Thursday, 20 September 2012

Opposing the Welsh proposals

Somebody commenting here was quite affronted when I said that raising concerns about the possible cost of registering and monitoring home educated children was the latest strategy by home educators anxious to head off the Welsh scheme. She thought that I was hinting that this was something which she herself had dreamed up. Nothing of the sort; I was merely suggesting that she was surfing the zeitgeist.


Few ordinary people seem to be actually opposed to the idea of home education. They may be a little dubious about its efficacy or see it as an odd enterprise that they would not care themselves to undertake, but that is all. It is when they realise that there is no compulsory involvement of the ’authorities’ that the eyebrows start to raise. They will say things like, ’Who do you have to ask for permission?’ or ’I suppose the council check up on you regularly?’ When they discover that you simply don’t need to send the kid to school and there is no need to notify anybody; that is when you can sense that they think that there is something amiss.

Most home educating parents know this and also are aware that the average citizen thinks that it is a grand idea to ensure that home educated children must be registered and inspected by the local authority. This presents a problem when you are campaigning against anything of the sort. The tactic is to find an objection which will resonate with the man or woman in the street. We saw this a lot during the organised opposition to Graham Badman’s proposals. Some of this is discussed on home educating lists and forums, while key players also exchange emails and telephone calls, devising ideas which may then be planted on the lists or put in comments to online newspaper articles on the subject. You need only use a word like 'conflate' on the home education lists and in no time at all it will go viral and everybody will be using it. The same thing happens with ideas. A brilliant example of this was the idea a while ago that children would be left on the school roll for a time after being deregistered. It was a sensible plan and so something ad to be dreamed up which would show ordinary parents the implications. This was duly done and named the 'Ibiza Loophole'. This particular piece of propaganda was successful.

During these times of austerity, two linked ideas have emerged from discussions as being best calculated to gain the approval of ordinary people for the fight against the Welsh proposals. One of these is the projected cost and the other,  all the things that are wrong with the educational system and should be fixed first, before we start fretting about home education. The notion is being put about that if we spend money on a scheme to register home educators, then that money will have to be taken from more needy folk to pay for it. Gosh, how terrible if this meant that some child genuinely in danger were to suffer because of this obsession with a tiny number of home educated children!  Surely there are better things to use that money for? Another strand which is emerging is to agree that education in general is in a frightful state, especially in Wales. Then, we can bring the conversation round to educational standards in schools; the exams fiasco, exclusions and various other problems. My, it does seem a pity that with all these serious difficulties involving literally hundreds of thousands of schoolchildren, they are worrying about a tiny handful of a few hundred home educated children. Why, if they got their house in order, people might not even feel the need to remove their kids from school!

The truth is of course that nearly all home educators know that their children are safe and cared for and just want the authorities to piss off and leave them alone. Saying this to people who sent their own kids to school would be tactless and so other sentiments need to be expressed if we are not to alienate the man in the street. Keep an eye on the comments being made to newspaper articles and so on, as the Welsh proposals gather pace and you will see a coordinated campaign of comments along these lines. As articles appear, so somebody will draw attention to them on various lists and forums and this encourages home educating parents to comment. The result is that it looks from a glance at the comments as though there is mass opposition to any plan to change the law.

37 comments:

  1. Smearing people in order to dismiss their views instead of engaging with their arguments, ignoring requests for evidence for your claims, some of which appear to be fabrications, seems to be becoming a habit, Simon. It would have been nice to be able to debate the issues, but this seems to be impossible for you since you ignore most arguments and requests for supporting evidence to your own points, and nobody else seems willing to contribute, which is a shame since criticism of ideas is a gift and I'm open to changing my views if arguments make sense as I've done in the past.

    I can assure you that I began with the belief that a register and at least informal enquiries for all home educators might help some children. But after reading about the experience of New Zealand and reading many case reviews I changed my mind. You can attempt to twist this anyway you like but what you say does not change the fact that I am not part of some plot to convince the public of anything. This is the only place I've written my views so they are hardly likely to be read widely. And even if others are approaching it in the way you suggest, if the arguments sense, does it matter? If they don't make sense, why not engage with the points made?

    ReplyDelete
  2. ' You can attempt to twist this anyway you like but what you say does not change the fact that I am not part of some plot to convince the public of anything'

    I suggested nothing of the kind. The speed with which the phrase 'Ibiza Loophole' spread and appeared in comments all over the place, must surely tell you something? The aim was to prevent the passage of a regulation which would delay the removal of a home educated child from the school roll for three weeks or so. There was huge opposition to this from some quarters and various ideas were put forward as to the best strategy to adopt. Mike Fortune-Wood and Ian Dowty were largely responsible for devising this and it was then taken up by others, via places like Home Ed Biz and HE-UK.

