I'm a radical unschooler AMA

[OutOfControlSpirals]

I'm a radical unschooling mum, which basically means I've taken the principals of unschooling, where a child is free to learn what they want, when they want, and applied it to every aspect of our lives. So my children have the same freedoms that I do when it comes to eating/sleeping/learning etc.

I suspect a new head and cultural shift at some point will help

well, nothing stays the same forever, I suppose one day we will have a new head, and be more focused on statistics, but it will be to the detriment of education.

Can you afford to be so fussy? we can't afford not to be

Earlier today you said you turn away most home educated students because you know you can’t help them...

yes, we turn them away from the A level department, but they would be offered something, most likely level 1 or level 2 BTEC. If they look promising, they might be offered a GCSE resit year, but if they have come at aged 17, or even 18, they will no this means no chance of reaching A levels ever, some will take up the offer, most won't.

Of course some HE students are offered a chance to do A levels. Some of those succeed, quite a small number though, but if we judge that there is a chance, they will be given an opportunity

Online there are lots of HE adults saying how hard it is to do qualifications in their twenties and working full time. The benefit to doing qualifications as a child is that you don't have to earn your living as well.
Also online some HE adults say that going to clubs in the community did not socialise them. Because basically the other kids all knew each other from school, and basically ignored the HE kid who they only saw for 1 or 2 hours a week.
For true socialising HE kids need to have friends of their own age. I know some do, but some parents do not understand that socialisation requires socialising with peers of the same age - socialising with older people only means they do not treat you as harshly as peers will, and socialising with younger children means as a child you have more power and won't be treated as harshly. Socialising requires your peers making it clear that certain behaviours such as selfishness has negative consequences.

How many HE students apply to your college for A-Levels annually? Approximately. How many do you turn away or offer alternative courses too? Approximately.

The main points brought up by unhappy HE adults are lack of knowledge around maths, history, physics, chemistry, lack of socialising and in some cases abuse.

I don’t think a HE child is more likely to be abused than a school child though

This is simply not the case. HE children are far more at risk of abuse than school educated ones, and the reasons are pretty obvious really aren't they. It's far easier to hide abuse under the radar when the eyes of teachers aren't on your children daily.

The fact that HE children are able to totally fall through the cracks through a total lack of any checks or regulation means that abusive parents are free to behave as they wish largely undetected. Please don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying that all HE parents are abusers, not at all, but HE does give an abusive parent the freedom to be abusive.
And yes, there are horrible people in all walks of life, including teaching, but teachers in schools will have been subject to DBS checks and are subject to the scrutiny of others constantly.

Going to school does NOT protect children from being abused within the home

I disagree. Yes it may still happen, but teachers will be looking and noticing it. As I have said up thread, I work in a school with lots of very vulnerable pupils where staff constantly pass on concerns to a team of safeguarding staff who work tirelessly to ensure pupils are safe. They have far more protection under our collective gaze than they would have should their parents take up their legal right to homeschool.

Not sure what means zzzzz to be honest.

Which bit zzzzz and for what reason? Do you feel that you know more about the safeguarding practices of schools?

Let me give you some examples of the ways we safeguard children every day from neglect and abuse. Non-specific for obvious reasons.

A child regularly presenting with a dirty uniform will be given alternative clothes whilst theirs are washed. Safeguarding referral will be made.

A child arriving hungry will be fed. Safeguarding referral will be made.

A child discloses something to an adult. Safeguarding referral made in line with the very detailed policy on this.

A child is tired at school regularly, to the point where they are falling asleep in classes etc. Safeguarding referral is made.

A child is absent from school- even for one day- and contact will be made by the attendance team with home. If this goes on then a team of staff will do a welfare home visit to make sure the child is safe and well.

Reporting to the safeguarding team will cause action to be taken, either by the team themselves or via social services. It won't be ignored, and if it is, staff are trained to pursue it.

We have councillors in school full time in addition to a team of safeguarding officers who work all year round. Our students are told on the last day of term that school is open throughout the holidays should they need a safe place to go.

There are countless other examples I could give of scenarios where teachers have got their eyes open and are looking. I will add that I am not a safeguarding officer- they would give you even more scenarios.

You surprise me zzzzz as you seem to think teachers don't do it when, in fact, it is a huge part of the job.

