How about home education?

[Hazzy]

These days, choosing which school to send your child to seems to take up more and more of parents' time, energy and often money. I wonder how many people out there have considered home education - and indeed know that it's perfectly legal; the law merely states that children from 5-16 must receive a 'full-time education' suitable to their age, aptitude and abilities. And you can do that at home.

The Mumsnet page on choosing education simply says: "Give up your career, move into a less expensive area and cancel all social engagements for the next twelve years. Educate your children at home." Although I understand these sentiments, it would be a shame not to explore the option further.

There are something like 150,000 children in England and Wales who are being educated at home. Parents have all sorts of reasons for choosing this way of life: perhaps their children were unhappy or were being bullied at school; maybe a suitable school is too far away; or perhaps the parents just feel that the present system cannot deliver the sort of education that children deserve - where they are not pressured into achieving impersonal goals in a system that seems to care more for league tables, the National Curriculum and group control than it does for the development of a child's love for learning and need for creative play and 'work'.

Of course, home education takes up time - but imagine an end to school runs, and pre- and after-school care! Many 'experts' (but don't let that put you off :-)) reckon that the actual time a child takes to 'learn' to read, write, do arithmetic and so on is remarkably short - what is more important is that a child is doing it at his/her own pace and with support and encouragement. After all, we don't all learn to read at 5 or 6, and do long division at 10 or 11 - if at all!

My partner and I home educate our six-year-old son (and intend to home educate his four-year-old brother) after he spent one frustrating and fruitless year at what is reckoned to be a good school. Perhaps our experience - and those of other home educators we know - would be helpful to anyone considering home education. So please fire away with any questions, objections or concerns you have...

Hello,
I'm afraid this reply is a bit long, but bear with me :-)
Our six-year-old had been going three days a week to a private nursery, which he enjoyed a lot, from the age of three (and our four-year-old is there now). It's a pretty average but happy and mixed nursery, with little in the way of 'teaching' - they do a bit of letter formation and counting, but mostly drawing, painting, singing, dancing, dressing up and charging round the garden.

The local school is a CofE infant and junior school in a 'leafy' part of London (we're in the scruffy end of the parish :-)) with good reports from parents, Ofsted etc. Our son went there in the term before he was five and almost straight away there were 'problems'. He's a bright, active, interested lad and was bemused that most of the time at school was spent sitting down, not talking or moving, and being made to write out the letter 'A' thirty times, and so on. He's also the sort of lad who questions why he has to do certain things, and his teacher was pretty poor at explaining - rules were rules and were there to be obeyed, full stop.

Of course, a school needs order and discipline, but only because it can't function any other way. This 'control' aspect seemed to me to be more important than any other part of a teacher's job - apart from delivering the National Curriculum in an incredibly inflexible way. The idea that every child who is five can and will be able to read and write flies in the face of all our experience as parents. Children do all sorts of things at different rates and different times - and are usually best at creativity and learning when they're free to 'choose their moment' as it were.

As is the way these days, lots of stuff that I remember doing in the playground was banned - physical contact games, running and generally yelling - so our son would come home from school and need an hour or two running around, playing football or whatever, just to satisfy his need to be physically active.

It was becoming clear to us as his parents that his frustrations - and those of the school, which seemed incapable of accepting anything other than quiet, compliant little children - were not going to go away while he was at school, so we decided to take him out of school at the end of the summer term. To give you some indication of his teacher's attitude, she told my partner that 'children should learn to be bored' - after we had queried her decision to punish our son for fidgeting and talking by making him stand facing a wall for twenty minutes (which is not necessarily cruel - just an amazingly stupid way of dealing with a 'bored' child).

We 'de-registered' him from school - all you need to do is inform the headteacher of your decision, and you don't need his/her permission or that of the LEA. The only legal obligation on the LEA after that is to satisfy themselves that the child is receiving a 'full-time education' (whatever that is) suitable to his/her age, aptitude and abilities. It's a very woolly bit of law - some LEAs demand to see evidence such as written work on a regular basis, whereas others might just make do with an informal chat with the parents. Our LEA, in fact, hasn't contacted us at all since our son was de-registered last September. Most LEAs should offer a sympathetic ear (but no financial support) to home educating parents, but many in fact don't even let parents know that home educating is legal. If your child is younger than five, there's no obligation to tell the LEA at all that you are going to home educate.

