To think you as a parent are responsible for your child’s education.

[washingmachines4]

To think you as a parent are responsible for your child’s education.

I have always considered myself the primary educator of my child, manners, shapes, ABC, 123, speech, reading and over time that evolves into fractions, telling the time and so forth. I view any education at school as a bonus, to my mind I want them socialising and learning how to interact with others well when they are there. There are times I have failed, my husband and I said we were going to be a multilingual family and bring up our kids with English, Spanish and Chinese – we didn’t learn Spanish and Chinese so fell at that hurdle.
That said, I wouldn’t consider allowing them to go to any old school, before we had children we moved house and one of the criteria for me was that we were in a catchment for multiple good schools. Things can change, we could have got unlucky, in the 5 years after moving before they started school they all could have gone downhill, unlikely but possible, in which case we would have moved again. An acquaintance of mine says this is insane but will always justify sending her kid to the closest school rather than moving to be near the best school for her kid. She also thinks the school is to blame that her child failed the national phonics test in year 1 – she has never once read with her kid, ‘that is the teachers job’ and actively discourages him from reading – makes comments he wants to feel better than others, brainbox – proper nightmare Matilda’s parents style. She is an extreme example but the responsibility is ours right? (For reference, I work full time but try and make learning as time efficient/fun as possible – eg. Got a CD of all the times tables in a song to put in the car so whenever we travel to do something we sing the song of the times tables they are learning that week) etc.

To an extent, yes, parents are responsible for their childrens' education.

But what is better? A well-meaning parent or a professionally trained teacher?

We had silly debates on here during covid where people said "why did you have kids if you don't want to teach them" when the schools were closed. Well lets do away with all the schools and make all the teachers redundant, shall we?

As for catchments, you have to be able to afford to live in them. Or just be lucky that a house comes up for sale or rental in the area you want.

My mum used to do spellings and timetables with me, but it is enough to do them at home, you don't need to force learning on the kids the whole time they are in a car. Just play music or even Radio 4 - that is very educational!

Unless you and your DH are bilingual with Spanish and Chinese, there's no way on earth you'd be able to raise them trilingual.

Oh shut up 🤣

And don’t even get me started on the psychological impact I have seen on children pressured and being tutored for the 11+
I’m talking about the ones who actually have undiagnosed learning needs or just plainly can’t achieve the level needed, but who get pushed in to it from an early age anyway.
And the feeling of failure at 11. 11 years old and you feel you e failed at life! The children feel the pressure, no matter how much the parents think they are having a light touch approach. So yes, there are other extremes as well.
And no, I’m not talking about all children who sit 11+, but I am talking about a good percentage I have witnessed over the years.

@sst1234

All the attacks on OP have a hint of envy about them.

It's not attacks, it's pointing out the reality that this is not feasible for a huge range of parents, due to circumstances, ability, and the children themselves. I'm a single parent of 3, working full time. Of course I'm envious of parents who have time to do extensive shape learning. But that's not the point, which is that we cannot accept the kind of laissez-faire approach to public education provision that makes education the responsibility of the parent, yet also doesn't allow most parents to afford to be home with children. This just amplifies existing inequality and condemns so.many children to an even more unequal future (and so many women to extreme financial insecurity, because there's no reliable way for most people work and do all this with young kids). Op also totally fails to notice the underlying privilege that makes her approach possible.

Unless you and your DH are bilingual with Spanish and Chinese, there's no way on earth you'd be able to raise them trilingual.

And even then it can be an uphill struggle. I’m British and am struggling to get my DC speaking English (DH French, live in a Francophone place)!

Goodness, what a smug post. I think the most important thing is to read to your kids and let them see that you read books for enjoyment. The parents role is to back up the school not compete with it.

Parents are legally responsible for ensuring children of CSA attend school or home educate them, yes.

I do otherwise get what you are saying OP but there is a middle ground. My personal opinion is that kids also need time and space to be kids after school, which can be very tiring for them.

I do read to mine/encourage them to. But museums, BBC documentaries, Duolingo are surely just (very) optional extras depending on the parents' own interests.

But what is better? A well-meaning parent or a professionally trained teacher?

It’s not either/or

A child with a can have a can do attitude is better than a child raised not to care about education!

A school-educated child's education is a combination of school and parent input. Of course parents should care where their child goes to school, and do their best to stimulate and help their child learn, but imo your expectations are unrealistic. Many parents do not have the education or resources to be able to provide much educational input, or necessarily the range of choices to be able to pick an excellent school for their child.

Sorry, but the fact that you thought you would be able to bring your dc up in a multilingual household before you'd even learnt any of the (2!) foreign languages in which you planned for your children to presumably become fluent demonstrates quite how unrealistic your ideas are on this. (I say this as an experienced language teacher).

It’s all fun and games now, listening to times table songs in the car… wait until your kids are older. You also sound rather smug - are you really doing all this for your kids or are you doing it in order to give yourself a congratulatory pat on the back everyday? As pp said there is a middle ground.

