AIBU to ask Wtf Is 'Child Led'?

[JustDanceAddict]

Seeing this a lot lately - what does it actually entail.
If my DCs didn't want to get up for school cos they're tired, is it child-led to keep them off school?
Mine know unless they are illthey are going in, as I have to go to work when tired, etc.

I will listen to my kids' reasons to do x,y or z but if I don't agree they will not be doing it.

I have let DD (15) off a couple of optional things and have regretted it as in the end it wasn't right in the circumstances that she didn't attend.

Surely it's all about compromise, but some things: school, family events, etc. are non-negotiable (barring mental health issues around school before I get flamed).

Its like co-sleeping, baby led feeding etc etc instead of letting them have cuddles cos you need sleep or feeding them when they are actually hungry as babies.

Everything seems to have to have a label and fit into a very neat catagorised box

drspouse the question of being neutral about school causes me some grief too.

I do what I can to promote it as an option, but my DH is very much a 'well yes you could go to school' in a tone that suggests you would have to be insane to do so.

This has been compounded by the fact that many of her best friends in the HE community have been taken out of school due to various horrifying situations and will sometimes tell her just how awful the experience was for them.

Even her cousin who usually adores being at school was unhappy the last time they spoke and starting railing against all the tests he had to do....and the extra classes and homeworks....which at 6yo, well its hard to think he doesn't have a point.

I suspect based on national statistics that the problem of gender stereotyping is endemic in the system though, and not a local phenomenon at all. I mean, find me a state school where the proportion of the A level art class that is female is equal to the proportion of the physics A level class that is female....

And how do you know that, without the efforts of the school (but with only the impact of the media/parents/children's own friends) the ratios would not have been even worse??!

I can see a lot of female scientists and schools promoting STEM for girls. It's not something that most parents, who are not scientists or possibly graduates at all themselves, would really consider.

It really does sound like you are thinking that all bad in society is caused by schools, and none by parents. But despite this, you are assuming parents can have no influence on schools or nurseries.

And you do know not to pay a jot of attention to Ofsted ratings??! Reading between the lines on reports is an art but ratings are rarely worth the paper they are written on.

Your DH is not offering your child a life that is child-led at all. He is offering her a life that is led by his ideas of what should happen to her.

drapouse I'll disagree with you revendre stereotyping in schools.
It's rife. Really really common.
From the teachers who tell you that viens can't do maths and boys will always struggle with spelling (so no need to push them on that score. It's pointless). To punishment given to all boys (even if some girls are involved), teachers anways asking girls to go and fetch xxxx in the other classrooms etc etc.
Irbthe yeaxher who told the class in Y5 that wo do The shopping this way whereas men do it that way
And then of course you have the huge gap between boys and girls in maths and literacy/arts.....
It's so ingrained that when you actually explain to said teachervtgat actually no, girls can do maths etc.., they don't believe you (I've been told in no uncertain terms that I am wrong and they know best....)

The latest one was at a meeting for a class trip
Please could you bring some dvds to watch in the bus? We don't want to have only boys films but also some girls films.
Said by a teacher in her early 30s....,

DD is going into science based career (assuming she gets the grades!). Ds will too, but they are both into & good at some creative subjects too.
Yes, school can be harsh, but they are all different to some extent.

the problem of gender stereotyping is endemic in the system though

It's endemic in most parents as well - and the retail trade and advertising

I read recently that even using the words "boys" and "girls" in settings (as opposed to always using "children") can teach children that boys and girls are intrinsically different besides their genitals. I can't find the article again but it fascinated me and I've been trying to moderate my language accordingly. After all, we would be horrified at a teacher addressing a group: "black children come over here" so there should be just as little need to refer to sex as there is to race.

I don't think child led is the same as letting your DC do what they like. At home we are child-led to a degree by Dd(7) in that I let her have some choices I.e. Clothes, let her direct play I.e. If she wants to play shops I won't insist we play it in a certain way but will follow her lead and have listened to her to find a learning style that works for her.
I've found she learns better if I let her take the lead so she would baulk at a handwriting practice book but if I can get her to write loads of shopping lists while we're playing shops she'll get the handwriting practice by stealth.
My mum I've found is much more dictatorial in play and often takes over to the extent my mum ends up doing the craft or whatever by herself because DD has got fed up.
I think most parents do child led stuff but just don't stick a label on it

Morphene seems to be getting it in the neck a bit, though I don't think she has said anything particularly unexpected?

Most home educators have chosen to HE, so obviously they think that is a better choice than school; similarly, most people who have chosen to use a school, do so because they think school is a better place for their children. Generally, parents do what they think is best for their kids. I'd be open-mouthed if a parent said that, assuming a free choice, they've purposely chosen an option that is not best for their child!

My children have never been to school, and from neighbours and extra-curricular activities, have loads of friends who do go to school (as well as HE friends too). Personally, I loved school, so don't talk badly about schools in general. And yet, given the choice, neither of my children want to even try school. They are more open to the idea of going to college at 14yo, but school? Nope, they've heard too much from friends to not want to go.

