# Homeschooling?



## lhancock90

So lately all i read in the press is about how awful the UK school system seems to be getting. I'm not a massive fan of any of the schools around here to be honest.
I keep thinking whether homeschooling, finances depending, is a better option?
Anybody else feel the same?


----------



## freckleonear

I am home educating my two children and was home educated myself for four years. One of the biggest benefits is being able to give them an education tailored to their own individual needs. Nowadays there are lots of resources and support groups available all over the country.

There was a short documentary this week about home education in Wales: https://www.itv.com/news/wales/story/2013-08-29/can-home-education-ever-make-the-grade/.


----------



## lhancock90

Thankyou! I'll give that a watch later.

x


----------



## noon_child

I work in education and have just become qualified to teach and tbh I can get v.depressed about the priorities in education at the moment.

I have considered home schooling for the future but don't want to deprive my child of friendships and a sense of independence. Going to school for me was very much a sense of having "my life" seperate from home life and it would have driven me mad to be with my Mum or Dad 24/7.

I think if you are considering home ed. you probably already have the skills to enable your child to flourish IN school too, and to challenge the school when they institute unrealistic or unhealthy attitudes to learning (i.e unreasonable homework demands, pushing yuour child towards subjects they do well in rather than those they love etc.)

I think both have advantages and disadvantages.


----------



## Rags

Hi. My ds won't go to school until 2015 so I'm not rushing to decide yet. He was offered a nursery place to start this week (age 3 and 5 months), I am finding peoples reaction to my choice not to send him yet quite unexpected. I have had comments to the effect that I am preventing him make friends, depriving him of socialising, holding on to him. I've also been told that it will be good for me to have time away from him, I work sometimes up to 60 hours a week - don't know when I'm meant to see him then.
Sorry, that was slightly off the point. Basically at the moment my schooling thoughts are this: I have what is meant to be one of the best schools in the area across the road from me, so I should give them the opportunity to have my ds enrolled. I am more than willing to become part of their community and invest my time and energy not only for ds benefit but that of the other children. However should I feel that my son is not getting all he deserves from the teachers/school/other children I will have no quams about taking over his education myself. My brother would much rather I home schooled from the start but I would like to give him the chance. I know that there is a very good home schooling network within a short distance so I wouldn't be worried about him not mixing with others.
Anyway, as I said, I have another year and a half at least before final decisions.


----------



## JASMAK

I have considered it. I work full time thoughh, and currently my kids enjoy school and their friends. I just cant stand the system.


----------



## annanouska

To be honest... I'd never considered it. I loved school and learning and new people etc HOWEVER....I trained as a secondary school teacher and walked out. I hated it, there was no " educating" at all really more ticking boxes and juggling resources. Th bright ones got left behind due to focusing on the discipline of the naughty ones. Homeschooling is now something I am considering but don't know much about it and I know it would be frowned upon by all my family and dh xxx

He loves nursery too at the moment for 2 days a week so would I be depriving him of a social life?


----------



## freckleonear

No! Home educated children socialise and have friends just like all other children. Home-ed groups are fantastic for mixing with large groups of children, and there are lots of other activities and clubs they can attend. They also get to mix with a wide range of people, rather than just other children who happen to be the same age.


----------



## lhancock90

Thanks for the POVs. Its a lot to consider. I agree with above though. My children already mix with many others so im not concerned about the social aspects.


----------



## Eleanor ace

I have considered it. On the one hand, I loved school. I went to good schools, I had great friendships and enjoyed my independence. I also worry that I wouldn't be good enough to teach some subjects past a certain level.
On the other hand, I have taught in some schools which really make me concerned about what my children might experience.
I'm pretty sure we will send our LO's to mainstream school but if they really don't get on with it then I'd home school.


----------



## leelee

No. I wouldn't homeschool unless I felt one of my children was deeply unhappy in school. I loved school myself and am still extremely close to some of my schoolfriends


----------



## freckleonear

I loved primary school. I also loved being homeschooled. Yes, home educated children may miss out on school... but equally children who go to school miss out on being home educated! They are two very different experiences, each with their own advantages and disadvantages, so I don't really think it's fair to imply that home educated children miss out.


