Why does home schooling appeal ?

[SeptemberFlowers]

I myself would be far to scared to do it with my dc's as I'd be needing to reach for the most weekends of having to teach them curricular that I was shit at at school.

Why does it appeal to so many people ? There are a few children in the next village (live in a rural location) who are HE but only because their mother doesn't trust other adults with her children. I know this an extreme case but the only one I know personally.

How would you know your child is learning all the correct syllabus for different subjects ?

From the Home Education UK website:

Just how popular is it?

While there are no official figures on how many children are home educated in the UK my research suggests that there are around 60,000 (approximately 0.6%) UK children of compulsory educational age who are currently (2012) being home educated. This web site seeks to support those families and inform them of their legal rights and responsibilities.

I wouldn't call this 'having a lot of appeal'!
I dare say that there are people who would like to, if they could afford it, but even so you would be hard pressed to get above the 7% in private education or the 5% in grammar schools. It seems very limited appeal to me.

But who decides what standard of English or maths a child of whatever age/stage should be at? How do you determine if their education is at a 'suitable' level?

A job for the LEA. They already do-just not enough IMO.

If the child is in school signs of abuse and neglect can be followed up. If the child isn't there no one knows how they are. If you are a HE parent like the very great majority who is meeting the needs of your child why would you not work with the LA or other agencies to evidence this? How do you propose to monitor the safety of young girls pulled out of school who are forced into marriage? Their parents cab claim HE but that shouldn't be subject to checking?

ILove I am sorry your school's safeguarding was inadequate and that they failed to protect you. I don't think it negates the point I'm making.

appalled that there are "no official figures"

I would be doing a primary PGCE this year if it weren't for the baby coming. I feel like I could provide a good home education insofar as their learning went, I would hope that their one to one tuition would help them to get a head start with school.

But I don't think I would, because although I know some communities have fantastic opportunities for HE children to meet and socialise with their peers, don't think we have that here and I would be worried about them missing out.

Even if they could be guaranteed a good social life, I also think it's important for children to experience the diversity that school can provide. Many working class parents just can't afford to HE, and I would be reluctant to put them in private school for the same reason.

That said, it seems to be clutching at straws to me to suggest HE parents are doing it because they are neglectful or lazy. If you were neglectful or lazy then surely you would pack them off to school so you can have time for yourself during the day.

Where did anyone suggest that most people HE because they are neglectful? Where was "lazy" ever mentioned?

Just to clarify - I am certain that most HE parents are caring, conscientious and meet their child's needs. I just think they should be required to evidence it.

For a start, I didn't say 'most'.

And the person I was referencing who mentioned neglect was you, in your post on page two.

I also gave examples of neglect and made it quite clear what I meant. And where was laziness ever mentioned?

No you said "that HE parents" and implied a generality that had never been suggested by anyone.

I think that we can safely say that HE is not for the lazy! You have to pretty dedicated to spend 13 years at it! I have known the very enthusiastic get bored with it after that length of time, especially when if you have more than one child you can devote far more than 13 yrs to it. I had a child in school for 24 years and it certainly wouldn't have appealed to be restricted in my movements for that length of time. I preferred to work, have the house to myself, be able to go away without them etc etc.
I can see that I might have felt that I could provide for my 5 year old better than school, but after 24 years I would be a bit jaded-I much preferred them to come across the fresh and enthusiastic teachers.

"If you are a HE parent like the very great majority who is meeting the needs of your child why would you not work with the LA or other agencies to evidence this?"

Much depends on a borough or county. The LEA often no, because many don't have the needed intelligence, ability, consistency, or knowledge required, and have a very poor attitude, offering nothing positive, and treating educational choices other than using one of their schools, as some form of wrong doing, especially if the family have left the state system because of poor quality or wrong doing, and are heavy handed and over officious in their approach, and often bring their own politics and needs into family lives.

Good LEA's and counties have far less difficulties in forging good relationships.

For some because it would be rather difficult to keep going back to some particular place in this country and organising appointments with people with full timetables, from wherever they happened to be working, educating, or touring, in order to prove/state something, as in the Bethlehem model, (and look how that worked out for mankind!) just in case they were in the minority of lousy parents who abused their children, and a hour check on a pre arranged day, might show that up.

Other agencies do see h.e. children, Dr's, clinics, HV's, as well as many organisations who aren't agencies but do have duty of care, such as youth clubs etc.

I think you need to separate out your arguments between your concerns over are they accessing education, from your concerns over safeguarding and general welfare, because they are very different, with school attendance guaranteeing neither, and the later requiring a child to be seen closely by an intelligent independent ready to call for help witness every day, including throughout school holidays, and as Daniel Pelka and many others have tragically proved, even that happening, during set term times won't prevent an abusive parent abusing or killing.

