Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

Guest post: "This September, my daughters won't be going back to school"

800 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 30/08/2016 12:49

When we first considered home education, I pictured handwriting practice, daily reading tasks, desks and mini-projects. I used to be a teacher; I imagined some kind of co-op, where I'd teach four or five children Stuff I Knew and another parent would include our children in a similar group for Stuff They Knew.

We decided to opt out of the school system after a brief dabble with preschool for Evie, who's now five - her four-year-old sister Clara won't be starting school this September either. Society can sometimes laugh, with varying degrees of mirth, about the lack of fun and creativity in schools. But given the government push for testing and an ever-narrowing curriculum, we stopped laughing and just felt a bit sad. We decided that home educating would suit our family better.

Of course, we had early worries about doing the right thing for the kids; qualifications; making friends; the embarrassment of telling people.

Although I'd initially envisioned a kind of school at home, my children don't learn that way; in fact, few of us learn that way. It's how schools work because there are 30 children in each group with one adult, and that's hard to manage. It's what has always been done.

We're usually wet or muddy or covered in ice cream or - on good days - all three. Some days I'm Queen Elizabeth I at Hampton Court Palace (but a nicer one at Evie's instruction, because our ginger queen wasn't known for her benevolence) and the girls are my daughters (but secret, illegitimate daughters, because she didn't have any really). Other days we might go back to check on some tadpoles at the park. The girls are enthusiastic explorers and biologists. I'm a rather repetitive and slightly irritating Protector of the Tadpoles. No tadpoles have been harmed, but many have been stroked.

I always knew that these kinds of activities were legitimate ways of learning, but surely you'd also need lessons, or some form of structured teaching. I had read a bit about unschooling but I wasn't really convinced. The essence is that you live with your children and allow them to live: offer lots of opportunities and resources, and allow the children to choose how they spend their time. Be supportive and talk to them. It's the parenting that most of us did when our children were babies and toddlers. They learnt to talk and walk, and recognise individuals, they knew their colours and how to count, and how to stack things, and what would make them feel better if they got hurt. As I started to look for and find learning in ways that don't look like school, this way of educating, and living, made the most sense to me.

We're lucky these days that lots of unschooled kids have grown up and been to university; they're getting good jobs and living satisfying lives without ever having faced the stress of year 6 SATs or last minute Sunday night homework or bullying.

So we're unschoolers. We don't do it in exactly the same way as anybody else, because everyone has their own set of interests and learns in different ways. We go on all sorts of trips organised by home educating parents - to museums and nature reserves and sites of historical interest - and a whole lot of unorganised trips to parks and IKEA and the swimming pool. We read lots of books and go to the library to get more. We play with toys. We watch a lot of Netflix and YouTube and are currently in a phase of playing an abundance of Kirby's Epic Yarn on the Wii.

We spend time with lovely friends and travel around the country to see family. We never take tests; we're never limited by a curriculum; we don't sit if we want to run, nor do we run when we need to sit.

I don't worry about the same things any more, which luckily leaves me time to worry about the mess, or the sibling squabbles or what we'll have for tea instead. I know this is the right choice for us. If they need qualifications there are plenty of ways to get them; they have lots of friends of all ages; and I'm not at all embarrassed to tell people that we're not on holiday, actually, we home educate.

OP posts:
drspouse · 31/08/2016 15:36

Why have you decided those things already? My DS is about to start Reception and I haven't decided any of those things. I wouldn't have thought any of them would be set in stone till DCs were about 14 except maybe jockey (because of the physical needs and riding being a life long skill). That is, if you are prepared to give them a rounded early education and a more academic and/or specialised secondary education.

Jockey - probably more about physical type but if he really wanted to learn to ride, fine, and if he was suited, again fine.
Videogame designer - these days mainly achieved by doing something like engineering or computing at university. Easily achievable with the right school grades.
Astronomer ditto. Probably more something you study at university and then go on to use your mainstream physics degree in something else, with this being a fairly minority career, but why not? Good grades in maths and physics at school, good degree, become the next Astronomer Royal.
Clothes maker - as I do this myself I'd hope he gets enough skills to make his own and go professional if he wants. I don't sell clothes but occasionally sell other crafts. Plenty of people have done this as a result of school teaching though. Some of them just did it because it was an option that looked vaguely interesting - not through a prior burning desire to make clothes.
Piano tuner, singer - we already do music lessons - no need to cut this out. Singers mature late actually so choir as a child plus singing lessons as an older teen are what a boy would probably need.
Chef - I should hope that anyone who learns to cook for the house as a child, and can get a couple of GCSEs, could work in catering. Silly example as I'm pretty sure you have not actually removed the avenue to this.
Zookeeper - the local workers at our mini-zoo usually start out as after school volunteers and then pick up a few hours and then get a more full time job. But some biology qualifications are going to be very helpful.

So if you've cut all these out, then I'm even more worried about the limitations of home ed!

