Different people make different guesses about the number of electively home educated children in this country. These guesses though, remain just that. Paula Rothermel a few years ago produced a figure of almost half a million, the York Consulting research suggested perhaps a twentieth of that. When Graham Badman put forward the figure of a possible eighty thousand, some claimed that this was a wild exaggeration.
The reason that the estimates vary so greatly is that different people are trying to prove different things. Since nobody has the least idea of the numbers, nobody can really argue with the guesses. If a home education organisation wishes to demonstrate that home education is hardly worth bothering about, they might suggest that only thirty thousand or so are involved. If on the other hand, somebody wishes to portray it as an unstoppable, mass movement, then the claim might be made that the numbers exceed a hundred thousand. Those calling for increased regulation of home education use the same tricks.
Mike Fortune-Wood now claims that his research suggests that the true number of home educated children in this country is eighty thousand. Let us take that number and see where it leads us. York Consulting found that the average number of home educated children per family was 1.4. This would suggest that there are somewhere in the region of a hundred thousand parents of home educated children in the country. (This is based upon the blatantly heteronormative assumption that each child will have two parents and if I offend any families living in seaside resorts on the south coast where this may not be the case, I can only apologise.)
Not all parents of home educated children are in favour of home education. We know that some mothers have difficulties with ex-partners over this question. Even with parents who remain together, one or the other can be against the practice. So when working out what percentage of parents of home educated children are in favour of this aspect or other, I think it wise to take all the parents into account when making our calculations. After all, when responding to those conducting research, it is quite common for both parents to submit separate responses.
A fairly large Internet list like the Badman Review Action Group has about seven hundred and fifty members. Not all those who belong are actually home educating parents. There are quite a few people like me and Ali Edgely who do not have a child aged between five and sixteen being educated out of school. I would guess that about a third of the members are like that. The remaining five hundred would mean that for all the anger and noise generate on such a list, it represents the interests of just 0.5% of home educating parents. Hardly representative! When they conducted a survey to see who was opposed to compulsory registration, eighty nine people voted against the idea. Even if we assume that all were home educating parents, this tells us the views of fewer than 0.1 of home educating parents in this country.
Even the biggest groups, Education Otherwise for instance, have only three thousand members or so. Again, not all these are home educating parents. If they were, then this group would represent the interests of just 3% of home educating parents in this country. Realistically, this is more like to be 2%, as many members are not genuine home educators. The implications for the legitimacy of these organisations is greatly diluted, the larger the estimated numbers of home educated children. Try looking at the responses sent to the Badman review and the subsequent select committee hearing and then calculating by removing about a third, sent by people who were not home educating parents, and then expressing the remaining numbers as a percentage of a hundred thousand. They are pitifully small in number and hardly able to claim anything at all about the average home educating parents.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"Since nobody has the least idea of the numbers, nobody can really argue with the guesses."
ReplyDeleteBut some are more educated and reasoned guesses than others. Have you found out how Mike FW calculated if estimate yet?
"The implications for the legitimacy of these organisations is greatly diluted, the larger the estimated numbers of home educated children."
Do you know of any campaigning or interest group in which much higher percentages become actively involved in putting their views forward? How does the situation within HE compare with, for instance, breast feeding mothers, or more currently what proportion of students who are against increased fees actually protested? What proportion of school using parents have responded to consultations that affect them?
Unless you have comparative figures for other groups, just looking at this issue within HE is pretty meaningless. It could be that a much higher proportion of home educators have responded publicity to consultations and generally on issues that affect them than these other groups which would suggest that the group as a whole feels more strongly about the issues than other groups feel about the issues that affect them.
"They are pitifully small in number and hardly able to claim anything at all about the average home educating parents."
What does this mean? Are you suggesting that someone who officially home educated last year suddenly knows nothing about home education, for instance? Or that someone who home educated last year cannot be concerned about the rights of their children to home educate their grandchildren in future? Or for their friends to be able to continue home educating as they are now? What's your point?
'Have you found out how Mike FW calculated if estimate yet?'
ReplyDeleteI was already aware of this. It was his reference to research which I was curious about. I thought that he had conducted some largescale project which has not been mentioned elsewhere. Nothing he has done or calculated has improved upon the existing guesswork.