----------



## Pearls18

I would absolutely not consider homeschooling for practical and ideological grounds. I think the media blows things up too much for one thing, but also I think parents need to be more hands on with their children's education. No I don't want to home school, but that doesn't mean I am going to cart my boys off to school every day and keep my fingers crossed for parents evening, I will take an active role in their education, knowing what they're doing in school, helping with home work, bringing in extra help if needed and doing educational family things out of school, by being hands on my boys will not fall through the net, I will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, what problems the schools are having etc and be proactive in intervening before problems arise. Ok I know I sound like a naive first timer with the best intentions like all first time mums sound, but I am a pretty determined, opinionated and obnoxious person when I want to be, I have looked into teaching in the past and indirectly work in education in the heritage sector so it is something I am passionate about. 

Whether you home school or not, parents should be proactive in their child's education, that is what I am trying to say!


----------



## lhancock90

MarineWAG said:


> I would absolutely not consider homeschooling for practical and ideological grounds. I think the media blows things up too much for one thing, but also I think parents need to be more hands on with their children's education. No I don't want to home school, but that doesn't mean I am going to cart my boys off to school every day and keep my fingers crossed for parents evening, I will take an active role in their education, knowing what they're doing in school, helping with home work, bringing in extra help if needed and doing educational family things out of school, by being hands on my boys will not fall through the net, I will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, what problems the schools are having etc and be proactive in intervening before problems arise. Ok I know I sound like a naive first timer with the best intentions like all first time mums sound, but I am a pretty determined, opinionated and obnoxious person when I want to be, I have looked into teaching in the past and indirectly work in education in the heritage sector so it is something I am passionate about.
> 
> Whether you home school or not, parents should be proactive in their child's education, that is what I am trying to say!

This would always be my intention. But having attended schools in this area and watched my Mom pull my sister out of them i recognize they they are extremely below par.


----------



## Creative

It's something I did consider very hard when my eldest was having a real struggle at his school in Surrey. I was all up for it rather than subject him to the bigoted attitude of the school he was at, but my gran died and left us some money so we moved back to Yorkshire and because I was pregnant, I sent him to the local school for two terms in which time they got his problems diagnosed and put one to one help in place and Joe thrived under their love and care and so we let him stay there.
Home Eductaion is a lot easier these days though because of all the online groups, help and advice etc. i wish you "a very happy classroom" if you go ahead!


----------



## Pearls18

lhancock90 said:


> MarineWAG said:
> 
> 
> I would absolutely not consider homeschooling for practical and ideological grounds. I think the media blows things up too much for one thing, but also I think parents need to be more hands on with their children's education. No I don't want to home school, but that doesn't mean I am going to cart my boys off to school every day and keep my fingers crossed for parents evening, I will take an active role in their education, knowing what they're doing in school, helping with home work, bringing in extra help if needed and doing educational family things out of school, by being hands on my boys will not fall through the net, I will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, what problems the schools are having etc and be proactive in intervening before problems arise. Ok I know I sound like a naive first timer with the best intentions like all first time mums sound, but I am a pretty determined, opinionated and obnoxious person when I want to be, I have looked into teaching in the past and indirectly work in education in the heritage sector so it is something I am passionate about.
> 
> Whether you home school or not, parents should be proactive in their child's education, that is what I am trying to say!
> 
> This would always be my intention. But having attended schools in this area and watched my Mom pull my sister out of them i recognize they they are extremely below par.Click to expand...

Sorry I didn't want it to sound like you wouldn't, or that anybody here wouldn't, I was just talking generally. I have no idea what schools my children will go to as we will move frequently, but I do believe I can help instill stability and improve their education where a school may lack, to a degree.

Oh and the "you" in my last line wasn't you op, just people in general!


----------



## Rachel_C

I think, particularly at primary school age, home is the most important thing even when kids are in school. If the parents are supportive and enthusiastic about learning and enjoy learning new things, the kids probably will too even if their school is terrible. When it comes to high school, I think things like facilities and quality of teaching come into it more so I would want my kids to go to a decent school, but again I think if they have a supportive family they won't be really disadvantaged.