You asked about SATs - which are usually presented as testing the children, but are in fact there to test the school. Typically, worried parents see them as essential hurdles for their children to jump over, for fear of 'falling behind'. Personally, I'm saddened by the often hysterical way that children are pushed, forced, coached and coerced into achieving all sorts of things that are in reality quite meaningless - I'd suggest that any happy child who is given support and encouragement but little or no formal teaching will be perfectly able to read, write, do arithmetic and know and care about tons of stuff to do with the world by the time they're, say, ten. Exactly when they do these things is quite beside the point, in my opinion. And the school our son went to was more, not less, likely to act against this natural curiosity and desire to learn than it was to support it.

I'd better leave it there for now, but I'll post later about what home educators often call the 'dreaded S word' - socialisation. But if you've any queries about any of the above, please let me know.

Best wishes

message withdrawn

I'm sorry your son had such a poor teacher and that has put you off schools. I asssume he has plenty of social interaction with kids of his own age at other times.
Is there any conflict in your parent/teacher roles? What will you do as he gets older?

Hazzy why do you sneer at the term 'socialisation'? it cannot be emphasised too much in my opinion. There's more to life than intellectual stimulation. Remember being a child? I think of the games we played at lunchtimes, the friends I made at school, the laughs we had in lessons. And as for sport, how can you possibly replace those team games at home. And yes I do remember being bullied, but that is part of life that I shouldn't have been protected from. I got all the qualifications I could ever need, but I certainly don't remember the lessons. So what are your children going to remember?

Hazzy, I know some children have special needs, but for your normal child how can you possibly give them what school provides, i.e.friends of their own age and YES socialising.

My main objection to home education is the socialising aspect too. Academic qualifications are only one side of what a person needs to succeed in life. How do home educators get round this - are there networks? shared online classes?
Hazzy, I don't blame you for removing your son from a school where he had to learn to be bored though!

Hello Lil,
I didn't mean to sneer at 'socialisation' - I called it the 'dreaded S word' because it's usually the first objection that people have when they hear you're home educating - so we get used to hearing about it :-) Of course the learning of social skills is important, but maybe we need to look at how it happens within the school system.

Schoolchildren spend most of their day among a large group of people who's only thing in common is their age - except for one adult (the teacher) who tells them all what to do. This doesn't look much like 'the real world' to me, where one meets all sorts of people of all ages, backgrounds, interests and so on. Social skills are learned in large and small groups, formal and informal settings, among people of all ages, at the park, at the shops, in places of business, in places of entertainment, in private homes, with friends, relatives and strangers.

Taking a chosen item to the checkout and paying for it is a social skill. Ordering a meal in a restaurant is a social skill. Writing a thank you letter is a social skill. Comforting a hurt sibling is a social skill. Once learned, these skills are easily transferred to other situations with other individuals. It is the quality, rather than the quantity, of social interactions that will teach our children how to successfully relate to other people.

The 'socialisation' that most people think in connection to school only seems to happen in the 'times in-between' - at lunch, break-time and after school. And without wanting to exaggerate, I think we mustn't forget the social problems associated with the school environment: reports from the USA and Britain that a significant minority (30-40%) of schoolchildren are involved in bullying, either as victims or perpetrators - or sometimes both; tens of thousands of children in the USA (and increasingly here) who are dosed up with Ritalin and other behaviour-altering drugs in order to perform in the school environment; and the sometimes harmful effects of adult-free 'peer-group pressure', where children feel coerced into fitting in.

In my opinion, a 'peer' isn't just someone of your own age - it is someone with whom you have something equally in common, regardless of age. When it comes to cryptic crosswords (a passion of mine), many of my peers are significantly older than me, but if, say, I was to take up learning the violin, I suspect my peers would be seven- and eight-year-old children :-) Nowhere in 'the real world' would I regard my peers simply as people born in the same year as me. In fact, I'd suggest that the relative lack of diversity among age-restricted peers is likely to limit a child's ability to be socially competent in a whole variety of 'real world' circumstances.

