...have been turned down by the DCSF has finally emerged.
As Maire says, it seems to be OK to suggest false things about home educators, and to allow these misrepresentations to be propagated in the main stream media, but when someone explains how this is the case, or parodies the report and a public figure, it is deemed harrassment and cause for censor.
Surely what's sauce for the goose etc, and shouldn't this rightfully mean that the Home Education Review should be withdrawn?
On the other hand, for a plea that FOIs should rightfully be answered, please read comments below.
Related posts:
Renegade Parent
Bishop Hill
Friday, September 18, 2009
Graham Badman now requesting further evidence
...here.
Well, if that isn't embarrassing, I don't know what is! First he writes a report which makes recommendations on the evidence of a very small self-selecting sample which in all probability contained a high proportion of statistical outliers, the reasons for which were not investigated.
Then home educators set about checking out his stats and find them to be woefully researched and misrepresented both in the review itself and in the media. For example, freedom of information responses from all the LAs reveal that home educated children are actually less than a third less likely to suffer abuse than children in the rest of the population.
Home educators start preparing their submissions for the Children, Schools and Families' Select Committee Inquiry, (NB: responses due in by Tuesday 22nd September, at noon, in four days from now) to include criticism and correction of Mr Badman's evidence along with explanations of how his conclusions could best be described as the poorly targeted use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. A universal screen of tens of thousands of well-functioning families that will not reliably unearth abuse will not be a popular move in these days of news that cuts will have to be made in patently useful services such as the NHS and when social work departments are already horrendously under-resourced and over-loaded.
Mr Badman seems to have realised that his figures might need some further examination, and pleads for evidence to support his forgone conclusions. Is that really a good way to make the case for a monumental change in legislation involving massive appropriation of parental rights and intrusion by the state into family lives?
Other related blog posts:
Corvidae Corner
Making it Up
Staffordshire
Our Story So Far
Irdial
Renegade Parent
Patch of Puddles
Home Ed Forums
Well, if that isn't embarrassing, I don't know what is! First he writes a report which makes recommendations on the evidence of a very small self-selecting sample which in all probability contained a high proportion of statistical outliers, the reasons for which were not investigated.
Then home educators set about checking out his stats and find them to be woefully researched and misrepresented both in the review itself and in the media. For example, freedom of information responses from all the LAs reveal that home educated children are actually less than a third less likely to suffer abuse than children in the rest of the population.
Home educators start preparing their submissions for the Children, Schools and Families' Select Committee Inquiry, (NB: responses due in by Tuesday 22nd September, at noon, in four days from now) to include criticism and correction of Mr Badman's evidence along with explanations of how his conclusions could best be described as the poorly targeted use of a sledgehammer to crack a nut. A universal screen of tens of thousands of well-functioning families that will not reliably unearth abuse will not be a popular move in these days of news that cuts will have to be made in patently useful services such as the NHS and when social work departments are already horrendously under-resourced and over-loaded.
Mr Badman seems to have realised that his figures might need some further examination, and pleads for evidence to support his forgone conclusions. Is that really a good way to make the case for a monumental change in legislation involving massive appropriation of parental rights and intrusion by the state into family lives?
Other related blog posts:
Corvidae Corner
Making it Up
Staffordshire
Our Story So Far
Irdial
Renegade Parent
Patch of Puddles
Home Ed Forums
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Not Back to School Picnics in the Press
South Devon
London
Norfolk and again.
Cambridgeshire
Cumbria
Birmingham
Kent, Sussex, Surrey
Bristol
Yorkshire
Oxford and again.
Stroud
Sheffield and here
Totnes
Evesham
Bradford
Isle of Wight
Southampton
There was also some great coverage about the London picnic on LBC, East Midlands Today carried an item about the Leicestershire picnic, and see link below for Hereford picnic on Radio 5 Live.
London
Norfolk and again.
Cambridgeshire
Cumbria
Birmingham
Kent, Sussex, Surrey
Bristol
Yorkshire
Oxford and again.
Stroud
Sheffield and here
Totnes
Evesham
Bradford
Isle of Wight
Southampton
There was also some great coverage about the London picnic on LBC, East Midlands Today carried an item about the Leicestershire picnic, and see link below for Hereford picnic on Radio 5 Live.
Comment on Draft Legislative Programme
My letter to comments on the Draft Legislative Programme:
"Dear Sir/Madam
I am writing with regard to a clause in the Improving Schools and Safeguarding Children Bill, namely "improving monitoring arrangements for children educated at home".