You haven't read my post though. I worry about the possibility of educational neglect full stop in the early years by those parents with anti-structure views. For younger children of committed parents then I'm sure it can work (I just prefer to expose my children to things I can't introduce them to, as well).

It's the older children who have not wanted to do Maths and whose parents have taught them a little arithmetic that I worry about. Not doing 12 years of school maths and not doing ANY school maths are rather different things. Some children can teach themselves GCSE maths. Some would like to be videogame designers but struggle to do mid level maths on their own - and their parents scraped a GCSE so can't teach them - with a committed expert school teacher they'd sail through, going way beyond their parents.

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 15:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

freetrampolineforall · 31/08/2016 15:58

Well done for getting a level maths with no prior learning. You obviously have the aptitude for it. Please don't kid yourself that everyone else with an interest in, say, design could do that.

drspouse · 31/08/2016 15:59

I know of home educators who have, as I said, done maths qualifications with no problem and no prior formal learning.
Do you mean a parent who does not have even GCSE Maths has taught a child and the child has got an A? I think that's possible if the child was naturally gifted (most are not) or the parent had been through a different education system to a more advanced level, and was able (not just prepared) to adapt their teaching methods to a less able child.

For a child who struggles with Maths, and a parent who also struggled with Maths and could not reach that level themselves (or who was very very good at Maths and couldn't understand how to explain step by step) this is somewhat less believable.

Or do you mean that the child re-entered formal education and (under the tuition of a qualified teacher) got A in GCSE Maths?
That is somewhat less unbelievable as that is what qualified teachers are for.

I believe in exposing my child, as I've said, to a wide variety of experiences and areas of knowledge. Some of them I personally could never dream of bringing to the table (and neither could my DS without having experienced them already). Is that what you call "stuffing them with information and experiences"?

If so, why are home edders going on about how their children get such a wide range of experiences? If it's wrong to have a wide range of experiences?

I'm confused. But I guess that's because I can't think outside the box.

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 16:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

drspouse · 31/08/2016 16:13

For younger children, though, the home needs to be structured so that they can choose a variety of things to play and they need to have opportunities to learn outside the home. That's what I mean by structure in earlier years.

Offering them a small range of toys and the TV, not setting up trips outside the home unless they ask (and how do they know what's available?) and even then not bothering to arrange them because they are too much effort, happens. I've seen it. It's educational neglect. I am under no illusion that I could provide the range of play based experiences in my home/outside that a school can. So I don't. But for some unschoolers, setting up something that children may or may not choose to experience is either too structured or too much bother.

I know many teens do return to or enter formal education. How do those teens that do not know what would be available if they did choose to do so? How can they know whether they'd like to go to university to do Physics if they have no idea what it is because they got captivated by History and never did any science? Or because they hit a stumbling block in Maths and decided not to do any more? What do the ones who were "busy doing craft" but then find they can't make a living doing it, do with their lives?

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 16:24

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

brasty · 31/08/2016 16:32

From what I have read, children who are unschooled are much much more likely to go into the creative fields, than schooled kids. Which is not surprising.

Blackberryandapplejam · 31/08/2016 16:37

Interesting thread. Lots of posters who are clearly giving their all to HE and doing their absolute best to educate their children. I'm uncomfortable with those who slip through the HE net though. I know of siblings who were home schooled throughout their teens. One still at home with mother and the other, now 19 who is at further education college doing GCSEs - qualifications that my own 19 year old completed when she was 16.

I also worry about those children who are pulled out of school so that they do not attend senior school under the guise of HE when in fact here is no intention for these children to receive any further schooling - example the local traveller children.

Eolian · 31/08/2016 16:37

I always read threads on H.E. because I've never quite managed to get my head around it. I loved school and have never really been out of the education system (school, then university, then teacher for 20 years so far). My children are 8 and 11 and really like school.
All my instincts scream at me that H.E. is a bad thing, for all the reasons given above. I have taught kids who have entered school after H.E. and they have all been a bit... odd. Plus I can never imagine how parents actually successfully H.E. - I'm quite sure I'd be rubbish at it, and I've got 20 years' teaching experience.
However... although I think that being in a school setting is generally good for kids, there is a great deal wrong with schools in this country (and probably elsewhere) these days. And maybe some of the principles of unschooling could be applied in schools to make them better.
I would not dream of taking my kids out of school unless I had no choice, but the more the government messes with the education system and makes it ever more like a data-driven business operation, the more I begin to understand why people choose to H.E.

drspouse · 31/08/2016 16:45

maybe some of the principles of unschooling could be applied in schools to make them better.
I feel like this is what's happening in Reception in a good school currently. We chose our DS' primary school because we could also see it happening in Y1.
But if it doesn't happen enough in later years, we can do it ourselves in out of school time.