I do hope to be child led. My oldest asked to go to nursery so we sent her as soon as she got her free place. She has said she doesn't want to go to 'big school' so I've said that's fine but I know when it's time for her nursery class to move up she will want to go too. If at any point she is unhappy at school I would home school if she would prefer it. I do have some concerns over the local school's approach to learning and discipline but I've thought hard about it and I think the kids' home life is strong enough in those areas to offset anything negative from school so I'm happy for them to go. 

I would be confident about providing a good home education but the social aspect would worry me slightly. Home ed groups are only going to have other home educating families there - either people who can afford to have one parent not working during the day time or parents who feel strongly enough about home ed to learn to live without certain things in order to do it. You're going to be missing some groups, more than if you're in school and missing the home ed kids I think. You can go to out of school activities to meet kids who are in school but I remember well from being a kid that you never formed the same kind of attachment to kids you only saw once a week rather than every day. We could work to get around that I'm sure, but because of those concerns we're starting with school being our norm unless the kids say otherwise.


----------



## lozzy21

I wish I could do part time schooling, send her to school to learn English, maths, science etc and cover things like history, art etc at home.


----------



## lhancock90

lozzy21 said:


> I wish I could do part time schooling, send her to school to learn English, maths, science etc and cover things like history, art etc at home.

That sounds so good!


----------



## freckleonear

Rachel_C said:


> I would be confident about providing a good home education but the social aspect would worry me slightly. Home ed groups are only going to have other home educating families there - either people who can afford to have one parent not working during the day time or parents who feel strongly enough about home ed to learn to live without certain things in order to do it. You're going to be missing some groups, more than if you're in school and missing the home ed kids I think. You can go to out of school activities to meet kids who are in school but I remember well from being a kid that you never formed the same kind of attachment to kids you only saw once a week rather than every day. We could work to get around that I'm sure, but because of those concerns we're starting with school being our norm unless the kids say otherwise.

In terms of diversity, home-ed groups are generally far more diverse than most school classrooms, which tend to draw children from the same catchment area. There are plenty of very low income families who attend, as well as people from different ethnic groups, faiths, lifestyles, sexual orientations and a large number of people with various disabilities. I suppose the only group not really represented are those with parents who just don't care. But there are other ways to mix with those children, for example my children attend church-run clubs targeting the poorest children on a disadvantaged estate.

One hugely noticeable thing about the home-ed community is how accepting they are of differences compared to the rest of society. Nobody blinks an eyelid if a someone looks and acts differently, or has an unusual family structure, or a boy turns up wearing girl's clothes (and how many times on this forum have we heard the argument that parents won't allow their sons to wear pink because they would be mocked at school?).

I think that attitude of acceptance towards diversity is far more important than having every possible group represented. Because, let's face it, schools are not generally tolerant places.



lozzy21 said:


> I wish I could do part time schooling, send her to school to learn English, maths, science etc and cover things like history, art etc at home.

Flexischooling is still currently a possibility, although the government are discouraging it. The decision rests with the individual head teacher and alternative schools are particularly likely to agree to it. Lots of families find it works really well for them.


----------



## annanouska

Can you take my lo for art please? I hate art! Sorry!


----------



## Rags

freckleonear said:


