Buy

Books
Click images for more details

The definitive history of the Climategate affair
Displaying Slide 4 of 5

Twitter
Support

 

Recent comments
Why am I the only one that have any interest in this: "CO2 is all ...
Much of the complete bollocks that Phil Clarke has posted twice is just a rehash of ...
Much of the nonsense here is a rehash of what he presented in an interview with ...
Much of the nonsense here is a rehash of what he presented in an interview with ...
The Bish should sic the secular arm on GC: lese majeste'!
Recent posts
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace

Entries in Education (144)

Wednesday
Mar182009

A disastrous idea from BoJo

Boris Johnson holds forth in the pages of the Telegraph, unveiling his latest bright idea. Headlined as

an education policy to gladden diehards, enrage trendies - and preserve the glory of English literature

it is, on closer inspection, just a call to have children learn poetry at school.

Boris! No!

Think about it. The sun is shining, Jonny and Jenny are bored and are staring out of the window wishing they could run around outside. What better way to put them off poetry for the rest of their lives than to order them to learn the first twenty stanzas of Grey's elegy, with the threat of dire punishment for non-compliance.

Can storied urn or animated bust
Back to its mansion call the fleeting breath?

I mean, who gives a stuff? The sun's shining! What person of any sensibility or love of nature would want to be inside reading a book?

My children love poetry. They pick up poetry books for fun (yes, for fun) and recite verses to unsuspecting visitors to our home. This is a particularly popular activity when it's raining or when there's nothing better to do.

The glories of English literature are being preserved, in homes all over the country. English literature is safe there, unmolested by the dead hand of the state.

Leave it alone.

 

Tuesday
Mar102009

UKIP enters the home education debate

UKIP has called for the sacking of Vijay Patel, the NSPCC official who tried to link home education with child abuse.

UKIP is calling for the sacking of a child protection official following "dishonest" claims over home education.

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children is backing a government investigation into home-schooling amid fears that teaching children at home can hide abuse.

"The NSPCC is trying to shift blame away from itself to the home education community," said UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom.

He also picks up on the "Fake Charity" angle I've been pushing here.

It is no surprise that the NSPCC is a government toady given that it ceased to be an independent charity years ago and now is a branch of government. It is heavily funded by the government and does the government's bidding. Today that job is to vilify decent parents.

Excellent. Maybe all this slogging away at the keyboard is having an effect. UKIP have also been busy on the policy front, issuing a position paper on HE, stating that they are fully behind the principle of the existing law and opposing any attempts by the state to get in the way of the freedom to educate at home.

There are said to be something of the order of 50,000 home educating families in the UK. That could be a lot of votes just hoovered up by UKIP.

(Via Carlotta)

 

 

Sunday
Mar082009

Pigeons and paleoclimate

The Libertarian Alliance blog has posted another one of its "they can't really be asking intelligent children this drivel in an exam" articles - this time on maths.

While the paper is undeniably straightforward, Question 1 struck me for a completely different reason. It shows a table of the lengths of various species of garden bird and also their wingspans. The first question asks the reader to plot these as a scatterplot and to draw a best fit line through the points. Then they have to estimate the wingspan of a different species, whose length is given.

Easy peasy.

The last part of the question is this:

It is not sensible to use your line of best fit to estimate the wingspan of a pigeon
whose length is 41 cm.

Explain why.

The answer is that 41cm is longer than any of the other species in the list. To use rather more technical language, 41cm is outside the range for which the mathematic model has been calibrated. You don't know if your model still works for such big birds, in other words.

This is good sound stuff, and addresses an important scientific point. It's laughably easy of course, but that doesn't make it wrong or anything like that.

But the important point is this. Projecting answers outside the range for which a mathematical model has been calibrated is exactly what paleoclimate researchers do, including the stickmeister himself, Michael Mann. This is from the critique of the Hockey Stick by Burger and Cubasch:

For almost all of the 24 proxies, the range of the millennial variation is considerably larger than the sampled one, with numerous cases of proxies exceeding 7 and more calibration standard deviations (cf. SM). As a consequence, the regression model is extrapolated beyond the domain for which it was defined and where the error is limited.

So my question is this: if we can expect schoolchildren to get this simple bit of statistics correct in an examination that is widely seen as being risibly dumbed down, how come the world's leading paleoclimatologists can't?

Or am I missing something?

