Wednesday, 13 February 2013
Home educated children missing from education
As some readers may be aware, there has recently been a consultation about revising the statutory guidance on Children Missing from Education or CME. Needless to say, this has provoked anger among certain home educators who are concerned that the CME agenda might end up with local authorities chasing home educating parents. This would be absurd, wouldn’t it, because home educated children are not missing from education at all?
This is really an etymological and perhaps philosophical problem. Can we change the essential nature of a thing by altering its name? To make this clear, I want to look at a specific case and then invite readers to suggest their own solutions. Local authority officers read this blog, as do civil servants working for the Department for Education; so this is an opportunity to explain to them where they are going wrong!
Fourteen year-old Jack has a history of playing truant and under-achieving at school. He has very limited literacy; barely enough to read the simplest of texts. This is not caused by dyslexia, he has been tested for this, but because he mucks about in class and misses a lot of school. His mother has to leave for work early and Jack is left to get himself up and to school. He often does not manage to do so. Soon after his fourteenth birthday, Jack stopped going to school altogether. He is over six feet tall and his mother cannot physically make him get up. He usually rises at about one or two in the afternoon and then watches TV or plays on the Xbox until his mates finish school. Then he hangs round with them. He seldom gets to bed before two or three in the morning.
Naturally, his mother was worried about being prosecuted for truancy, but a friend told her that if Jack was registered as being home educated, then she won’t need to worry. She accordingly downloaded a template for a deregistration letter from an internet site and sent it to the school. When the local authority asked to visit, she also downloaded and adapted an educational philosophy for an autonomous education and then sent them that, declining a visit.
Here then is the real situation. A semi-literate child is receiving no education of any sort whatsoever. He will not only pass no GCSEs, he is unlikely to attend college and his mother is not the type to arrange an Open University course. His older friends are all unemployed and make a living from a combination of benefits and petty crime. Jack is moving in the same direction. He is, without a shadow of a doubt, a child missing from education. The question is, should describing a child missing from education in this way as being ‘home educated’ be enough to prevent the local authority from taking any further action?
I invite readers now to take the role of a local authority officer and decide what to do next. Should they issue a School Attendance Order? On what grounds could they do so? They have no solid evidence that Jack is not receiving an education. Should they turn up on the doorstep and try to speak to the mother or child? We all know how some home educators view the practice of ‘doorstepping’! Perhaps they should simply write the kid off and forget him? Do we really want local authorities to abandon a vulnerable child in this way? Should they send another letter?
I will be interested to know how readers think that a local authority should actually deal with a child of this sort who is missing from education. As I said earlier, this is a golden opportunity for you to tell local authority officers where they are going wrong and how they should deal with cases like this without resorting to doorstepping or other unacceptable strategies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The authorities who were allegedly educating said boy should be thoroughly investigated, hauled up & cough up to make good! It is time to become accountable for every penny being spent in the name of the child. Clearly the education provided was substandard.
ReplyDelete'The authorities who were allegedly educating said boy should be thoroughly investigated, hauled up & cough up to make good! It is time to become accountable for every penny being spent in the name of the child. Clearly the education provided was substandard.'
ReplyDeletePerhaps, although we must not neglect the possibility that it was the home background which was substandard, rather than the school environment. But what would you actually do about this situation if you were a local authority officer?
If I were an LA operative I would launch an enquiry into the education being provided by schools to ensure that public funds were not being wasted. Simply identifying that a child is missing education and reinstating them back to the very same institution is not a creative solution. It is the bum on seat model. Fail.
DeleteA sensible local authority should then initiate the procedures requiring the parent to satisfy them that an education was being provided prior to issuing a SAO, because they would have grounds to doubt that it was being provided that could stand up to a trial in court.
ReplyDeleteBUT, and it is an enormous but, they have to have grounds that would stand up in court. Not prejudice, not belief that their way is better, not idealogical views of the sort displayed by LA's at the Select Committee hearing.