On a practical level, there is no reason for home educated children to be cocooned from the rest of the world (which is why perhaps 'home-based education' would be a better phrase). There are hundreds of opportunities for meeting and interacting with adults and children - who aren't after all in school all the time :-) I can sympathise that this is more difficult if one lives in a very isolated area, but we go to the shops, museums, libraries, clubs, parks, friends, family, neighbours and so on (at little or no cost) and talk to and interact with all sorts of people. Of course, these experiences are also likely to bring up life's more unpleasant experiences - 'nasty' people, fighting etc - but these things can be discussed with children, who can form their own ideas, with support and encouragement, based on what they see around them. Children in those circumstances aren't being prepared for the real world - they're already there.

Best wishes

Agree with SMls and Lils comments about the socialisation aspect. Hazzy do you ever/is it possible to combine with other home educators for part-time group classes? What you describe so thoroughly and lucidly obviously works for you, and you have my admiration.

What will you do if your child wants to go to school in a few years time? Do you try and give an education that could enable him to tackle the National Curriculum say, at 9 years old if he wanted to go back to school? I say this because I knew a boy who was not home educated, but went to private schools where the emphasis was on creative self expression, not the three 'Rs'. When he got to age 9 or so, he felt a bit left out as he saw those of his age reading well and so able to read a menu, play on the computer, have comics etc while he still found reading very difficult and felt he had more in common with much younger children. He did catch up with these skills very quickly when he went to a more structured school.

Obviously as you say, home education is about learning to read and write etc at the children's pace,and they will get there whenever - possibly sooner than some children in big school classes.

But do you ever worry that you child my feel 'out of synch' with his peers? And would you give into pressure if he wanted to go to a conventional school?

But Hazzy, don't you think that throughout life (University, Work, Sporting Clubs etc) we are thrown together with people with whom we don't necessarily have anything in common?. I don't have a view on home education but I do think its important to learn to fit in with and get along with a disparate group of people.

Hazzy, you've obviously thought this out very thoroughly! I am interested in home educating myself, but am not convinced by what you just said about socialising, as it doesn't tie up with my own experience.
Firstly, socialising experience HAS to be gained outside the family. My mother thought it didn't matter that we never met other children because we had siblings - how wrong she was. It took all of us years to get used to other people.
Secondly, it sounds a bit exclusive to say that peers aren't generally of one's own age, though I'm sure that wasn't your intention! It doesn't do a child any favours to place them in an environment composed of people of similar intelligence and tastes to their own. On the contrary, they should be learning how to interact with all kinds of people, clever and stupid, rich and poor, from all different races, religions and backgrounds. When they are older, they will then have a firm foundation on which to choose their company. I agree that it's important for a child to be confident with a wide age range, but suggest that it's more important for them to be confident with their age contemporaries. I was at university with a few people who seemed to be precociously middle aged, I didn't envy them!
Bullying is a problem, I agree - but it's the last reason that would make me educate my children at home. What a negative message to give them, that they are too precious or too dangerous to take part in the same world as other children of their age.
Similarly with other school related problems - isn't it better to support your children as necessary and let them see you knowing how to conquer such problems rather than just take the child away from them?
The trouble with gaining skills by socialising in the real world is that it is difficult to reproduce the relationships you get at school. My school friends are still the women I know the best in the world. Not many families in the UK socialise to an extent that would replace the friendships that children make at school, or live in the sort of communities that would make this possible.
It is also not true to say that socialising at school only occurs in breaks - my teachers were the only adults outside my immediate family that I knew well.
I would be thinking more seriously about home based education if it was semi home based, eg with shared activities such as sports with other home educated children, the important thing being that they would see each other on a regular basis. Evening classes aren't the same, as the participants tend to change frequently, also, they've all got their own circle of friends at school, so no incentive to make new ones ( the lonely person's familiar scenario!).

Hello Tigermoth,

To answer your first point, yes, there are lots of local groups of home educators who get together for 'play' sessions and trips out to galleries, parks, museums, castles and so on. Most of these sorts of places are happy to accommodate all sorts of groups and the children can feel free to follow worksheets or not while they're there.

On your second point, of course we wouldn't stop our child from going to school if that's what he really wanted (I'm tempted to say in the same way that a parent would consider letting a schoolchild leave if that's what they really wanted). I'd hope that decision had been reached though after a good chat about what school was likely to offer that home educating can't.