I believe that the inclusion of this clause is unwise and suggests that the government has not given due consideration to the principles of good legislation, namely that it should be proportionate, consistent and well targeted.
The clause is included in the Bill as a result of so-called evidence in the Review of Home Education, by Graham Badman (1) which was hastily conducted at the beginning of this year. The evidence and statistics in this review were not of a high quality, a point which Mr Badman now appears to concede as he has only recently (well after the publication of the Review) called for further evidence from local authorities to back up his foregone conclusions. (2)
Mr Badman's evidence has been subjected to scrutiny by home educating groups such as Action for Home Education (3). AHEd investigated his claims that there is sufficient evidence to prove that it will be necessary to monitor home educators more extensively and have found that contrary to the impression that the report gives, which largely consisted of the misleading claim that
"8.12 ...on the basis of local authority evidence and case studies presented, even acknowledging the variation between authorities, the number of children known to children’s social care in some local authorities is disproportionately high relative to the size of their home educating population"
in fact, that abuse of children in the home education is actually less than a quarter the rate of that found in the population as a whole. (4)
Basing policy and legislation upon the basis of a few statistical outliers, the reasons for which have not been investigated, is not sound procedure, and is likely to result in legislation which is neither proportionate, nor wisely targeted and which would be hugely wasteful in terms of money and manpower.
Further, there is good reason to believe that the full implications and consequences of implementing the recommendations in the review have not been considered. Baroness Morgan suggested (5) that no further funding would be necessary to implement the registration and monitoring arrangements, but given that implementation would involve a greatly extended workload for LAs, many of whom are already struggling to meet their responsibilities with regard to home educators, it is reasonable to assume that this will not be the case and that a considerable amount of funding will be required, much of which will be wasted investigating tens of thousands of well-functioning families.
The fact that home educators will resist the implementation of these recommendations should also be factored into the considerations about funding.
There are other issues of serious consequence, for example there does not appear to have been given due consideration to the legislative and constitutional implications of legislating for the Review's recommendations. Legislating to monitor home educators more extensively in order to assess for educational attainment will impact the interpretation of sections of legislation, such as s7 of the 1996 Education Act, (6) and upon s436a of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. (7) which will henceforth have to be interpreted as meaning not simply that parents must provide a seemingly suitable education, but that they must ensure that their children attain a suitable education. This will impact on all parents everywhere, not simply upon home educating ones, and for the law to remain consistent, should mean that schooling parents should also be held to similar account.
The many questions about the Review and its recommendations have resulted in an inquiry into it which is being conducted by the Children, Schools and Families Select Committee (8). There is also a public consultation currently underway on the registration and monitoring proposals (9).
We do not know when the Select Committee will announce its findings but we would not expect anything to be available before the Queen's Speech. Furthermore, the public consultation does not close until October 19th, which suggests that there will not be enough time consider the input from stakeholders before rushing to primary legislation.
Several hundred home educators have been to see their MPs about this issue, raising many questions with regard to the Review's recommendations. We do not envisage that this clause will procede without extensive debate about it's disproportionate and poorly targeted proposals.
Yours faithfully
References
1. Home Education Review, Graham Badman
http://publications.everychildmatters.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/HC-610_Home-ed.PDF
2. DCSF call for supplementary evidence to bolster the conclusions of the Badman Report in advance of Select Committee questions
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/everychildmatters/news-and-communications/la-weekly-email/
laemail17september09/#ms883
3. Action for Home Education (AHEd)
http://www.ahed.org.uk/
4. Figures on Abuse in the Home Education Community:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=rbrk5-GEdrUdcmfi670Mihg&gid=2
5. Baroness Morgan on cost implications of the review:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2009-06-29a.6.4#addcomment
6. Education Act 1996 s7.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1996/ukpga_19960056_en_2#pt1-ch1-pb3-l1g7
7. Education and Inspections Act 2006 s436a
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060040_en_2#pt1-l1g4
8. Select Committee Inquiry into the Badman Review
http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/csf/csfpn220709.cfm
9. DCSF public consultation on registration and monitoring of home education
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=consultationDetails&consultationId=1643&external=no&menu=1
"Dear Sir/Madam
I am writing with regard to a clause in the Improving Schools and Safeguarding Children Bill, namely "improving monitoring arrangements for children educated at home".