 

Saturday
Mar072009

Clause 28 revisited

The whole Clause 28 debate is being revisited over at The Times, where a London primary school has been teaching children about homosexuality, including a trip to a "pink" version of Romeo and Juliet entitled "Romeo and Julian". (Conspiracy theorist hat on again: would they do this just to provoke a reaction from the Tories? - surely not.)

The readers are predictably unimpressed, nay outraged, and have been taking their offspring out of class in protest. For this outrage, we learn, parents are to be prosecuted. Free societies are wonderful things aren't they?

I can almost hear the sound of Clause 28 being dusted off in Conservative associations around the country. I wonder though if Cameron's Cuddly Conservatives have actually got the balls to bring Clause 28 in again, but fortunately there is a liberal alternative of dealing with this issue. That's the good news. The bad news is that Cameron's Cuddly Conservatives probably haven't the cojones to go through with this idea either.

Still, for what it's worth, here it is.

Privatise the schools. All of them. Bring vouchers if you must. Repeal the National Curriculum in its entirety. Fire the LEAs or whatever they are called nowadays. Then simply allow schools to differentiate themselves on their approach to education, including sex education. Some schools want to buy season tickets to Romeo and Julian, others will not mention homosexuality at all. Some will do heterosexuality in primary and homosexuality in secondary, others may choose to do things completely differently. Who knows what will happen? It depends completely on what parents want for their children.

It's impeccably liberal.

Oh, there is another problem with it of course. The education system is run by people who think that what parents want for their children is secondary to what the state wants - which is to say what the educational bureaucracy wants. Children, they believe should be taught to think like bureaucrats, which is to say rarely, uncreatively and only in a progessive, left wing manner.

 

Saturday
Mar072009

Could my eight-year old pass a GCSE?

I reckon there is a real possibility she could, based on these GCSE papers posted at the Libertarian Alliance blog.

Biology

Chemistry

Physics

Go through to the LA blog to get links to the marking schemes. Alternatively ask a passing toddler: they'll probably know the answers.

 

Saturday
Mar072009

NSPCC deletes criticism from its Facebook site

Everybody's favourite fake charity, the NSPCC, has been taking a bit of a kicking at its Facebook site, with home educators, outraged by the NSPCC's linking of HE with child abuse, giving full vent to their feelings about being slurred in this way.

Rather than engage, the NSPCC has first denied doing anything wrong and has now tried to kill the debate by deleting the criticism in its entirety.

Here's the Facebook page before

 And here it is now

Pretty much every trace of the criticism is gone, with only official responses from HE organisations like AHEd remaining. It looks as though they've got rid of the links section completely, presumably because they can't control what people are saying about them on other sites.

This is shameful behaviour.

Outrageous slur followed by innocent denial is a familiar tactic in political circles of course - I'm reminded of the Haltemprice & Howden by-election, when Labour backbenchers dropped heavy hints that David Davis was romanticly involved with Shami Chakrabarti. The smear was outrageous, and clarifications and apologies followed in due course, but by then the damage was done. This kind of subterfuge is the way of the world among politicians: acting without honour or decency is a mark of strength, showing remorse a sign of weakness.

But for a charity to behave in this way is a surprise, and with our conspiracy theorist hats on we can wonder if the NSPCC's sudden lurch into political hatcheting doesn't actually have the fingerprints of government spin doctors on it. Either way, a charity, especially a big one like the NSPCC, shouldn't be adopting the "apologise, shrug shoulders and move on" approach that suffices for the political classes. It has to deal with criticism in a public manner. Its charitable status depends on providing a public benefit, something that it is arguably no longer doing if it is facing such vehement disapproval by one sector of the community with which it is involved.

If it doesn't, people might just start to mistake it for an arm of government rather than the charity it purports to be.

 

 

 

Thursday
Feb262009

So schools don't indoctrinate do they?

My intemperate rant about Home Education continues to attract interest. If nothing else, it has been useful in publicising the issue.

One thread people may not have seen is by Chris Dillow, who rather misses the point of my post when he gently takes me to task for not providing evidence that HE is better than school. The post was of course about civil liberties and whether the state has a stronger claim on children than the family. It doesn't matter if HE is better or worse on average.

In the comments, Shuggy, himself a schoolteacher, makes light of my suggestion that schools might be indoctrinating children rather than educating them. In my experience it is pretty much naked indoctrination most of the time.