BTW when you say if a child isn't in school, "no one knows how they are" for the vast majority of home ed, tutor ed, NUTT ed etc, that's just not true.
They're part of their own communities and the wider community, and many people 'know how they are'. Whether you like and approve of those many and varied communities may be the bigger question.

I do agree that it is possible for a child (or adult) to be entirely invisible in society, but those determined to keep their children entirely invisible to genuine care will find a way to do that, regardless of what you do to everyone else.

i wanted to do it but daughter wanted to meet more people and go to more birthday parties. that was fine.
home education can be totally child-led and at your child's own pace. you don't need to follow a curriculum. its brilliant really.
i'm delighted to say that my daughter, who did well in the education system (particularly from 11 when she went to an independent school), is strong enough to take her own daughter out of school and home ed if the need arises. baby is only two though, and won't even be going to nursery for a while.

Children learn. It's what they do, whether we like it or not. All those who are protesting that home-eders need to be monitored and supervised and strapped into the straitjacket that is the NC are showing a massive disrespect for the intelligence and resourcefulness of children.

My DS was born and educated through primary school in France. He spent years tortuously wading through their incredibly prescriptive approach to reading and writing, weighed down by numbingly boring homework. He hated it, and still reads French only under extreme duress and in a very expressionless manner. In English, he was never "taught" by anyone, though I did of course read to him from day 1 and we have always had a house-full of books. He reads English fluently and happily.

He also knows tons of other stuff that no-one has ever "taught" him ... most noticeably, he is a bit of an expert in marine biology.

Having reached the end of my tether at the way communal schooling is slowly squashing his thirst for learning, I have decided to home ed. I mentioned this to a friend, who to my surprise responded that she did this with her two girls years ago. Here is an excerpt from her mail:

*We had great fun and they just soaked up all the basics with which they had been struggling, bored for years, then once the reading writing and number (using lego as a main tool) were sorted (about 6 weeks) we mostly did nice things and learnt as we went along. Me too! We walked through woods, beaches and towns and brought home plants and even creatures to look up trying to work out why they were in their habitats. We went to museums, farms, even a factory just to see. We compared the same news story as told by various sources and tried to work out what the differences in presentation, were and why. . .Even now they question information, I hope it gave them critical minds. School should be about learning how to think, not what to think.

After two years ... [for various reasons they had to return to school] ... they had to sit mock exams at that point, They got A star grades in every subject except geography. I think it might just have been their good reading and writing that secured those grades. I am not a believer in measuring and comparing kids with one another, but I felt so pleased that they had by no means lagged behind. Serious hours of study per week probably 2-3 with me, all the rest just through their own inquiring minds and reading.*

We are privileged in the western world to have the choice of free state education for all; I see no reason why those who choose otherwise should be vilified.

I relocated to a decent LA in order to home ed. It's not true that all children aren't monitored by the authorities. Mine will see the LA Ed Pysch on a termly basis, and I'm really happy about that.

My kid is one of those poor souls who just can't cope with mainstream, despite lots of adjustments & a 1:1. His intellect and diagnosis are don't tick the right boxes to get him a special school place. Private schools that cater for his SN's are upwards of 40K a year and only obtainable via tribunal - which would require me to remortgage in order to fund the legal fees, expert reports etc..

Had he stayed in the state system it was a cast iron guarantee he'd have ended up one of the 42% of state educated children who finish without the all-critical C grade in maths and english. Realistically that means an adult life mostly dependent on state benefits. Now I fully expect him to not only achieve that, but the grades he'll need to go onto further education or training and eventually gainful employment. It became a no-brainer.

I home ed as I wasn't prepared to sit back and watch my bright, but disabled child grow up to become a statistic. I've met too many parents in the same boat - SN state education in this country needs root and branch reform. Currently it is incredibly expensive and too many people are growing fat from failing the most vulnerable of all our children - state neglect in my eyes.

Sadly state education doesn't cater adequately for ALL children on a universal basis. Some kids are bullying victims, others have SN's or developmental needs not best suited to a factory environment, other kids have long term illnesses, fall pregnant, recover from accidents, spend time abroad etc, etc. Then take into account those children who are truly gifted, and those who are just late developers.

All children are not created equal but the state education system becomes more and more rigid in it's approach every year and fails to cater for more children at either end of the bell curve.

Many middle-class parents of clever children opt for the private sector as they feel the local state options are inadequate. These are often the gifted cohort of children. Home ed is just another option. The advent of the internet means that children can now do secondary school live online, and that access to information and meet ups are more accessible than they have ever been.