I know a small minority of those claiming to be home educators are not actually home educating. I also know that a small minority of parents abuse their children. Does that mean that all parents should be inspected and required to provide proof of their parenting? Similarly, some motorists are driving stolen or untaxed cars. Should all drivers be stopped and asked to prove that they are complying with the law?
Finally, your hypothetical Jack has opted out of the education system. The signs were there for years and no one did anything about it when he was small enough to be salvageable. So the hypothetical sensible LA should learn from this experience and look closely at the truancy records of children who are far younger, find out what lies behind it and make sure that those children are in an educational environment that stimulates and engages them, and, if necessary, enforces an education (hate jargon, but I am being a hypothetical LA here...) BEFORE the problem escalates to this level.
With the letter requesting details of the education prior to the issue of a SAO the LA should include details of courses that would teach him basic literacy skills alongside a practical skill, because he doesn't sound the academic type. All too often those courses don't exist I see very little difference in the outcome for Jack whether he is at school disrupting things for those who do want to learn or at home when at least the teachers can concentrate on the kids who want to make something of their lives.
(And stand by for the howls from liberals!)
Atb
Anne
'A sensible local authority should then initiate the procedures requiring the parent to satisfy them that an education was being provided prior to issuing a SAO, because they would have grounds to doubt that it was being provided that could stand up to a trial in court.'
ReplyDeleteI should perhaps have mentioned that the mother had also sent a list of educational 'resources' that she would be using. It was of course a pack of fairy tales; the usual old guff about libraries, museums, educational TV programmes and so on. You seem to be suggesting that if a home educating parent refuses a visit and only provides an educational philosophy and list of resources in this way, then the local authority should issue a School Attendance Order?
No, I'm not suggesting that, Simon. I'm suggesting that if there was proof that a parent had de-registered to avoid prosecution for truancy and had no intention of providing an education and if a LA had proof of what you had been asserting about Jack's habits then they could present that evidence in court. After that they could 'rescue' Jack and return him to school. Of course, it's anyone's guess how they'd reach him to teach him or keep him there, so it won't solve the problem, and will cause one for the school.
DeleteIn practice very few SAO's are ever applied for, let alone issued, but the power is there to do so when the LA has genuine doubts. I've often wondered why LA's don't use it more since they are allegedly so concerned about a high proportion of home educated children.
The only explanation that occurs to me is because they know that they do not have evidence to the necessary standard or anywhere to put these children if they do send them back to school. Given the way so many LA's force SEN cases to go to tribunal it cannot be a fear of incurring legal costs.
By all means, make parents of home educating children responsible for their child actually learning as long as you first make every head teacher personally responsible for ensuring that every child in their school is safe and being educated while on their premises.
Your Jack doesn't want to learn. That is the problem, not the place where he isn't wanting to learn.
Atb
Anne
'If I were an LA operative I would launch an enquiry into the education being provided by schools to ensure that public funds were not being wasted. Simply identifying that a child is missing education and reinstating them back to the very same institution is not a creative solution. It is the bum on seat model. Fail.'
ReplyDeleteSo you would do nothing at all about a child who was receiving no education, is that correct?
I would do exactly what my LA operative role expects of me by following LA policy, statute etc, by supporting the child to fulfil their potential whether it is in or out of school.
DeleteWhat is your solution Simon?
Delete(seem only to be able to reply as "anonymous")
' I'm suggesting that if there was proof that a parent had de-registered to avoid prosecution for truancy and had no intention of providing an education and if a LA had proof of what you had been asserting about Jack's habits then they could present that evidence in court.'
ReplyDelete'In practice very few SAO's are ever applied for, let alone issued, but the power is there to do so when the LA has genuine doubts. I've often wondered why LA's don't use it more since they are allegedly so concerned about a high proportion of home educated children. '
These things go together. Without hiring private detectives, it is simply impossible to obtain proof or even evidence about what sort of education a child is receiving. This is why so few prosecutions are brought.
