Home educated children are more socially adept than schooled children?

[HomeEd]

Following on from issues raised in another thread, (and understanding that some children are naturally more sociable than others), what do you think on balance?

I don't think its a competitive sport, is it?

ROFL

now, what shall we talk about today?

I have been baking lovely lebkuchen, does anyone want some?

and in a similar vein, anyone know of a good website for explaining Yule to a 3 year old?

I'm not aware of it being a competitive sport. It is an issue that comes up time and time again on the Home Ed threads, hence my interest in discussing it.

One of my schooled children is more socially adept than my other schooled child. My pre-school child is the most socially adept of all. I know one home-schooled child who is, frankly, weird, and three other home-schooled children (from a different family) who are lovely. One is quite shy, the others more outgoing. I know loads more lovely children from my dc's schools, some of whom are shy and awkward, and some of whom are social butterflies.

I fear the only possible conclusion is:

Some children are more socially adept than others. Doh.

EXACTLY frogs!
That's that sorted then!
And now when the issue pops up on yet another unrelated HE thread we can point the poster in the direction of this one!

I'm not trying to be deliberately argumantative but this really is an unproveable statement - and can only be as answered in one way (the one given by frog)

I think a better question/statement would be

"Does home education hinder social skills development or help to encourage it (or indeed does it have no effect)?"

That way you can argue for any given child whether it is better or worse for them to be home educated educated or to go to school. This question is also pretty impossible to answer definitively but can at least be discussed.

Of course it is an unproveable statement, but yet it still comes up on almost every HE thread.
I am just tired of having to discuss the 'socialisation' issue on every thread, (and defend my life choices, when what I really want to know is where I can access some great literacy resources online, or such) and this thread makes the point that "some children are naturally more sociable than others" as stated in OP.

if you are tired of discussin gthe home socialisation thing - why on earth devote another thread to it???
seriously though, frog is right. It is too easy to generalise, all children are different, all home ed and school experiences are different, what works for one won?t nec. work for another.
We all know the potential pitfalls and advantages of both systems blah blah
I wasn?t going to post as I reckon it has been done to death too - and read too many heated arguments over this one to be drawn in. Only posting because of your comment about being tired of discussing it - yet happy to start a whole thread on the topic??!!!! Confused!
(As a teacher, I met quite a few home schooled kiddies (local primary schs were rubbish) who then went into secondary. Some were VERY weird, others delightful.)

Well, My 5yo eldest is very sociable and can strike up a conversation with pretty much anyone. My 3yo is very much happier with her own company than Dd1 ever was. But then, she's 3, so there's all sorts of development things happening with her in just learning the basics anyway, which would happen anywhere.

My own feeling is that learning to be sociable and interact with their own family is the priority, and more useful than learning to interact in an artificial age-peer environment like school.

My other strong feeling is that it's important to define what we mean by 'socially adept'. Do we mean shyness? If a child is shy by nature, being in an age-peer group isn't neccessarily going to do anything to change that, and may even ingrain it more.

Do we mean able to hold a conversation with someone else? There's no reason why school or home should have the advantage on that issue. Do we mean knowing about the latest trends/fashions/obssessions? Well, hands up, my girls don't know about those things, and I wouldn't call that being socially inept, anymore than I am because I don't know the in and outs of the latest Coronation street storyline

When there's other people around, my children don't sit in the corner rocking backwards and fowards murmuring the periodic table to themselves. They're generally polite to adults and other children, but they're not automatons.

So I suppose I would say that when people suggest that HE kids are more socially adept, I would want to qualify that with - there's nothing kids at school get, in terms of positive social interaction, that HE kids can't get too, but there can be social interaction that HE kids get that schooled kids don't. All depends on the kids and the parents, really.

goodness, it's almost like we're all individuals or something...

It's a tricky question, and I think SueBaroo has answered it really well.
I just wanted to add from a personal perspective that since my two boys have been home educated (just over 2 years), they have become much more confident about being themselves.
For example, our eldest doesn't have to pretend to like playing football, which he did at school in order to be with the 'in' crowd.
Our youngest doesn't get teased or hassled about his dyslexia, so he is less stressed, more confident, and much more fun to be with now.
I wouldn't say our children are more socially adept since they left school - they have always been chatty, friendly and polite - but I think they are less likely to follow the crowd now, and more likely to stand up for what they believe in, even if it differs from the views of their peers.

Well obviously this is total rubbish.

Don't bother asking why, it just is OK and what I say gos.

There I hope that cleared that little issue up.

Thanks for that, flutturkey!

You're more than welcome, anything else you want resolving just shout for me I will be more than happy to help out.

DS2's combined christmas and birthday present has not arrived, despite being assured it would be here by yesterday. Can you organise a contract hit on a very large toy store at all?
I have a feeling I may get in trouble for hijacking this thread though!

Another deviation on the theme (sorry Op) ... but do HE children generally get taught by their parents and, if so, are the parents generally ex-school teachers or just organised, confident parents who believe in themselves and their ability to give their children an education?

Nothing snide meant here, it's a genuine question. My children don't respond too well to me trying to show them how to do things (maybe it's me, maybe it's them, maybe it's an age-group thing), so I'm one of those 'thank god for schools because I don't think I could do it' types!

I'm not an trained teacher, my education goes to nearly degree level - I wasn't able to complete my degree because I became a carer for my mother.
My confidence waxes and wanes, tbh. And lets not say too much about my organization (where did I leave that turkey again?)

I think some of the issues some parents with children in school face is due in part to the idea that 'education' is something that happens in school. I guess it's often the same as my poor Dh - he struggles with recreational reading because he's reading all day at work, and it just feels like 'work' to do it at home. I imagine some kids feel the same when it comes to learning at home after being at school.

A high percentage of HE parents that I know are former school teachers, but I am not.
One thing that has amazed me about my children since they have been home educated is how they have become independent learners, and I just facilitate that.
I can see that if we spent our days with me trying to show them how to do things, there would be resistance!
I obviously help where needed, and there are certain things that they have to do everyday, no arguments.
There are also families who have a completely autonomous approach, but this wouldn't work for us.
My children are dyslexic so have tuition from a specialist teacher once a week.
I also lack confidence in my maths abilities, so they have a maths tutor too, but mainly because I don't want them to inherit my lack of confidence about the subject.
I think the parent's ability to pass a love of learning on to their child is more important than their educational qualifications - which surprised me, because before we home educated I assumed that only teachers would be able to do it effectively.

One of my HE friends is an ex-teacher and said that her main job as a teacher was crowd control!

So HE people dont teach their kids then,
they just send them to loads of clubs and get tutors in?
Whats the difference to school then? You can wear your slippers all day?

Hmmm How did you arrive at that conclusion then, Edie?

The difference in our case, ediemcreedie, is that the English school system fails spectacularly when it comes to providing an appropriate education for dyslexic children.
We don't.
It's a pretty big difference isn't it?

We have no tutors and we don't go to any clubs either. Putting the slippers on is the highlight of our day.

Runnerbean, It very much depends on the school. I wouldn't argue that is some schools teachers spend vast amounts of time in crowd control. However it isn't true of all schools. I teach is a state comprehensive school, and we don't have many major problems regarding behaviour (and we are you 'bog standard' comp). We do a good job by our students . we take them in significantly below average, and turn them out significantly above average. I love my job very much. I work with kids who are a joy to work with.

I do agree that a good education for dyslexics can very very hard to organise within the state sector.

martianbishop hellooooo!

so lovely to see you.