What do I really truly think about schools?

[emmaagain]

In response to a discussion with AbbeyA in another thread, but I can't cope with these Byzantine conversations-go-everywhere thread.

I'll try to be very succinct.

1. Schools are inherently places where people get bullied [it's a feature of closed societies which people have not chosen to enter, like prison. Where outside such societies those who don't fit in with the particular culture can choose to leave it, finding alternative people to mix with, in schools you have to stay in a room with people you dislike day in day out]. If your child is not one of the ones being bullied, you might not notice it, but look around. There is often someone being belittled, whether it is by staff or pupils. Except of course in the perfectly happy skippy schools where it never ever happens (only I'm not sure I believe in them)

1. Schools are inherently and institutionally coercive. The teacher is the authority figure, and right and proper in a room of 30 pupils not all of whom want to do what everyone else wants to do, or even be there. The alternative would be chaos. But I am ideologically opposed to my children spending their days in a dictatorship, however benevolent. (NB I am aware that most will not agree with me about it being wrong to submit children to the dictatorship of adults, at home or at school. I am a libertarian and that's an unusual stance. But I am trying to express my objections to the institution of school and this is a large part of my moral objection)

1. Schools have really weird cultures which don't reflect the world outside at all (asking permission to speak or urinate? Eating on someone else's timetable? Stopping an activity when someone else says it's time to move on rather than because you've finished?)

1. Schools, by definition, cannot enable a child to learn in the most efficient manner, as responsive to their ability and interests. Because there is a national curriculum. Because there are so many children for each adult - there's no way there could be a truly personalised curriculum. Educational professionals do their bets, I know, to respond to the needs of each child, but there's no way they're going to come close to what a parent can do, just by definition.

I said that I hadn't come across anyone in my area who didn't know that HE was a legal choice (I was told that this couldn't be true, based on the fact that whoever it was gets asked this question all the time!)

---------

No, you weren't. I responded to your comment:

And AbbeyA would you be happy if the LA automatically had the right to come into your house and checked up on your children frequently before the age of 5?
Parents are rightly trusted to care for their children up to the age of 5 unless there is a reason to be concerned.
If there are concerns then checks can be made by social services.
Why should a child be any less safe after the age of 5?

It is the same for a HE child if there is a reason to believe an education is not taking place, the LA can ask for evidence and if necessary go to court. If there are welfare concerns then the SS can ask to see the child, as they can with any child.
They have the powers to act if someone were to report a problem-as they do for preschoolers.

My children have the right to a private family life, before I give that up, I would need to see evidence that there is a risk to these HE children.

Home education itself is not a welfare issue.

"Home education itself is not a welfare issue"

As is stated VERY CLEARLY in the recently issued guidlines to Local Authorities on Home Education

link

You might find this useful to read AbbeyA, since it outlines the legal position of HE in the UK. You will notice not only the welfare aspects being addressed, but also very clear instructions to LAs.

Bottom line: parents, NOT the State, are responsible for the education of their children. If we choose to exercise that responsibility by educating our children ourselves then, in law, the State has to have valid grounds for believing that an education is not being provided.

If some of the school-lovers around here want to change the law so that the State is responsible for the education of all children, with intrusive monitoring of HE children, then the State is going to need to brace itself, as are schools and the teachers within them, for a deluge of lawsuits from the people who leave school dissatisfied with the education they received there (functional illiteracy, anyone? What's the statistic? I heard 1 in 6 school leavers but I can't believe it's that high, I mean, that would be outrageous).

oh god is this still running?

rofl.

it's gone a bit OT, though.

but you're to blame too, now, you just inadvertently bumped it

'why all schools have to be seen as evil or why all schooling parents are being seen as lazy.

Yes as a home edder it must be irritating to come up repeatedly against ignorance, but why be equally ignorant back. Just tell people about it, If it's right for a family they'll embrace it. '

OK I give up. Yurt said the above on Wednesday - very simply. This has been the only point I have been trying to make! I will leave you all to it!

Am a bit nervous about bumping this up again, but had an "experience" today and just wanted to tell someone. I've been reading this thread for about an hour and this seemed like a good place to do it!

I took my DS (2.3) to a new activity group based at a primary school today. We left at 3pm, and there was a secondary school on the same road which was just letting its pupils out. I was absolutely shocked to see at least 5 police men and women just on the road I walked down, whose job apparently it is to be there after school each day just to keep the peace.

I live in East London, and I have always lived in the area and always loved school right from when I started here 20-odd years ago. But it really looks like things are different now. I really appreciate that there are many fantastic teachers (I know lots, and respect what martianbishop has to say on here) and some generally fantastic schools, but I have a feeling that my experience, in my geographic area at least, will be fairly negative.

I was home educated and for me it was the best experience ever. I have gained a lot of qualifications and my dream job, and never had a formal lesson until I was sixteen. My sister was also home educated, and hated it. However, she also hated school most of the time.

I believe that there are drawbacks to home education and to school education, and I don't see the need to pit them against each other. Both should be valid educational choices, and some people will be more suited to a particular method. Why must people argue about how the opposing method is evil?

My main reason for being wary of HE'ing would actually be the authority figure thing. There's no way a teacher could ever wield the authority I do. When I was a child I loved and respected my parents to the extent where I found it difficult to get my head round the fact that there might be different ways of seeing the world. As an adult, it has taken quite an effort to acknowledge that much as I still love and respect them, I don't necessarily always agree with them.

I can see that my dd could end up in that situation- where she would quite simply be swamped by me and my way of being. I am, after all, well educated, eloquent and with very pronounced principles; I can see how I could quite unintentionally become overwhelming. She needs her own space.

The question of HE did come up very loosely last year, as my dd's disability has meant her missing out so much on school anyway. She reacted with horror, so that was that. If she would rather drag herself in in severe pain, than stay at home comfortably with a hot water bottle, then she's clearly telling me something. What she mentioned was partly wanting to be with her friends, partly wanting more independence from me. She is 11 and I can see her point of view. It's like my dh and I don't want to live in each other's pockets, but prefer meeting up in the afternoon after work- she wants the same chance of a life of her own. And I enjoy being educated on contemporary culture, the sort of things that would never occur to me to teach her at home.

hello Cory
I can see that many people have that sort of idea that home educators is about being with your parents 24/7 -and it could be that way, but isn't in my experience of hundreds and hundreds of home educating families.

Very many of us are autonomous educators, where the child follows their own interests and the parent facilitates that-and this leads to very independent children, who often spend longish periods with HE friends and their families.

My own children have been doing so for quite a long time now-indeed our youngest has only just returned from staying with friends, whilst practising for a gig she did with the band she plays with. She has been away for just under a week.
Although she is older than your Dd, this all did start with smaller steps when she was around 11 and of course as they are not restrained by having to get up early for school or term times, they can spend much more time with their friends than their schooled peers and cousins can.

Many things didn't occur to me to teach when we started home educating-other home ed families soon showed me the way-and our children did the rest.

For anyone seriously looking at home educating an older child, who wouldn't want a school at home situation, should consider reading Grace Llewellyn's book The Teenage Liberation Handbook: How to Quit School and Get a Real Life and Education
Title says it all really-and it will open up your eyes to the possibilities of the freedoms home education brings.