    I am not saying that you are part of any conspiracy, nor that you are on any lists or forums. Indeed, I could hardly do so, because I have no idea who you are. If you are not on the lists, then perhaps you have not seen this sort of thing happening?

    'you ignore most arguments and requests for supporting evidence '

    It is, I think, less that than that we are both looking at the same evidence and drawing different conclusions from it. If we laid out all the evidence available, I suspect that this would still happen. This has more to do with the nature of the world than it does a desire on my part to conceal evidence!


    ReplyDelete
  3. 'The tactic is to find an objection which will resonate with the man or woman in the street.'

    Or, another way to look at it is that most home educators will simply explain to their friends why some new proposed interference is unreasonable in ways that make sense to them.

    That's what I tend to do. I don't have to dream up 'tactics' or 'propoganda' or 'devise ideas'. I don't need to read national lists or find out what 'key players' are up to. I just explain to my friends how it currently works and why it works that way. My explanations, combined with the evidence of my grown up kids, is enough to allay their fears.

    ReplyDelete
  4. ' I don't have to dream up 'tactics' or 'propoganda' or 'devise ideas'. I don't need to read national lists or find out what 'key players' are up to. '

    I am quite prepared to believe that both you and our anonymous friends who commented here earlier today are both completely free spirits who think for yourselves and do not pick up stray expressions or ideas from others. The evidence suggests strongly though that many do. Take for instance the legal phrase 'ultra vires'. Very few ordinary people use this expression or even know what it means. The idea that various home educating parents just happened to be thinking over the actions of local authorities and then round about the same time all decided, quite independently, that the actions of many were ultra vires, is frankly improbable. What actually took place was that a lawyer described the behaviour of some councils in this way to a well known former home educator, who then began pushing the words on a list of which he is the owner. In next to no time, 'ultra vires' had been seized on by various people, until now it is hard to read a blog or go on a forum concerned with home education without encountering the expression.

    This is not a sinister conspiracy and much the same sort of thing happens with many campaigns and pressure groups. I was simply describing what is going on and mentioning that the comments here which are apparently so concerned about the possible cost of the Welsh proposals are part of the phenomenon. If people wish to view this as 'Smearing people in order to dismiss their views' then that is fine. It does not alter what goes on in the world.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'I am quite prepared to believe that both you and our anonymous friends who commented here earlier today are both completely free spirits who think for yourselves and do not pick up stray expressions or ideas from others.'

      I've never knowingly used the term 'ultra vires', because I'm not a lawyer and suspect it has a specific meaning which I might get wrong, No idea what 'grown knowledge' is all about and I find most catchphrases quite annoying because they quickly become emptied of meaning.

      As I've said, I and others, I am sure, are quite capable of knowing why we believe something and of explaining that, on a personal level, to our friends.

      There may well be an orchestrated campaign. My point was that most of us normal people don't need to resort to 'tactics', 'propaganda' etc The facts, when explained clearly are usually enough to 'resonante with the man or woman in the street.' Have you not found this to be so in your own life, Simon?

      Delete
  5. "It does not alter what goes on in the world."

    Another thing that goes on in the world is that people like you dismiss views and refuse to engage with ideas by dismissing them as propaganda or by hinting at some kind of conspiracy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point, except 'people like you' sounds a bit malicious.

      Delete
    2. Why does it sound malicious? It's clearly a tactic being used by Simon so, in that respect, he is like other people who use that tactic.

      Delete
    3. The phrase 'people like you' or 'people like them' is a common way of dismissing someone's views, which in this case, is both ironic and counterproductive to your argument.

      Delete
    4. Then I apologize, because that was not my intention.

      Delete
  6. Simon wrote,
    "I was simply describing what is going on and mentioning that the comments here which are apparently so concerned about the possible cost of the Welsh proposals are part of the phenomenon."

    Did you use the word, 'apparently', here to imply that the people who express these views don't really believe them, or was that an accidental effect? And do you still think they mean financial cost, rather than the cost of harm to children?

