I have talked over the last few days about the fact that almost every high profile home educator in this country, those who appear in the newspapers, on the television, lead support groups and constantly pop up on blogs and lists; have or claim to have malfunctioning brains. This sets home education apart from various other minority interests. Does this matter though? I think that it does, because it has a bearing on the agenda that that they push forward and urge others to adopt.
It is important to realise that those characters who hand out press releases and so on or appear on radio or television news programmes, have not been chosen by the majority of home educators to represent their interests. They are creating opinion, rather than merely reflecting it. We saw this very clearly with the reaction to the Graham Badman enquiry. It was announced on January 19th, 2009. That same day, a press release went out from Sheffield, which the BBC mentions here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7838783.stm
‘Home educators are angry’! Of course only one home educator is angry, but she wishes to stir up others so that they share her anger and desire not to allow regular monitoring of home educated children. This is a classic example of how the supposed leaders of the home educating ‘community’ try deliberately to create an atmosphere of fear and mistrust. There is no evidence that any other home educators had even heard about the proposed review at that point, let alone that they were angry about it!
There is not room, nor do I have the time, to examine every aspect of how and why these prominent home educating parents shape the views and opinions of others to their own ends. I want to look at just one part of this; the campaign against visits from local authority officers.
Nobody except a home educating parent can understand why anybody would object to someone from the local authority checking on the educational achievement and welfare of a child who is not at school. Yet this has become almost the orthodox position among many parents who educate their own children; they don't want visits. Why should this be so?
This opposition to visits has been spearheaded and coordinated by no more than hundred or so militant home educators or former home educators, most of whom, as I have said, have either learning difficulties or mental illnesses. This might explain why they feel so strongly about this subject and why they urge others to join in their own, almost pathological, desire to avoid having visitors in their home from the local authority.
Let us take the case of a parent who is bipolar or schizophrenic. Without debating the rights or wrongs of the case, many people, including local authority officers, would think that such a parent would need closer monitoring and a sharper eye kept on her child than one who was not mentally ill. Such parents therefore wish to avoid local authority involvement in their lives as far as possible, lest they are told that they are not well enough to look after and teach their children. I know of a number of well known home educators in this position and their opposition to monitoring is a direct consequence of their medical condition.
Some parents with dyslexia or ADHD had terrible experience at school twenty, thirty or forty years ago, before such conditions were really understood. They are very quick to pull their children out of school at the first sign of trouble, because they think that the kids will suffer as they did themselves. A lot of them have a hatred and mistrust of teachers and schools, caused by their own experiences. Once they have the child at home, they are not prepared to allow any former teachers to come round and monitor their children’s progress. This scenario is enormously common among well known home educating parents.
I wrote yesterday about the way that bizarre belief systems are often associated with home educators with mental illnesses or learning difficulties. These provide another reason why parents do not want home visits from the local authority. Consider the case of the mother who blogs enthusiastically about her nine year old daughter’s enjoyment of spelling. What’s that? You can’t see why that would discourage anybody from wanting monitoring visits? Spelling is a part of literacy, why would you want to keep that hidden from a local authority officer? Not that sort of spelling, you fool! I mean spelling as in casting magical enchantments. The mother is witch and encourages her daughter to spend her time learning magic. When you combine this with the fact that the father is a professional medium who raises the dead in the back parlour, you can see just why the parents are dead against having anybody from the County Council poking round the house and asking how their kid spends her days! Again, this is a pretty common theme among prominent home educators; children being at best exposed to and at worst indoctrinated in barking-mad worldviews.
Those home educators who are influential in British home education are nearly all like those I have described above. They have, or think they have, good reasons for avoiding visits from their local authority. They work hard to try and persuade others to share their odd approach to home education, which has of course the effect of creating tension and confrontation between local authorities and home educating parents. At the root of the problem is the disordered thinking of a fairly small number of militant home educators, who have managed to make their own weird belief system the default setting for many other parents who do not really know what is going on.
'I have talked over the last few days about the fact that almost every high profile home educator in this country, those who appear in the newspapers, on the television, lead support groups and constantly pop up on blogs and lists; have or claim to have malfunctioning brains.'
ReplyDeleteI've racked my brains and have only ever seen two home educators on tv. You and Peter Williams. Do either of you claim to have malfunctioning brains? (That's a serious question, by the way.)
I should, I suppose, have said television or radio. Mike Fortune-Wood was on the radio a few days ago; it is not uncommon to hear home educating parents on the wireless. I can think of four parents who I have seen on television, but as they all fall into the categories I have recently been discussing, it seems unfair to name them.
ReplyDelete"I mean spelling as in casting magical enchantments. The mother is witch and encourages her daughter to spend her time learning magic. When you combine this with the fact that the father is a professional medium who raises the dead in the back parlour, you can see just why the parents are dead against having anybody from the County Council poking round the house and asking how their kid spends her days! Again, this is a pretty common theme among prominent home educators; children being at best exposed to and at worst indoctrinated in barking-mad worldviews."