@HoppingPavlova

I view any education at school as a bonus, to my mind I want them socialising and learning how to interact with others well when they are there.

I was exactly the opposite. I believed education was the remit of the school system. I believed it was up to school to teach my kids numeracy, literacy, science etc. If there was an issue and a child was struggling or fell behind in any area then we stepped in ourselves to get them up to speed or organised tutoring to achieve this but we certainly didn’t consider ourselves their primary educators in these areas.

Some of my kids went on to do highest level maths, physics etc and believe it or not I left that to the school system. Again, if it looked like they were struggling or behind I would have organised tutoring. Didn’t need it but I certainly didn’t believe it was on me to educate them in these areas, I don’t have the necessary higher level qualification and don’t pretend to! Nor those who wanted to specialise in history and humanities, I’m not an expert, I’m not the educator.

A lot of your post just doesn’t make sense. You don’t believe in schools teaching children anything, it’s your responsibility. Schools are for social skills and peer interaction. Yet you say it’s imperative for people to be in an area with top schools and if they are not they have failed their children. What does it matter if you don’t believe it is up to schools and teachers to educate your children but is your responsibility. It’s like a post that wants some weird smugness award but just fails in the detail.

I agree with this. Education is a human right, no one should feel lucky they have it or that it's a 'bonus'.

I just don't know why anyone would try and teach their child things that a professional who knows better will teach them, for free

@OverTheRubicon

Take your kids swimming from babies for goodness sake it isn't expensive and really important Why do people expect so much from the system

Don't know where you live, but it's fairly privileged to say swimming doesn't cost much.
To take a baby swimming, you need a baby swim suit (replaced every 6 months as they grow), an adult swim suit, baby swim nappies, pool entrance and to pay for transport there and back. It may not be much for you, but that's a lot for many people, even before accounting for lesson cost. And people with less money are also less likely to know how to swim themselves and therefore be confident teaching their DCs beyond the basics.

A baby swims for free in every council pool an adult is around three pounds the baby can wear a swim nappy for about 2 quid a pack. If you can't afford to do basic parenting then I question why you would bring a child into the world in the first place.

@secular39

I think pps on here are very harsh to the OP. Having worked in many mainstream schools, reading OP's comments is not surprising. However, I predominantly work with children with special educational needs so my opinion may not be reflective of the whole population.

I work across three secondary schools and many children start off in year 7 having the reading age of below 6. Not only that, I've met many students, who have difficulties with spelling, forming narratives, losing track in fast paced lessons. I regularly do to teachers meetings and 10/10 of a child
Is not performing well, they blame the parents.

I am a firm believer that you cannot rely on a school to help your child, no offence, but your child is just another pupil/a number in your class. You may be lucky to get a good teacher who pushes you and gathers supports for your needs. However, they have 30 children to worry about and are incredibly overworked as it.

I understand that parents comes from different backgrounds and beliefs, which may hinder their ability to not only recognise but to support their children. Academics is not everything, it's good to teach life skills, being compassionate etc. But being a competent at reading and writing (academically speaking) is essential in my opinion.

I did have a friend who was complaining about the school, that her child was not progressing, I did advice her to seek tutoring (she had the number- a lot!) but refused as she said it was the schools job. Honestly, I found her a drain to be around anyway.

But to answer your last question, would I move to get my child into the best school, it depends on many factors, if we are talking about children with special needs, yes I would do it as there's hardly any schools around that cater to them- let alone good ones. However, I do believe being nearer to family and being a part of the community (not so much) is important and I wouldn't want my children to miss out- that's if I had the choice

Wow, just wow. So my DS started secondary with a reading age of 8.5, he struggles to keep up with face paced lessons and struggles a lot with his writing and punctuation etc. I can assure you that's not from lack of parental support. He coped well at his lovely primary school that gave him the right support. He didn't cope so well at his 'outstanding' secondary school who spent more time putting him down then helping him learn and develop. He has just moved to a 14+ provision to do year 10 & 11 and the change in him and his attitude to learning is already amazing. They have been wonderful and the communication with me has been fabulous. He has also now been diagnosed with several SEN needs, his previous school supported his referral and documented a lot of evidence of his struggles, yet continued to punish him for the things that they told a paediatrician he just couldn't do (note couldn't not wouldn't). On the flip side my DD its doing well at school, is fair more academic and enjoys reading in her spare time. She being 6 years younger is probably at a similar level of reading and writing. How do you explain this in your 10/10 theory? Did we suddenly improve as parents or do we just favour DD in our teaching?

Another vote for middle ground here. There is definitely parental responsibility, but I heartily disagree that school is just the icing on the cake. The teachers are there to teach the things that we cannot comprehensively cover at home (unless homeschooling). Our job as parents is to support their education. There is quite a big difference between giving a child the tools they need to succeed in life and in school and hothousing them. The former is good, whilst the latter is, in my opinion, both unnecessary and sometimes unhelpful for the child in the long run.

