Ofsted climbs down

Just read in the Guardian that Ofsted has decided to amend its advice on identifying children at risk of radicalisation so that it no longer suggests that special interests make autistic children (and by extension the rest of us) are particularly at risk of being drawn into extremism. Thanks to all who campaigned for this change (including NAS and Chris Packham). 

Parents
  • I saw that too and I'm glad, what on earth made them take this stance in the first place? It seems a classic kneejerk reaction to one autistic person doing something abhorent that in no way reflects the rest of us. What about NT children who become radicalised, don't they count?

    Thank you to all organisations and people who campaigned for this change

  • I can see reasons why someone might be more vulnerable to radicalisation, but also reasons why they might not.

    I suppose this means they cancel out and on balance they are no more prone.

    Literal interpretation, black and white thinking, moral absolutism, lack of nuance, vulnerability to misunderstanding and manipulation, etc. are on the negative side.

    On the positive side, focus on detail, wanting to dive deep into information and obsessive research might provide some immunity.

    But emotional processing differences might cut either way. Particularly since lots of manipulative stuff these days plays to emotions, not facts. If you are prone or overly empathetic it sucks you in, if you are cold or can switch it off, you may be too hard.

    Note that tendencies to fixed ideological end goals can apply to any area, human rights, climate change, politics, religion, where the greyness and compromises of the real world can become lost.

    Ultimate though, everyone is an individual and should be treated as one, rather than lumped together as a class or group. Although, people are happy to be lumped into a group when it is advantageous.

Reply
  • I can see reasons why someone might be more vulnerable to radicalisation, but also reasons why they might not.

    I suppose this means they cancel out and on balance they are no more prone.

    Literal interpretation, black and white thinking, moral absolutism, lack of nuance, vulnerability to misunderstanding and manipulation, etc. are on the negative side.

    On the positive side, focus on detail, wanting to dive deep into information and obsessive research might provide some immunity.

    But emotional processing differences might cut either way. Particularly since lots of manipulative stuff these days plays to emotions, not facts. If you are prone or overly empathetic it sucks you in, if you are cold or can switch it off, you may be too hard.

    Note that tendencies to fixed ideological end goals can apply to any area, human rights, climate change, politics, religion, where the greyness and compromises of the real world can become lost.

    Ultimate though, everyone is an individual and should be treated as one, rather than lumped together as a class or group. Although, people are happy to be lumped into a group when it is advantageous.

Children
No Data