Which brings us to the Englishman's post this morning in which he shows us one of his kids' homework for last night. This isn't indoctrination?

 

 

Monday
Feb232009

David Semple on home education

This is a response to an article by David Semple on home education. David Semple is an Oxford-educated teacher and a state-worshipper: the kind of person who has got the country into the authoritarian mess it's in now. I don't normally do swear-blogging, but unfortunately I may have lapsed once or twice during this posting. Semple is basicly a fascist though and I think he deserves it.

Firstly, as a teacher, I’m not willing to be told what I can and can’t empirically examine by a political lobby. Those who provide education in schools are in a position to examine the education provided by home educators.

Bullshit. Teaching one-to-one is completely different to teaching one on thirty. Teachers know precisely nothing about home educated children, either individually or collectively. In fact, teachers know nothing about providing an education to anyone. They don't provide an education in their own schools, they provide indoctrination in left-wingnuttery and environmentalism. David Semple says himself that teachers are not properly trained and that they are delivering a deficient educaiton and yet here he is at the same time saying we should listen to what he and his ilk have to say about home education. The nerve of the man is astonishing.

It may be that the home school lobby don’t want to listen to some of the things which have to be said - but that’s a different issue.

Too right they don't want to listen to you. But you are going to try to force them to listen to you, and moreover to do what you tell them to, anyway. I can think of no better word for this than "fascist".

My concerns are as follows: a) what does the child want

This doesn't bother teachers in schools does it? The child gets the education the school is willing to give them, not the one the child wants. My son wants to learn history and geography and has been told in no uncertain terms that he lump it until high school. This is gross hypocrisy by David Semple, demanding things of home educators that he knows full well are not delivered and can never be delivered in schools.

b) is the child getting the same breadth of education as in a classroom;

Almost certainly. As we've heard in the news this week schools are delivering only English and Maths and not much else, a fact that David Semple even quotes himself! It would be astonishing if home educators could deliver anything quite as crap as Semple and his colleagues manage, and yet here he is questioning HE families.

c) is the child simply being taught to regurgitate the world-view of the parents;

Rather than being taught to regurgitate your worldview I suppose? If I had a penny for every time my children had been indoctrinated into some facet of environmentalism I would be a wealthy man. Oh, but wait a minute, you know better than me, don't you?

d) does the child have access to sufficient resources to support learning to a level equal to that which his or her peers will reach by the same age.

Give tax refunds to home educators. Problem solved. The problem is there is not a teacher in the country who would support this because for these parasites the education system is for feathering their own nests rather than providing a service. And anyway, just how much do you need by way of resources?

All of these things can be measured. I have always been particularly concerned about c) since I know that in the United States, home schooling is increasingly prevalent among extreme Christians and I have seen it suggested that this trend is the same in the UK. If home schooling can be a vehicle to prevent scientific learning, then we should regulate it.

Not only a fascist but an ignorant fascist. Home educators in the UK largely report that religion is not a reason for taking their children out of school. It's because they think that the education provided by Mr Semple and his ilk is crap. And what business is it of yours anyway if parents want to teach their children religious stuff? It doesn't affect you, you fascist prick.

The consequences for science of d) are equally important. If a child is to be kept out of primary school, this is of less importance, but post-11, large swathes of science teaching is practice-led. Titrations, dissections, circuit-building, oscillations and so forth are just some of the practicals for which the equipment is unlikely to be just lying around one’s house.

I am not so narrow minded, of course, to suggest that the lack of this equipment means that home schooling should be dispensed with.

You are pretty narrow-minded though aren't you?

It may simply mean that the LEA should have a remit extending to the provision of such equipment to community centres, where home schooling families can access it. Whether or not it gets used needs to be monitored.

Jesus, can you just for once open your slobbering fascist mouth without demanding that the state monitor somebody. Can you conceive of no human activity that shouldn't be snooped on and checked up on by the state?

I’ve never believed in measuring skirt lengths, tucking in shirts and so forth - and one-to-one teaching obviously gets rid of this sort of requirement. Additional time, with a suitably able parent, also offers the chance for a much broader range of activities - from mechanics to ornithology to wood work. However its a big step from saying, “This is possible” to ensuring that every home schooled child has these opportunities.

Ensuring these opportunities needs to be the responsibility of a body with no intellectual bias towards one form of education or the other - but since primary legislation is the responsibility of the State, it is to the State such a body must answer.