Given that you know all of this then, how can you argue that school attendance doesn't safeguard children from abuse at home? I have listed lots of ways in which it does and you have agreed with those examples.

not the slightest inclination to reflect on your own provision which while you feel is marvellous ofsted obviously don’t.

it is absolutly marvellous, and I promise you it is light years beyond anything you could possibly offer. You are speaking from a position of total ignorance, and it is very easy to sit and sneer at something you know absolutly nothing what so ever about, with absolutly no understanding at all of the dedication and skill of the staff, and the miracles performed.

there is absolutely no way you could ever achieve anything like what we achieve with these young people. You, without any of the skills, dedication, experience, knowledge, qulifications or understtanding of the situation, are ignorant enough to hold ofsted up as a guide of the quality of education offered!

Honestly, just open ANY level 2 statistics book, and have a glance through what is considered valid statistical analysis for a 15 year old, and compare that to the statistical analysis ofsted do...... ofsted fall far short of the statistical skills required for a level 2 BTEC! if you don't believe me, look for yourself.

Ofsted are a irrelevant nonsense, most people in education recognise that. their opinion counts for nothing.

Shall I explain it again?

We take students noone else will take, because we don't care about our statistics.

So students with terminal illnesses, students on remand facing a possible custodial sentence, students with unresolved immigration issues, students who are applying to the armed services, but need to be in education so they have something to fall back on if unsuccessful, students with a history of crime and drugs, students of no fixed abode, some of whom are placed in different hostels on a DAILY basis, and who carry all their possessions with them, and have no idea which county they will be sleeping in that night,

In other words, students who are likely to drop out. Students no one wants because they mess up the statistics ofsted are so silly about.

We take them ALL, and give them an opportunity.

My last tutorgroup contained a girl with terminal cancer, and two girls from a children's home more than 15 miles away, both of whom reached care leaving age during the course, and were rehoused several hours away. The girl with cancer is now at university, one of the care leavers completed her (lower level) qualifications.

No other school would accept these children into their sixth form.

Our school is brilliant.

We also offer courses to HE students.

none of these students are guaranteed A level places, but all are offered something.

The home edders tend to apply older, and are less likely to take up a lower level course in a different department, if they are turned away from the A level department.

How many HE students apply to your college for A-Levels annually? Approximately. How many do you turn away or offer alternative courses too? Approximately.

Its hard to say, I won't be involved in all applications, just the science A level ones, I guess in a typical year we would have 50 or so pass through our hands. Most have applied elsewhere first. We might take a punt on about 10 of them, but the success rate with this particular group is very low.

Others may be offered a GCSE resit year, if they have GCSEs, but they are too spread out to be of value. This isn't popular with anyone, you don't always get a choice what you are sitting. It would be maths, English, a language a science and a humanity. So possibly not resits, if you end up doing geography and biology, and you haven't done either before... or maybe you already have GCSEs in all the subjects you are resitting, but struggle to resit all the exams in one go, if you are used to only 1 or 2 at a time. Still, it can be a way forward to being accepted onto A levels, and if you can't do it, then you won't cope with A levels either.

There are other level 2 courses, such as BTECS, and whilst they don't lead on to A levels, they can lead on to level 3 BTECS, and be an alternative route to university. You may well have to sit English and/or maths too though.

If someone is not up to a level 2 course, there are level 1 courses, but once you starting point is that low, there is no realistic chance that you are going to get to A levls before your free education runs out, especially if you are starting older than 16, and many home edders come to us older than 16.

( level 2 means starting at about the level of a 14 year old in secondary school, and level 1 below that, maybe an 11 year old)

below that, there are entry level courses, and below that life skill courses, and independent living courses. Self explanatory really.

so say I get 50 home ed applicants for A levels, 10 might be given a place, and the other 40, depending on qualifications, performance at interview, sometimes a few informal written questions, will be offered something else, between "independent living" and " GCSE resits" Within this group (HE) the typical response would be to refuse and leave, although some may return a week or two later having reconsidered.

We are very over suscribed though, and can't always make the same offer again, not in the Autumn, although there may be places later.

@Arewehomeyet I know it’s not a popular view but I think parents have a right to “radicalise” their children because there is no way I can tell to define it that doesn’t restrict political and religious belief and freedom of conscience. I’d be happy with a law against encouraging children to be violent (for political reasons or any other reasons such as entertainment or to get back at other families) but when we start saying things like “you can’t teach your kids that ‘Christians and Jews are like pigs and dogs’ or ‘trans women aren’t women’ or ‘gay marriage is not marriage’” where does it end? What if we decide it’s socially unacceptable that less currently controversial views are taught. It’s not for the state to decide which peacefully held views, however abominable, are acceptable or not.