What I think we ARE responsible for as parents:

• Teaching life skills (personal hygiene, manners, social skills, riding a bike, swimming, tying shoes, etc)

• Making sure they are well rested, well fed, clean, dressed appropriately for the season/weather, and on time for school. Those things need to be in place for them to be able to learn during the day.

• Being engaged as parents, which includes looking out for their physical and emotional well-being, spending intentional time together as a family (for example talking about everyone’s day at the dinner table), and providing healthy stimulation at home (things like going outdoors to get exercise, playing board games, having age appropriate interesting discussions on different topics, etc).

• Providing learning support as necessary (reading both to them and with them at home, helping them to study—or at very least showing them how to study independently—if they have an exam or quiz coming up, making sure they practice and/or review the things they bring home from school like times tables and spelling words, etc)

• Providing enrichment opportunities as we are able (extracurriculars like sports or musical instrument lessons, cultural activities like visiting museums or attending the ballet, etc). Obviously what people are able to do varies quite a lot according to income, but the important part is trying to expose the child to things that broaden their horizons, and that doesn’t have to cost a lot of money (museums, the library, etc).

That already feels like quite a tall order to me! Let the school teach what it teaches and then support as necessary at home so that they can absorb it all and learn.

I don’t disagree with the basic premise. But I think the OP just posted about this in the hope of forty pages of people telling them what a marvellous job they’re doing and of course their “acquaintance” was in the wrong, what an awful parent they must be. It’s just a bit off.

There’s always a ‘friend’ or ‘acquaintance’ who has a really extreme position isn’t there?

OP, I think that if you genuinely view school as a ‘bonus’ then you seriously need to step up your educational game beyond times tables CDs.

Definitely a check your own socioeconomic privilege issue here, OP. The privilege is being able to choose where you live and its selection of wonderful school. The privilege of not being crunched for time so you can spend your time educating your kids from 3.30 til supper time. The privilege of having a car to sing your times tables in. The privilege of compliant kids without any SEN. Well done, I am sure your children are winning the race.

This also isn't a strategy that will translate well to secondary school where you have 13 subjects to juggle. You'd be better off supporting them to be self sufficient in their learning. And why are you leaving the social side to the school? That's where you should be guiding.

Your post is really smug.

Not everyone has money to move house for catchments, not everyone understands or can teach fractions, and not everyone understands, knows or has time to do many of these things at home.

There’s a middle ground- school is NOT primarily for socialising- it’s for learning. Parents absolutely should model good behaviour, teach values, do ABC, 123, colours, shapes, flowers etc if they can, but if they can’t or won’t then the child still deserves an excellent education, which is why every school should strive for excellence.

Now stop stealth boasting.

Caring about you own children's education, great. Judging others by your standard, not so great. School isn't bonus. If you don't need school to teach your children, then you really should home school. I'm sure you can do better than teachers.
What a horrible post.

YABU!
I think you can only be the 'primary educator' until they get to about age 6. After that they will be learning significantly more in school than you have time to teach them at home. If they go to a school which is providing inadequate education you are going to struggle to compensate for that at home as they get older. Are you still going to be the primary educator when they are doing GCSE?
Your role as parent is to support their education- not provide it all.

You don't need school.

You need cake.

Walking to the shop to buy eggs = PE. Measuring baking ingredients = numbers. Mixing = science. Forming soft peaks with the batter = geography. Reading the packets = literacy. Listening for the fruit cake 'singing' when it's ready to come out of the oven = music. King Alfred burning 5he cakes = history. Cutting the cake in half =fractions. Washing up the plate = life skills. Watching Bake Off = drama.

@FawnFrenchieMum read my latest two posts.

If you only have time/resources to do one thing then it should be listen to your kids read IMO. A lot of people couldn't afford tutoring in Chinese and Spanish (and without any kind of immersion is probably wouldn't be very useful - 5 years of GCSE French tells me that) or afford to move to be in catchment of good schools.

I also think you are doing school and teachers a huge disservice, I taught my ds his phonics and practiced reading, tables, telling the time etc but at no point did I think that I was completely responsible for everything he learnt! I was just supporting the things he was taught at school - and at GCSE/A-level I wouldn't have a clue about some of what he learns.

OP, your posts comes across as very smug. You obviously have privilege to be able to move whenever the schooling provision changes in your area. That's simply not realistic for the majority.

And you have time, energy and £ to help your child/ren with times tables songs etc. Again, any parents don't have access to those resources, don't travel in a car to listen to a CD, don't have confidence in their own abilities/knowledge/education to feel equipped to pass it on to their DC.

I agree that ideally a parent should expect school to deliver all of a child's education. But I think a school has a huge part to play. I'm very grateful to the teachers my DD has had who've given her a wide outlook on life as well as taught her in ways I wouldn't have known how to, in a way that has made learning relatively easy for her.

Having said all that, I bought into the baby swim lessons, classical music DVDs that I played endlessly when DD was newborn etc, thinking I was going to raise a child genius. But I soon realised my limitations and that school would offer her expert tuition that I couldn't give, as well as priceless group learning and social and independence skills.