What you seem to be saying then is that in the absence of proof, or at the very least strong evidence, the local authority should do nothing at all. Since it is impossible to obtain evidence without insisting on a visit and asking some searching questions, you feel that the best tactic is to do nothing. I can see why you would feel this way, but it means doing nothing about a child in a desperately unfortunate situation. You can see why some local authority officers would be concerned about such a child. Their concern would be quite genuine; they would have spoken to the school and have a very good idea about what was going on. Any suggestion about other possible steps that could be taken, apart from doing nothing?
I'm not doing nothing, Simon. I'm accepting that that boy, at this stage in his life, is quite possibly uneducable. If the LA officers have spoken to the school, then they should know this already - unless of course they're not telling all the truth. Remember the Select Committee hearing with the LA officers? They all knew of cases when exactly this sort of child had been 'encouraged' to deregister, yet no one seems ever to have challenged the schools that do it.
DeleteI'm assuming from what you said that this alienation from learning has been going on for some time and that if the school and LA had a facility where he could be helped to catch up and given some practical direction then it would already have been offered.
So, if I was the LA, as I said before, I would be taking a good hard look at provision for this type of child at a much younger age.
I would take them out of mainstream altogether and put them in an environment with small group working, strong teachers (preferably ex-Army, and given the power to discipline as needed) who would give them role models and plenty of outdoor and practical stuff. Yes, it would be expensive, but if these children could be reached and shown that they could make themselves a better life then you'd break a cycle of dependency and save more in the long run.
Plus, of course, you'd make mainstream schools an easier, safer place for teachers and students alike.
(And yes, once I believed in mainstream. I believed in the tooth fairy and the Easter Bunny once too, but the truth is that it doesn't work for every child any more than HE would.)
Thanks for a good argument.
Anne
'I would do exactly what my LA operative role expects of me by following LA policy, statute etc, by supporting the child to fulfil their potential whether it is in or out of school.'
ReplyDeleteYes, but you see some home educating parents are not at all satisfied with the way that local authority officers carry on when coming into contact with parents who claim to be home educating. I am giving as an example an actual case and inviting parents to come up with ways to tackle this which will not have an adverse effect upon real home educators.
Who said anything about being a parent?
DeleteI answered your question about being an LA operative. I would abide by the law, acting lawfully no matter what.
And as a parent, home educating (or any other brand) I would do exactly the same. Act lawfully and responsibly.
Truancy and deregistration are both symptoms of a broken education system, as someone above rightly says. But that system cannot be mended retrospectively by policing the people who opt out of it. It has to be mended from within.
ReplyDeleteYour hypothetical boy in the course of his week or month will interface with officialdom in a variety of different ways. Eventually he will have to be dealt with by the Job Centre and training course managers if he wants to get money in legitimate ways as a young adult and cannot do this without their help.
But this is a problem caused by the faulty economic and educational systems in this country, not by parents failing to force their children to fit into them. If the state wanted parents to take full responsibility for children, it would not have introduced compulsory education laws and free schooling. In fact, it does not want parents to take daily responsibility for their own children - only for them to take the blame when the state provision goes wrong.
'But this is a problem caused by the faulty economic and educational systems in this country, not by parents failing to force their children to fit into them. '
ReplyDeleteSo does this mean that, like the previous people who commented here, you think that the local authority officers should do nothing and simply ignore this child and his lack of an education?
I think they should follow the current law and guidance, which is to do nothing unless and until they have specific reason to be concerned about a failure in educational provision. There is then a structured course of action for them to take which eventually might lead to a school attendance order, etc. The comments above have answered this very well.
ReplyDeleteWatch these numpties - they'll tell you all about how excellent things are in LALAland!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=12596
Jack seems to have taken responsibility for himself and his situation. He has decided that the rigidity of the school system and the pressures that have been placed on him through their failure to educate him to a reasonable standard are too much and chosen to remove himself from that system.
ReplyDeleteHe is occupying himself with the Xbox and gaming which demands a high level of concentration, logical and lateral thinking skills and commitment. He is socialising and is aware of what is expected of him from society as he has access to media.
He lives in a household where a work ethic is present.
I would consider Jack to be autonomous in his education.