In fact, many home educators do follow the National Curriculum or similar alternatives and many children only start being home educated during their teenage years. But there's plenty of evidence that home educated children usually learn 'quicker' than schoolchildren of the same age - often it's the parents' lack of confidence in their own abilities that causes concern in this area. We're all good teachers when we want to be, it's just that few of us have the confidence to do it in front of thirty children...

Yes, I sometimes have worries about our son being 'in synch' with those of his age, but when I think about it, I think it's a false worry. Perhaps we care too much about fitting in - and children worry about it because they have no choice about fitting in when they're at school. Many people are naturally unsociable (as we all are from time to time) and don't fit in, but I don't think there's anything particularly terrible about that. As long as children have the love and confidence of supportive parents, that confidence to follow their own paths in life will usually rub off on them.

To answer Croppy's point, we do have something in common with people at university, work and sports clubs - ie learning together, working together and playing together. Of course, we not going to become friends with everyone in these situations - why should we? - so perhaps 'getting along' with people is more important than 'fitting in', which suggests a degree of uniformity that most of us would find unattractive.

The activities of home educators I've outlined before probably make it more not less likely that children grow up being aware of, appreciating and 'getting along' with all sorts of people who are different from them. In a school whose intake is decided by catchment areas or (in the case of private schools) parental income, children are unlikely to meet a wide range of people of all ages, backgrounds and so on.

Best wishes

Hello Sml,

Hey, I think we're in a lot of agreement here :-) You say, "Socialising experience HAS to be gained outside the family". I agree completely, which is why I prefer the phrase 'home-based education' to 'home education'. You say, "It doesn't do a child any favours to place them in an environment composed of people of similar intelligence and tastes to their own". I absolutely agree, but this is very likely to happen at school - state schools are being encouraged to become 'specialist', private schools select their pupils and many schools have catchment areas that are pretty uniform socially and ethnically.

If you do get out and about with your child/ren, there are hundreds of places, people and activities to learn from and learn to be 'socialised' about - our son would happily spend half an hour watching a man build a brick wall. He'll ask what's going on, what are you doing now, what's that tool for and so on. You'd be surprised how most people are only too happy to chat to an interested child - who's not getting in the way! After all, most people don't bite :-)

We'll be on the bus and he'll ask how someone becomes a bus driver, how long do they work for, do they take the same route all the time and so on. I don't think he's remarkably bright or intelligent, it's just that he learns that way - and schools generally haven't the time or resources to foster that natural curiosity.

When you say, "The trouble with gaining skills by socialising in the real world is that it is difficult to reproduce the relationships you get at school," I'd reply that the relationships were got at school because you were at school. Most of my long-term friends are school-friends as well, but you'd have to show that home-educated children don't make lifelong friends in order to prove that the school environment is more likely to foster friendships. And as far as I know, there's no evidence that that's true.

You comment that, "Bullying is a problem, I agree - but it's the last reason that would make me educate my children at home. What a negative message to give them, that they are too precious or too dangerous to take part in the same world as other children of their age." I don't think that to home educate children is to mollycoddle them in any way - and I think that in the rest of life we don't tolerate bullying. Of course it happens, but we can do something about it - report it in the workplace, tell the police if it's violent - or simply avoid it. A schoolchild can't avoid it because s/he doesn't have the choice and very often the parent only hears about it after much of the damage has been done. I think any parent that tells a child that bullying just has to be put up with is putting across a profoundly negative message.

Best wishes

Hazzy, I do agree with much of what you are saying, and I wish you well in your enterprise. But I'm still not convinced that it's practical in modern Britain to take away all the social contact that children get at school and try to reproduce it in the home/family environment. All the examples of out of school socialising that you've given are things that school educated children do as well - but they also have around 1 1/2 hours a day totally free to socialise with people of their own age, with no parental input - it can't be easy to reproduce that.
I also 100% disagree that we can't do anything about bullying at school. I have asked lots of people about this, and the recurring theme is "my parents never asked/ I never told my parents". I keep a closer eye on my children, and I am not afraid of raising any problems with parents or teachers, or of pursuing the matter to a satisfactory conclusion. I am thinking of some dreadful cases of teenage bullying here, not amongst primary school children actually.
Sometimes it's hard to see the whole picture until afterwards, but in hindsight, I am very grateful that I got away from my family to go to school, as it was the only way I got a different perspective on life.

PS - Seems to me that the best environment for a good social mix is a state school in a rich area, that way you get all backgrounds - anyone else agree?

