Teachers' Visual Guide to Twitter Chats

June 25, 2014
In an earlier post here in Educational Technology and Mobile Learning I talked about some of the ways teachers can leverage the power of Twitter for their professional development. One of the things I mentioned is the use of Twitter chats. I am a big fan of these chats and though I don't  attend them regularly but I always check the archive to catch up with what teachers discuss and share on them. In fact several of the ideas and tools I share with you here  come from those chats.

Today when I  came across this infographic on Twitter chats I thought it would make  a great follow-up post for my previous article. In this visual, Teamtait ( author of Edutait) provides some practical ideas to help teachers make the most out of Twitter chats. He starts with outlining some of the reasons why teachers should consider taking part in these chats, then moved to the ways to follow a Twitter chat. Next, he features the popular education chats on Twitter together with the time they take place and he concluded with useful tips to effectively use Twitter chats for professional development purposes.



 Follow us on : Twitter, Facebook , Google plus, Pinterest .

Learning the old fashioned way; autonomous education, the oldest method in the world

One of the most endearing features of autonomous home educators in both this country and the USA is the way that many of them seem to be convinced that they are doing something daring and revolutionary by leaving their kids to learn what they wish. They apparently believe that this is a radical idea; that they are on the cutting edge of educational theory! Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact there is something rather quaint about those who choose to adopt this antiquated method of educating their children.

Modern humans have been around for at least 10,000 years. Until perhaps 3000 years ago, there was nothing at all like a modern school. For the first 97% of humanity’s existence, home education was the only game in town. Gradually, the idea of sending children to be educated by strangers became popular. It was a slow process. In Elizabethan England, only about one child in eight attended school; all of them boys. In other words, as recently as the 16th century, only one child in sixteen in this country went to school. Things continued in this way for another three hundred years or so. Most children were educated at home. One of the commonest ways of undertaking this was to let the children themselves choose what to learn; or indeed whether they wished to learn anything at all. The best way to see how this worked is to look at a fictionalised account of home education in the early part of the 19th century. Pride and Prejudice is generally reckoned to give a good picture of life among the upper classes at that time. Here is Elizabeth Bennet describing the education which she and her four sisters received;

Such of us as wished to learn, never wanted the means. We were always
Encouraged to read…those who chose to be idle, certainly might.

There is plenty of evidence to suggest that this sort of education, especially for girls, was very common at that time. As for the ordinary working class child; home education was almost universal.

As a matter of fact, it is universal, compulsory schooling which is the radical alternative in education; not home education, which has been around for at least a hundred thousand years. Those who choose this path are not blazing some new trail, but turning backwards to an older way of life. They put one in mind of the American Amish, who prefer to follow a deliberately archaic way of life. The one thing that radical unschoolers and autonomous educators are not is revolutionary.

Home educators in a panic...again

I sometimes despair of the home education scene in this country. Many parents, particularly those who belong to internet lists and forums seem to be prone to running round like headless chickens at any available opportunity. Once again, my unwelcome views on the latest of these flaps are being censored on the EO support list and so I thought that I ought to reassure those who are genuinely worried and want the facts.

The latest fear centres around a consultation on what the government call raising the participation age and the rest of us think of as raising the school leaving age. As part of this, there is an intention to define just how many hours constitute a full time education. This has nothing to do with home education, but is to prevent unscrupulous employers from pretending to run apprenticeships and just getting teenagers to work full time.

How does this affect home educators? Well, it doesn't; not in the least. The consultation document makes this perfectly clear, when it says:


'it is at the discretion of the home educator as to what form that education takes'

and

We do not want to set regulations for home education that do not exist pre-16'

In other words, the situation for home educated seventeen and eighteen year olds will not change. Still, what about the whole business of defining full time education? Could that affect home educating parents? Hardly. The favoured figure for the minimum number of hours of education spread over the whole year is five hundred and thirty four hours. Since home education takes place every day, this would mean less than an hour and a half a day!

In spite of the fact that there is nothing to worry about, threads are appearing on various lists marked 'urgent'. Why do people do this? I very pleasantly drew attention to what is actually said in the RPA consulation and my message was not posted, on the grounds that this is 'meta' discussion. This is absurd. Those wishing to spread panic and alarm are allowed to voice their views; it is only when I quoted from the actual document that the discussion apparently became 'meta'. In other words and as usual, facts are not welcome in the debate!

I have remarked before that there seems to be something of a cottage industry in raising fears of this sort and pretending to be working to protect home educating parents from supposed new threats. When I have the time, I shall post more about this.

