Autonomous home ed - am I doing this right?

[Lookslikerain]

Background is that DS is 5 and a half, dx with autism at 3, and technically should just have started school (Scotland). He attended an amazing mainstream nursery for 2 years, but school is just the wrong thing for him.

His attention can be awful, especially if he isn't particularly interested. From what I've read, a child-led, autonomous approach is definitely the best fit for him. I'm just concerned that I'm not doing it right, or missing something. I guess the problem is that we're just continuing to do what we've always done day-to-day. He tends to stagnate if we stay in the house too much, so we've always been a busy family both during the week and at weekends (also have DD and baby DS). We do lots of museum visits, parks, library, baking/cooking, playing, meeting friends anyway, and he's always really enjoyed that stuff. And we do all the other stuff like going to the shops, post office, running errands etc. We have also met some other home-edders too, though he was pretty uninterested.

At the moment, he's into bugs and was trying to build a bug house in the garden using an empty box today so tomorrow we're going to the library to look for some books on bugs, and we might try and build a proper, big bug house so we can attract lots of them for watching. But this is something I'd have done anyway, just because he was interested, not something I'm doing because we home ed.

Am I getting this right? I almost feel like it should be more difficult and less fun!

[Charis1]

it depends what you want for him. If you want him to be able to conform to social expectations and norms, then obviously a more structured approach is going to provide more appropriate training. Do you intend him to attend any time of lessons, or take qualifications when he is older?

[petmyunicorn]

It sounds right to me! We autonomously home educate, too. The beauty is that it is shaped to your child and family, so it might look different for every family that does it.

[ommmward]

You are getting this absolutely absolutely right

[Charis1]

Charis1 - formal lessons are probably at least six or seven years away, for a child on the autistic spectrum - it will take time before he's got to grips with all the sensory stuff that interferes with how he interacts with other people enough to be able to learn on an adult agenda. It will come, but there's no point hurrying it.

If he is autistic, then early training will impact on the rest of his life, you can't delay it.



And qualifications is funny - this is not something that the mother of a five year old needs to worry about, seriously

It is a very important consideration, particularly for a child on the autistic spectrum.

[ommmward]

But at age 5??? I think that's too early - I find the change in a child between 5 and 12 so massive, that there is no point mapping out their future aged five (and it's their future not mine, anyway, goddammit). Instead, I think a five year old needs taking to lots of metaphorical water, and then the bits they drink, we support and provide more of.

Had you asked me even a month ago, I'd have said that one of my.children had a total, shameful gap in a whole massive area of the school curriculum. They weren't interested in it, just zoned out if the conversation went that way. And then we came across a book on that subject, and the floodgates have opened. I have learned to trust that, if I make the opportunities available, and trust that children will take those opportunities when ready, they will end up aged 18 ready to take their independent steps onto work or training or university (and of course by then they will have armed themselves with the necessary qualifications, but that doesn't mean we need to follow the national curriculum from age 5!)

[ommmward]

I mean, there were books knocking around already, but a particular one just Hit The Spot.

[Charis1]

sorry, Ommmward, I have to disagree with you, after yeas of enrolling students for level 3 courses in sixthform ,it is devastating whenever a home educated student arrives hoping to be accepted onto a course, and has to be turned away, often with their dreams in tatters.

Probably more than 3/4 don't make it onto level 3, although they may be offered a place on a level 1 or 2 instead, but at an age when they will never have the opportunity to progress to level 3.

Every year we have tears and despair from these children and their mothers. It could all be avoided if home educating parents took care that their children kept up from the beginning onwards. Particularly important if the child has autism.

[ommmward]

If wanting sixth form college, isn't the important thing to get the right portfolio of GCSEs in hand at 16? If so, do you think that relies on following NC from the outset?

[Charis1]

largely, yes it does, particularly with an autistic child.

So many home ed children are just so far behind by the time they reach us, or have huge numbers of meaningless qualifications we can't count, like doing GCSE French when they are 8, etc.

[Charis1]

one of the most distressing things I have ever seen was a mother sobbing and shouting and stamping, because she had completely blown her daughters hopes and dreams. We couldn't offer the girl an A level course. She was desperate to get to university and needed English A level and maths GCSE, but her maths was years behind, and she had got English GCSE in year 9, so that couldn't be counted either.

it is always upsetting, but that mother literally howled. It isn't something I'll ever forget.

