Last weekend threw up an interesting contrast. On Radio Three’s Private Passions available on iPlayer (until 6th December) Bill Bailey described his schooling (the independent King Edward’s School, Bath) where his talents were recognised and encouraged. On the other hand since her first audition for the X Factor:
one felt that Stacey Solomon had somewhere along the line been failed by the school system. Is the King Solomon High School (motto: “If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, who am I? If not now, when?” Ethics of the Fathers, 1:14) really meeting the requirements of Section 7 of the Education Act 1996? If you delegate the education of a child to the mass schooling system do you have any redress when that system fails the child. As Ms Solomon enters the X Factor semi-finals (and, one hopes, ultimate victory) one can only wonder at the countless other children who have been failed by such a piss poor system. If only there were some form of education otherwise than by schooling….
Himself
We are here
The All-Sky Milky Way Panorama is an impressive bit of stitching.
Ye olde CDs?
A pertinent piece by John Hill on The golden age of infinite music made me smile having been irritated by some intrusive advertising on Spotify the other day and then realising my copy of the CD containing the music was just a couple of steps away. I did not bother getting up and retrieving the CD; I stuck with Spotify.
Select a quote, win friends, influence people
The Freedom In Education Under Threat blog is one of the reality distorting points of view that seem to predominate the home education blogging world. The Home Education and Religion post is a typical non-story that is inflated to bizarre proportions.
Selectively quoting is a dangerous game. Peter Traves was responding to a comment about failing schools. The full quote is:
May I respond to that? I don’t see how the issue of failing schools negates the issue about our responsibility to children who are not educated in schools. We have a responsibility to improve all schools, and that is absolutely right and proper. On the issue of withdrawal, parents withdraw their children from school for a whole range of reasons. I did six years of home visits, and there were parents who withdrew their children because we had failed them-that is absolutely true. There were parents who had withdrawn their children for ideological reasons because they had a profound belief in a different form of education, which I respected. There were also parents who withdrew their children for particular religious views because they wanted those views inculcated in that child. It is not just about the rights of parents, but about the rights of children. It is not necessarily about the state’s responsibility to children, but about the community’s responsibility to them.
So what is the complaint? Are we being asked to support the Indoctrination of children? Who knows? The original complaint is conflated with some perceived descent into a fascist state.
Really? The evidence seems to be a little slim.
Shall we just ignore “The council said the children would not have been moved solely on the basis of weight.” Perhaps they were the only fat family in town and so singled out. Perhaps not.
Nowhere in the linked article or in the report is there mention of “Your 5 year old being taught how to masturbate”
But why let mere facts get in the way of good rant story.