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 17:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Petal40 · 31/08/2016 17:12

Eolian,odd???.cheers. Mine arnt

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 17:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Petal40 · 31/08/2016 17:17

You can't go around branding a lot of children odd,for a start it's the parents who decide to home ed,not the kids also some home ed kids have autism or other issues.mine included.and odd would be very hurtful to call them..I've met lots of home ed kids,none of them odd.thats just unkind and uncalled for,unless yr trolling and I've got sucked in,why would you be so nasty

Waitingfordolly · 31/08/2016 17:18

the other, now 19 who is at further education college doing GCSEs - qualifications that my own 19 year old completed when she was 16.

I'm wondering why this is a problem? My DD actually wants to do GCSEs as soon as possible but she thinks she might want to delay doing A levels for a while, especially if she's not sure yet what she wants to do, and I don't have any problem with this at all providing she's doing something with her time. Bearing in mind all the stress that young people are under, particularly girls, I think this could be a good idea.

Blackberryandapplejam · 31/08/2016 17:33

Waiting - my daughter's fried is feeling left behind her peers. She was unable to go into an apprenticeship because she has no GCSEs. Her other friends have now completed their apprenticeships and A levels.

noblegiraffe · 31/08/2016 17:42

People dissing maths? Bring it on.

I've watched the TED talk and read the articles about maths and found them to be wholly depressing. You've got people who don't like maths arguing why they shouldn't have to do maths, and a teacher with a blinkered utilitarian view of education.

Oh we should only learn the maths that we will use and sod the rest. I read Shakespeare and school and I haven't used that knowledge since, therefore it was worthless. Nonsense.

I'll quote Tom Bennett on this, railing against another person making a utilitarian argument about the curriculum:
His main agenda appears to be that of utility: how useful in the real world is what we teach children? After all, the saw goes, when will you ever be asked to solve a quadratic equation? But that misses an important point about why we teach, and therefore what we teach. We don't aim for irrelevance, but simple usefulness itself isn’t our aim either. What we aim for is value.

We do not teach because it appears to be immediately practical and useful; we teach because we are helping children to inherit their intellectual heritage, the pearls and rubies of science, art, the humanities. We don't teach it because we think it will help them change a plug (yeah, why isn't he raging about that? Or a million other things I’ll categorise as ‘handy to know’?) We teach them literature, and mathematics, and art, and science, and a dozen other taxonomic milestones, because they are valuable; because they are important. Because without their acquisition, this generation is dislocated from the last one and every one prior to that, and every cultural and scientific asset is lost.

www.tes.com/news/blog/dont-stay-school-inspirational-teacher-bashing

As for higher maths - It's not just the maths we are teaching, there are skills that go along with the content: problem solving, resilience, logical thought, clear working out (you don't want an electrician who can't show you his coatings clearly etc). But even that aside, we teach a broad curriculum including maths so that as many doors remain open to our students for as long as possible. If my students decide they want to be an engineer at 16, they don't suddenly have to mass-cram the entire secondary maths curriculum to catch up, they've already got the background to progress to A-level. The same student (grades permitting) could equally decide to study other subjects.

And what about further study of maths in its own right? How will that spark of interest be ignited in a student who has only been exposed to fractions of pizza and financial calculations because they didn't need anything else, and their parents didn't know any better?

brasty · 31/08/2016 17:44

I went to university at 18. Those who went older often did not socialise with the 18 year olds, understandably. I think you get the most out of university by going at the same time as your peers.
I can see how concentrating on maths GCSEs would only take a couple of months. Pupils learning at school only do a few hours a week, so condensed they are probably spending about the same amount of time learning.
When I went to university I learned the most in tutorials. Not in reading texts. To develop your ideas you need to discuss them with others.

Eolian · 31/08/2016 17:51

Ok I said the ones I'd taught were odd, not necessarily all H.E. kids. Besides, my own dc are decidedly odd in some ways. But the H.E. kids I taught were all odd in a similar (but not bad ) way. Because they had not been moulded to the system, I guess.

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 17:54

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TrustIsKey · 31/08/2016 18:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Petal40 · 31/08/2016 18:08

So odd would be a poor choice of a word then.not moulded to an education system implies free thinker to me...

noblegiraffe · 31/08/2016 18:09

It's insisting on teaching maths, or anything, to a kid who has no interest in it that I have a problem with.

Which is just daft. When a kid says 'I don't like carrots', you don't say 'fine, you don't need to eat carrots ever again'. You say 'you haven't even tried the carrots, give them a go, you might like them'.

There are plenty of kids I teach who don't like arithmetic, or angles or whatever. But they'll say 'I like algebra'. I've got a kid at the moment who isn't great at numeracy, but hand him a calculator and he can do (and enjoys) trigonometry.
If that kid decided that primary school maths meant they didn't like maths and they couldn't be bothered with it any more, then they would have missed out on stuff that they do like and can succeed at.

Petal40 · 31/08/2016 18:11

My son is autistic,I'd be reporting any teacher who called him odd..id of expected better from a teacher...don't they train you to accept and embrace all children and delight in the ones who have a mind of their own....maybe not....