Exploding a myth


It will perhaps surprise nobody to hear that I have once again managed to piss people off on a home education forum. I have to say that on this occasion, I was genuinely trying to help vulnerable parents and reassure them that they should stop worrying. This came about because the thesis was advanced that some local authorities in England and Wales bully and badger home educating parents into either abandoning home education or altering the form or content of it so that it more closely resembles a school type model. One person referred to parents being made ’to jump through hoops’ and forced to teach reading in a structured way. This sort of thing is usually done under the threat that a School Attendance Order will be issued, the parent prosecuted and the child returned to school if the parent does not do as the local authority officer requires. So far, so good; I don’t think that anybody here could disagree that this sort of thing happens. I then went on to suggest that it was astronomically rare for home educating parents to be issued with SAOs and then prosecuted for not obeying them, convicted in court and forced to send their children to school. Indeed, I expressed doubts as to this ever happening at all; upon which, a number of people became very angry.

The best way of seeing just how rare this process is, is to look at the figures. Let us begin with two local authorities who are famous for taking what some describe as ’ultra vires’ actions; Staffordshire and Birmingham, for instance.
Here is a Freedom of Information request made to Birmingham about the number of SAOs that they issued in one particular year;

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ehe_department_suitable_educatio_4
 
It will be observed that no SAOs at all were issued. Freedom of Information requests on this subject have been made to every local authority in England and Wales and the picture is same across the entire country; most never issue SAOs. Some issued one or two, but these were hardly ever to home educators. Staffordshire, for example has issued one School Attendance Order in the last five years, although not to a home educating family. See here:
 
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ehe_related_statutory_attendance
 
Most of the tiny number of SAOs which have been issued over the last few years have not been to home educators. Of those which were, only a few reached the stage of prosecution. I can find not a single case where a local authority has issued a School Attendance Order to a home educating family, prosecuted them in court and then managed to secure a conviction and force them as a result to return their child to school.

I found this to be very reassuring for home educating parents. Knowing that this favourite threat of local authorities is an empty one which can generally be disregarded should allow home educating parents to form a more equal partnership with local authorities; one which is not founded upon fear and threats. Of course, not everybody seeks such a healthy relationship with their LA and some parents might be happy to be bossed about by petty bureaucrats. This is fine; I was not trying to bully anybody into changing how they deal with local authorities; merely pointing out that there is more than one way.

Actually, I thought that digging around might perhaps uncover one or two cases of home educating children forced back into school by their parents having been prosecuted for disobeying a School Attendance Order. In fact, I have not been able to come up with one case of this happening. May I ask, does anybody know of a case where a home educating parent has been served with a School Attendance Order, prosecuted for breaching it and as a result been convicted in court and forced to return their child to school? If so, could we just be told the name of the local authority? Since this is the only way that a home educating child can really be forced back to school by a local authority, it would be interesting to know if it ever happens. Is this some sort of urban myth? Can anybody give a real example?

There is one final point. One can readily see why local authority officers would maintain the fiction that they might issue an SAO to home educating parents, take them to court and force them to return their children to school. This suggestion would be very distressing to many parents and they might well back down under the very threat and do as they are told in order to avoid it. What puzzles me is why some home educating parents themselves seem so keen to buy into this myth and help local authorities to keep the pretence going. This seems to me to be a psychological question, rather than a legal one!

Warning! This post contains emails which according to EO will harm home educators..

Like an alcoholic who is able either to abstain completely or when once he touches a drop goes on a mad bender; I seem to be posting here once again. This must stop! One would think that I would by now realise that it is impossible to debate anything in a rational way with some of those on the main home education lists and I am slightly irritated with myself that I have even been trying.



Just to remind readers, my trouble on the EO list began when somebody posted a message complaining about attempts by local authorities to suppress debate of home education. She went on to say that censorship should be challenged in any form; a sentiment I agree with wholeheartedly. My response to this was a brief message which I shall share with you all in a minute. Before that, I must say that I am relieved that EO admit now that they have actually been blocking my messages. Some people were talking slyly of conspiracy theories, as though the whole business was my being paranoid! Why have my messages been moderated or censored? One of the moderators explains that it was because,



’ I am not, however, personally happy to allow goading, rudeness or debate which would appear to be designed to harm home educators.’



Rudeness! Harming other home educators! Well of course, this is fair enough. If I have been rude or harming other parents, of course I should be prevented. (I am tempted to ask how I am harming them? By exposing them to opinions which differ slightly from their own? Yes, I suppose that could be pretty harmful, but only if one were a sheep or bigot!) Anyway, here is the message which I sent. Readers may judge for themselves just how rude or harmful it was. It begins with a quotation from the post to which I was replying:

 

'Censorship can come in many forms but it is usually recognisable for what it is and should be challenged accordingly.'



Fascinating idea, as though local authorities and newspapers somehow have a monopoly on this unsavoury practice! Many forums and lists for home educators operate censorship quite shamelessly, blocking posts which do not agree with the views of the moderators. Others simply chuck off those who are too vociferous in what the list owners feel to be the wrong cause. Witness how Tania Berlow was banned from HE Forums last year.