As far as I can make out, the general view seems to be that it is OK for children to drop out of school and that local authorities should make no particular effort to identify such children or arrange for their return to education. I am bound to say that this is not a view with which I have much sympathy and tomorrow we shall look at the hazards for children of adopting an approach of this kind.
ReplyDeletewill these be real hazards?... you know, ones backed up by evidence & statistical probability?... or just more hypothetical ones invented by your horrendously narrow mind?
ReplyDelete'will these be real hazards?... you know, ones backed up by evidence & statistical probability?... or just more hypothetical ones invented by your horrendously narrow mind?'
ReplyDeleteBy which I take it that you too feel that if a child drops out of school, he should just be left to his own devices? Or do you feel that the local authority should make enquiries? If so, how do you think that they should go about this process?
Erm, whose children are these anyway? There is never any guarantee of optimum outcomes wherever a child is educated. I, for example, may have a potential violin genius on my hands. But because I have never put a violin in my child's hands we'll never know. Should the state break down my door to return my child to school?
ReplyDeletehttp://people.howstuffworks.com/15-notable-people-who-dropped-out-of-school.htm
ReplyDelete...& then of course there are those who no amount of education will ever help to be people 'of note'... eh Simon ;)
ReplyDeleteMy my what a very frightened man you are! All these children with time on their hands... you have such a poor image of young people. I think that children are incredibly creative and innovative and it is exactly that time they need to put into motion some of their fabulous ideas. This schooled generation has every moment of their day timetabled & they've lost the ability to use their time wisely. They need external supervision to drink water or use the toilet responsibly.
ReplyDelete"They have no solid evidence that Jack is not receiving an education"
ReplyDeleteNo, but they certainly have an "appearance" of failure to educate which is enough for them to implement section 437 of the Education Act. How do they have an appearance of failure? Well obviously by copying and pasting a chunk of text from the Educational Philosophy the mother supplied into Google. It would immediately show up as a template. Maybe you should give up sloppy thinking?
Simon, what do you think should happen to teens like Jack who drop out of education? If they are returned to school and abscond again, do you think the mother should be fined or imprisoned? How much force do you recommend to persuade Jack that he should continue to attend school, or do you expect the imprisonment of his parent to be persuasive enough? Perhaps he should go into care? What kind of result is normally expected from such a child who goes into the care of the state? These are genuine questions and I would be very interested to know what your solutions to this sort of problem are.
ReplyDeleteAnd the consensus still seems to be that local authority officers should do nothing about children like this who drop out of school. I am glad that I took the trouble to put this case. Incidentally, only the name is false. All the other details are quite true. The outlook for children like this is very poor and I am slightly surprised that nobody commenting here thinks that they are worth bothering about.
ReplyDelete'Simon, what do you think should happen to teens like Jack who drop out of education?'
ReplyDeleteI shall be answering this in a day or two. There is no single, simple solution, but of one thing I am quite sure; the answer is not to ignore the problem and pretend that it does not exist.
But Simon, you wanted a simple answer and solution from me, did you not? You need TWO DAYS to think up a response? I am not sure you should be left to your own devices for so long!
DeleteWhy procrastinate so? Do you have a previous outline of solutions to which I might refer, or must I linger clinging to a vague faith borne of mere courtesy that you might; given some time to work on it?
DeleteI suppose you have an outline of how you have planned your blog posts to progress and no amount of response will actually get you to talk about something you don't want to talk about yet. It is just too dilatory.
I am curious about your solutions to those questions, but I am not sure I am that curious. It is lent, I have other things to think of.
'horrendously narrow mind'
ReplyDelete'My my what a very frightened man you are!'
I have remarked before on the very odd reactions when I pose a question without offering any opinions of my own. Clearly, asking questions in this way is the mark of both narrow mindedness and extreme fear!
Does my opinion offend you, sir? Come come there's nothing wrong with a bit of fear!
Delete'http://people.howstuffworks.com/15-notable-people-who-dropped-out-of-school.htm'
ReplyDeleteA glance at this is enough to see that it is a lot of nonsense. Does anybody here really believe that Princess Diana dropped out of school?
