| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

View
 

valentine

Page history last edited by Tech 12 years, 10 months ago

--- In ahedmembers@yahoogroups.com, "woodwench1" wrote:

>

> This is going to have a pretty quick turn around if we're going to do

> it, so could really do with almost immediate input if possible!

 

Hi Tech

 

I’ve just looked at the postcard in question and feel that unless your child truly understands what it says then they should not send it. It may be better sent from HE parents?

 

Well yes that is something I was pondering earlier actually; wondering if it was ethical to get a child to sign it. Originally I thought that it could just go as it was without any signatories, but then I got a bit concerned incase we could be acused of harrassment - I have an animal rights case stuck in my head where a woman sent 2 protest emails and ended up with ISTR a prison sentance for her trouble. SO to avoid that possibility it seemed like a good idea to have the children sign them. Easier enough to alter though. I guess people could make that judgement themselves if I put up 2 versions. Just to make that clearer - I don't mean use our children so we don't go to prison! Rather so that it is clear they come from many different people, rather than being a mass mail bombing by ahed!

 

 

I am surprised that it is “treasury” stats that reveal bla bla .. can u send me the quote?

 

 

I hope you're not suggesting I made it up ;-) The quote is David Cameron's and can be found on the BBC here http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6214428.stm

 

 

I would not supply my child’s age – what purpose does it serve?

 

None I guess, maybe I was meant to be a blue peter presenter instead of a home ed activist (send postcards with your name and age on the back).

 

 

> Overall idea:

>

> Print off postcards and get our children to sign their first name and

> age, then send them off to Jim Knight in time for Valentine's day - we

> home educate out of love for our children, hence Valentine's as day of

> action.

 

Will he get the relevance of valentine’s day unless it is writ large on the pc somewhere? I doubt it.

 

Probably not, I saw it more as a date for us to commit to taking action by, as well as giving me a little chuckle to think of JK thinking he'd got a sack full of valentines from his admiring hoards, and then finding out it was those irksome home educators.

 

 

And you are saying we/adults do this –ie he for the love of a child (child is sending card)

 

Bla bla - being pedantic – thinking aloud - tired

 

I don't know. I've been up since 4am tossing it all around, and have spent the rest of the day trying to find useful quotes and articles to use to help. Not sure my children will see me having used up my entire day working on the computer as a sign of love.

 

 

>

> Send them to anyone else you think might be relevant too obviously.

>

> I've thrown together a letter to MPs that you may or may not like to

> send at the same time or the following day.

 

I am getting selective about what I can send to my MP cos he’sstarting to think I’m a nutter -can’t imagine why 

 

Snap ;-)

 

But I am sure I can find someone deserving of my valentine msg

 

Edit ed section follows

>

> >>Dear .......

>

> I am writing to you in support of the "I'm an Anomaly” campaign by

> Action for Home Education (AHEd.org.uk) which aims to prevent the DfES introducing legislation that would damage us/my children/my education (not hit on best words here yet) children. I enclose a copy of the postcard that home

> educating families have sent to Mr Jim Knight for Valentine's Day.

 

(I have a wriggle of discomfort when people “use” children to boost their argument)

 

I do to, but frankly I'm not sure I care anymore. I'm sick to death of *them* using our children for their own evil gains, so I think I've now reached a point whereby ethics I once held have desserted me when dealing with this bunch of lowlives.

 

>

> DfES continues to respond to serious questions about the validity of

> the proposed consultation on the statutory framework regarding home education with a stock reply in which we are told we are an “anomaly” “at odds with

> the Every Child Matters agenda”. We do not find this acceptable, and

> would very much appreciate your help in challenging DfES about their

> woeful treatment of our minority group.

>

> Home Educators are fed up with being patronised when we ask serious

> questions, we sick up of being told we are not stakeholders in

> those consultations which could impact heavily upon us and

> potentially damage our children, and furthermore we are outraged by the DfES using the

> Every Child Matters agenda to try to turn Home Education into another

> version of the spectacularly failing, one size fits all system that is state

> controlled education.

 

Not at all keen on the following section – it is weak prose IMO

 

Do you mean the quote or the ramble I went into? If the quote then I thought it gave a good, gentle overview of where I feel this country is heading, without being too conspiracy theorist or orwellian. I've been trying to wrack my brain all afternoon to think where I recognise the name from, and have a sneaking suspicion that the guy may actually be a HEing journo - will have to go google now. If my ramble, you're more than likely right, I'm not very good at writing these things, which is why I don't normally bother.

 

“> As James Bartholomew writes in "The Welfare State We're In"

>

> "The troubles that arise when the government decides what should be

> taught (and how) keep on mounting up. The government makes mistakes.

> There is a kind of totalitarianism about it which is repellent in

> itself. Education and intellectual activity should be open and involve

> debate and different ideas. Let a thousand flowers bloom. Don't let us

> have a government deciding what is good education and what is bad."

 

 

 

> Home Education maybe an “anomaly” in the eyes of the DfES, and indeed we agree it is incongruent but it would be a very shortsighted government indeed that chose to bring it “into line” with state and independent schools and we will vehemently resist any such action.

 

Besides being a perfectly suitable education choice, proven to be efficacious on many levels, sometimes Home Education is the only safety valve families have available to them when school harms or fails their children.

 

I like your changes. Much better :-)

 

There are already perfectly adequate

> laws in place which can be used if it appears that a child is not

> being educated according to their age, ability aptitude and special needs, and the

> government should be spending their time ensuring that LAs act within

> these laws, instead of attempting to change those laws to accommodate ultra vires practice and prejudiced ambitions.

 

 

> Yours<<

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.