Bullshit again. This is the connection between leftwingnuttery and fascism made plain. "We demand opportunity for everyone and therefore we must have access to your home to check that you are providing it". Why don't you just go ahead and say that you want CCTV in every room to ensure that nobody is doing anything bad?

Collectively, as a society, we have a responsibility to our children - who are not the property of their parents and shouldn’t be treated as such.

And they are the property of "society" are they? You clearly think so. But if you took the trouble to check it out, you would find that children are legally the responsibility of parents. This is why it is not possible to sue the state when your teenagers take to drugs. Are you advocating that this should be possible? Of course not. When you say that children are the "responsibility of society" you don't mean anything of the sort. You are simply demanding a right to indoctrinate them to your personal preferences while avoiding any actual responsibility. It's the same as every other time you deal with the state - interfering busybodies get to tell you what to do but take no responsibility for the outcome. Teachers are not responsible for delivering a shitty education, child welfare officers are not responsible when children die. As soon as the state starts ruining the lives of home educated children they will not be responsible for that either.

Without taking away the right of a child to learn what interests them, there are also certain necessary things every child should know, whether John Holt and his fellow pro-home schoolers want to admit it or not.

Bullshit again. The majority of children come out of our shitty schools without even a semblance of an education and here is this arrogant prick of a teacher claiming that he knows better. The nerve of the man is astonishing.

I’m referring to things like the scientific method, skepticism and all forms of rational argument and the examination of evidence required to support or disprove such an argument.

I wasn't taught any of these things at my shitty bog standard comp. I learned them myself afterwards.

After all, this is a democracy. However distorted our public sphere is by a bias towards Capital, the opinions of the individual still have social consequences. So, as a fellow citizen in a democracy, I want everyone to know about things like evolution and to be able to judge the merits of an argument on the basis of rational thought, not on the basis of prescribed doctrine.

More ignorant prickery. What kind of a semi-educated halfwit thinks that democracy justifies anything? Vote to send people to the gas chambers and that's OK is it? This is why people don't want to let their children near people like you. What happens if someone doesn't want their children to know about recycling or whatever half-baked trendy idea some fart of a teacher has picked up in the pages of Socialist Worker? You couldn't have rational discussion of environmentalism in schools anyway because it's the new state religion and cannot be questioned. Why should your ideas take precedence anyway? What happens if the child isn't interested in evolution on the day you decide to teach it?

My only problem is that, even in schools, teaching to this standard is far from secure!

Genius! Let's try to stop the only alternative in town anyway!

In conclusion, I haven’t met a teacher yet who will deny the important role that family can play in a child’s learning. Also I don’t doubt, looking at the Swedish model as example, that there are better ways to organise education than what we currently have. Home schooling certainly has the potential to be one of these better ways - but how we talk about it is key.

"We" can talk about it all "we" like. Others just wish you'd shut up and let the rest of us get on with our own lives. But of course the Semples of this world will harass us without end because they're doing it for our own good.

Currently the State may be biased against home schooling - but there is no excuse for the near-hysterical reaction of home schoolers to a desire to regulate what they do. We need to find ways to open opportunities for child learning - at home or in school - and we need to do so knowing that this may be against the express wishes of the parents.

Understand this people. For those on the left they are not your children any more, they belong to the state. This is fascism, pure and simple. The man at the LEA knows better than you what is good for your children. David Semple is on a mission from Gordon and you are just going to have to learn your place.

This is at the core of my problem with home schooling; parents have replaced the absolute authority of the State with the absolute authority of themselves - and both need to be a lot more open to democratic regulation. This is reflected, to some extent, in the US figures below; of particular interest should be the 38% who are home schooled on religious grounds, and the 12% who object to what the school teaches.

Ignorant fascist again. Why quote the US figures? The UK ones are available and only 14% of UK home ed parents give religion as a reason. And regardless of that, what right do you have to demand that your views take preference? Choose liberalism and let people make their own minds up, or choose fascism and tell them what they must do.

Parents do have absolute authority because they are legally absolutely responsible. Get that through your cretinous teacher skull.

It highlights the hypocrisy at the heart of the home school movement and begs the question, since when are parents more qualified than teachers to choose what their children can and can’t learn?

Who gives a monkey's about the qualifications? The question is, who gets the better results and the answer is clear - home educating parents without degrees acheive better results for children than degree-educated teachers. Face it, you are working in an industry that does not do anyone any good. You are a waste of space and time. You are a parasite. Go and start doing something useful with your life and stop knackering other people's.