Hazzy, surely children at primary school have no more in common with each other than at university or anywhere else. As you say, at University they are there to learn, well so they are at school. At all stages of life, we are thrown in together with groups of different people and I personally think it's improtant to learn to get along with all sorts from a young age.

In any case, for young children, I do think that age is the most important single factor. Most people develop their specific interests later in life (unless you did cryptic crosswords at 5!) and it does seem to me that there are universal things (music, books, entertainment, clothes etc) which tend to appeal to say, 6 year olds. The same can't be said of say, 36 year olds.

I don't think "fitting in" necessarily implies uniformity. To me it suggests being accepted as part of a group, usually this can happily encompass many different types of personalities and so on. As for bullying, well it certainly doesn't stop in the school yard. Any office I've ever worked in has a bully - to me it's a fact of life.

Overall, for my child I value the ability to socialise and make friends far above academic qualifications as in my experience, that's what makes for a happier life.

sml, I suppose it depends on whether the local catchment area for the school is uniformally rich or not. If there is ( as is usualy the case)a variety of different housing etc in the catchment area then it seems likely you'll get a wide social mix at the school. I must say that at all the state schools either I or my son have atttended in wildly differing areas of the country, the social mix was pretty diverse.

Hazzy, Isn't there a differernce between helping a home-educated child to stand up to an isolated case of intimidation from a stranger, ie calling the police etc and helping them to stand up to intimidation from schoolmates they see every day? I don't mean extreme bullying, just children not always rubbing along together for a whole variety of reasons.

Personally, I think it's much, much harder to stand up to your friends and peers whom you see all the time, than it is to stand up to a hostile stranger whom you may never see again. If your child has no experience of this process at school, how can you replicate it when they are not part of a regular mixed social group. If they are mostly with people who are tacitly 'on their side, aren't you sheltering them from reality, a little bit?

Do ever worry that your child is maturing more quickly that most other children of his age like those children we see in the papers?

You still haven't said what you will do as he grows up, will you be able to give him a balance of subjects? How will you teach chemistry for example? I certainly couldn't teach my daughter a language. The stereotypical home educated child appears very good at maths!

Thinking about the socialisation aspect of school. How did the members of Mumsnet meet their 'best' friends? My closest friends are from school (2 of those from primary1). Yes, I have friends from Uni and work but in times of real bother it is my friends from school that I would turn to, these are people that I do not see often (due to distance) but as soon as a speak to them it is as if we spoke yesterday. You said that 'you'd have to show that home-educated children don't make lifelong friends in order to prove that the school environment is more likely to foster friendships'. I'm not suggesting home-educated children won't make long term friendships but it is the experiences we shared at school that helped to build our friendship. I

You have a lot of negative images to break down!

message withdrawn

To pick up on Kate71 point, I have made a lot of friends since my eldest went to Playgroup/Nursery and then onto Primary 1 last summer. We live in a very rural area, and i do agree that socialisation is vital to children in these circumstances, I was an only child and so no one except from school or my cousins who lived over 150 miles away. But, I do also know of some children at our school who were educated at home and did primary 7 at our school before going onto the High School, they were bright, articulate and very sociable children, but they lived in a group of over 10 families. Don't really know what else to add, except I would end up sitting in a cage drooling, hair verticle, glasses askew, beading sweat, trying not to swear, and desperate for a fag and a gin and that would only be at 9.00 am in the morning!. Think that teachers do a great job, I know our ones do and that is not the case all the time, can't imagine a class full of Primary1 or hormonal children going onto the High School, makes me even greyer just thinking about it.

Hello,

Just to pick up on a few points. Croppy, you say, "Overall, for my child I value the ability to socialise and make friends far above academic qualifications as in my experience, that's what makes for a happier life." I couldn't agree more :-) It's unfortunate that the perception of home-educated children is of some sort of weird superbrains being hothoused by their equally weird parents. Believe me, this isn't true of any of the home-educating families I know. With some people, that might be their choice, and I wouldn't want to stop them, but the home educators I know see all of life as a learning experience - and not just academic learning, but learning about yourself, about other people and about how best to pursue what is important to you in life. [And Kate71 - don't worry, most home educated children aren't especially good at maths:-) Unless, of course, they love maths, in which case they can follow whatever paths they choose.]