    ReplyDelete
  7. In your view parents are inadequate to educate their children without State oversight. This is uncomfortably like Eastern European socialism.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Here is another example of an odd expression which is turning up during discussion of the Welsh proposals. This relates to a child having 'grown knowledge'. This is a very odd piece of language which I have seen being used three of four times by different people in the last few days. It can hardly be coincidental that this strange arrangement of words, a child who has 'grown knowledge', could just spring up in three different places independently and more or less simultaneously! Does anybody have an original source for this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've seen it used by one person, only once on the EO debate list (the same person has also used 'grow knowledge' three times). Where else have you seen it?

      Delete
    2. Ahh, partly answering my own question. I see the Dare to Know blog has written a very similar article to the posts I've already mentioned on the EO Debate list. http://daretoknowblog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/ok-so-what-is-wrong-with-welsh.html This looks so similar to the email list messages I suspect it was based on them. I see nothing wrong with people taking ideas that ring true for them and discussing them with others. Isn't that human nature? I'm not sure why you feel the need to point it out or think it strange?

      You appear obsessed with how people talk about things and how they develop their ideas and seem to avoid discussing the ideas themselves at all costs. I see you have made no attempt to continue the discussion about children growing knowledge on the EO Debate list, and you do the same here on your own blog. For instance, you said that many exemption requests are refused in New Zealand but then blanked any further discussion on the subject when someone asked for evidence to support this claim.

      Delete
    3. "You appear obsessed with how people talk about things and how they develop their ideas and seem to avoid discussing the ideas themselves at all costs."

      It's called meta-discussion. Simon appears to be the King of Meta-Discussion!

      Delete
  9. Janet's word is 'mobilizing'.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ' I see you have made no attempt to continue the discussion about children growing knowledge on the EO Debate list, and you do the same here on your own blog. For instance, you said that many exemption requests are refused in New Zealand but then blanked any further discussion on the subject when someone asked for evidence to support this claim.'

    Two points to consider. First, I did not want to mention the EO debate list here, because it is a private list of which I am a member. I thought it would be a breach of protocol to do so. I have commented there extensively on the topic of children's rights, as you must know, but have a limited amount of time in which to do so. I have not responded yet to the mention of children's 'grown knowledge', but intend to make it the subject of a post here, now that it has appeared on a public blog.

    You say that I have blanked further discussion of the number of exemptions refused in New Zealand, but this is only because I do not wish to go beyond the facts. I have exchanged emails with somebody in the Ministry of Education there and he has told me that refusing exemptions is routine, but that he was either unable or unwilling to give me the precise figures. The ministry is now considering my request and if I am given any hard data, I shall of course put it up here. There is a difference between 'blanking' people's requests and being unwilling to go beyond what I know.


    I would not hold your breath waiting for this information. The attitude seems to be that it is one thing for a somebosdy resident in New Zealand to get the officials from the Ministry of Education scurrying around collating data and quite another for some random forigner. We shall see!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'You say that I have blanked further discussion of the number of exemptions refused in New Zealand, but this is only because I do not wish to go beyond the facts.'

      Yes, but you are not really aware of the facts, are you? The person you exchanged emails with has not given you any hard facts. They themselves may not even have access to the stats.

      Delete
  11. 'I see nothing wrong with people taking ideas that ring true for them and discussing them with others. Isn't that human nature? I'm not sure why you feel the need to point it out or think it strange?'

    I don't find it at all strange and pointed out that the same thing happens in other pressure groups. Ideas do of course enjoy vogues of this sort. What is slightly out of the ordinary is the extent to which particular words and phrases become firm favourites of home educators so rapidly. The word 'conflate' for instance is a relatively little used one in everyday English. For a couple of years, it turned up in almost every communication made by home educators, in the sense of 'conflating educational concerns with welfare issues'. This seizing upon one word and working it to death is a little unusual, although I would probably stop short of calling it strange.

    I might point out that I have a particular interest in the use of language and am perhaps more apt to notice such things than the next man.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'Yes, but you are not really aware of the facts, are you? The person you exchanged emails with has not given you any hard facts. They themselves may not even have access to the stats.'

    If you scout round New Zealand home educating sites and blogs, you will soon see references to the fact that not all applications for exemption are granted. After I posted this piece, somebody from New Zealand who claimed to have been refused an exemption also emailed me. When somebody from the Ministry of Education tells me the same thing, I am inclined to believe it to be so. If and when I have any statistics, I shall certainly post them on here.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "If you scout round New Zealand home educating sites and blogs, you will soon see references to the fact that not all applications for exemption are granted."

