The Select Committee day of investigation into the conduct and findings of Graham Badman’s Home Education review is fast approaching. Someone has now found this little gem:
Please see the attached letter from Graham Badman.
Graham would like to make local authorities aware of the forthcoming Select Committee hearing in early October which is likely to examine the evidence from the various sources which led to the 28 recommendations in his Home Education Review.
In the course of the review statistical evidence was collected from a sample of local authorities on vulnerable children who were home educated. This provided persuasive evidence for change.
However, it was a small sample and we would like to supplement this data in order to provide more statistically rigorous information to the Select Committee about safeguarding and educational issues that affect home educated children.
So there is a nod to the fact that the information used in the review and on the basis of which legislation is being prepared is not statistically rigorous enough to satisfy a select committee – methinks then that it shouldn’t be enough to satisfy a government to consider legislation.
And why does Graham Badman get to call for more evidence at this point? Surely if the review was well enough put together he should be able to go before the select committee and say that, there should be no need to scrabble around for further details to support it?
Someone is running scared.
Time to redouble our efforts methinks. Is your local group involved in putting together a submission to the select committee? If not, go on, you know you want to. You’d better get your skates on though, as unlike Graham Badman, home educators only have until 22 September to get their submissions in. Why does he get until 1st October? And why does he get to call for evidence through official channels, surely he had access to those while doing the review – we don’t get these shortcuts. Sigh.
ETA further blogposts on the same issue:
Dare to know: Graham Badman now requesting further evidence
Corvidae corner: a small announcement and a rant
Wondering if i have the wherewithall to do one.
This is a bloody joke.
We have until noon on the 22nd, would hate anyone to miss the deadline for not knowing that. 100% behind you on this as always.
.-= Maire´s last blog ..Graham Badman admits evidence behind the Review of Elective Home Education is NOT ‘Statistically Rigorous’! =-.
Was the data collected only about *vulnerable* children? Hardly right to make a judgement about HE as a whole, if so.
Saying he needs “more statistically rigorous” evidence is de facto saying that his review was based on evidence which was NOT statistically rigorous. I hope the Select Committee sees this as the admission of incompetence that we do. Perhaps he has been tipped off that the Committee is taking the deconstruction by actual statisticians seriously. I hope so.
What we need now is headlines saying “Badman admits Review based on insufficient evidence.”
We also need enough LAs to realise that the recommendations will be bad for them, and that they have the power to stop them if they just will refuse to play along with him.
Copied this link to my blog.
.-= Elizabeth´s last blog ..Protest away my children! =-.
‘… information collected from a sample of local authorities …’! Anyone reading this would think that they threw a quadrant square or summat. It should read ‘self-selecting sample’ just like the new lot of responses will be.
i’m in the weird position of thinking everything I say will be duplicated by the submissions from most others since we’ve been working as a community. Otherwise I could submit something personal but I didn’t think they were looking for personal.
I don’t have a local group who have even read the review and rely upon me to keep them up to date with what is happening! I could only really write as an individual.
Do you think it is useful to submit the same evidence as others? I thought it would dilute out the time the committee spend discussing, and I KNOW it will be a duplication.
Not apathy, just indecision.
x
I may just attempt to direct them to the interview with Alan Thomas and attempt to express what’s to lose. Not sure that is ‘evidence’ but it certainly is a most important consideration.
We’re preparing for a probably pointless meeting with our MP who just spouts the party line like an automaton and only agreed to a meeting when we called the ‘professor’ card! With a rebellion rate of 0.08% and some of the highest MPs expenses nationally …. what hope?
@ Sally
We had a really pointless (but very funny) meeting with our local MP. He defended the review by saying “school pupils are protected because they are seen by teachers every day, but WHO sees YOUR children?”
He said this to approx 30 HE parents, and some were there with these “hidden” children.
This whole thing is driving me insane. I shall start swearing soon.
.-= kellyi´s last blog ..for the love of a ninja =-.