There Is Little Evidence Disproportionately Associating Home Schoolers with Child Abuse: A Rejoinder to Stewart and McCracken

Q2 Social Sciences
M. Shakeel, B. Ray
{"title":"There Is Little Evidence Disproportionately Associating Home Schoolers with Child Abuse: A Rejoinder to Stewart and McCracken","authors":"M. Shakeel, B. Ray","doi":"10.1080/15582159.2022.2163968","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Stewart and McCracken at the Coalition for Responsible Home Education (CRHE) present a rebuttal to our article where their main critique is regarding our study’s ideological roots. In this rejoinder to Stewart and McCracken, we highlight three things: a) the takeaways from our study are robust to the criticism of CRHE, b) our survey instrument and conclusions are well aligned with the existing surveys and findings on child abuse, and c) CRHE itself admits that their mission is not based on using empirical evidence for cross-sector child abuse comparison. They say, “they are not particularly interested in contesting our empirical findings.” While Stewart and McCracken claim that lax homeschooling laws enable or cause abuse, they provide no empirical evidence to support this claim. We argue that CRHE insists on pursuing goals based on their ideology, hence they miss the mark regarding the purpose of our empirical study and critiquing it. Our study is the first of its kind to use a valid and reliable instrument with a representative sample and we encourage others to further this line of empirical work. We caution policymakers to use representative evidence in framing child protection laws after accounting for the role played by demographics and not just school sector.","PeriodicalId":34913,"journal":{"name":"Journal of School Choice","volume":"17 1","pages":"218 - 222"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of School Choice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15582159.2022.2163968","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT Stewart and McCracken at the Coalition for Responsible Home Education (CRHE) present a rebuttal to our article where their main critique is regarding our study’s ideological roots. In this rejoinder to Stewart and McCracken, we highlight three things: a) the takeaways from our study are robust to the criticism of CRHE, b) our survey instrument and conclusions are well aligned with the existing surveys and findings on child abuse, and c) CRHE itself admits that their mission is not based on using empirical evidence for cross-sector child abuse comparison. They say, “they are not particularly interested in contesting our empirical findings.” While Stewart and McCracken claim that lax homeschooling laws enable or cause abuse, they provide no empirical evidence to support this claim. We argue that CRHE insists on pursuing goals based on their ideology, hence they miss the mark regarding the purpose of our empirical study and critiquing it. Our study is the first of its kind to use a valid and reliable instrument with a representative sample and we encourage others to further this line of empirical work. We caution policymakers to use representative evidence in framing child protection laws after accounting for the role played by demographics and not just school sector.
几乎没有证据表明家庭教育者与虐待儿童有不成比例的联系:Stewart和McCracken的反驳
负责任家庭教育联盟(CRHE)的斯图尔特和麦克拉肯对我们的文章提出了反驳,他们的主要批评是关于我们研究的意识形态根源。在对Stewart和McCracken的回复中,我们强调了三件事:a)我们的研究结论对CRHE的批评是强有力的,b)我们的调查工具和结论与现有的关于儿童虐待的调查和发现很好地一致,c) CRHE本身承认他们的任务不是基于使用跨部门儿童虐待比较的经验证据。他们说,“他们对反驳我们的实证研究结果并不是特别感兴趣。”虽然斯图尔特和麦克拉肯声称,宽松的在家教育法律使虐待成为可能或导致虐待,但他们没有提供任何经验证据来支持这一说法。我们认为,CRHE坚持以其意识形态为基础追求目标,因此他们没有抓住我们实证研究的目的并对其进行批评。我们的研究是第一次使用有效可靠的工具和代表性样本,我们鼓励其他人进一步开展这方面的实证工作。我们提醒政策制定者在考虑人口因素而不仅仅是学校部门的作用后,在制定儿童保护法时使用具有代表性的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of School Choice
Journal of School Choice Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信