Socpie Citings Response

We all accept products in good faith because we do not have the expertise to evaluate them. If leaners are given ‘reckless' learning advice, it can have a similar impact upon learners as medical negligence. 

Socpie is dedicated to challenging those, who misinform children and their parents about educational issues, especially quoting ‘fake' news.

Most challenges are never referred to on the socpie website. O
nly those who ignore challenges are cited on the website.

These are normally those playing being teachers or researchers, who know they cannot defend the criticisms.

Professional advice has been furnished to the authorities on pedagogic issues by socpie also.

Readers are reminded that education is a language. The problem that exists in society is lay people and the media often do not understand educational principle and law. The word teaching, for instance, has a professional meaning.

Anyone who wishes to sue socpie for deformation of character must employ the services of an educational solicitor and produce legal evidence to support the claim, but they will only refer to qualified teachers.

  Anyone wishing to report socpie to the police for harassment for any criticism of their practice or any website presentation on socpie must inform the police officers that they have no legal teaching qualifications and they must obtain qualified educational opinions to support their opinions. If not counter-charges may be made by made by for wasting police time. This also applies dishonest harassment claims

Whilst this website is independent, Howard remains a member of the Nas, Uwt. Whilst there may be differences of professional opinion, Howard does not make allegations on websites he cannot substantiate.

Sadly it is necessary to say this because of the conduct of an individual. Legal action will be taken if necessary. 

Acceptance of a Challenge

    Socpie is a professional website and only professional responses will be furnished for publication on this website. Professional teaching is fostered on proved methods. Those without legal Q.T.S. Teaching qualifications, are not teachers whatever they claim and they will only be expressing their personal opinions and prejudices.


1. The response must polite and courteous, the responder agrees not engage in any multi-media criticism pertaining to the challenge.

2. There are no legal threats or demands to remove challenges.

3. The challenger must provide a full rationale with supporting evidence.

4. The evidence must be proven and must come from reliable sources.

5. A contact telephone number must be provided.

Arbitration can be arranged, but if those challenged can prove their case then this will rarely be needed. All professional educationists change their opinions over time.

Anyone who does not defend a criticism accepts it. If those who are cited play at being teachers, researchers or educational, then that is their problem. Those who are cited offering fraudulent services, then they can use the legal evidence on this website to ask for their money back and to sue the person cited. It is an offence to make claims that cannot delivered.

They can contact use Howard on this email to to answer the challenge and research to support it. There a bibliography of references on this website and researched papers.

Mr Aran Jones is invited to answer concerns through this email address.


Howard does not make citings he cannot substantive.