Home Schoolers??

[succeed]

...her very middle class parents pulled her out to educate her at home due to 'bullying'. When probed, the girl had become upset because a boy in her class threw a rubber at her (admittedly more than once).

Are you sure you know the whole story? Taking on the responsibilities and costs of home ed is not something parents do lightly. Especially when the National Baby Sitting Service is free.

Schools don't teach social skills (the public seem to assume that children somehow magically develop empathy, conflict resolution skills etc., simply by being with 29 other kids the same age. They don't.) Children don't automatically acquire an ability to deal with bullies either, they learn instead how to become good and compliant victims and they take that "skill" to adulthood. Over a third of children in our area deregistering from school are doing so because of bullying. It seems to be a major and nationwide problem.

...could potentially lock a section of society away in ivory towers

I love this old chestnut particularly because of the irony re. locking children up and forcing them to study. But, on a more serious note, our responsibilities as parents aren't to ensure schools are "representative of the community"; it's to give our children the best that we can. HE is increasing by about 10% a year and it's the sorry state of our schools that's to blame.

Sorry, but I disagree. I know we all love our own children dearly, but too many parents, including the parents of the child I describe above, are a little too 'precious' about their children and seem to delude themselves into thinking they are not part of the chattering classes, as they elegantly switch on the TV and plonk the child in front of it as part of their unique learning experience. For some of these parents, no school would ever be good enough for their child, hence the parent earlier voicing their concerns about whether their child may somehow become infected with the 'mentality' of the brain washed masses in the local grammar school .
I also think HE is increasing popular not because of any decline in standards or the 'sorry state of our schools' but simply because there is technology available now to make it possible - e.g internet, more opportunities for people to work from home etc. I'm not convinced it's the way forward, though I accept it's the best option for a minority of students.
And whilst we have all generally been painting a rather rosy picture of HE as executed by the motivated 'mums army', let's not forget or deny there will be as many HE kids that do live an isolated and unchallenging life, with little interaction with others beyond their own immediate circle.

Furthermore, schools DO teach social skills through assembles, form times PSHE days. It simply not as easy to assess the impact of this as you cannot measure what goes into the child's head or be there to witness all the situations where the child may use them.

[meerme]

(plonked in front of the TV)... many HE kids that do live an isolated and unchallenging life, with little interaction with others beyond their own immediate circle.

That doesn't describe any of the numerous HE children I know (and as someone who regularly meets with the HE staff at the LA and works with several HE groups ...I do know a fair few).

Do you have any stats, or is that a guess?

[southbucks3]

...her very middle class parents pulled her out to educate her at home due to 'bullying'. When probed, the girl had become upset because a boy in her class threw a rubber at her (admittedly more than once).

Are you sure you know the whole story? Taking on the responsibilities and costs of home ed is not something parents do lightly. Especially when the National Baby Sitting Service is free.

Schools don't teach social skills (the public seem to assume that children somehow magically develop empathy, conflict resolution skills etc., simply by being with 29 other kids the same age. They don't.) Children don't automatically acquire an ability to deal with bullies either, they learn instead how to become good and compliant victims and they take that "skill" to adulthood. Over a third of children in our area deregistering from school are doing so because of bullying. It seems to be a major and nationwide problem.

...could potentially lock a section of society away in ivory towers

I love this old chestnut particularly because of the irony re. locking children up and forcing them to study. But, on a more serious note, our responsibilities as parents aren't to ensure schools are "representative of the community"; it's to give our children the best that we can. HE is increasing by about 10% a year and it's the sorry state of our schools that's to blame.

I can see there are certainly some strong arguments for HE where the child really doesn't fit into the school model or would excel much better at home

HE isn't a fallback for oddballs and misfits. There are strong arguments for HE for every child. My children were perfectly happy and "thriving" in school. I took them out because I wanted them to have a proper, rounded education instead of the mush they're fed in the GCSE factories.

Why is it acceptable to insult the work done by education specialists, teachers and schools that the vast majority are more than happy with?
Why is it acceptable to imply parents use school as a free national baby sitting service?
Schools do of course contribute hugely towards a child's social ability and provide a large network of life long friends. I am sure home schoolers and home educators and unschoolers, or any of the titles given to people who have withdrawn their children from formal school education, purposely ensure their children have very active social lives and learn how to deal effectively with most social circumstances, but to deny that schools also help considerably with socialising is simply not on, or fair on the teachers, assistants, senco, administrators, heads and governors who work hard to make sure the children form great social skills.