It makes me a bit sad to read that there are kids who do not want to go to school. Not in a judgy way, I think every parent has to make the right choice for their kids. But, as a teacher, I want to make school an amazing experience for every pupil. Not always possible, but it is my purpose as an educator. But, I teach in a smallish, child centred, outstanding school in the middle of the countryside which I think colours my view a little.

Bit late back, but yes, DD 'chooses' when to go to sleep. I ensure that from a particular time her environment encourages sleep when she's ready.

I provide a range of foods, she isn't pressured to choose any specific food. She loves fruit & veg, is a healthy weight and very active.

It's my job as a parent to provide safe boundaries to her choices, and talk about the possible positive and negative consequences of those choices. And let her experience the consequences of her choices (having set the boundaries so that negative consequences have limited harm), so she can learn from the experience.

As I said, if it wasn't working I would try something else.

But I think when children are running riot there is something else going on than simply being given a choice.

And DD is by no means 'straightforward' in many ways, she only came to live with me at 5 (is adopted) and at times had rages that meant I had to physically restrain her to protect us both (and our home). Now, aged 9, she hasn't done that for a long time. But 'choice within boundaries and natural consequences' have worked for her trying not to think too much about the teenage years

I think it's just instinct and what feels right for you. I have never punished a child and I have 5 perfectly well behaved lovely children - youngest are teenagers.

Children tend to mirror the parents' mood and copy you - they do what you do not what you say. So my teenagers have no bed time but if they know they have to be up early the next day as one does tomorrow they will make sure they get to bed on time. We are all respectful of each other so no one keeps anyone up. No one swears or shouts in this house ever. They eat as they choose and I pay - one teenanger is currently vegan. They cook for themselves now.

however there are limits - I would never let a child avoid school. In fact they joke that no matter how ill they are they always go - one reason they are ideal employees - we always show up as a family, utterly reliable come hell or high water we will be where we say. We also always had a bed time structure, bath, story, songs bed, dark peaceful bed room, last breastfeed when babies etc.

My mum I've found is much more dictatorial in play and often takes over to the extent

I see a lot of parents do this! They seem for 'forget the point' of whatever they are doing!

For example at 5 DD could easily make a cake mixture weigh and measure break eggs etc (we did the oven) but every time MIL came over she'd just take over and DD would walk away leaving her to it!

FFS there are a lot of rude and badly informed posters on here.

Child-led parenting is not about letting children do whatever they want, or not having boundaries or discipline. In fact quite the opposite. But it is about parenting in a way that is prompted by the stage your child is at.

For instance I have decided to keep my DD at nursery for an extra year, so she will start Reception at 4 rather than barely 4, because of various reasons including her personality and developmental stage (and equally if I had a child who was ready for school earlier rather than later I would have seen if I could enable an early start).

Or one of our activities at the weekend will always be something that she chooses -- from a range of options that I give her, so I'm still in control as the parent.

I've tried to follow her interests, which for me has been quite a shift she's a desperately sporty, physically active little person, whereas I'm a kind of lazy bookworm and so we do a lot of running and kicking balls around in the park and cycling. More than I'd like if left to my own devices, that's for sure!

If you are genuinely interested, you might try Googling 'attachment parenting' rather than 'child-led parenting'. A lot of it is actually pretty good helpful parenting advice that is worth trying -- Aha Parenting and Hand in Hand Parenting both have articles that I often refer back to myself, or recommend to friends asking for advice.

But yeah, "It means letting your child be the parent instead of you" and "Child led to me is probably the excuse used by those who let their kids run riot around restraunts or push in on bouncy castle queues"...

But presumably penguin you don't feel the need to label yourself and it's covered under the heading of "parenting" ie doing the best for your child/family like everyone else?

The only need for any explanation is when it starts causing a problem.somewhere?

Or rather their interpretation of it starts causing problems

"Doing the best for your child/family like everyone else"

Absolutely, we are all doing our best as we see fit. But how I choose to parent is different from how some of my friends choose to parent and many of the other families my child socialises with through nursery and it's also helpful to be able to explain how and why.

And actually it does come up a fair amount in the course of ordinary life, rather than because there's any kind of problem, because when you go out with other families or your children socialise with other children you bump up against different ways of doing things. And kids in particular wonder why! (For example, co-sleeping, extended breastfeeding). We do actually use a lot of structure in our lives, but within that structure I try to offer a lot of choice, and I also try to be led by what stage my child is at (e.g. not weaning but letting her decide when to stop) rather than where I feel she 'should' be at.

