Nobody knows how many children in this country are educated at home; nor are we likely to find out in the future. One estimate widely bandied about during the Badman review was 80,000. In a book published last year, Mike Fortune-Wood argued for a figure of 150,000. Let us split the difference and assume that perhaps as many as 115,000 are being educated out of school. Some families contain more than one child and so this might give us roughly 200,000 parents of home educated children in this country. The vast majority of these parents do not belong either to groups which meet physically nor to forums, lists and online support groups. Obviously, a list which boasts 1000 members really represents only 0.5% of British home educators. Since only about 50 members post regularly, the views expressed even on a list such as this are only those of a tiny minority of home educating parents. The same applies to groups of home educating parents who meet in libraries, church halls and so on; they are very much a minority of home educating parents taken as a whole.
Commenting here yesterday, somebody said:
‘ Some of us need the services of the LA, especially those with children with SEND. However on some lists they daren't speak out and say that they are involved with the LA in that way for fear of being attacked.’
It is of course not only on Internet lists and forums that people are nervous of speaking out in favour of visits; the same thing happens at groups which meet. Somebody else commenting, said:
‘ I know, it can be a real pain when you want a visit and people try to talk you out of it.’
All clubs and societies have various unwritten rules to which members are assumed to subscribe. For those belonging to the larger home education lists and forums, one of these is that members are expected to be in opposition to local authority involvement in home education. Those who feel differently are often ridiculed and accused of making life difficult for other parents. An argument frequently advanced is that if some home educating parents accept visits, then the local authority will expect everybody to have them. Parents who have amicable dealings with their local authority are thus represented as traitors and fifth columnists whose actions have an adverse effect on other home educators. This conformity of views is enforced by anti-local authority parents forming impromptu pecking parties and bullying others until they stop expressing their own views. Sometimes, the dissenters are removed by the list owner in order to create the illusion of unanimity. This happened recently on the HE-UK list when a member asked for one person to try and make her posts a little clearer. The owner of the HE-UK list is famous for chucking off people who speak out in favour of either visits from the local authority or even for structured teaching of children.
The result of all this is that many home educating parents feel under pressure to pay lip-service to principles to which they do not subscribe. This enables those with extremist views on the subject of home education to make out that theirs are really the mainstream opinions of British home educators. We have seen a lot of this ’tail wagging the dog’ type activity on the home education scene in this country. Most home educating parents simply get on with the business of educating their children as best they can. An awful lot of them come to some accommodation with their local authority about visits or annual reports and relations are more or less good natured on both sides. When an organisation claims to represent home educating parents and their interests, we must bear in mind that even if it is a fairly large groups by home education standards, one containing say 2000 members, this is still only 1% or so of the parents of home educated children. It is unfortunate that sometimes, as in the case of visits from local authorities, this tiny minority seeks to shape the opinions and actions of others by cold shouldering and bullying those who express what are seen as unorthodox views on the subject.
"This happened recently on the HE-UK list when a member asked for one person to try and make her posts a little clearer."
ReplyDeleteThis is meta discussion and against the rules of most email lists. I would have expected an experienced internet user to be aware of this, Simon. Admittedly it is often ignore, which is a shame as allowing it to continue has wrecked many an email list I've belonged to over the years. Glad to hear at least some listowners support the rule. Maybe I should join this list.
I must have been lucky, because I haven't run up against this issue (the visit or not issue) on the email lists and groups I belong to and I accept visits. Yes, the pros and cons of accepting and not accepting visits are discussed, but I don't see someone else's choices as a criticism of mine. Others appear also to accept my reasons for having visits though they also offer suggestions for alternative ways to achieve my objectives. This if fine as far as I'm concerned, since I am free to accept or reject such advice.
I'm surprised at you, Simon. When people complain about being upset by LA visits, your attitude seems to be, 'well I don't have any trouble with these visits, they have no power over me, so why should I care what they think?' Presumably you felt like this also when people suggested to you that there are good reasons for not accepting visits. Why are you able to feel empathy for one situation but not the other? Is it because you prefer attacking particular home educators above and beyond your true feelings about the situations under discussion?