[ommmward]

Why couldn't you count a GCSE that was taken at an unconventional time? That is really interesting (and reassuring, actually, that it really is not a good idea to start doing exams aged 11 and pick up a couple a year). I expect her howl was a howl of rage as much as anything. It is still a bit catastrophising, though. The university where I work has a foundation year for people who are bright with unconventional qualifications. If they are successful in that year, they are guaranteed a place on a degree course in the same faculty. Three students immediately spring to mind who went through that sort of route and graduated with a first. All "mature" when they started - their life didn't turn out with having the right sheaf of a levels aged 18 to pursue their dream, but there totally was a route through. And others too, who have got a lot out of it, and pursued the degree with determination, but who aren't intellectual superstars, yet contribute to the department's life in other ways and we are happy to have them. I think it is a question of having really focused conversations with our children aged about 12 or 13 about how they might want to spend their late teens and early 20s, and then help them get themselves in position for that. And get savvy about whether their dreams involve engaging with an institution like mine (and what we would require for that foundation year - it's a Russell group uni, BTW), or yours, which sounds much more rigid from your description.

I still highly doubt the value of NC from the beginning, because I've seen successful alternatives so often, and so often child-led.

One last thing that is worth bearing in mind. I haven't looked at this statistic recently because it is just too depressing, but the national autistic society has stats for how many people with autism are unemployed. It's something like 80%. This tells me very clearly that the formal educational solutions through which the vast majority of autistic people are channelled do not work for them. They end up unable to contribute to the work force. So many people in the home ed community have children whose mental health and intellectual development were damaged terribly by their school experience. In that context, truly, anything we can do to raise happy, confident people who are competent to function in society and hold down a job is going to equal or better what the school system achieves 80% of the time. And we know our children, and we know what they are ready for and when. And of course they aren't accessing the broad curriculum at the same time and stage as everyone else and they are"behind" in some things and ahead in others, because their brains aren't developing along the same tracks as every one else's! That's what autism IS! So we are likely to have different priorities with our primary age children, like learning to toilet independently, eat a variety of food in a socially acceptable manner, sleep independently, recognise their own emotions and those of others, interact socially in a mutually positive way with other people, not get call-999 lost on a regular basis, have road sense etc etc etc. Without that sort of thing managed, it's pretty irrelevant to their long term well being that we made them do keystage 2 maths at the "right" moment.

[Amberdays]

Goodness Charis what a bleak image. I'm in Scotland so am a bit lost when you talk about levels and I'm not really clear what sixth form college is. Is that a one year school where kids go and get their A levels? I'm quite honestly stunned that the English system seems so inflexible, that a child could not progress to A levels EVER if they hit age 17/18 without being where the majority of kids their age are. Home ed aside, a lot of kids have an awful time at school for a variety of reasons from difficulties with their family to simply floundering around not really knowing what it is they want to do. Here in Scotland I believe it's possible to leave school with a handful of standard grades or whatever they are called, maybe none, maybe work for a bit then go to college and work towards an access course which would get them into uni. Maybe it's that the particular path you are responsible for requires quite definite things to access it but to it sounds to me like you are saying that unless you impose structure from a very early age your kids don't stand a chance at gaining a fulsome further education including uni and I just can't believe that's true when there are a variety of different routes you can take. It just doesn't make sense to me. And it doesn't seem to fit with the experience of many others I know of. Also I'm not sure it's safe to extrapolate that the key factor is lack of structure from an early age that is responsible for the kids you see being unprepared for the stage you see them, it could be for many other reasons. In every single scenario I've heard about both IRL and online kids with ASD do better at home following their interests at the tender age of five. Perhaps the problems are happening further along but to say that the structure needs to be in place age 5 for a child with ASD in order that they stand a chance academically later on seems faintly ludicrous. While I'm not denying what you see, I just think there may be more to it and that the wrong conclusions are being drawn which is unhelpful for the OP.

[NickiFury]

I'm not sure why the mother was howling. Couldn't you just tell her and her dd to take a year to get the required quals and then re-apply? Of course there are other options educationally. It's ridiculous to imply that all these HE are good for little more than the rubbish tip because they didn't keep up in line with mainstream schools.

[Charis1]

Why couldn't you count a GCSE that was taken at an unconventional time? That is really interesting (and reassuring, actually, that it really is not a good idea to start doing exams aged 11 and pick up a couple a year) because it is so easy to get 10 A-A* if you only do one or two a year for many years, so GCSEs taken in this way don't count for anything.

You are talking largely about private education, including foundation years, which cost thousands of pounds, and are out of the reach of many. yes you can do an education at all, after the age of being entitled to state education, if you can pay for it.

That's what autism IS! I know what autism is, having taught in a school for autistic children, and having then taught the same students in sixth form in another school.

Many autistic people are never going to be employed, but many are, and we have and excellent history of getting the best opportunities for our students, many of whom do go on to get jobs. The route to success can be very long and arduous, and it is never to early to start.

[NickiFury]

But one GCSE taken alone by a mature student will count when applying for a course. Why not a handful taken over the years by a younger person?

[Charis1]

I'm not sure why the mother was howling. because after several hours of several managers from several schools explaining and explaining and explaining to her, it was finally sinking in that really NO ONE wasgoing to accept her daughter onto an A level course.