I have friends who are very definitely and proudly 'adult-led' families. They leave their children with babysitters for weeks while they go off to work abroad, they all go to festivals, they have late parties that the children stay up for, and their kids have done very structured activities (particualrly language learning and maths, I've noticed) from a very early age. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that at all, but it really isn't right for MY family -- my life is seriously quiet since I've become a parent, I have only ever spent one night apart from my DD since she was born (and I regret doing it! It was too early and DD wasn't actually ready), and although I prompt DD to try new things regularly I only book courses/classes/activities when it's something she's really keen on. She's also always still welcome to sleep in my bed, although increasingly she prefers her own space and overall she is a super independent little person.

I think it's great that we all have our own different ways of doing things, and for the most part parents choose them because they think they're best for their children. But let's not insult other people's choices or shut down discussion about what those choices are or why we make them. We can all learn a lot.

I have never come across a teacher who says things like "girls can't do maths." Seriously.

There are many reasons why women are less likely to go into STEM but I really don't think that it is teachers' fault.

I think letting children choose the topics they want to study or the format they want to use (essay/drawing/costume-making/whatever) is OK for an occasional thing, but I would be worried if this kind of idea started to take over the curriculum and make up a substantial part of children's learning. There is a danger of children remaining locked to their parents' outcomes, exacerbating class divisions. And it will not help children to overcome their natural weaker areas.

I'm finding this thread very interesting but a couple of points have annoyed me:

1. Not everyone can afford to HE even if they thought it was the best option, because it relies on one parent being at home instead of working. It also involves quite a lot of expenses that would normally be covered by the school. From what I've seen it gets even more expensive for secondary school children as the subjects are mostly beyond what the parents can teach. In which case it's either tutors or something like InterHigh at £3,000 odd per year.

1. My DD has just finished Yr1, at school she is allowed to go to the toilet whenever she needs to. Yes, she does have to ask the teacher but that is so they know where the children are. If she doesn't return in a reasonable time they can check she hasn't got into difficulties or gone AWOL. This is not a bad thing!

In my experience (good) schools do teach in a different way to they used to 20 years ago. For example the children pick a topic, such as wild animals, and the learning revolves around that. So, which animal is the fastest or tallest? How many legs in a herd of zebra? Making footprints to track in the playground etc. It's still structured, but more child-led than some people think. I think it's quite unfair to suggest that professional teachers aren't interested in finding the best ways to keep kids engaged in learning.

Generally, parents do what they think is best for their kids.

And many parents harbour serious delusions about what is best for their children. So their ideas are not necessarily accurate.

And quite a lot of them think they are giving their children free choice while actually guiding them in a very heavy handed way (like Morphene's DH seems to be doing - "well I suppose you can go to school if you really want to").

And the reverse works of course. So people think they are doing the best by their child by sending them to school and not giving a choice...which many would consider equally delusional.

And I don't know anyone in real life who calls themselves child led

I do. Her son came round for a play date recently, and he won't be invited back because he was a total pain. He wouldn't do as he was told because he clearly thought everything I told him to do was optional. And I'm talking about stuff like 'Don't chase the cat, you're scaring her', 'stop pulling at that plant, it will break' and 'time to wash your hands please'. He either point blank refused or completely ignored me.

I'm not going to host children who haven't been taught to do as they are told.

Shelby Not everyone can afford to HE

Home ed is as expensive or cheap as you want it to be.

While many families may have one parent non-earning, it's not always the case; in my family, I work part-time in the evenings. Other families may have a parent working from home, another may have both working part time, another family may have both working full time, but opposite shifts, and yet another may have two parents working the standard 9-5, and they home ed in the evenings, and weekends. There is lots of flexibility. And yes, there are single parents who work who HE, single parents on benefits who HE, disabled people who HE etc. It is not limited to middle-class two-parent families at all (in fact, where I live, they are in the minority.)

The only expense for HE that is specifically covered by school, is exams (if you choose to sit them). If you are home educated, you will be classes as a private student and there will be costs associated with sitting that exam. However, there is [currently] funding for Pre-16s going to college at 14yo, to sit exams; not to mention that a child can be enrolled in a school in order to study and sit exams.
You do not need to use tutors or online courses like InterHigh; there are libraries, free online courses and other parents locally who swap skills (there are loads of ex-teachers who home educate!). Again, there are options.
I, otoh, look at schools with the constant outlaying of money for specific uniforms, shoes, trips, lunches, raising money for this and that, etc and school seems the more expensive option. It all depends on your perspective.

I'm not denying the fact there is also sacrifice, but arguably there is sacrifice whatever option you take: my parents sacrificed a helluva lot to put me and my sister through private school (no holidays, my dad worked full-time, my mum worked 3 jobs, etc).

As I said before, I'd be open-mouthed if a parent said that, assuming a free choice, they've purposely chosen an option that is not best for their child!
If you have looked at all options and you can't afford to HE, then that's not a free choice as you wouldn't be able to choose that option.

Ouch, it can be cheap, HE, but exams, activities etc can be very expensive. Some people say private education could be afforded the amount they spend (agree!)

A survey somebody linked to a while ago, I would have to search for it, showed demographic for HE is more likely to be middle class.