Parents of schooled children do not simply pick their dc up at 3.15pm and put them in a box, bringing them out to play at school again at 9am. The hone education process for most school educated children wraps around school hours, harmonises with school and complements the structured day. We have chosen that format, some of us have considered hone education for various reasons, but stuck with school, not out of laziness, not because we have been brainwashed, or are too ignorant of our options, but because we decided school offered the best all round education for our children.
Every one has a choice how they bring their children up in the UK, we are a wonderful free country. Obviously other countries have made home education illegal, are in the process of doing so, or make it nigh on impossible, other countries insist the parents who hone ed follow national curriculums. I will be honest, I kind of see those countries government's side of the argument too, particularly when I read the reasoning behind the legislation. In comparison I cannot understand why anyone would get so upset with their UK LEA offering optional guidance to home educators, that some parents admit they gratefully receive, it would seem we have a very reasonable balance.

Btw:
Why do so many home educated children start secondary school, but only grammar, rarely comprehensive or upper if that is all that is on offer, particularly round here in Bucks. My friend said she thought the languages at gs were better than she could offer within her budget, but her son was selected for upper school and she wasn't impressed with the language department so continued to home ed, is there more to it than purely curriculum difference?

What would happen if the child who intends to start grammar school, as an experiment, actually really enjoys it and insists she wants to stay beyond the few experimental terms, would you be upset?

[meerme]

We have the most incredibly dedicated and talented teachers. As an ex-teacher I also know how hard they work. But like your local constabulary, too busy with paperwork to investigate "minor" crimes like burglary, teachers are too busy proving they're doing a good job to actually do that good job.

Pleasing political masters is not their only problem. Our system, designed to factory farm children based on their date of manufacture rather than individual needs is highly inefficient. In a class of 30 you have extremely academic children and those with learning disabilities. The wider the range the more difficult to cater for individuals. Children at both extremes suffer. If a child starts Y2 at 3A, the "maximum" for the KS1 SATs, wouldn't it make sense to concentrate on those children who are likely to score below 2b and bring their scores up? To average the kids out? Whether openly stated or not, that's the primary goal in primary.

Teacher training involves a lot about safeguarding and allergies and catering for SENs (or SENDs, to use the latest abbreviation, expect it to change in a week or two! As a school governor I spent a lot of time on G&T and ECM, all wasted now). Teachers learn nothing, I repeat nothing, about the best learning methods for very bright kids though that's a subject of great interest to researchers and book writers. The main focus in teacher training today is crowd control. Or babysitting (and delivering the government's social engineering agenda).

I agree about the lifelong friends though I expect people keep in touch more with university friends than school friends. But I would disagree strongly with the social aspect. Human children, like those of our primate cousins, evolved to develop social skills through long periods of play with other children (of various ages). The school environment of 30 odd humans your exact same age is artificial. It is also not something you encounter in the adult world. When you do play with other children it's in the playground after everyone's been cooped up for several hours. It's a letting off steam environment, not one for developing skills.

The picture you paint of LAs is very different from the truth. I could give you some real horror stories. The vast majority of LAs are operating highly unlawful HE departments and persecuting even those honest, hardworking home educators who are doing a fantastic job. I can point you to no end of links on this subject that prove just how atrocious most LAs are. They have a financial incentive to get kids into school and some stop at nothing to do so.

Many parents seem to lack the confidence to HE past the age of 11. We choose to continue HE because we'd rather our children had a rounded education - to be just as comfortable pitching a tent / identifying safe mushrooms as they are reinstalling Windows/ configuring a firewall as they are changing a tyre / replacing a ball cock as they are comparing mortgages / choosing investments. Schools, particularly grammars, prefer to use resources towards measurable results (GCSEs) rather than life skills. They have a responsibility to do this. If DD's education is suffering because she's in a school she'll be pulled out. I have zero doubt the suggestion will come from her, not us.

Some parents see school and education as the same thing. Some supplement school education with other stuff. Whatever. I support 100% their right to choose. They may get it wrong. We may be the "misfits" who have it all wrong. That's not the point. Parents are better placed than governments to decide what's best for their own kids; I support that. Parental choice doesn't sit well with edited by Moderator regimes in places such as Herefordshire and Kent and numerous other counties in the UK determined that every child should be under the state's influence to allow them to be cultivated in the image that best suits the state.

[kenyancowgirl]

meerme: you have just said you support a parent's right to choose and then spent the rest of the time still criticising - in VERY strong words - anyone who chooses to use mainstream education. You are still criticising teachers by saying that the main focus in training is crowd control or babysitting is wrong (not sure when you did your teacher training....) Referring to **** regimes, especially on Armistice Day, is kind of out of order.

If people want to HE, that is up to them - I am sure full time home educators believe they have valid reasons to do it - predominantly this is for reasons related to bullying or for the so called rounded experience - however, I would certainly say that my children got and continue to get a fully rounded education (in all senses of the word) through a combination of school and home life - to me that is just good parenting.

Research in European countries seems to have found that contrary to popular beliefs, home educating is counter effective on the social side as social relationships are more engineered (unlike real life) with home schoolers than in a mainstream environment, hence the move to all but ban it in the majority of Europe. There have also been major concerns in a number of European countries about religious indoctrination aspects to some HE (which I appreciate is a whole minefield and will get people hot under the collar on here and do not intend to turn this into a religious debate.)

