further to my recent email, the list moderators have now had time to discuss this issue and we have decided to remove you from the list.'
The whole world is mad!!
ReplyDeleteAll these unreasonable people doing and saying unreasonable things and not making sense.
The only sane logical person is Simon who sits in the middle of the storm whilst everyone around him acts like nutters.
Or is it the other way around?
What is your basis for syaing that autonomous education is the most popular method amongst home educators - how could you possibly know?
'What is your basis for syaing that autonomous education is the most popular method amongst home educators - how could you possibly know?'
ReplyDeleteA fair point indeed. As written, the piece originally said, 'One of the most popular methods...'
Once one sells an article, it is for the editor to rearrange it as he will, which is what happened in this case. There is another clue to where this happened in the heading, where 'home schooling' is mentioned. this is not an expression which I use myself. I certainly did not write that it is time to get tough on either home schooling or home education!
'Well suzyg, the problem is that when somebody tries to set a hare running, as you did yesterday by saying, 'you were barred from HE-UK because you put material from the site in the public domain without the permission of the poster', I feel that I must set the record straight.'
ReplyDeleteI think you set the hare running by claiming you had been barred from EHE lists because of your views. Since, as you pointed out, you had been expressing said views on said lists for a couple of years without let or hindrance, I don't think that view holds water.
"If that were the case then all the people who come on here would by now have started following my methods; after all I have, as you put it, 'shared my successful experience of HE' with them! The fools! They still think I am wrong."
ReplyDeleteOne can disagree with a method without lying about it though. For instance, in the article you claim that autonomous education involves nobody teaching children anything at all, despite being told repeatedly that this is not the case.
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"A fair point indeed. As written, the piece originally said, 'One of the most popular methods...'
Once one sells an article, it is for the editor to rearrange it as he will, which is what happened in this case. "
Yet when this was challenged previously you made the following comments in support of your claim, making no mention of the possibility of editors rearranging your words:
You say that I have no substantial grounds for believing it to be the case that autonomous education is the most popular method among British home educators. Of course, one cannot be sure. A couple of years on the HE-UK message board, EO and Herts-HE boards all tend to suggest that this is so.
http://homeeducationheretic.blogspot.com/2009/08/paula-rothermel-and-alan-thomas.html
'You say that I have no substantial grounds for believing it to be the case that autonomous education is the most popular method among British home educators. Of course, one cannot be sure. A couple of years on the HE-UK message board, EO and Herts-HE boards all tend to suggest that this is so.'
ReplyDeleteI can't see any contradiction here. Of course we cannot be sure that autonomous education is the most popular method used, but autonomous educators seem to be in the forefront of the home edcuation movement in this country in a way that they are not in, say, America. The reasons that I did not mention then that my words had been edited was that I sent the article off some while before it was published and do not generally check these things line by line after publication to see what has been altered. It was in any case a fairly minor change, the omission of a couple of words.
'One can disagree with a method without lying about it though. '
ReplyDeleteAs usual, you are a little to keen on talking about people lying. Without proper research, it is all but impossible to say how many children from autonomous households are actually taught in a systematic way. You might care to follow the second link in the post though, which leads to an account of autonomous education. I would be interested to know if you regard this as fairly typical example of autonomous education. Because autonomous educators are dead set against any monitoring of their methods, we must fall back on individual accounts like that above.
"Without proper research, it is all but impossible to say how many children from autonomous households are actually taught in a systematic way."
ReplyDeleteYou didn't mention systematic in your article. Another example of your usual moving of the goalposts?
"You might care to follow the second link in the post though, which leads to an account of autonomous education. I would be interested to know if you regard this as fairly typical example of autonomous education."
Probably fairly typical of AE for young children and it clearly includes teaching. For example:
I can't tell you how many times a day I am asked the question "What does this say?" "How do you spell this?".
More systematic teaching if often requested by older children. Mine have requested correspondence courses and help working through a chemistry text book, for instance.
"Because autonomous educators are dead set against any monitoring of their methods"
Not dead set against monitoring methods, but against monitoring children. There is a difference. It is easy enough to monitor methods if the parents give detailed information about what they have done with their children and their learning outcomes.