Tuesday 1 March 2011

Paranoia point proven

I'm not going to name names, and I am not even going to say where I have got this information from - mostly because for those with a modicum of intelligence finding out, or guessing won't be that hard, but I actually laughed out loud at something today, which proved the very point I made yesterday about how some Home Educators verge on the paranoid. 

A couple of days ago, someone made a post on a well known Home Education yahoo list. It consisted of a brief introduction, followed by several, quite specific questions pertaining to Home Education. 
Basically the person wanted to know specifics about the comparisons between home education and mainstream schooling, as far as children are concerned. The person requested 'hard statistics' which they could peruse, which supported the much talked about academic success of home educated children. The person wanted to know specifics about examinations, and future employability, viability of Home Education and other such things.  

This person was swiftly met with a barrage of suspicion and promptly labelled a researcher. It was suggested to other users - by the list owner - that all further communication with the person who had posed the question, should be halted, until further investigations had been carried out to ascertain if the person in question was indeed a researcher or not.

Now, looking at recent posts by the same person, it is blindingly obvious that what we actually have here is simply a well spoken and written person, able to come forward with exactly the questions they require answers to, in a no nonsense, no frills fashion. The fact that this person did this without fluffing up their introduction with countless details about their personal circumstances is in my opinion what the HE community needs more of. 

Just because someone posts a message onto a list, does not imply that they want to meet up with people and become best friends with the head honchos of the list. I thought that the whole point of a yahoo list being created is to impart and share information for those that want to know. Or do I have that completely wrong? 

As far as I can see, all the naysayers on the list have managed to achieve is to make themselves look completely unapproachable, paranoid, and generally unpleasant people. Not to mention hideously old fashioned and so set in their ways that they refuse to see beyond their own fears of integration and social responsibility.

The list owner did also mention that in all their years of running groups and lists etc, they had never once come across such a message, so full of questions. But more and more people in this country are considering Home Education for a variety of reasons. Therefore surely groups and lists ought to be preparing themselves for further straight to the point messages such as this one, from NEW COMERS, as opposed to those who have been hanging about on the shelves of the list gathering dust for countless years? 


Loz 

13 comments:

  1. The person requested 'hard statistics' which they could peruse, which supported the much talked about academic success of home educated children. The person wanted to know specifics about examinations, and future employability, viability of Home Education and other such things.

    Sounds like it could be an LA worker asking about exams and statistics! Home education is not just about how many exams you pass? who ever it was has started from the wrong way round! Home education is not school where all that matters is passing often meanless exams!

    LA staff spend time on these lists looking for people so does the department of Education in London looking for weakness or wanting to use information to attack home educators

    so any one running a list needs to make sure it is some one who is really a home educator or some one really wanting to find out about home education for good reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Quite right, Loz. If a few more people looked into the facts about home edcuation before they embarked upon it, it might be no bad thing.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Old webb says-Quite right, Loz. If a few more people looked into the facts about home edcuation before they embarked upon it, it might be no bad thing.

    What type of facts you thinking about Webb? the Badman/Balls facts of how to do home education?

    you done any bar charts on it? I am sure you would enjoy doing polls of statistically significant samples in your spare time, then perhaps draw up some bar charts and graphs? Perhaps you could do this for every opinion expressed on a home education forum. Is that LA speak LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  4. What is it with this taking discussions from email lists and dissecting them elsewhere? If you are part of the list, why not take part in the conversation there? It seems plain rude to talk about others elsewhere behind their backs. Does this happen with other email forums or is it peculiar to HE?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous..aka suzi from HE-UK said: What is it with this taking discussions from email lists and dissecting them elsewhere? If you are part of the list, why not take part in the conversation there? It seems plain rude to talk about others elsewhere behind their backs. Does this happen with other email forums or is it peculiar to HE?

    Having been on the list for only a short time, I quickly learned that it was populated mostly by a clique of like-minded people who really had little time for those who did not immediately share their views, and also seem to suffer chronically with paranoia towards any research to do with HE or any LA influence.

    I for one, am interested in finding out as much as possible about the past of HE, the present and the future of it...therefore I expect at some point legitimate research is needed, and should be welcomed. I find it very narrow minded that such a large group such as HE-UK would be so negative about this - to the point that a new member was initially isolated by the list owner.

    The post was not dissected, it was summerized. No names in my initial post were mentioned, or sources.
    It might actually have suited HE-UK better in the long run, to have read what was being said, taken note, and acted upon it to ensure such an awful social slur didn't occur again.

    And as for taking part in the (one way) conversation on the list, You have got to be joking aren't you?
    If I had spoken out at that time, in her defense, before everyone was given the go ahead by Mike to do so, I would have been verbally stoned and swiftly placed in the same pigeon hole as the original poster.

    Of course, all of what I have just said is now just speculation (I may have been verbally stoned, I may not), therefore anything I have said, and anything you may subsequently say (denying that such a verbal stoning would have taken place) is now null and void. The deed is done. And yes..my point has still been proven.