Whether boards of governors, LEAs or some body that will collectively represent home schoolers, this sort of regulation is the right of a democratic society - however we collectively decide to arrange it.

You can collectively naff off.

 

 

Thursday
Feb192009

Eurosceptics read this

Home Ed blogger Gill Kilner has taken a look at the government's sinister Every Child Matters agenda and finds its roots in the work of the colleagues in Brussels.

It's getting hard to reconcile support for the EU with support for civil liberties, wouldn't you say?

 

Saturday
Feb072009

Self service

As if we needed any more evidence that the public sector is run for the benefit of its employees rather than of the people who pay for it, here is the latest proof:

While thousands of state schools received heavy criticism for closing due to transport disruption and fear of accidents on slippery playgrounds, almost all independent schools carried on, they said.

See that? State schools were closing by the thousand, but nearly the whole of the independent sector stayed open.

There's no argument. They must all be privatised.

 

Saturday
Jan312009

School for social problems

Chris Woodhead says that schools are giving up on teaching knowledge and are delivering discussion groups in social issues like homosexuality and "fair trade".

Don't I know it. In the day job I sometimes see school textbooks and it's clear to me that a lot of what goes on is propaganda. If I had a penny for every time I've seen the Hockey Stick graph in a school science book....

Monday
Jan262009

Brain training doesn't work

Nintendo's brain training games aren't as good as the advertising puff and the hype would have you think.  Our kids' school recommended them to us, just a few weeks ago. I'm glad we didn't take them up on it.

Sunday
Jan252009

Grinding down dissent or making work?

Hot on the heels of their last inquiry into Home Education, the government are launched another. Home Educators are not amused.

Education Otherwise and home educating families have contributed to three
major consultations on the guidance to local authorities since 2005. The latest
guidance was issued in autumn 2007.

I have this pet theory that much of the apparent campaign against the citizen is actually just bureaucracy run amok. This looks like more of the same.

Saturday
Oct252008

Quote of the day

Schools have not necessarily much to do with education....they are mainly institutions of control, where basic habits must be inculcated in the young. Education is quite different and has little place in school."

Winston Churchill

Thursday
Sep112008

News from the front

Johann Hari has dared to cross the monstrous regiment of home educators in his article in the Independent today. In a carefully ambiguous article, he manages to imply that there are lots of home educated children who are simply not learning anything at all, and insinuates that HE parents are little better than child abusers.

Having bad-mouthed the HE community, Hari manages to compound his error by a bit of blatant misrepresentation. He quotes research by someone called Rob Blackhurst, who apparently found that children in HE families, as old as twelve, couldn't read and write. Now if you look up Rob Blackhurst and home education on Google, you will find that Mr Blackhurst is a journalist rather than an academic, and that he wrote a very sympathetic piece about HomeEd in the FT some months back. In it, he does indeed talk of children who didn't learn to read until very late...

One of our children didn't read until he was nine or 10...

says the quoted home educator. Full marks to Mr Hari then? Not exactly. The rest of the quote is

and he's just completed an MA in creative writing.

Not exactly what Mr Hari would have you believe that Blackhurst found, I would say.

There has been a great swathe of media comment about HE in the last week or so, presumably timed to coincide with the return of the English schools. The unions and the left wing commentators have been attacking really quite hard, with vague insinuations of child abuse, and heart-rending tales of children shut up inside for months at a time, deprived of the alleged benefits of a state education and the national curriculum.Reading between the lines though, there are two factors driving them. Firstly they are frightened that the trickle of children out of the state system and into HE will become a flood. If this happens then the state education system will be put under enormous strain and enormous pressure to change. And of course, change is the last thing that the teaching unions want. But most of all, they want access to people's homes. If you read Hari's article, he wants all children to go to school, but most of all he wants education and welfare officers to be able to turn up to check that home educating parents are not abusing their children. He is really that much of a fascist. And rest assured that once education and welfare officers have access to HE homes to check up on children there, the same outraged voices that question why nobody can check up on HE children now, will be raised again to demand why HE homes can be inspected, but not the homes of other children.

HE families are the front line in the fight against the big brother society. They may not realise it, but their fight is the fight of all of us. They deserve our support.

Page 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 10 Next 15 entries »