'What's your point?'
My point is that many responses received by the Badman review and the select committee were from people who had never home educated nor ever intended to in the future. I took the trouble to track down quite a few of the people who submitted statements to the select committee to check on this. It makes it less impressive when people claim that the overwhelming majority of home educators think this or that, when a lot of the views are by people who have not been involved in the thing at all.
"I was already aware of this. It was his reference to research which I was curious about. I thought that he had conducted some largescale project which has not been mentioned elsewhere. Nothing he has done or calculated has improved upon the existing guesswork."
ReplyDeleteSo you have read the two books detailing his research mentioned yesterday (as presumably that's where he details how he arrived at the figure). How did Mike estimate his figures?
"My point is that many responses received by the Badman review and the select committee were from people who had never home educated nor ever intended to in the future."
Yes, I agree that too many people without a genuine stake in the outcome were consulted. Some had very tenuous links to HE. Which makes it even more surprising that you supported his report so strongly.
But out of those claiming to represent home educators, how many had home educated in the past and have children who might want to HE in future? How many had friends or were representing groups of people who currently HE? How did the response rates as a proportion of the HE population to the consultation compare to the response rates of other consultations?
For everyone that exposes their position in Home education there is probably many hundreds that don’t.
ReplyDeleteWhy?
Human nature,
Being part of a persecuted group of people
Privacy
Shyness
Not driven by a self-publishing ego
And most of all:-
not wishing to classified as being anything like Simon Webb
Your lack of reasoned thinking judgement strikes again Webb.
ReplyDeleteOpen your mouth before engaging brain again, just as usual.
Another childish rant that lacks any academic rigour (characteristic of your pathetic book) and lacks any knowledge of the people that you claim to have expert knowledge of. You have never met such people as the Polish Immigrants that Home Educate because their children are bullied for being Catholic and for many other understandable reasons too. In a world that you are ignorant of, there are many Home Educators that you will never discover.
You demonstrate as little understanding as the poorly trained EWO’s that you actually represent.
In Home Educating circles, claims based up ignorance are commonly referred to as ‘Doing A Webb’. Something which your distorted mind will no-doubt revel in.
'For everyone that exposes their position in Home education there is probably many hundreds that don’t'
ReplyDeleteWhat on earth is 'exposing their position in Home education'? Is this English?
'Being part of a persecuted group of people'
What does this mean?
'You have never met such people as the Polish Immigrants that Home Educate because their children are bullied for being Catholic'
I am intrigued to know how you would know this!
'
Webb
ReplyDeleteYour English usage is appalling but by some odd conditioning of your peculiar mind, your choose to deride and berate the words of those whom you should learn from Pretending that you don't understand as a way of ignoring that which you should take to heart, is characteristically questionable reasoning once again.
For something easier for your obscure mind to digest, try this:
Pillock!
By the way, next time you try to wheedle out of a difficult situation by saying 'I'll buy you a coffee', remember to pay for it before you scurry away with a red face.
Has your memory faded along with other faculties?
JF
"I am intrigued to know how you would know this!"
ReplyDeleteDon't lie, just tell the truth. It is one of the many facets of H.E that you know nothing about.
The biggest revelation in your book is how little you know. In the words of G.E. 'He will never know what he does't know'
Harvey S
'By the way, next time you try to wheedle out of a difficult situation by saying 'I'll buy you a coffee', remember to pay for it before you scurry away with a red face.
ReplyDeleteHas your memory faded along with other faculties?
JF '
Come come, JF, I think that we all deserve to learn a little more about this! My memory is umimpaired and I am not in the habit of buying people coffee. Is this supposed to be a reference to some incident in my life? You must tell us more, otherwise we shall suspect that you are simply romancing! As for my being a pillock this is, to say the least of it, a debatable point. I am quite prepared to believe that this is the case with one of us, but I feel a little further investigation is needed to establish to our mutual satisfaction which of us could most aptly be described by this expression.
'The biggest revelation in your book is how little you know. '
ReplyDeleteBe a little more specific, Harvey S.