My own anecdotal experience shows me that home ed parents tend to be of the sub-group that really, really care about their children's education and that put a helluva lot of effort into it.

I'm sure the lazy, neglectful parent of urban myth exists but those aren't the ones I'm meeting at the lively and vibrant local homeschool groups we attend. I noticed however that when DS was at school we tended to befriend those families who cared whether they did their homework or not, so my anecdotal viewpoint might be a very narrow one. La's have a part to play here, my old one was incompetent, my current one seems superb and will be able to help me ensure my child fulfils his potential as they see education as a true partnership whether the child is educated by Mum or at school.

Why does Home Ed appeal?

• Because the children can follow their own interests and not be restricted to what's on the curriculum.

• Because they can learn at their own level, be that "ahead" or "behind" their chronological age - for most children, they'll be at different "levels" in different areas.

• Because they won't be subject to the endless testing and monitoring that the English education system consists of at the moment.

• Because their love of learning can be nurtured and not stifled by being forced when they are not ready or interested.

• Because they have more time with family

*Because they have more free time than half an hour of "golden time" each week - and I firmly believe that they need this child led time in ordder to develop creativity, imagination, lateral thinking skills, etc.

• Because they socialise more widely, rather than being with 30 children who just happen to have been born in the same year.

• Because they are my children and I don't want to hand the responsibility for their education over to someone else, a stranger who I don't know.

*Because I'm not convinced that socialisation in a school environment is mainly positive - the wrong kind of social experiences can be devastating to a child's self esteem.

As for monitoring...if children are not receiving an education, they are not Home Educated children, they are Children Missing from Education. That is a different thing and shouldn't be confused. But the education doesn't have to look like school learning - there can be little or no formal "work".

Those of you who say you don't feel equipped to educate your child - you have been doing it, before they started school. You taught them to talk, walk, interact, share toys, build with blocks - you probably taught them to count, recognise colours, letters etc. You are your child's first teacher, Home Ed just continues this.

DOnt forget that home ed doesn't necessarily mean that the parents do the teaching. Some kids teach themselves and there are home ed providers too. It can be mix and match.

I think you need to separate out your arguments between your concerns over are they accessing education, from your concerns over safeguarding and general welfare, because they are very different

Different but both valid. No, school attendance doesn't guarantee anything, but it's one visible method of assessing progress/safety.

BTW when you say if a child isn't in school, "no one knows how they are" for the vast majority of home ed, tutor ed, NUTT ed etc, that's just not true

I acknowledged that. But the odd child does disappear. Is no one going to address the kidnapping/forced marriage concern?

All those who are protesting that home-eders need to be monitored and supervised and strapped into the straitjacket that is the NC are showing a massive disrespect for the intelligence and resourcefulness of children

I mentoined monitoring and supervision. I fail to see why HE parents seem to think they should be exempt from it. I never advocated that children should be forced into NC learning.

Is anyone prepared to explain/justify the lack of official figures for children being educated at home?

ilovesooty I am actually trying to discuss your concerns, which is part of why I suggest separating them out, because there are likely to be different solutions (or not) to different parts of them. Bear with me I'm not fast.

DH and his brother were home educated & are both exceptionally social, capable & academically successful in their respective fields.

It is noticeable though that you can be a little limited by your parents' interests though, so a home educating mother who loves maths but hasn't the slightest interest in literature might struggle to teach both fairly.

I am interested in HE, as is DH, but only if we were living somewhere where the local system was unsuitable or less than ideal.

ilovesooty - lots of studies show HE kids are much less likely to be abused or neglected. They are also in general healthier, sleep better and on the whole achieve more than their schooled peers.
Perhaps you should read and research a little.

No, school attendance doesn't guarantee anything, but it's one visible method of assessing progress/safety.

My experience of schools is that generally no it hasn't done that, though I can see that for some it may have, so I'm not wishing to slate, just say it isn't good enough to be relied on as a system.

Our experience is it's assumed that because problems were known, it somehow made them seem less problematic and safer. It didn't, it made them worse and more dangerous, because everyone assumed it was somehow ok if it was known about and so those children accessed less help, not more, and were forced into danger rather than protected.

It also takes the default position that all parents can't be trusted to do that themselves without official supervision, rather than a minority.

That isn't the law of this country regarding parents’ rights and responsibilities over their children while between the age of 5 and 16 so you need to fight for the law to be changed and remove parental rights and responsibilities legally towards children in that age group, if that's what you seek, but in doing that you need to create the mechanism allowing schools to be sued and pay, when they fail to meet those responsibilities instead of parents, just as parents face legal action if they fail.