to wonder why teachers are so sure school is better than home Ed for all children?

[IceBeing]

An acquaintance is thinking of removing her 5 yo from school as he has started self-harming due to anxiety about going.

The school seem to be all over themselves to tell the parent that there is no way home ed would be preferable to carrying on in school.

What makes schools so very certain on this point and what would it take for a school to admit a child might be better off being taught at home for a spell or even entirely?

"feather the reading thing you describe is also very important. learning earlier doesn't equal learning better and in fact the opposite is very likely true particularly when it comes to reading and maths. Learning it when you are ready and interested is totally the way forward and apparently totally impossible to achieve in classes of 30."

What does "ready" even mean where things like reading and maths are concerned?

Our brains didn't evolve to readit's a completely unnatural skill (which is why children don't automatically pick it up like they do spoken language). Our "natural" maths ability is limited to counting up to about 4anything beyond that is an artificial skill that has to be heavily cultivated.

Since these aren't natural abilities, it simply doesn't make any sense to talk about natural "readiness" to do them.

This is not a post "against" homeschooling, by the way--I know loads of homeschoolers who have got their kids to a great academic level. But these are the homeschoolers who actually teach their kids and have proper curricula, textbooks and so on.

Ready means child-led. Children realise there is a need to read because they have a real life goal that requires it. So they decide to learn. It makes a massive difference.

I'm off to tell my 7 year old to put down her copy of The Boy In The Dress and forget how to read immediately as she's never been taught.

I haven't read the whole thread, but why is there an assumption that all teachers are against Home Ed?
I am a retired teacher and seriously considered it for my youngest child because Junior School was such a horrible experience for him. The reason I didn't was that I could see him refusing to do any written work and I thought it would create a lot of stress for both of us.
I have recently met some Home Ed children. They are a family of five, and the eldest two got really good GCSE and A level results and the younger ones are doing really well. It works for some people. They meet other Home Edders and share skills. They are able to visit museums as a group and have the same experience a school group would be given.
I think the parents need to be well motivated and pro active, but as a concept I think for some children it would be far better than the 'one size fits all' approach foisted on schools by successive Governments.

I Home Ed ds because after 3 years at school he could not read at all. I took him out of school and taught him to read. I put him back into school and he fell behind again. He is now in yr 9 and studying for his GCSEs at home. He has a wide range of friends and activities. He goes to skiing, fencing and does drama. In school although he was ok socially he didn't have any real friends. In fact since he left school not one child has asked after him.

NewStatesman, it's true that reading and non-basic maths are not innate. But they don't necessarily have to be "heavily cultivated". It is often enough for the child simply to be in an environment where they are often used, such as our culture.

In fact it is very very common for home educated children to acquire these skills spontaneously. The reason this phenomenon is not more widely known is an unwillingness within the school system (and even among many home ed parents) to wait for it to happen. Some children are keen to read at four, but anecdotal evidence from within the HE community suggests that seven is a more common age. Even ten is not very unusual.

Given that so few children have the opportunity to choose when they learn to read, few adults will have observed this happening. Certainly it can't be observed within the school system, except for the few children who happen to learn to read before Reception. And even there, people often disbelieve parents who say they didn't teach the child to read, or put it down to the child being so exceptionally bright as not to be relevant to other children's capabilities. So I completely understand the belief that not teaching children to read is risky.

I don't know much about home-schooling but it obviously works for some people and when it's done well it beneficial to some children.

However, I work with FE students who have been 'home-schooled,' but not in the way most of the home-schoolers on this thread are talking about. I work with the ones that can't read, who have never taken an exam, who have little life or socialisation experience, who didn't go on nice educational trips or meet up with other home-schooled children, and whose parents were abusive or had addictions or undiagnosed mental health problems that led to a paranoia about authority (such as school). These are the children that are at risk and that LAs have safeguarding concerns about.

And I suppose, going back to the OP, a highly anxious 4 year-old, might be anxious because of issues at home, and could be taking that anxiety to school with them, rather than getting it at school. That is why in this situation home-schooling should be potentially looked at as a risk to a child.

Looked at by who, though? That's the question.

Or should that be whom?!

Charley I think it is safe to say that HEers are not a homogenous group. I think, in most cases there are more differences between two HEing families than there ever could be between two school-going families.

It is also pertinent to point out that many HEers also have children in school.

I had an educational psychologist report that made the recommendation that my son's school was meeting his SEN very well and that HE would be a detrimental move.

I did it anyway. In order to safeguard myself against accusations of neglect or irresponsibility I had an independent baseline of a variety of his skills taken, which included social skills, adaptability, life skills as well as academic, and then again towards the end of the academic year. The progress has been astounding and shows development of YEARS. That is, he is catching up with his peers on things schools would measure, including things a special school would measure, and OT and SALT.

But the educational psychologist could not possibly know that I was able to provide this education for my child, and their own professional credibility was at risk if they could be accused of recommending it and the progress not be made. HE is less 'controllable' and more vulnerable to family and life difficulties. Professionals often really can be taking a risk if they allow themselves to appear openly supportive of it in general terms.

I disagree that any child learns to read without being taught. The education is all around. My dd1 was reading before school and has never been put on a school reading scheme. I didn't ever 'teach' her phonics but I did read to her constantly, sing to her, we played with language based toys, did baby signing, used flash cards and countless other things. Children need to learn to read- it is a man made creation. It isn't like walking or talking which for most children will happen anyway.

And Charley I totally agree and have had very similar experiences. HE children who join mainstream education at whatever point are often missing parts of what they need to know, both in terms of academia and in terms of understanding the routine of school. I have a pupil at the moment who was HE until year 9 which he joined part way through in anticipation of GCSEs. This boy is bright and capable and should have been an A candidate across the board but isn't. He also has very poor attendance as he has never been taught that ethic of getting up and going to school every day. His ability to chose when to work formally is entirely messing up his GCSE courses and any parent should be worried about that.

My ds baked a cake without ever having been taught.

I came downstairs one Sunday at 5am as he was taking it out of the oven. He was 7yrs old with ASD.

I then 'taught' him about oven safety. He would have figured it out through experience, exploration and mistakes but it wasn't an experience I wanted him to have.

Most autonomously HE children learn to read when the motivation strikes them. Many of them reach that time when they want to play video games with their peers and need to communicate in written form. So what?

A friend of mine's child was in the middle sets at primary but wanted to get into a selective grammar. She saved up her pocket money and bought the verbal and non-verbal reasoning tests and spent hours downloading and playing them online. She got in. Her parents were not the type to value that kind of skill or have the money to facilitate it through a tutor so she had to do it herself. She had to work hard at home too, as her pocket money was dependent on completing chores. She also stole some money apparently.