Jack is 14 and old enough to know when the education system has failed him. I suspect by the time the LA has hounded his family sufficiently, he will be old enough to go tell them to take a hike. He is a young man and infantalising him in the way that this system is doing, is no doubt helping to create the apathy that he is displaying. Jack in many other cultures is already a young man, not a child. I suspect the young man Jack does not care for the LA interference anymore than he cares for the interference of do gooders who write blogs. Good luck Jack. I trust that when you have shaken the control freaks off your back, you will be able to put your mind to something that you find worthwhile. I hope they don't grind you down before you are able to persue your dreams.
ReplyDelete"And the consensus still seems to be..."
ReplyDeleteConsensus : general agreement : unanimity
Nope, didn't spot one of them.
"A glance at this is enough to see that it is a lot of nonsense"
Interesting...your confirmation bias does not permit you more than a glance.
"Good luck Jack. I trust that when you have shaken the control freaks off your back, you will be able to put your mind to something that you find worthwhile. I hope they don't grind you down before you are able to pursue your dreams."
ReplyDeleteLove this.
"By which I take it that you too feel that if a child drops out of school, he should just be left to his own devices? Or do you feel that the local authority should make enquiries?"
ReplyDeleteI think the LA have failed Jack quite enough, don't you?
By the way, EWO's often urge parents to deregister their truanting children, so that their poor attendance can no longer affect the school's records.
Errant EWOs/ESWs/LAs were discussed in the HoC if I remember correctly. Their practices were declared illegal!
DeleteJack, you are quite right to look for an alternative. The system is well and truly broken.
"I think the LA have failed Jack quite enough"
ReplyDeleteAin't that the truth. It's quite irrational to think their interference at this stage is going to make a blind bit of difference. Kinda sloppy thinking really
Haha, yes, it is like the cops investigating the cops, a bit suss :D
DeleteIts almost a pity that parents are responsible for their own children's' education. Imagine if the LA were, they'd be bankrupt from being sued within months. All those disenfranchised kids leaving school unable to read or write or worse committing suicide.
ReplyDelete'Why procrastinate so?'
ReplyDeleteBooks to write! I have covered this before in detail, in any case
I have never looked at your blog before, you could direct me to said solutions previously covered. It wouldn't take longer than the replies you have already provided saying you can't answer without the passage of a few days, would it?
Delete'By the way, EWO's often urge parents to deregister their truanting children, so that their poor attendance can no longer affect the school's records. '
ReplyDeleteUsually the schools, rather than the EWOs. This practice is known informally as offrolling.
"Perhaps, although we must not neglect the possibility that it was the home background which was substandard, rather than the school environment. But what would you actually do about this situation if you were a local authority officer?"
ReplyDeleteYou have shown your true colours. You blame the parent or child for walking away from poor provision and then judge them for allegedly providing no provision. You cannot bring yourself to criticise the LA can you? If LAs cannot provide the thing they are paid to provide they are frauds. Public money is being squandered to pay operatives to pretend they are providing a service.
Humans globally have survived and thrived for millennia (imagine that) without LAs or schools but now we (in this country) are suddenly unable to cope or act responsibly without the watchful guiding eye or illuminating light of local government officials?
Natural responsibility for children always lies with the parent. Your political and philosophical principles lead you to declare that the state should actually have more power than the parent. This is a foolish default position.
The god-like status that you have bequeathed LAs is very revealing. They are, after all, public servants tasked with providing a service. They are not the parents of the child in question. If a servant is useless they get the sack. What's so difficult to understand?
Novel about a bunch of kids playing truant who saved America with an x-box. Don't knock it. Read it. You may even learn a lot.
ReplyDeletehttp://craphound.com/littlebrother/download
Hi Simon, I'm someone with a mild interest in freedom and autonomy, but can appreciate that even the best laid plans can be subverted to malfeasant ends.
ReplyDeleteFor example, it seems obvious from not only your initial post but your subsequent 'answers' to people's points, that you ask a very leading question and then only ever respond in leading answers.