I do have experience of home educating as we chose to flexi school for one year - my son was at home one day a week in y6. We were inspected by the LEA and I was glad of that as the consultant who came out was exceptionally experienced and offered some very valid suggestions - as well as her learning from some of the things we were doing. I would not do it again, as I do not feel that it added positively to his social experience (although certainly to his educational one).

I do worry that many HE protagonists seem to use it as a means to "tutor" for 11+ throughout primary - we quite often hear of people on here who have HE until the child achieves a place at GS...this seems to be a slightly worrying trend to me, and not what HE is about.

[meerme]

still criticising - in VERY strong words - anyone who chooses to use mainstream education.

I criticise the education "system", not parents who choose it so please don't take it personally. If parents are happy with it, great! There's been a huge increase not just in HE but in private school admissions as well. It appears that while many are satisfied with schools such satisfaction is not universal.

Re crowd control: It's officially called behaviour management. But it's not unknown for bouncers to provide teacher cover. Teachers have often been quoted as saying their job is half crowd control and half social worker.

There is, definitely, potential for religious "indoctrination". There may be the oddd household where it happens, but for those opposed to too much religious education the big danger is religious schools, not HE. There was a recent piece about a thousand boys in Jewish yeshivas - parents opting out of mainstream education to put their children in religious schools. And we've had the Trojan Horse schools. If you want proper indoctrination for your children you register them with a school that specialises in this, you don't take them out and teach them yourself. I don't see it as a HE problem.

Re using HE to hothouse for the 11+, it may not serve the child well, but if that's what the parents believe is the best way forward I support their freedom to choose this. Do you not?

I'd be interested in some links to this European research you talk about. If this exists online it's always interesting to see who funded the research.

[sherry_d]

Oh dear... this is getting hot.

It's good to agree to disagree.

[Guest55]

Yes and I'm waiting for meerme to apologise for the post which was reported.

[sherry_d]

Yes and I'm waiting for meerme to apologise for the post which was reported.

I am not sure what she/he may have said, but some of the post above aren't better either. Perhaps time to draw a line and move one.

[kenyancowgirl]

meerme: when you said: quote "We choose to continue HE because we'd rather our children had a rounded education" you didn't have the subtext "obviously, those of you who don't choose to HE don't care about your child's "rounded" education".....But, unfortunately that is how it reads to me.

And, as you can see from my comment: "If people want to HE, that is up to them" so I think it is fairly obvious that I am supporting their right to choose to HE - what I don't like is the growing trend of people who say they are using HE to get a "rounded" education but then are quite happy to stop as soon as their child gets into a GS (which could be argued is the least "rounded" education you can probably get) - and on this forum, it more often than not IS a GS - or occasionally an independent, but very rarely a state comprehensive ....if people were more honest and admitted that their reasons, in these cases, for HE'ing was to gain an advantage for the 11+, it would still sit uncomfortably with me but at least it would be honest. You are right that people are more reticent about HE'ing in secondary - it is possibly harder educationally then and also, any parent knows, along with the teen years comes a growing need for the teen to move away from the parent as the centre of their universe, towards their own social network being more important.

And, yes, I know about behaviour management - it is also called classroom management and forms part of training for a number of different jobs, including being a Careers Adviser. The emphasis is on "part" of the training and it is certainly not babysitting - it is tools to enable you to run a class, or year group, effectively, using a number of different strategies and a differentiated approach, as appropriate for the needs of the individuals in the group you are taking.

Teachers are often quoted as saying lots of things, incidentally, but in this case, I doubt any of them actually mean that their job is just half and half crowd control and social working - it's a good sound bite though! But, in the same vein as your phraseology, I know lots of teachers who are also very good at teaching, classroom management, nurturing, challenging, inspiring and providing a very rounded education.

I am pleased that the moderators have been in and edited your comments which were inappropriate, particularly today of all days. And, in terms of the links - Google brings up lots - there is lots to be read, from a number of different sources - assumedly you read them before you chose to HE - obviously there are also a huge number in support of HE from a variety of sources too - like anything, you tend to agree with the ones that fit more with your beliefs, I suppose.

To be clear, you have your right to choose HE in the same way that others have their right to choose mainstream education. What is interesting is that it sometimes comes across from HE protagonists, on forums like this, that they are superior in some ways for having made that choice - and fundamentally, that is what I object to.

sherry_d - if you think anything in my previous "post above aren't better either" (although how you can make that judgement, when you also admit you don't know what meerme said?), then feel free to report it to the moderators. Be assured, I take care with what I write, to not offend and to have a reasoned and measured discussion - I have re-read my post and cannot see what you have an issue with.