Yet, 15 years ago, when we started HE'ing the situation was reversed. Most people I knew(who were known to the LA) had visits. Most seemed to see it as a necessary Child Protection issue and were prepared to participate in this practice.
ReplyDeletePeople who did not want a visit were reassured by their local group that all would be fine, which it generally was.
However, things have changed. Now we have beligerant LA's, aggressive and confrontational behaviour from both sides, the law and HE Guidelines being flagrantly disregarded and some extraordinary behaviour on the part of LA officers. Eg, LA visitor urging parents to buy his book on how to control behaviour in EBD schools, parents being given the wrong information or threatened with an SAO in their FIRST letter from the LA, unjustified referral to Social Services, withdrawn after complaints etc.
15 years ago, no one I knew locally had any beef with the LA. Now, there's a catalogue of abuses. If I were just starting HE now, I'd be very wary of any kind of contact with the LA.
Because the situation has changed so dramatically, I can't see relationships improving much any time soon.
The first commenter you quote above is right. There is peer pressure not to allow visits. The second commenter was me. However, I went on to say that it is easy to resist such pressure if you know something good will happen for your child as a result. That is frankly unlikely.
Children with Special Needs rarely receive any help as a result of an LA visit. I was wanting to make sure the commenter wasn't just imagining that help would result. In our area, the 'support' that might result could be, for eg, the LA officer lying about your educational provision, telling people it was inadequate, whilst writing to you saying that it was fine.
There are some good reasons in some areas for people to urge caution about visits. Having said that, in our (large) local group, the moderators are always at pains to ensure that parents' decisions are supported no matter what they decide to do about visits.
"This is meta discussion and against the rules of most email lists. I would have expected an experienced internet user to be aware of this, Simon. Admittedly it is often ignore, which is a shame as allowing it to continue has wrecked many an email list I've belonged to over the years. Glad to hear at least some listowners support the rule. Maybe I should join this list."
ReplyDeleteIf you're not on the list how did you know about the discussion? The detail Simon gave weren't enough for you to know it was a meta discussion.
"If you're not on the list how did you know about the discussion? The detail Simon gave weren't enough for you to know it was a meta discussion. "
ReplyDeleteDurrr.... and of course I meant either, "The detailS Simon gave weren't enough" or, "The detail Simon gave WASN'T enough"
Mmm...I own several yahoo groups and have never heard the term meta discussion. 'Meta narratives' yes. I must go and look it up now and see if I should ban it.
ReplyDeleteJust read the wiki page description and as far as I can understand it, this sort of discussion happens all the time on every list I've ever been part of:
ReplyDelete'Still, it may sometimes be valuable to explore the higher-order issues about a discussion rather than the subject of the discussion itself. Tactful consideration of personality issues with some contributors as revealed in a discussion may lead to better insight and calmer exploration of the primary topic of the conversation.'
I'm wondering, what, in practice is meant by this (meta discussion) and why it would be banned. Do you mean things like when someone asks for long posts to be written in paragraphs? Or when someone uses vague terminology which no one understands and some poor schmuck asks for an explanation?
Or do you mean something more brutal and personal such as attacking the character of the commenter?
Webb says-Let us split the difference and assume that perhaps as many as 115,000 are being educated out of school. Some families contain more than one child and so this might give us roughly 200,000 parents of home educated children in this country.
ReplyDeleteYou have no real evidence that these figues are correct? i would think it is much lower most parents sent they child to school.
"Some of us need the services of the LA, especially those with children with SEND."
ReplyDeleteThe appropriate support and services are not available whilst the child is at school. The idea that these 'alleged' services are offered to home educators is highly unlikely.
"The owner of the HE-UK list is famous for chucking off people who speak out in favour of either visits from the local authority or even for structured teaching of children."