ReplyDeleteStrangely enough, there are several "respectable" institutions that believe in very similar ideas (although some are not keen on the idea of women performing the incantations). Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me on how to differentiate between the respectable ones and the barking mad.
"At the root of the problem is the disordered thinking of a fairly small number of militant home educators, who have managed to make their own weird belief system the default setting for many other parents who do not really know what is going on."
ReplyDeleteIf you want to see some examples of "disordered thinking", then you should read the Badman review report (on reflection that was probably "orderly lying"), the output from Ed Balls' DCSF and many of the home-education policy documents from local authorities; "thinking" is too strong a word for the process used to produce many of those.
I find all of this laughable coming from a man who allowed his teenage daughter to fraternise with Ed Balls.
ReplyDelete'I find all of this laughable coming from a man who allowed his teenage daughter to fraternise with Ed Balls.'
ReplyDeleteIf only I were the sort of stern, Victorian patriarch who could forbid his seventeen year-old daughter to become involved in politics of which he disapproves! Alas, those days are gone. Is that how you run your own household, Anonymous? Telling young women who they must vote for and which politicians are acceptable? This is very quaint in this day and age.
'Strangely enough, there are several "respectable" institutions that believe in very similar ideas (although some are not keen on the idea of women performing the incantations). Perhaps you'd care to enlighten me on how to differentiate between the respectable ones and the barking mad.'
ReplyDeleteA reference presumably to the Catholic church. You have a good point; the difference between cults and mainstream religions is often one of degree. However, my main point remains, that when parents take their children out of school so that they can train them to be witches, necromancers or astrologers, they are apt to be reluctant to let outsiders into the home to see this.
"A reference presumably to the Catholic church"
DeleteNot only that, but religion generally. The Christian church has almost total monopoly on indoctrination rights in state schools; this is one of a number of reasons we have for home educating - there should not be any kind of religious indoctrination in schools.
To many of us, the idea of religion in schools or any other part of state activity is as bizarre as witchcraft and necromancy.
"Telling young women who they must vote for and which politicians are acceptable? This is very quaint in this day and age."
ReplyDeleteSimon, this is precisely the kind of thing that you are trying to do here in your recent posts. You have decided on a model of normality, "ordered thinking", acceptable behaviour or whatever, and announce that dissent from these constitutes "bizarre behaviour".
And, for the record, in this household we have no need to tell anyone how to vote and which politicians are acceptable; we all understand - from observation, experience and analysis - that most politicians - of all political persuasions - fall into the same class of pushy chancers as witches, necromancers and religious leaders of all kinds.
"However, my main point remains, that when parents take their children out of school so that they can train them to be witches, necromancers or astrologers, they are apt to be reluctant to let outsiders into the home to see this."
ReplyDeleteThat's because they are afraid that their weird ideas will be unacceptable to people with other equally weird ideas.
Maybe it all boils down to an early example of health and safety legislation: "Necromancy is a good thing folks, but don't practice it in the home; leave it to a qualified necromance... erm... christian/muslim (add or delete as appropriate) religious practicioner. Women and gays not permitted (subject to local variation)."
Replying to myself, I should add that we don't accept inspections either, because we don't allow poorly-educated social control weirdos into our home to pass judgement on us.
DeleteI am still enchanted at the thought that there are home educating parents who are able to grant or deny their seventeen year-old daughters permission to engage in political activity! How on earth is this done? I can see that the power dynamic in some home educating families is a lot more authoritarian than it is here. What do these fathers do? Do they say something along the lines of, "Where do you think you're going young lady? Helping the Labour party? Oh, no you don't. Back to your room at once!". Is this how it works? Perhaps the person who criticised me for 'letting' my daughter associate with Ed Balls could let us know how this useful trick can best be achieved?
ReplyDelete"What do these fathers do? "
DeleteFunny how you generally assume anonymous comments here are from women, but if it looks "authoritarian" it must be a man.
"...Perhaps the person who criticised me for 'letting' my daughter associate with Ed Balls could let us know how this useful trick can best be achieved?"
I think you've already failed; once they make a choice like that they're beyond redemption. You can either disown them or cling on to some hope that they might come good in the end (highly unlikely if they're in with the Oxford PPE set). Of course, you could always resort to a sack, six bricks and a deep pond for one or other of you.
Oh yeah, really helpful, thanks. Because of the stupidity of what you've written, no doubt thinking you were being oh-so-witty, Webb will now write a blog post about how some home educators are in favour of Honour Killings and/or Infanticide. Nice one.
DeleteWord to the wise: Don't try to 'help' any more.
"Webb will now write a blog post about how some home educators are in favour of Honour Killings and/or Infanticide."
DeletePrecisely; it'll do a lot for his credibility.
But in which direction?