      I've been doing just this and have only seen occasional mention that sometimes they ask for more information - not the same as a refusal at all. I've seen no mention of anyone being refused so I would be very interested in seeing the ones you claim to have seen. Refusals may happen, but if they happen are as often as you suggest I would expect it to be easier to find evidence.

      Delete
    2. Yes, and I am friendly with an ex-NZ HEer who tells me it's practically unheard of. That's the problem with hearsay and not actual facts.

      Delete
  13. People do not want money wasted on home educators over visits or monitoring when there can see with there own eyes what needs to be done for the local state school the lack of resources etc more teachers for that school.the cost would be to much in exchange for NO benefit for those that send there kids to school.you ask people you wanna spend that money on those silly home educators? most will no thanks!
    I know some she wanted checks on home educators but when i said that cost a fair bit she went off the idea as she wants any spare money spent on the local school!

    ReplyDelete
  14. 'Yes, and I am friendly with an ex-NZ HEer who tells me it's practically unheard of. That's the problem with hearsay and not actual facts.'

    I am convinced that Old Mum must mean this humorously. If I tell people that a man I know said X or Y about some place that I have never been, then that is of course hearsay. What Old Mum is saying in effect is this:

    'We are neither of us possessed of any hard data regarding the percentage of parents who are refused exemption in New Zealand. However, you have spoken to one person and I to another and I prefer to believe the hearsay which I have picked up, rather than that which you have related here.'

    This is a perfectly good position to take, as long as we both know that we are relying solely upon hearsay. I know this, but am uneasy in my mind that you are also aware of the situation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. {sigh}
      {Head hits desk}
      No, not at all. I'm saying precisely that NONE of us can rely on what people tell us or our impressions. Sorry, I thiought that was clear.

      Delete
  15. 'People do not want money wasted on home educators over visits or monitoring when there can see with there own eyes what needs to be done for the local state school the lack of resources etc more teachers for that school.the cost would be to much in exchange for NO benefit for those that send there kids to school.'

    You know Mr Williams, I sometimes wish that you were not quite so quick off the mark to confirm whatever point I have been making on this blog about the ways of home educators in this country! I mention in a post that soon home educators will be talking about the waste of money and need to fix our schools before dealing with home education and sure enough, you pop up and say that very thing.

    Some have speculated that you do not really exist and are in fact no more than one of my sock puppets. Perhaps it is worse than that. How if you were the dark side of personality, like some evil twin? It really doesn't bear thinking about. Or what if, and this is a truly chilling thought, you really are me? Do you think that we are like Mr Jeckyll and Dr Hyde?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. we are Jeckyll and Dr Hyde and your the evil one! I am the nice and kind twin.
      People do not want money wasted on home educators!

      Delete
  16. Those interested in home education in New Zealand might want to look at this:

    http://mro.massey.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10179/1227/02whole.pdf?sequence=1

    The forms needed to apply for an exemption are at the back.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. An interesting study. Interesting to see also that it's not just home educators in this country who find monitoring visits stressful.

      "I don't think the Ministry really understands how very threatening the review process is to homeschooling families because it is not just the child's education at stake. It is actually the way we parent, the entire way we live our lives, that is under threat every time we have a review. I am not saying whether or not the reviews should take place. I am just pointing out that the stress created by the idea of being reviewed is very real and very detrimental to the education process"

      Delete
  17. 'An interesting study. Interesting to see also that it's not just home educators in this country who find monitoring visits stressful.'

    Which ties in neatly with what I said the other day, about the evidence being capable of pointing in two very different directions at once. It is possible to read this and then believe that it indicates that monitoring of home education is an unwarrantable intrusion into family life such as to make normal people become very stressed out. It is equally possible that it is just one of those minor irritations of everyday life that we all have to endure and that many home educating parents are neurotic and fraught types who are driven to the verge of despair by trival things that the rest of us take in our stride.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or more likely, somewhere in between, where it is felt as an intrusion into family live that adversely affects the education process, but people cope with if they have to, which was our experience. But should all home educators have to put up with this routinely if there is no proven benefit?

      Delete
  18. '{sigh}
    {Head hits desk}'

    Brace up, Old Mum! Do not let your soul be driven to the sin of despair by my monumental and well known obtuseness.

    ReplyDelete
  19. It would appear to me that far too many individuals, get bogged down with semantics and being pedantic. As such they lose sight of the central point that is being made.
    Far too concerned with blowing their own trumpet, classic case of style over substance!!

    ReplyDelete