> Rachel_C said:
> 
> 
> I would be confident about providing a good home education but the social aspect would worry me slightly. Home ed groups are only going to have other home educating families there - either people who can afford to have one parent not working during the day time or parents who feel strongly enough about home ed to learn to live without certain things in order to do it. You're going to be missing some groups, more than if you're in school and missing the home ed kids I think. You can go to out of school activities to meet kids who are in school but I remember well from being a kid that you never formed the same kind of attachment to kids you only saw once a week rather than every day. We could work to get around that I'm sure, but because of those concerns we're starting with school being our norm unless the kids say otherwise.
> 
> In terms of diversity, home-ed groups are generally far more diverse than most school classrooms, which tend to draw children from the same catchment area. There are plenty of very low income families who attend, as well as people from different ethnic groups, faiths, lifestyles, sexual orientations and a large number of people with various disabilities. I suppose the only group not really represented are those with parents who just don't care. But there are other ways to mix with those children, for example my children attend church-run clubs targeting the poorest children on a disadvantaged estate.
> 
> One hugely noticeable thing about the home-ed community is how accepting they are of differences compared to the rest of society. Nobody blinks an eyelid if a someone looks and acts differently, or has an unusual family structure, or a boy turns up wearing girl's clothes (and how many times on this forum have we heard the argument that parents won't allow their sons to wear pink because they would be mocked at school?).
> 
> I think that attitude of acceptance towards diversity is far more important than having every possible group represented. Because, let's face it, schools are not generally tolerant places.
> 
> 
> 
> lozzy21 said:
> 
> 
> I wish I could do part time schooling, send her to school to learn English, maths, science etc and cover things like history, art etc at home.Click to expand...
> 
> Flexischooling is still currently a possibility, although the government are discouraging it. The decision rests with the individual head teacher and alternative schools are particularly likely to agree to it. Lots of families find it works really well for them.Click to expand...

Thank you, you have covered many of my concerns regarding local school education. As I said previously I intended to give the local school a go and very much hope it will all be wonderful for him. I am however very aware of the fact that he fits into the 'unusual family dynamic' category and I don't want him made to feel uncomfortable or unwelcome because of this. I work within the entertainment industry and am used to being around a very diverse group of people, as is my son. I want this to be an advantage in life, not a disadvantage.


----------



## lozzy21

I wish they were flexi schooling schools rather than just sending her part time to a full time school IYGWIM? I would feel that I was putting her at risk of being bulled simply because she's doing something different. Also from a practical point of view my lessons were all over the place, in secondary school I can remember having maths for my first lesson of the day and the last on a Tuesday.


----------



## Cassie123

We might end up homeschooling. LO is very bright and my experience of schools and bright children isn't good. 

Once children have hit their targets they are not stretched or pushed to do better or more. I remember being bored for a lot of my time at school. From my experience schools are about ticking boxes and pleasing ofsted. 

Having said that we will send her to school and see how she gets on. She may go to a great school with great teachers.


----------



## Itsychik

I, personally, would not consider homeschooling my children (unless there were some extreme extenuating circumstances) for a variety of reasons, some of them selfish, some of them not. 

As a child, I was both home schooled and attended public school. I was in a public school system until (in the U.S.) 4th grade (around 9 - 10 years old). I struggled with Attention Deficit Disorder and outside of school was constantly shuffled between therapists and given various medications and in school received little support and lots of negative attention. After a particularly horrible 4th grade (with a teacher who hated me, and suspended me 3 times in the first few months of the school year) my mother made the decision to take me out and home school me, as no other schools had the room or were willing to take me at that time. I eventually returned to public school to complete middle and high school, where I thrived and have really great memories.

When I was in high school I was also very active in a church group where 90% of the other kids were all home schooled (20 - 30 kids) and as some PP's mentioned, were part of the same home schooling network so saw each other for in- and out-of-school related activities. Those kids LOVED being home schooled and constantly told me of the benefits they received that I--as being in public school at that time--did not. Although I never thought their 'benefits' were 'better' than the ones I had from my public school system, but it was clear they were happy with their education, just as I was with mine.

The point to the above, is that I think many children will learn to be happy and thrive with whatever type of education they receive, assuming (as many have mentioned) they have a strong support system and parents who are involved in their lives and the education they receive and how they receive it. The home schoolers I knew really liked the personal attention they got with learning problems, the support from a close group of friends/other home school supporters and the close friendships they developed as a result of basically going to school with the same people their entire lives. On the other hand, even though I had a 'rough start', I made some amazing friendships in my school and learned to be confident and I really thrived with the variety of classes I was able to take in high school (for example, "Animal Science" and "Network Design and Engineering" which were electives I choose to take along side my 'normal' courses) and those helped me to choose the career path I have today.