I believe that the inclusion of this clause is unwise and suggests that the government has not given due consideration to the principles of good legislation, namely that it should be proportionate, consistent and well targeted.
The clause is included in the Bill as a result of so-called evidence in the Review of Home Education, by Graham Badman (1) which was hastily conducted at the beginning of this year. The evidence and statistics in this review were not of a high quality, a point which Mr Badman now appears to concede as he has only recently (well after the publication of the Review) called for further evidence from local authorities to back up his foregone conclusions. (2)
Mr Badman's evidence has been subjected to scrutiny by home educating groups such as Action for Home Education (3). AHEd investigated his claims that there is sufficient evidence to prove that it will be necessary to monitor home educators more extensively and have found that contrary to the impression that the report gives, which largely consisted of the misleading claim that
"8.12 ...on the basis of local authority evidence and case studies presented, even acknowledging the variation between authorities, the number of children known to children’s social care in some local authorities is disproportionately high relative to the size of their home educating population"
in fact, that abuse of children in the home education is actually less than a quarter the rate of that found in the population as a whole. (4)
Basing policy and legislation upon the basis of a few statistical outliers, the reasons for which have not been investigated, is not sound procedure, and is likely to result in legislation which is neither proportionate, nor wisely targeted and which would be hugely wasteful in terms of money and manpower.
Further, there is good reason to believe that the full implications and consequences of implementing the recommendations in the review have not been considered. Baroness Morgan suggested (5) that no further funding would be necessary to implement the registration and monitoring arrangements, but given that implementation would involve a greatly extended workload for LAs, many of whom are already struggling to meet their responsibilities with regard to home educators, it is reasonable to assume that this will not be the case and that a considerable amount of funding will be required, much of which will be wasted investigating tens of thousands of well-functioning families.
The fact that home educators will resist the implementation of these recommendations should also be factored into the considerations about funding.
There are other issues of serious consequence, for example there does not appear to have been given due consideration to the legislative and constitutional implications of legislating for the Review's recommendations. Legislating to monitor home educators more extensively in order to assess for educational attainment will impact the interpretation of sections of legislation, such as s7 of the 1996 Education Act, (6) and upon s436a of the Education and Inspections Act 2006. (7) which will henceforth have to be interpreted as meaning not simply that parents must provide a seemingly suitable education, but that they must ensure that their children attain a suitable education. This will impact on all parents everywhere, not simply upon home educating ones, and for the law to remain consistent, should mean that schooling parents should also be held to similar account.
The many questions about the Review and its recommendations have resulted in an inquiry into it which is being conducted by the Children, Schools and Families Select Committee (8). There is also a public consultation currently underway on the registration and monitoring proposals (9).
We do not know when the Select Committee will announce its findings but we would not expect anything to be available before the Queen's Speech. Furthermore, the public consultation does not close until October 19th, which suggests that there will not be enough time consider the input from stakeholders before rushing to primary legislation.
Several hundred home educators have been to see their MPs about this issue, raising many questions with regard to the Review's recommendations. We do not envisage that this clause will procede without extensive debate about it's disproportionate and poorly targeted proposals.
Yours faithfully
References
1. Home Education Review, Graham Badman
http://publications.
2. DCSF call for supplementary evidence to bolster the conclusions of the Badman Report in advance of Select Committee questions
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/
laemail17september09/#ms883
3. Action for Home Education (AHEd)
http://www.ahed.org.uk/
4. Figures on Abuse in the Home Education Community:
http://spreadsheets.google.
5. Baroness Morgan on cost implications of the review:
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/
6. Education Act 1996 s7.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/
7. Education and Inspections Act 2006 s436a
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/
8. Select Committee Inquiry into the Badman Review
http://www.parliament.uk/
9. DCSF public consultation on registration and monitoring of home education
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/
Monday, September 14, 2009
Hereford "Not Back to School Picnic"
...a lovely day out: lots of old friends and new faces, lots of leaflets about the problems with the Badman recommendations handed out, thousands of bubbles floating up around the cathedral and hundreds of private school pupils passing by on their way to lessons, reading our signs with generally extremely favorable expressions on their faces.
The press turned up early, but there were still a good number of HEors, who rather weirdly it has to be said, had also turned up early!
Supermum, Julie G provided an interview about home education and the picnic to Radio 5 Live which can be heard from the 39th minute at the Listen Again facility.
The press turned up early, but there were still a good number of HEors, who rather weirdly it has to be said, had also turned up early!
