Home ed a place to really let rip and debate

[singingmum]

OK so it seemed needed so I'll start.
I HE.It is best fro my dc's in my opinion and that of my dp.
Why? Well a number of reasons really.I'll be short as have tired fingers from posting on other HE threads where anyone who wishes can see the full story.
My dp,my brothers,my friend and myself all attended the same comp over diff years.It was crap.
I actually became bored of learning the same stuff over and over again.My dp and brothers were pigeon holed for having learning difficulties(ie dyslexia)and were taught very badly and left to rot.My friend could learn much but was often left to it and did not do as well as she could.
My son had mega probs caused by nursery and am not putting either of my dc's go through that as my ds is bright but may have aspergers and my dd has dyslexic tendencies.
So as everyone has been letting rip indiscrimenently(bad spelling sorry)I thought I'd put it all in one place.
Let rip ladies and gents

Well, as we're letting rip and all that, we don't HE to avoid subjects, but we do HE partly to avoid the way certain subjects are taught. (mind you, that partly is a very tiny part - our motivations are much less about what we're not for, tbh)

but mb, to be clear, you are talking about gcse and upwards science really, aren't you?

I suppose my gut instinct is that there is a LOT of very poor science teachers around.

In a HE situation, parents are very unlikely to pretend that they actually know what they are talking about if they don't. They are far more likely to admit gaps in their knowledge, both to themselves and their kids, and seek help (there are a suprising number of HEing scientists round here!), get some sort of curriculum, a tutor, or whatever.

Whereas a teacher will not usually admit to kids that they are teaching a subject that they have a fundemental lack of understanding of their subject, and thusly will perpetrate wrongities. Like MY physics teacher who said, in all seriousness of quantum physics "oh no, no point thinking about quantum physics, it hasn't been proven anyway". I reiterate-grammar school. Not sink comp.

Mostly, although there are parts of the KS3 curriculum that people get fairly confused over. I've talked abut the scince curriculum, because it is the thing I know about. I dare say that my collegues in Primary could well put the argument for their parts of the school curriculum.

And if I'm brutally honest I would rather see a return to the Nature table, than have science mistaught.

Lack of decent teaching is an issue. But to my mind the answer to that isn't 'learning alongside another learner' (Although that has its place within the classroom at times) but rather having more properly trained staff. As I asked earlier, how many people think that the best person to learn to drive with is another learner driver?

but mb, HErs on here need a solution for their kids now.

In the secondaries round here, we have an exclusion rate of over 50% and less than 15% A-G passes. THAT is my choice I am NOT prepared to risk that for my kids.

I dunno about learning alongside. I think for some kids it is a VERY useful technique. I think Bruner (I know) offers a better one re scaffolding-so you have a slightly more experienced learner.

I DO tend to feel that once you get to 15 or 16, if you are reasonably competant, you CAN actually self teach a lot more than you are given credit for. You can identify your own knowledge gaps.

I do know of kids who have self-taught science and then gone off to redbricks to study it further. Its reasonably common.

The trouble is, most people DON'T like science, they do what they can to avoid it. Schools AREN'T doing their job.

One thing you don't often see with HE'd kids is a blanket hatred of any one subject. They tend to be generally interested in everything. So even if there IS wrong information (incidentally, gleaned from their school educated parents) they will still have the interest there to seek out new information. Which ISN'T always true of school educated kids, sadly.

But I doubt that it is always true of all HE kids either. Beacuse the HE wouldn't 'hate' a subject, because if they don't like it, they can just avoid it (which is another question I think). They question over whether a child should be forced to do a subject is a different issue. But at present they have to do things they don't like in school, but can (largly) avoid the in HE.

And generating self motivated learners is what the ed biz is hot on atm (The Black Box stuff)

And I sympathise re the schools. We pay to get round the same issue. I don't know a teacher who thinks the schools system is perfect. I just get a bit antsy when HE cannot see any drawbacks in it at all.

Mrs Moderates in most things me.

Have started another thoughtful thread.

have to go....kids to teach

Home educators always make a good case for what they do. Except when they (some of them) start on about the rigidity of schools, the lack of learning in schools, the drive to conformity in schools. They always seem to be describing some Victorian institution not a school of today. I can understand that if you make so radical (compared with the rest of society) decision, there is a need to defend it to the hilt but there seems a narrowness of vision too.

For example, Katy (was that the name?) described some negative aspects of her own HE and was told that could have happened anyway and probably wasn't related to the fact she was home educated. Now, I'm pretty sure that if she'd given HE a ringing endorsement, her views would have been taken as proof of its efficacy.

SueBaroo - you have raised a very good point, asking for definitions of socialisation and social skills.

For what it's worth, I often think that people get confused between socialisation and institutionalisation, both of which are necessary to get on in today's world, but are different skills.

To me, socialisation is about getting on in society at large with people of all sorts and working out how to behave with others on your and their own terms. Parents have a critical role to play in giving a good example (ie being polite, concerned, friendly when out and about in shops, at the doctor's, at the playground, with family and friends). But you largely make up the rules as you go along and adapt to the person in front of you.

Institutionalisation is about learning how to behave in an institutional setting with fixed rules and regulations that govern behaviour - like school, but also like church, the Brownies, a hospital, the workplace...

