Until now, I have withheld from writing about Education Otherwise and its comments and recommendations to the home education review for a number of reasons.
Firstly, I was unaware of the existence of the 'prospectus' document, or its possible implications. By the time I had chance to read it, other people had done a fine job of critiquing what it contained: Ali, Debs and Gill spring to mind; there are also the comments on the Facebook thread. Today, Carlotta has thoughtfully written about the document here, and Gill has also added further thoughts - she’s preparing to fisk the document this week, which will be illuminating (if anyone else has written about this, please let me know and I will add the links... Jax's post is here).
But most importantly, I suppose, is that Education Otherwise has never really fully appeared on my radar. We had never assumed that we would send the Jenklett (and her brothers and sisters, as they appear) to nursery or school, and then made the big decision not to. Rather, we’ve always thought: unless it’s their decision to go, why would we want to send them? As a family, we live, learn, work, travel and generally enjoy our life with as little state intervention as possible. Why would we change that for something as insignificant and often unappealing as school?
I figured that we would just meet other people we wanted to spend time with along the way – which we have, and continue to do. I also never saw the need for representation; I am quite happy speaking up for myself, if the need arises. Maybe it’s the control freak in me, or maybe it’s that, as with any other family, we don’t fit neatly into the boxes that others are so keen to file us away in.
So whilst I was aware of EO, and I know other home educating families who are members, we never joined. Regardless of its stated aims, the primary purpose of any organisation is to survive, as well as to extend its sphere of influence. This is as true for EO as it is for a private business, and we should never forget it.
And that is why I am pretty unnerved that EO’s engagement with the review could be construed as in any way representative of EO’s 4000 or so members (not to mention its trustees), especially if it is true that they have had little to no influence on the contents of the submission.
But what horrifies me the most is the possibility that EO’s submission can or will be construed as an overview that is somehow representative of me, my beliefs, and my opinions. It is not, and it should hold no more sway than any individual’s side of A4 submitted to Graham Badman for consideration. Not, of course, that any of this is legitimate in any case. This review is an absolute farce: built upon lies and contradiction, it is a globby spit in the face of civil liberties, a kick in the teeth for all parents (not just home educators) who only wish to take full responsibility for their children.
There are only two things that home educating families have in common:
- We do not send (all of) our children to school (all of the time), and
- We are all individual families, and thus unique.
Any organisation that believes it can adequately unite and fully represent the interests of such a diverse community is sorely mistaken.