    You may continue by all means to follow my blog, but do be aware that if I deem your future comments to be nothing but aggressive, or confrontational, or argumentative simply for the sake of it, then I will choose not publish them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 'Anonymous..aka suzi from HE-UK said'

    Somebody's sharp today!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Loz said,
    "Anonymous..aka suzi from HE-UK said:"

    'Fraid not - no idea who suzi is as I don't read the HE-UK list. I just find it so strange that HE bloggers seem to base so many of their posts on email list messages (which are not supposed to be cross-posted). Two of your recent posts are like this. In fact, my comment probably makes more sense on the other article but I just happened to read this one second. Do you also feel the same way about the other list? Do you think cliquishness is peculiar to HE or is it a normal human behaviour? Are there different cliques on different lists? Do you belong to any clique or are you completely open minded about everything and belong equally to all groups in society?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous said: 'Fraid not - no idea who suzi is as I don't read the HE-UK list

    OK fair enough..we'll just leave that at that for now.

    Anonymous said: Do you also feel the same way about the other list? Do you think cliquishness is peculiar to HE or is it a normal human behaviour?

    I think it is an acquired trait which comes from feling a need to belong to something. in my opinion cliques occur when there is a sense of insecurity. (A primitive 'safety in numbers' mentality).

    Anonymous said: Do you belong to any clique or are you completely open minded about everything and belong equally to all groups in society?

    If you knew me, you would know that I absolutely do not belong to any clique, other than what occurs under my own roof. If ones family can be classed as a clique, then I stand corrected.

    I await your inevitable volley

    ReplyDelete
  9. Why do you view a clique as negative? According to WikiPedia a clique is an inclusive group of people who share interests, views, purposes, patterns of behaviour, or ethnicity. What's wrong with that and how does anyone avoid belonging to one or more cliques by this definition?

    How do you feel you are excluded from cliques you have experienced on home ed lists? Are the cliques the same or do you dislike different lists for different reasons? Not a volley, just curious. If I don't like a group of people I meet either in real life or on the internet I just leave, I can't see where the adversarial attitude comes from.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous said: Why do you view a clique as negative? According to WikiPedia a clique is an inclusive group of people who share interests, views, purposes, patterns of behaviour, or ethnicity. What's wrong with that and how does anyone avoid belonging to one or more cliques by this definition?

    I never said that there was anything wrong with cliques..so long as they promote a healthy and open minded opinion on that particular interest, view, purpose or pattern of behaviour which draws like-minded people together.
    It is when a clique begins to breed a sense of paranoia, or indeed a sense of elitism (as there appears to be when comparing autonomy with more structured forms of home education) that I begin to become wary of it.

    From what I have witnessed on the list in question, those who are in any way opposed, or even just unfamiliar with AE are usually met with a much colder reception than those who come along singing its praises.
    Also, it is apparent that if one upholds any positive views of the LA's involvement with HE, or in anyway comes across as being like them (as in asking too many questions) they too are met with pack like behaviour - where the underlings gather round the head honcho eagerly awaiting his orders as to how to proceed.

    Nevertheless, a clique is not in itself a bad thing, as you rightly point out, there are many a varied form of clique in society.


    Anonymous said: How do you feel you are excluded from cliques you have experienced on home ed lists?

    HE-UK is the only list I have experienced this on. Others which I am a member of appear to manage themselves without the need to rely on any one specifc person instructing them on how to conduct themselves. Therefore, the sense of them being a clique is minimal. They have more of a feel of an informational resource. Impartial, and unbiased.

    anonymous said: I can't see where the adversarial attitude comes from.


    Not from me. I simply used information which I was privy to on a group listing as supporting evidence for a theory I had about a small proportion of HEers.
    It would appear that in so doing I have ruffled some feathers. which offers the suggestion that there is some underlying guilt involved with those who felt the need to get offended by what I had done. I have contacted the person who originally made the post I was referencing..and surprisingly, she has not reacted in the same way, in fact she has not reacted negatively at all.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "HE-UK is the only list I have experienced this on."

    Yet you still felt the need to bring discussions from other lists here and discuss them behind people's backs instead of with them. Why?

    "It would appear that in so doing I have ruffled some feathers. which offers the suggestion that there is some underlying guilt involved with those who felt the need to get offended by what I had done."

    That, or they are fed up with people ignoring the rules people agree to abide by when they join a list. But then, that reflects badly on you so I suppose you prefer your own theory.

    ReplyDelete
  12. anonymous said: Yet you still felt the need to bring discussions from other lists here and discuss them behind people's backs instead of with them. Why?


    Already answered above.

    anonymous said: That, or they are fed up with people ignoring the rules people agree to abide by when they join a list. But then, that reflects badly on you so I suppose you prefer your own theory

    Of course I prefer my own theory. Because it holds far mor weight than the one you are proposing, which is that I simply gained some entertainment by not abiding to the rules.
    Do I appear that shallow to you? If so, then I apologise, because in reality I am very definitely not so superficial as to act in ways to only please my rebellious side. I'm sorry that is the way you view me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. In years gone by (when I was a more prolific blogger) I was often inspired to post by something I'd read on another blog or on an email list. But what I tended to do was try to address the subject without referring to specific exchanges or people. It satisfied my urge to vent without leading to the difficulties involved when you start to mention specific people and places.

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for leaving a comment !!! xx