Obviously there is some overlap between the two, but I still find the distinction important as it makes you understand why it is important (a) to accompany your children in the outside world to teach them social skills (b) to send them to school (and other institutions) to learn to be accepting of a regulated environment.

And after all that, children need to be let loose to let off steam and use their own imaginations

Anna8888, interesting distinction. I'd say we have all the bases covered on that definition, tbh.

SueBaroo - I'm quite certain that it is possible to HE and to cover institutionalisation, socialisation and imagination .

I worry more about children who have too much institutionalisation than those who are HE'd.

And I do understand that some people live in places where the schools are so awful that HE is always going to be preferable.

Personally, I am very glad that I have a good school available for my daughter as I believe a good school will always do a better job of educating my daughter than I could do myself.

Actually, I don't really know what the schools around here are like. I know the primary closest to us is in a different catchment area and has a waiting-list anyway, so I presume it has a good reputation.

SueBaroo - do you children have friends who are at that school?

interesting thread. Ds, nearly three, does not go to nursery. i am struggling a little at the moment to find him enough friends to hang around with because they all go to nursery now, and have done for the last year at least. He is an excellent socialiser, and enjoys playing with his friends. i feel we are doing the right thing by him at the moment, but I am constantly asked why he doesn't go to nursery, and told that children need nursery to acquire 'socialization' skills. I am considering HE but worried he won't have enough contact with other children, as it is already a concern. I think we'll try school and have HE at the back of our minds just in case he hates it. Just wondering if the He er's children here do most of their learning with parent only or if you see much of other children in the day to day learning situations?

Anna8888, I know a few of the parents and our children having a passing acquaintance with their children, but nothing much more than that.

SueBaroo - do you think it is hard for HE children and school educated children to socialise together? Are there differences in behaviour?

I have school-ed children and home-ed children. My home-ed children have friends locally who go to school. They don't seem to have a problem mixing with them at all. They all play out together when the local children come home from school or during the school holidays.

In all honesty, I don't really think so. Much is made about HE children being more confident, but I think it's much more about the individual.

My eldest is very gregarious and confident, but her next younger sister is much happier in her own company. When they play with their schooled cousins, for example, I don't really see a lot of difference (except perhaps when they play school, lol)
One cousin is very shy and needs to be directed, but it would be difficult to tell if that was due to school or not, so I shan't attempt it

Most children just get on with other children, and particularly befriend those with similar interests and character traits.

I don't think children consider whether someone is home educated or schooled as a reason for or against befriending someone.

And I don't either.

On social occasions, my children can usually be found running around noisily, and having fun. There's not much time to discuss schooling options and lifestyle preferences when there are pirates to repel.

My dc's have to do certain subjects they dislike even though they are HE'd.
We make them do set work for about 2hrs in the morning and then they lead the rest.
My son hates english though it has always been on af my fav's.My daughter has trouble reading and would rather draw or paint so I get her to paint words and letters thereby teaching her to make things she hates fun.
And that's the point in school the subjects I loved were english,physics and generally science but I got bored as I must have redone things so many times.The work just kept repeating itself.V.boring.
My dc's know that you have to some times do stuff you hate.They know you have to behave certain ways in some situations.They learned this through experiencing life around them.
My dc's aren't only influenced by my dp nd I but by others around them.We have rels and friends who all contribute to diff areas of their education.My SFIL teaches woodwork and such,my brother is an electritian and talks about that sometimes with my dc's,my MIL likes geography so helps with that,my mum loves art so helps there and my dp's best mate(who the dc's have adopted as uncle) has sport qualifications so we can call on him for help there.
As you see wide range of subjects just from some of the basic influences around them.
As for science being immpossible to teach at home at GCSE standard,my ds is just starting that and loves that as I help him he see's me remember some things I learn't and that some things were taught incorrectly to me in school.It is possible to learn GCSE at home wether from books or other places.

I've been thinking about this a lot. And even thoug I've just said on another thread that I'm reluctant to contribute, I'm going to! I think that there is often a lot wrong with schools - (although, as NFK said,I often don't recognize either the schools or the teachers that are sometimes described!)

However, I think that as a parent, I can fill in the gaps left by the school system. I'm not convinced that HE, for all its undoubted benefits can provide all the good bits of school. It's a question of whether the lost elements are important or not. I think they are - others disagree.

It's a question of whether the lost elements are important or not. I think they are - others disagree.
---------

Very good point katelyle. That is very much where the distinction lies, really. I don't think HE parents can do the same as school, and that is half the point for a lot of people - we're not trying to replicate school.

You're right, it does all come down to whether or not we consider what they miss to be essential or not.

I agree with you sue, obviously as a parent you make a judgment into what is best for your child (as well all do). Quite often, thoughm, in HE debates these 'missing bits' are often said not to be missing, by those who HE. And that I find rather hard to believe.

So while I will have no problem with a parent who HEs saying' My kids get XYand Z out of HE and they may miss out in A, but on ballence I think it is worth the trade' I do get rather fed up of 'Nothing is missing from my child's education' which simply cannot be true, regardless of where the child is educated.

I also feel that parensts who HE do see schools as they were and not how (most) of tem are now. The school I work in has almost nothing in common with the school I attended. And those who see schooling as turning out corporate drones, incapable of argument and dissednt have obviously never met the kids that I teach!

Thank you Sue and Martianbishop - what I wanted to say only more eloquent!

actually Kate... I was thinkinmg the exact same thing about your posts!