I am opposed to censorship, but let us admit that it takes place among home educators as much as it does anywhere else.



Simon.’



Just how harmful could this have been to other home educators? I emailed the moderators when I was told that this had been blocked. Perhaps this was when I began to be rude. Here is what I said:



‘Dear Shoshanna,

I cannot help making one or two points in response to your email. You say, ‘My personal feeling is that the EO group is the wrong place to have this debate’. I find this curious. Yesterday a message was posted complaining about censorship and the stifling of open debate on the subject of home education. Among other things the poster talked of, ’ the reluctance by many LA's keep an open debate’ and also said, ’ Censorship can come in many forms but it is usually recognisable for what it is and should be challenged accordingly’




Here is somebody who evidently wishes to start a debate about censorship relating to home education. You did not block or remove this message and so I must assume that you feel that this EO group is actually the right place for such a debate. When I point out that censorship around home education does not only happen in local authorities and newspapers, but is also undertaken by some home educators’ groups themselves, you apparently decide that this is no longer a topic which should be discussed on the list.



The result of this is, as I have said, to slant debates and give a false impression. The people coming on here seeking support and advice will be allowed to read that local authorities operate censorship and that is a bad thing, but will not be allowed to learn that home education groups do precisely the same thing. Do you really find nothing bizarre about somebody starting a debate on the EO list about censorship and the first person to respond to this being censored himself? I am sure that if you have any sense of the ridiculous, you will grasp this point!



Simon.’



Nothing rude or harmful here either! That this is actually censorship is clear from the way that while not being allowed to read my actual messages, those on the EO list are being told that they are rude and harmful. This is untrue and suggests strongly that those saying such things are not acting in good faith. Believe me, this is not moderation at all but censorship. Refusing to let others read something and then telling them that this is because it would harm them to do so is one of the oldest justifications for censorship. It has never cut any ice with me.



I have also, by the way, recieved an email headed:



 Message not approved: Moderating question

From: catalonia13 Add to Contacts

To: simon



From this, I take it that the posts which I sent to BRAG containing statistics have actually been rejected, rather than just falling victim to a technical glitch.





Censorship in the world of British home education

There are probably those who will be horrified to see that I am posting here again. ‘Oh no’ they cry in dismay, ‘We thought we’d seen the back of that idiot!’ Well, not quite. I stopped blogging here regularly because I had too much going on in my life to be able to keep this blog. I hoped instead to keep in touch on various home education lists and forums; posting from time to time there as some subject cropped up which interested me. This is no longer possible.

Let us start on the Badman Review Action Group list, where a lively debate has been taking place about the merits or otherwise of GCSEs for home educated children. This is a hot topic, because some parents want state funding for these examinations for their children who are not at school. Others think that this would be inviting official interference in home educating. The opinion was expressed there that employers no longer value these qualifications and I responded by posting some statistics about how employers actually viewed GCSEs. As a result, I was described as a ‘pillock’ and ‘pathetic troll’, to say nothing of being told that I was ‘spewing nonsense’. Presumably the moderators were having a doze! They soon woke up on the evening of November 6th when I posted some more figures. This post vanished without a trace. Another was delayed for five hours. The next morning, people were enquiring as to the source of the statistics which I had posted, as well as asking a few other questions. I sent five messages, each going courteously through all the points which had been raised. Four of these vanished; one was posted eleven hours later. It was plain that I was being prevented from introducing facts and figures into the debate.

I drew attention to this on the EO list to which I belong. This provoked a response from one of the moderators on BRAG who put a message up on the EO list. I replied on the list on the morning of the November 12th. My reply has apparently fallen into the same black hole as my messages on BRAG! That this was not a technical glitch was confirmed when I posted a reply to the concerns raised by somebody else on the EO list. This person was worried about the stifling of debate and called for us all to challenge censorship around home education. True, her concerns were that this was happening with local authorities and newspapers, which is quite true, but I thought that I would point out that it also happens with home education groups. I as sent a message saying that the EO moderators had rejected my message because they did not think that the EO list was the right place for such a debate.

There is something deliciously ironic about somebody quite properly raising concerns about censorship, as was done by the poster on November 11th and that the first person to respond to this message is himself censored. If this sort of thing were limited only to the EO list and BRAG or if I were the only person affected, perhaps this would not be so important. These games are going on all over the home education Internet scene in this country though, especially on the larger forums and lists. The HE-UK list if famous for chucking people off who irritate the owner by their heterodox views and Tania Berlow was thrown off the Home Education Forums site for saying the wrong things. This was particularly unfortunate. I don’t agree with Tania about much, but she did a lot of work during the Badman Review, gathering statistics and so on.

There is something a little bizarre about the sight of people who are very keen on proclaiming the rights of the individual and then engaging in censorship.

Hallo

hallo