ReplyDeleteI've heard this a few times, but have yet to see any evidence of this. Every example I've been given involves the person breaking the rules they agreed to when signing up to the list. There has usually been a long history of posts that you claim causes them to be thrown of, yet they were fine until they broke the rules. There are currently people on the list who meet your description who have been there a long time and are still there. You are just bitter at being thrown off the list and feel victimized for some reason. Grow up.
"If you're not on the list how did you know about the discussion? The detail Simon gave weren't enough for you to know it was a meta discussion."
ReplyDeleteNot the original anon, but of course there is enough detail. Simon said that, 'a member asked for one person to try and make her posts a little clearer'. This is meta discussion. Meta discussion is discussion about discussion.
"I'm wondering, what, in practice is meant by this (meta discussion) and why it would be banned."
ReplyDeleteI suppose it's similar to off topic posts. The problem is that it can derail the intended discussion topic of a list. Asking for clarification of a vague term would be part of the discussion if the term is related to the lists topic. Discussing writing styles and grammar would be meta discussion. In this case, anyone with problems should contact the listowner off list and ask them to have a word with the other poster. Then the list doesn't get taken over and distracted by discussions that are irrelevant to the list topic.
This approach began originally because people had to pay to download messages and downloading messaged tied up your phone line. It could be very annoying to spend 50p on a download, only to find that none of the emails had anything to do with the list topic. I suppose, now access is easier, there is less need for this rule, but such discussions can be divisive, so personally I prefer not to see them on lists.
'I've heard this a few times, but have yet to see any evidence of this.'
ReplyDeleteThis week somebody who posts as cheznouscinq was thrown off for asking another prolific poster to use paragraphs and make her posts a little clearer. Cheznouscinq is a structured educator. A little while ago, another structured educator who posts here as Loz was thrown off the same list. It is a regular event and all those who are banned in this way are structured educators.
Simon.
'You are just bitter at being thrown off the list and feel victimized for some reason. Grow up.'
ReplyDeleteAh, this must be what is meant by meta discussion!
Simon.
'This week somebody who posts as cheznouscinq was thrown off for asking another prolific poster to use paragraphs and make her posts a little clearer.'
ReplyDeleteYou are kidding! I've been in HE yahoo groups since 1998 and people have always asked the streamofconsciousnesstypes to please use paragraphs. What could possibly be wrong with wanting to be able to read what has been written?
Perhaps it depends on how it's done? If you say, 'Do you think you could possibly use paragraphs because I am finding your writing terribly difficult to read. Also, I think some of us may be missing your main point or question.' Surely that's fine?
'For F***'s sake, write in paragraphs, you moron' probably not so much.
>>>>'You are just bitter at being thrown off the list and feel victimized for some reason. Grow up.'
ReplyDeleteAh, this must be what is meant by meta discussion!
Simon.<<<
Ah yes, I see.
''Do you think you could possibly use paragraphs because I am finding your writing terribly difficult to read. Also, I think some of us may be missing your main point or question.' Surely that's fine?'
ReplyDeleteWhich was precisely what cheznouscinq said on the HE-UK list. One cannot help but suspect that this was not the real reason for her being banned.
Simon.
'Discussing writing styles and grammar would be meta discussion. In this case, anyone with problems should contact the listowner off list and ask them to have a word with the other poster. Then the list doesn't get taken over and distracted by discussions that are irrelevant to the list topic.'
ReplyDeleteAll true. However, I'm a local listowner, with someone in my group who writes stream of consciousness, doesn't delete any previous posts within hers and uses language whioch many people find problematic.
Many have complained to me and asked me to 'have a word with her'. I have done, but she absolutely refuses to believe that anyone has complained to me or has a problem with her posts. She is utterly convinced that I have taken a disliking to her personally and has been quite abusive to me as a result.
In some ways, I wish such meta discussions happened onlist more often. {sigh}
"This week somebody who posts as cheznouscinq was thrown off for asking another prolific poster to use paragraphs and make her posts a little clearer. Cheznouscinq is a structured educator. A little while ago, another structured educator who posts here as Loz was thrown off the same list."