Supermum, Julie G provided an interview about home education and the picnic to Radio 5 Live which can be heard from the 39th minute at the Listen Again facility.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
First they came for Smokers,
...then they came for drivers, now they come for practically anyone who volunteers to help out with children.
You could replace the word "volunteer" with "home educator" and the "Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006" with the "Duty to Identify Children Missing an Education 2006" and the rest of the article would apply.
The hope is that people will refuse to participate en masse.
You could replace the word "volunteer" with "home educator" and the "Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006" with the "Duty to Identify Children Missing an Education 2006" and the rest of the article would apply.
The hope is that people will refuse to participate en masse.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
Why Home Educators are Frightened
It's a postcode lottery. A statement from the DCSF about the statistics used by Badman to support his recommendations:
"The proportion of children known to social care in the 25 LAs for which we have data varied widely - some had none, in one LA, 55% of their EHE children is known to social care."
Maire fisks the explanatory note here.
"The proportion of children known to social care in the 25 LAs for which we have data varied widely - some had none, in one LA, 55% of their EHE children is known to social care."
Maire fisks the explanatory note here.
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
The Horrible History Man
...is profoundly opposed to schools, labelling them an utter waste of a young life.
Wonder if he knows anything about the alternatives?
Wonder if he knows anything about the alternatives?
Home Education in Herefordshire
Julie Garrett and another home educating mum and her girls do a fantastic job at 2 hours and 51 mins.
Monday, September 07, 2009
Why Don't Children Like School?
A research professor of psychology demonstrates a real understanding of the problem and its solution.
Sunday, September 06, 2009
What happens to "Uppity" Parents
They have their children taken away apparently.
UPDATE: whilst these genuinely vulnerable children appear to have been neglected by an understaffed and overloaded social work team in Doncaster.
UPDATE: whilst these genuinely vulnerable children appear to have been neglected by an understaffed and overloaded social work team in Doncaster.
Friday, September 04, 2009
Increase in Home Education in Gloucestershire
The writer misspelled Brookes, and make it sound as if Rob was saying something he wasn't, but hey ho, it's still good to hear that the numbers are up.
Thursday, September 03, 2009
National Public Protest re Badman Review
...is getting some advance notice in the press.
There are now over 20 such events going on pretty much everywhere throughout England, mostly on the 16th September. If you fancy joining one of these for a picnic, bubble blowing and a chat with your local pressman, and haven't hooked up with a group yet, mail me at my email addy and we'll sort it out.
Recipe for green bubbles here.
There are now over 20 such events going on pretty much everywhere throughout England, mostly on the 16th September. If you fancy joining one of these for a picnic, bubble blowing and a chat with your local pressman, and haven't hooked up with a group yet, mail me at my email addy and we'll sort it out.
Recipe for green bubbles here.
Dissing the National Curriculum and The Rose Review
From Cambridge University's Faculty of Education, a report (PDF) which has a good pop at both the National Curriculum and the Rose Review.
It's good to see some scepticism, particularly as Badman recommends the Rose Review as a possible way forward for home educators, and as Michael Gove's office has recently told us that the Tories also intend to monitor us and that they haven't decided on the reach of the National Curriculum.
(Ho hum...wondering if Mr. Gove has yet to consult with any lawyers who have any knowledge of the implications of the consequences of implementing these ideas?)
Oh and can't resist appending this as have just noticed that it disses teacher training too. (About time!)
"While supposedly training teachers to advance children’s knowledge and skill in specific subjects, ITT (Initial Teacher Training) has (a) neglected many of those subjects and (b) failed to educate teachers in even the basics of epistemology."
Yep, basic epistemology...they should be coming to Home Educators for a proper lesson in that!
It's good to see some scepticism, particularly as Badman recommends the Rose Review as a possible way forward for home educators, and as Michael Gove's office has recently told us that the Tories also intend to monitor us and that they haven't decided on the reach of the National Curriculum.
(Ho hum...wondering if Mr. Gove has yet to consult with any lawyers who have any knowledge of the implications of the consequences of implementing these ideas?)
Oh and can't resist appending this as have just noticed that it disses teacher training too. (About time!)
"While supposedly training teachers to advance children’s knowledge and skill in specific subjects, ITT (Initial Teacher Training) has (a) neglected many of those subjects and (b) failed to educate teachers in even the basics of epistemology."
Yep, basic epistemology...they should be coming to Home Educators for a proper lesson in that!
Tuesday, September 01, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)