"As far as I can make out, the general view seems to be that it is OK for children to drop out of school and that local authorities should make no particular effort to identify such children or arrange for their return to education"
It occurs to even the most banal analysts of this statement, that this is the answer you had been looking for the entire time, and having a ready made blog looking at your response to your own supposedly discussion led answer is proof of this.
"So you would do nothing at all about a child who was receiving no education, is that correct?"
No Simon that is patently not correct and I don't even know the person to whom your were responding.
This is a very childish and narrow way of looking at an intensely complex issue. My heart truly goes out to the 14 year old human who has been failed so drastically by the public servants around him, especially the ones now lining up to use his situation for their own blatant agenda....it's just such a shame your agenda isn't to leave an obviously confused and upset human to recover from the ordeal he's been put through, and instead are trying to further pick at his bones after he's tried to free himself.
And before you list a collection of anti social activities he has engaged in that somehow make him not the object of pity I see him as, please don't. Greater men and women (who were statistically much better educated than yourself) have been trying to push this pseudo socialist agenda for over 60 years...and yet this 14 year old has had the experience he has....
"The definition of insanity is continually doing the same thing, and expecting a different result" - Einstein
Additionally I would not welcome any questions asking me what I would do in this situation as I quite frankly wouldn't presume to know anything about this human from the narrow and guided description you have provided.
"Local authority officers read this blog, as do civil servants working for the Department for Education"
To those who fall into the above category take note; this is not the way to treat people, especially people who have been failed by the system you purport is the best option, nor those who are showing the ultimate love and care for their children by personally introducing them to learning and the wider world around.
"I also know that a small minority of parents abuse their children. Does that mean that all parents should be inspected and required to provide proof of their parenting? Similarly, some motorists are driving stolen or untaxed cars. Should all drivers be stopped and asked to prove that they are complying with the law?"
This is a wonderfully concise and wise analogy. If any public servants reading are here to look out for those who need help, then this analogy should show you that staffing a hospital is where you belong, and not traumatising and frustrating average people.
To those who are simply doing this to pad their pensions, I hope you're young, young enough to watch that nest egg dwindle and die in the wake of the governments' (I use the term ambiguously as every political party since Churchill has sent us further down this path) defaults on their massive loans, both financial and social.
Simon, if you have a constructive and intelligent answer to this long winded "leave the 14 year old and home educating peoples you don't agree with alone" statement, then I would be happy to hear it; unfortunately I can see much wiser and cooler heads have tried in the comments above, so all I can hope for is a moment's pause from those I have mentioned here.
Peace.
'You blame the parent or child for walking away from poor provision and then judge them for allegedly providing no provision.'
ReplyDeleteI have done no such thing; in any case, the provision was not poor.
'Humans globally have survived and thrived for millennia (imagine that) without LAs or schools '
True, but then I had so little faith in schools that I did not send my own child to one.
'The god-like status that you have bequeathed LAs is very revealing.'
Perhaps not entirely true; I spent twenty years fighting against local authorities and trying to force them to make adequate provision for children with special educational needs. I am not sur ethat I would describe local authorities as 'god-like'. They are, like all human institutions, fallible and prone to error.
' Greater men and women (who were statistically much better educated than yourself)'
ReplyDeleteIs this actually English and if so, what on earth can it mean? How can somebody be 'statistically better educated' than me? I may be wrong, but I am guessing that the original post was perhaps written in another language and then translated by a computer programme.
'"The definition of insanity is continually doing the same thing, and expecting a different result" - Einstein'
ReplyDeleteThese words date no further back than the 1980s and cannot possibly have been said by Albert Einstein.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Insanity. However, I'm sure that's where you've just been, hence the point you made about the eighties.
ReplyDeleteAlso Simon, the 'statistics' statement refers to the 'quality' of state educated public servants in past years compared to you and your more 'contemporary' education, although, since the entire point of the statement (and not just that sentence of admittedly questionable quality) was pointing out that you almost certainly lack the mental resources to make any positive change in the social status quo, I'll just simply sit back and let your petty grammatical corrections prove my point.
Thank you Simon, you've been most revealing.