Of the 20+ home schooled students I was friends with in high school, only 2 of them ended up pursuing higher education degrees, which may be a complete coincidence, but as a parent I would be worried that I would not be able to provide the right kind of preparation and perhaps unbiased motivation to my child as to why they should consider that option as well.

So based purely on my experiences as a child, I would not choose to home school my child unless I had very serious concerns about how they were being treated in the 'public' school. I will try to be as involved as I can and am planning to teach my children some additional subjects outside of school (for example, we are a bilingual family and we live in the Netherlands, so in school my children will only be learning/speaking Dutch, and I will be sure they are receiving English education at home), I will be involved in the parent groups and will have contact with my children's educators, and I am confident they will thrive as well.

But I think this is a very personal choice for each parent, and you should follow what your heart tells you is best, regardless of what your friends/family may think. :flower:


----------



## sophxx

We are def homeschooling my lo will be attending forest school or wood school sessions to. Lo is so excited


----------



## lhancock90

Thanks everyone. Its a lot to consider. Paticular thanks to Freckleonar for all the info! X


----------



## pinkie77

I currently have 3 children in the school system (y8, y10 and y12) but I'm intending on home educating Phoebe. I'm also considering HE my y8 child as he's not getting the help there that he needs and he's constantly picked on because he behaves at school! (there are other reasons but that's the short answer).

Due to my experiences over the last 12 years I've become more and more disillusioned with our school system. In that time I've also done an early years degree which included work experience in schools so I've seen both sides. And I was also a very active parent during their primary school years, helping with swimming, reading, school discos, fetes and other fund raising. So it's not for lack of trying! IMO schools are simply teaching to pass exams, a view my oldest also shares. She's just done her GCSE's and starting A-levels next week and I'm shocked at some of the things she doesn't know. So as long as I can work around it, I won't be sending Phoebe. I'm not at all worried about her socializing, she does various activities already and as she gets older she can follow her interests. There's also a good HE network here from what I've been told.


----------



## cat_reversing

sophxx said:


> We are def homeschooling my lo will be attending forest school or wood school sessions to. Lo is so excited

I saw something about a forest school in Germany, sounds so interesting - although lo will prob grow up in the city I definitely want her to have a balance of urban and outdoor life and for her to feel close to natural things. I will look into this.


----------



## vaniilla

We've considered homeschooling and I think you can say we still are, aspects of state school worry me very much and are strongly looking at private school for him. The issues I have with homeschooling might seem a bit superficial to some but I think that I would feel guilty for him to miss out the excitement of wearing his uniform at the first time and sharing the experience with other children, school is such a big part of a child's life that I feel I would almost be denying him a milestone if that makes any sense.


----------



## pinkie77

Can I just say, for anyone in the UK that was considering googling etc for more info the term home education tends to be used here. Home schooling will usually give you information from the USA and other countries


----------



## nevernormal

DH and I plan to home school all of our children, though we'd be open to sending them to a private school when they are older if they want to be involved in sports & stuff, and if we could afford it!

DH was homeschooled his entire life, and I was on & off for my school years. Spent about half of my school years at home, and half in "real" school if you added it all up. We both had great experiences with home schooling, and we both have gone on to pursue higher education. Our education includes higher math & sciences, and I am artistically and musically inclined so I know we'll be capable of educating our children in a wide variety of subjects based on their interests as they get older.

Also, DH and I plan to be missionaries so homeschooling will allow us a lot of flexibility in schedules & traveling when we need to! We plan to go to a developing country where the public schools aren't good, so they wouldn't go there. I grew up as a missionary kid so I know that that lifestyle involves a lot of diverse social interaction and I'm not concerned about that part of it at all.

Like I said we'd be open to sending our children to private school when they are older, but high school for my little boy is still a looong ways away so really we'd just have to reevaulate when the time comes. There's no way I can predict exactly where we'll be and what other education options will be available to us in 13 years or so.


----------



## Natsku

I wouldn't home school Maria because I think I'd be terrible at it and its so rare here that I doubt there are any home schooling communities (at least not in my city) so she really would miss out on so much. And I think the education system is really good here so I'd feel like I'd be giving her the worst option whereas if I lived somewhere with bad schools then it might be the other way round.