Hello Sml - you wrote that, "All the examples of out of school socialising that you've given are things that school educated children do as well - but they also have around 1 1/2 hours a day totally free to socialise with people of their own age, with no parental input - it can't be easy to reproduce that." Maybe we don't want to reproduce that experience - and maybe we shouldn't worry too much about people of our own age. My own experience at school (which was, by the way, a very happy one) made me aware of the pressures to stick to one's own age group - it was rare to make friends or socialise with those who were a few years older or younger. I'm sure I was out of the ordinary in that I had (and still have) probably half a dozen or so close friends from my schooldays, one of whom is five years older than me, one is four years younger, two or three are a year younger and two or three were in my year.

As I said before, we all have lifelong friends that we made friends with at school - but I suspect that is just the age at which those friendships are made. As most children go to school, it's impossible to know what part school plays in that process, but equally it might only be marginally relevant.

Anyway, it's getting late - where's my glass of wine?:-)

Best wishes

Robinw
I certainly don't trust people in authority to protect anyone from violence. All the authorities in the UK routinely turn a blind eye every day to racial violence, for example. Don't doubt this; a black person goes to the police with 10 stitches in his head from being beaten up and is calmly told there is nothing they can do about it because he doesn't have any witnesses, end of story. (Oh, except now that some racist Asian youths in Bradford are apparently attacking white people - that's a huge scandal!!).
The lesson I expect my daughter to learn is that her parents will protect her from violence. If she has a problem with being bullied at school, I can assure you that it will not be tolerated by me, and I will use all legal means at my disposal to put a stop to it.
I think that you didn't give your daughter the impression of being too precious, because you moved her to another school, and she could see that the other school was different, and it wasn't she who was out of step. It would have given her a more negative message had you removed her from the school system altogether because of bullying.

Hazzy I'm still not convinced! I know it wouldn't have worked for me when I was at school age, and am not sure I could make it work for my children. But rest assured, here's at least one person who doesn't see all home educated children as weird! I'm very interested in how you tackle the socialisation issue. Also very interested in the possibilities offered by technology, eg online lessons etc - is there anything like this available do you know?

Hazzy
I just can't get my head around the fact that home-educated children are not spending much time with other children and you think that's fine. The only parallel I can find in my life is that I went to an all girls school, got a good education had a good time etc, but when I went to Uni I was out of my depth/backwards men wise! Even though I socialised outside school with boys, it was not the same as having to interact with them 8 hours a day at school. It must be 10 times worse if you spend your day NOT interacting with children ofeither sex.

And I find it worrying that the children are only exposed to the parents point of view. You are going to 'indoctrinate' your child with your view on life as you teach, its natural to do so. How can your child pick up new and independent ideas if they have only 1 teacher. When you think of all the varied adults who taught you at school, you picked up lots of different views on the world.

When do you propose to send your children to school? I mean you can't teach the GCSE curriculum for example. And you say you'll wait until they ask you, but if they only have your negative view on schools, they're hardly going to buck the traces!

Sml, I wonder why you are happy to raise your children inthe UK if that is your view of the authorities here?

Very interesting discussion here. Just to throw in my own thoughts. It is worth remembering that historically schools are very new. In the west they didn't really get going until after the industrial revolution and were used as a method for very young children to be kept safe while their parents worked. Given that they were usually a charitable or church run group the children were not allowed to "sit idle" but were taught passages from the bible etc.
Previous to that rich kids had tutors (to instruct them how to be a gentleman) and working class kids would either learn their parents' trade or another local person's trade. There are some rural societies in unwesternised parts of the world where that is still pretty much what happens (not the rich kid bit of course).
I have huge reservations about our school system in the UK. I am just about to start training to be a Montessori teacher myself and I am have real concerns about where our little boy will go to junior and senior school. My own memory of school was that it was such a drag. Very few lessons and teachers stimulated my interest and I only stayed at school and did my exams because I was afraid of my mother and wanted to go to university. I left school 12 years ago (locally it was known as a very good state school), so I don't know if things have changed radically since then but I doubt it.
My own view is that part of the problem is huge classrooms and an exam based education culture. I don't know what the answer is though. I certainly couldn't educate my own son at home as once he got remotely good at maths or science, I would be completely scuppered. Our only real option is to pay for private education or to move to an area where there is a good state school.
Good luck Hazzy.