ReplyDeleteThese posters were both aware of the rules when they signed up and certainly Cheznouscinq had more than one warning about the list rules (don't recall the other case). If anyone thinks someone is not obeying the rules they should contact the listowner. I do recall an unstructured home educator being removed, so I don't think you can claim that only structured home educators are thrown off. Certainly there are structured home educators who have been on the list for years.
"Ah, this must be what is meant by meta discussion!"
Not really, given the topic of this article.
"Which was precisely what cheznouscinq said on the HE-UK list. One cannot help but suspect that this was not the real reason for her being banned."
They were not banned for the original message, they were banned for repeatedly ignoring the listowner's request that the topic end. It had begun to dominate the list and was causing a great deal of bad feeling and conflict. It's up to the listowner to step in and stop flame wars. Certainly, as a past listowner, I regret not stepping in sooner far more than the occasions that I did step in. These threads can be very damaging to a list.
"She is utterly convinced that I have taken a disliking to her personally and has been quite abusive to me as a result."
ReplyDeleteAll part and parcel of being a listowner I'm afraid. Better that the abuse be kept of the list in my opinion, but it's ultimately up to you.
There is nothing wrong with individuals contacting others off list. This is where personal discussions belong.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I recall Cheznouscinq only posted the once to ask quite politely if posts could be in proper sentences with paragraphs and then loads of other people jumped down his/her throat and told her/him how horrible she/he was. I actually agreed wholeheartedly with Cheznouscinq as the posts in question have been driving me mad since I joined the list. If that's how that particular person speaks then no wonder she's always got the LA on her back. She does no favours to other HE'ers, writing so illiterately
ReplyDeleteIt goes back many, many years. I remember on usenet where it was often pointed out to people who wrote stuff that was difficult to read, or that top-posted, that most people would ignore their posts and move on to something else that was easier to comprehend. I doubt if that has changed, even though there's probably a greater understanding now of why some people write like that.
ReplyDeleteI disagree that Cheznouscinq's request was polite. All his/her posts came across as very aggressive and rude and she/he seemed incapable of following the rules regarding posting set by the list owner and seemed determined to be as obnoxious as possible.
ReplyDeleteShe/he was also very scathing about someone else's response to one of her posts, determined that she/he had been misquoted, when in fact she/he hadn't, leading to deep unpleasantness from him/her.
He/she didn't seem to add much at all to the discussions and I am very glad that this person was removed from the list. Maybe he/she should have recognised when to stop digging his/her particular hole and stop talking. It had nothing, I'm sure, to do with the style of education provided by that poster just his/her misguided sense of self-righteousness and utter rudeness.
Eavesdropping again I see, Simon.
ReplyDeleteMeta discussions...I've heard it all now. The truth is MF-W has the capacity to be a snide and ignorant git in real life too.
ReplyDeleteThere's a great deal of self-righteousness and utter rudeness going around in the HE scene.
ReplyDelete'There's a great deal of self-righteousness and utter rudeness going around in the HE scene.'
ReplyDeleteThanks for that in-depth and inciteful analysis which wasn't self-righteous or rude at all!
ooops, I meant insightful. I was thinking about rioting...
ReplyDeleteWhat, going down to Dixons with a house brick?
ReplyDeleteMaybe those 'home educators' who require all this support should not be allowed to home educate at all - clearly they are not up to the job? Just a thought.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we should have some prior assessment of parental ability, then those who are cut out for it can get on with it without interference from LAs, and those that aren't can have their kids kept in school?
You're right. And let's have a prior assessment for all potential parents too. Then those who can cut it can go ahead and have their babies, those that can't can just get their tubes tied/the Snip.
ReplyDeleteFab solution. It'll save the UK so much money.
If you are considering home schooling your children, you should ask other parents who home school for more home schooling information-such as what activities they have used to engage their children and whether or not they have taken a facilitated self-study approach or a lecture-oriented approach. Both approaches offer advantages and you must decide which is better for your child(ren).
ReplyDelete