----------



## louandivy

Brighton would probably actually be a great place to homeschool as there are alot of parents here are pretty 'alternative', I would imagine there would be a great support for it but like Natsku said, I think I would be crap at it :haha: Its a nice idea but from a selfish perspective I don't think I could dedicate myself to it as I have career plans of my own. I think if I was interested in it it would depend massively on the community I lived in, like when I was in Bristol there was a huge homeschooling community who all got together at this anarchist centre twice a week which I think is a really nice idea :)


----------



## Srrme

We're not big fans of the public educational system, so we're planning on homeschooling. We're in the US. I know a lot of people think public school is important for socializing, but we will include our children in activities outside of school where they can make friends, etc. :)


----------



## aimee-lou

I worry about my boys.....while school isn't the issue, it's the particular school that I have the issues with. Our local primary is supposedly 'outstanding' according to Ofsted, but I find it hard to believe given the people I have met, the children I have come into contact with, and the general feel of the place that I get from the times I've been in there. 

Earl has been at pre-school since he turned 2 and at a childminders since he was less than 1 so the idea of him being away from home in the correct environment is fine by me. I just have misgivings. Maybe it's because I went to 15 different schools, 11 of them primary, and was badly bullied in a few of them, and struggled academically at times due to the shortcomings of others. I guess I trust my instincts and they're screaming at me not to send my children there. I however do not really get a choice as nearly 100% of children from our area go there. I'm therefore considering home educating Earl or even deferring him by a year as by then we'll have moved to a different area and we'll stand a better chance of getting a school that feels right for my children.


----------



## RachA

Homeschooling is something that I wouldn't consider. 
Part of that is because I don't think I could teach my children well enough. 

A big part though is that I don't believe it will help the education system if we keep taking our children out of school. Rather than just focusing in our own children I think we should think about all children. Instead of saying 'the schools don't help my child' 'the system focuses too much in ofsted' etc and the taking the children out of school, why don't we say 'the schools worry too much about results, what can we do to change that'. Taking children out of schools will not change the schools for the better - in the long run it will make them worse and therefore force people into homeschooling even though they don't have the skills to do it. 
If we send our children to schools that aren't working then we get together as a body of parents and get the school changed-it can be done.


----------



## Jchihuahua

RachA said:


> Homeschooling is something that I wouldn't consider.
> Part of that is because I don't think I could teach my children well enough.
> 
> A big part though is that I don't believe it will help the education system if we keep taking our children out of school. Rather than just focusing in our own children I think we should think about all children. Instead of saying 'the schools don't help my child' 'the system focuses too much in ofsted' etc and the taking the children out of school, why don't we say 'the schools worry too much about results, what can we do to change that'. Taking children out of schools will not change the schools for the better - in the long run it will make them worse and therefore force people into homeschooling even though they don't have the skills to do it.
> If we send our children to schools that aren't working then we get together as a body of parents and get the school changed-it can be done.

This is a good point. 

I have been a teacher in the state system for 15 years and from an insider's point of view I have absolute faith in it. Someone asked me if I would send my kids to private school and I nearly fell over backwards! If I don't have absolute faith in what I and my colleagues do then how can other people? Everyone has the right to educate their children how they want to but I have to admit that I do feel sad and frustrated at how much our education system gets knocked by everyone. It feels like we can't do right for doing wrong most of the time.


----------



## Natsku

RachA said:


> Homeschooling is something that I wouldn't consider.
> Part of that is because I don't think I could teach my children well enough.
> 
> A big part though is that I don't believe it will help the education system if we keep taking our children out of school. Rather than just focusing in our own children I think we should think about all children. Instead of saying 'the schools don't help my child' 'the system focuses too much in ofsted' etc and the taking the children out of school, why don't we say 'the schools worry too much about results, what can we do to change that'. Taking children out of schools will not change the schools for the better - in the long run it will make them worse and therefore force people into homeschooling even though they don't have the skills to do it.
> If we send our children to schools that aren't working then we get together as a body of parents and get the school changed-it can be done.