Couldn't you just tell her and her dd to take a year to get the required quals and then re-apply? no, she was too old, that was the last year she could have started A levels. The entitlement to free state education isn't endless, depending on the year/local and national policy/funding etc you can rarely start A levels after 17, and NEVER after 18.

Of course there are other options educationally.
yes, many options if you have tens of thousands of pounds, but not in the state system. or you can do a year in the sixth form at the level you are assessed at -We did offer her level 1, I think. ( That is the equivalent of what 13 and 13 year olds are studying at school)

It's ridiculous to imply that all these HE are good for little more than the rubbish tip because they didn't keep up in line with mainstream schools.

not all of them, by any means, it will be assessed on a case by case basis, a good quarter who apply for level 3 ( A level or equivalent) are accepted. Of course, there are many HE children who apply for much lower level qualifications anyway, for example arriving aged 17 wanting to do a GCSE course. some will be accepted on to that, although again, we tend to find parents over estimate the level of course their child is qualified to be considered for.

It doesn't do anyone any favours accepting them onto a course they are not qualified to cope with.

[NickiFury]

Can I ask whereabouts in the UK you are? As the situations you describe just don't seem to occur in the extensive HE community that I am part of. All of the HE children I know have sailed through onto the courses they've wanted to and doing a few GCSEs and A'Levels do not cost tens of thousands of pounds round here.

[Charis1]

But one GCSE taken alone by a mature student will count when applying for a course. Why not a handful taken over the years by a younger person

because, when assessing the potential of a student, you look at their GCSE results. Actually, you don't really look as such, you just use the approved formulas provided, based on analysis of hundreds of thousands of students. The GCSE results assessed for sixthform/ college/ uni etc are those taken in KS4 only. You are assessing the potential of a student, and this is what gives you that evidence.

taking GCSEs over 3,4, 5 or even more years is so much easier that any taken earlier are excluded from any calculation.

Another factor is the break between doing the GCSE and starting the A level.

In this case, the girl had a good English GCSE, but it had been taken some years earlier, and she had no evidence at all that she had studied any English what so ever. The English department would not consider her because she had not studied any English for years. Quite apart from that, she had not done the minimum number of GCSEs in KS4 ( 5) to be considered for A levels anyway. In a very few special circumstancew we might consider someone with 4 - but "special circumstance" does not include "parents decided not to bother"

It is a different set of circumstances when someone is applying when they are older. They may be required to pass a specific GCSE simply as evidence that they know the content. Their actual academic potential will have been assessed separately.

[Charis1]

"Can I ask whereabouts in the UK you are?" London

[BertrandRussell]

While I agree that charis is catastrophising a bit, she does have a point that HEders sometimes miss. And one which I think is going to become increasingly relevant. It is becoming less and less possible to take unconventional routes into college or university- and any education which does not have as one of its objectives at least 5 good GCSEs taken at a single sitting is going to close doors. And it may be closing doors the person doesn't even realise they want to go through yet.

But as far as the OP goes, her child is 5 and what she's doing sounds fantastic. As he gets older, encourage him to record his interests. Find ways to get some conventional learning in there too- writing letters to grandma, making books, measuring materials for new and better bug houses, working out populations of bugs.......

[PieceOfPaper]

What I'm taking from this is that it is wise to consider the entry requirements of potential courses in plenty of time to allow you to fulfil them - would you agree, Charis?

I think it's rather a different question from what, if anything, you need to study formally aged 5 though.

[petmyunicorn]

I think joining a large home ed group on Facebook, especially one tha is aimed towards unschooling/autonomous home ed, would be a good support.

One woman who posts regularly and has been involved in autonomous ed for years has written a terrific piece about the hundreds of unschooled people she knows - not ONE young person or young adult is out of education, work, or employment. Most are pursuing very interesting careers - through university, self employment, etc.

All research in this area is very heartening, as well.

[NormanLamont]

My experience of HE is that DC are often ahead of their schooled peers when tested on rejoining 'the system'. And that several HEed DC I know have been offered places on courses (academic and vocational) more advanced than the courses that they applied for after impressing at interview and testing well.

A levels can be (and are) taken in FE colleges after 18 at minimal cost. And then there are Access courses and Foundation years as referenced upthread.

Lots of options.

I'm finding your catastrophic vision quite surprising too Charis

[NormanLamont]

because, when assessing the potential of a student, you look at their GCSE results. Actually, you don't really look as such, you just use the approved formulas provided, based on analysis of hundreds of thousands of students.

How depressingly formulaic.

Thankfully there are tutors and institutions who don't take that approach.

[NickiFury]

I'm in London too. Again as I say I just don't recognise the situations you describe Charis I don't know a single HE child who had issues moving in to mainstream study.

That's an interesting point though Bertrand that it's become more and more difficult so should be taken into consideration.