Delete"Webb will now write a blog post about how some home educators are in favour of Honour Killings and/or Infanticide. Nice one."
DeleteBut surely that would be a good thing, would it not? It would only go to show how he exploits remarks such as this and about the royal family being lizards, etc.
You write: "Nobody except a home educating parent can understand why anybody would object to someone from the local authority checking on the educational achievement and welfare of a child who is not at school. Yet this has become almost the orthodox position among many parents who educate their own children; they don't want visits. Why should this be so?"
ReplyDeleteBecause, Simon, when a child is removed from the school system he or she is removed from the school system. That's why. What business is the child's education then of the guardians of the school system? None whatsoever. In the nine years my son was out of school, no self-styled educational "authority" made any attempt to interact with my family and rightly so.
'when a child is removed from the school system he or she is removed from the school system.'
ReplyDeleteConfusion here between the 'school system' and society in general. The local authority may indeed be the 'guardians of the school system', but it is not necessarily in this capacity that they maintain an interest in children who are not being educated at school. Society has, rightly, a stake in the welfare and condition of children. This is a separate matter from the administration of schools.
By "society" you mean what exactly? Any old Tom, Dick or Harry who takes it upon themselves to interfere with other people's lives? You're not one of those crazy people, I hope, who thinks it takes a village to raise a child.
ReplyDelete' You're not one of those crazy people, I hope, who thinks it takes a village to raise a child'
ReplyDeleteIndeed not, but nor do I think that children are belongings of the parents like their shoes and coats. My daughter no more belonged to me than she did to anybody else. We all have a duty towards the weak and helpless. Often, this duty is delegated to our elected representatives; which is to say governments and local authorities.
"Society has, rightly, a stake in the welfare and condition of children. This is a separate matter from the administration of schools... We all have a duty towards the weak and helpless. Often, this duty is delegated to our elected representatives; which is to say governments and local authorities."
DeleteGiven that they've they've already made enough mess, why should we give these lying fools and pushy chancers even more power to interfere in people's lives? Why do you suppose that the likes of Ed Balls, Graham Badman and their fawning followers could improve anything? These people and their ilk have wreaked havoc - at enormous cost - for decades.
' you could always resort to a sack, six bricks and a deep pond '
ReplyDeleteDear me, the situation is even more serious than I supposed! I thought that the person commenting was suggesting that I should not have allowed my daughter to take part in political activity at the age of seventeen; it now turns out that he or she feels that I should have murdered her to prevent this. Surely this cannot be a common point of view among British home educators?
'"What do these fathers do? "
Funny how you generally assume anonymous comments here are from women, but if it looks "authoritarian" it must be a man.'
I don't think it that funny. I tend to assume that most of the comments are made by women because women are very much over-represented in this area. This was however a comment directed at me, as a man, suggesting that I had 'let' a young woman take part in political activity. This of course put me in mind of the patriarchy and so I responded with reference to a father, rather than a mother. Would you really think in terms of 'letting' a young woman of that age take part in the leadership campaign of a major political party? You are obviously keener on authority and control than I am myself!
ReplyDelete' you could always resort to a sack, six bricks and a deep pond '
I don't moderate comments here of course, but in view of things like 'honour killings' of young women, whoever made this particular joke might care to reflect on matters of taste. I offer this only as a suggestion, but it is worth bearing in mind that girls in this country are actually murdered for defying their parents political or religious views.
You might like to consider that thousands will die and many more will suffer over the coming decades as a result of the political beliefs of Ed Balls and his cronies across the political spectrum and in the parasitic organisations that they allowed and encouraged to flourish.
DeleteYou probably can't comprehend the magnitude of the mess created by politicians on all sides over the last thirty years or so. The erosion of manufacturing, the mutilation of education, the unfettered orgies of financial vandalism and the profligate expansion of worthless elements of state activity have taken a devastating toll on our economy, above and beyond the ususal level of political ineptitude.
Ed Balls has been a key figure in this and is jointly culpable for the catastrophic consequences - effectively the diversion of hundreds of billions - and arguably trillions - of pounds from useful elements of the economy. People will die prematurely or suffer needlessly over the coming years - no exaggeration, no question.
If I'd raised a child that had decided it was a good thing to support this man, I'd bury myself in a deep, dark hole rather than shouting my stupid delinquent mouth off on a blog.
'These people and their ilk have wreaked havoc '
ReplyDeleteWhat havoc has Graham Badman wrought for decades? I feel we should be told!
As chief education officer in Oxfordshire, he Initiated a controversial and expensive reorganisation of Oxford schools. While this was in progress, he sparked protests by going off to advise another authority on behalf of a private company. Later, before the reorganisation was completed, he jumped ship to Kent.
DeleteOnly ten months after he retired from a six-year tenure in Kent, Ed Balls had to send "expert advisors" there to deal with sustained poor performance.
Then he tried his hand in home education...