And to all those public servants who read this; still paying attention? I hope you are.
Simon said,
ReplyDelete"I have covered this before in detail, in any case"
What? You've written a similar post before? I find that hard to believe.
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"I have done no such thing; in any case, the provision was not poor."
How have you decided that the provision was 'not poor'? Did the school have a good Ofsted report? Was the provided education suitable for this particular 14 year old taking into account his age, abilities aptitudes and any special educational needs he had? Seems unlikely given his disengagement. A 'good school' will not necessarily provide a good education for all its pupils.
'http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Insanity. However, I'm sure that's where you've just been, hence the point you made about the eighties.'
ReplyDeleteFairly predictable response from somebody who probably does not have a dictionary of quotations on a nearby bookshelf!
'Also Simon, the 'statistics' statement refers to the 'quality' of state educated public servants in past years compared to you and your more 'contemporary' education'
I was educated in the 1950s. You believe that I was state educated, although I would be interested to know what grounds you have for supposing this to be the case. You seem to be saying that some people who were educated in the 1930s or 1940s were cleverer than me. Is that right? It is probably true, but does not really tell you anything useful about me, unless you have some idea how I was myself edcuated. I would be curious to know how you hope to use statistics to prove this one way or the other!
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete" You believe that I was state educated, although I would be interested to know what grounds you have for supposing this to be the case."
Not the anonymous you've been speaking to so far, but in the past you have claimed to have a working class background and you daughter claims you left school with no qualifications. This suggests that you either went to a state school, or you gained a scholarship to a private school and squandered the opportunity.
If you or your daughter haven't lied and my assumptions are accurate, I suppose this might explain your feelings about schools. Maybe you felt let down by the system and that it would be difficult for you to do worse in educating your daughter. Maybe you see a little of yourself in Jack?
But since you also claim to have been a primary school teacher, surely this tells us that it's never too late to make up for lost time during our school years?
"I would be curious to know how you hope to use statistics to prove this (Anon: the level and type of education Simon Webb received) one way or the other!"
ReplyDeleteRegardless of your curiosity, I have to yet again point out this is not a discussion about you, yet your continual nit picking and (very bad I hasten to add) need to point score has led us here.
"You seem to be saying that some people who were educated in the 1930s or 1940s were cleverer than me. Is that right? It is probably true, but does not really tell you anything useful about me"
Not just probably Simon, but I appreciate the attempt at humility, and thank you for it.
And the only useful thing the statement tells me (through reading your answer to it as much as the statement itself) is that I'm wasting my time having a discourse with you about issues you are exceptionally ignorant about. Which calls your abilities into even more question given how much exposure you've obviously had to the issues!
I could be convinced the whole human race needs chaining up and shooting if the argument made was objective and fact based; you can't even convince me a 14 year old boy and his mother, WHO ASKED FOR YOUR HELP IN THE FIRST PLACE, were in need of any interference from anybody, least of all a local history writer with an agenda.
And before you try and drag the debate down to a discourse about you again (I can see it now..."actually, I haven't always been a local history writer...") just don't, please don't.
I almost have a new understanding for social services, they at least are doing it for money or some misguided sense of a higher purpose; you are simply using other people to garner attention and have a conversation.
I'll happily talk to you, always keen to make a new friend, but let's leave the 14 year old boys out of it shall we?
Regards.
"You seem to be saying that some people who were educated in the 1930s or 1940s were cleverer than me..."
ReplyDeleteThat would be "more clever" rather than "cleverer" as you have written.
I wonder, Mr. Webb, if your insistence that the quality of some home educators provision needs checking up on is actually a case of projection, since your Blog and, I hear rumour, also your books, are full of school boy errors.
' I have to yet again point out this is not a discussion about you,'
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid that when you say things such as, '(who were statistically much better educated than yourself)', you are making the discussion about me. If you wish to avoid this, try to stick to the topic and avoid specualtions about my past life.
'"You seem to be saying that some people who were educated in the 1930s or 1940s were cleverer than me..."
ReplyDeleteThat would be "more clever" rather than "cleverer" as you have written. '
Alas, the Oxford English Dictionary does not agree with you...
Because the OED, in addition to defining words in common usage, now also indicates how to present those words within grammatically accurate sentences doesn't it...oh! Hang on! No, it still doesn't. Nice try Si!
ReplyDelete'Because the OED, in addition to defining words in common usage, now also indicates how to present those words within grammatically accurate sentences doesn't it...oh! Hang on! No, it still doesn't. Nice try Si!'
ReplyDeleteTell me, have you ever actually used a dictionary? This is a genuine question. Let's look at a typical dictionary of the sort that everybody ought to have in their home. Here is the Oxford Dictionary of English, second edition, revised 2005. Looking at the definition of the word 'fascinate', for example, we find the following:
fascinate verb (with obj.) attract the strong attention and interest of (someone): I've always been fascinated by computers, a crowd of fascinated onlookers.
Of course any decent dictionary will indicate how to present those words within grammatically accurate sentences. Seriously, have you ever looked at any dictionary; let alone the Oxford English Dictionary?
The entry for 'clever' begins:
Clever; adjective (cleverer, cleverest)
This is because dictionaries also list derivatives and superlatives.
I cannot go any futher with this. If people really believe that the word 'cleverer' does not exist or is in some way incorrect, when used in the sentence, 'some people who were educated in the 1930s or 1940s were cleverer than me';then that is fine. Or they could just look in a real dictionary.
"I cannot go any futher with this."... I know but well done you for trying.
ReplyDeleteI blοg often аnԁ I reаlly thаnκ
ReplyDeleteyou fοr youг infοrmation. The artіcle has reallу peaked mу intеrest.
I am goіng to boоk mark уour sitе and keep checking for new
infoгmatiоn abοut oncе per weeκ.
I ѕubscribed to your Feed toο.
mу sіtе fast cash loans uk
I have read the content of this discussion and find it interesting that a major factor appears to have been ignored by the original author.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to have been glossed over in the case study example that the child in question had been educated at school for, one assumes, 9 years and in that time:
"...has a history of playing truant and under-achieving at school...has very limited literacy; barely enough to read the simplest of texts...not caused by dyslexia...but because he mucks about in class and misses a lot of school."
Firstly, before one critiques an alternative approach to education that has only been underway for a very short time, it is necessary to try and understand what has happened in the 9 years of education prior to this which has left the child inadequately skilled, de-motivated and disaffected.
The assumption has been made by the author that the education the child received prior to his current 'autonomous education' is in fact suitable and efficient and thus the child is to blame for his failure to thrive educationally. Conversely, once the educational programme changes, to one which the author appears to disagree with, then the tables are turned and it is no longer that the child is to blame but rather the educational provision. In this respect two different rules of analysis are being used, which clearly show a bias in the author's thinking from the outset.
The author also makes some quite blatant sweeping generalisations about the child ie. the friends he associates with and the likelihood of their influence on his future life choices, without actually talking about other relationships he has, with other members of his family for example, and how influential they may be. He also appears to have an uncanny ability to make rather overwhelming predictions about the child’s future based on what is only very limited information about his current situation.
I feel that the author here has a very clear agenda, which in my mind, is to bait and antagonise autonomous home educators without actually doing any objective, empirical research in this area, save for a few anecdotal references to the small number of autonomous home educators he knows of. Clearly some of the responses in this discussion have been emotive but it seems this is what the author wants in order to discredit further an educational provision he disagrees with. Of course, he is entitled to his opinion, but without any proper evidence, this is merely what it is and therefore is no less ideological than the education provision he attacks.
Perhaps autonomous home education works, perhaps it doesn’t. It may depend on individual children, their personal histories, personalities etc. It is clearly unlike traditional school education, which is constantly measured and assessed, in that the outcomes may be longer to realise, but this does not necessarily make it any less of a viable option.
Perhaps if the author were to address the issues of what led him to home educate his own child, maybe even open himself up to the weaknesses in his own educational philosophy, he might get a better discussion about autonomous home education – pros and cons.