I do agree with this although I can also understand why a parent would want to take their child out of the school (not wanting to sacrifice their child for the good of all) but really schools will only improve if society demands it and people are less demanding if their own children aren't effected.


----------



## Gemie

Poppy and this new baby will be home educated. We've researched it and have family members who home ed successfully... I have built up a rapport with a couple of local HEers and have joined all the yahoo groups and am a member of a few Facebook groups which are very active. We're lucky in that we're in an area that has quite a lot going on on a weekly basis for HEers that there is no room for not socialising.

I'm really looking forward to it :)


----------



## Gemie

Also look at the helm website... I think you're in the West Midlands? And also education otherwise web page too, very informative


----------



## lhancock90

:thumbup: thankyou! :)


----------



## stephx

I wouldn't no. 

Mainly for the social aspects and I do believe children need independence from their parents and live 'their own life' at school- that's mainly for secondary school.


----------



## sophxx

stephx said:


> I wouldn't no.
> 
> Mainly for the social aspects and I do believe children need independence from their parents and live 'their own life' at school- that's mainly for secondary school.

Homeschooled chikdren are more sociable than schooled children as they encounter more social situations thannchildren do who are sat in school 5 days a week with the same teacher and children


----------



## stephx

sophxx said:


> stephx said:
> 
> 
> I wouldn't no.
> 
> Mainly for the social aspects and I do believe children need independence from their parents and live 'their own life' at school- that's mainly for secondary school.
> 
> Homeschooled chikdren are more sociable than schooled children as they encounter more social situations thannchildren do who are sat in school 5 days a week with the same teacher and childrenClick to expand...

How many hours a week do homeschooled kids spend socializing?

Also, how do you incorporate collaborative learning? teamwork? 

I know there are HS groups, but school kids do extra curricular activities too, go to groups, play with friends in the evening/weekend etc... So I think it's very far fetched to say they will be *more* sociable than schooled kids that spend 30 hours a week learning with their peers.


----------



## sophxx

I think you have the wrong idea of homeschooling and being sociable sitying in a class room does not make a child sociable children are sat with 30 40 othr children they dont have personal relatiinships with these other children being siciable is about being able to adapt in any situation they are pkaced in homeschool childrrn have this advantage as they mix with lots of different adults and children in different situations which pre pairs them for life after there efucation there often more self driven as they learn idependantly whuch helps prepair them for the working world/ uni

as for learning together
theres maths lessons
sciencevwirkshop lessons ran by the sfience museum
forest schools
wood schools or beach schools
stenier kindgergarden
homeschol trips picnic swimming
homeschool hourse ridingn lessons
libay vists mosque vists
the lust goes on this is as well as skype lessons with the other chikdren if you want your child to take part its up to you as a parent how pro active you are

onnyop of kids go to the usual clubs scouts beavers ect.

we have not back to school picnic christmas parties discos fundrasing events
lantern festivals the list goes on.

just because children go yo svhool does jot make them sociable it depends on the child if your shy you can get lost in a big school as the teachers as hard as they try dont alwaysbhave the time nr here revptiin classes in 70nchildren to 1 teacher and 1 parent helper




stephx said:


> sophxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> stephx said:
> 
> 
> I wouldn't no.
> 
> Mainly for the social aspects and I do believe children need independence from their parents and live 'their own life' at school- that's mainly for secondary school.
> 
> Homeschooled chikdren are more sociable than schooled children as they encounter more social situations thannchildren do who are sat in school 5 days a week with the same teacher and childrenClick to expand...
> 
> How many hours a week do homeschooled kids spend socializing?
> 
> Also, how do you incorporate collaborative learning? teamwork?
> 
> I know there are HS groups, but school kids do extra curricular activities too, go to groups, play with friends in the evening/weekend etc... So I think it's very far fetched to say they will be *more* sociable than schooled kids that spend 30 hours a week learning with their peers.Click to expand...


----------



## stephx

sophxx said:


> I think you have the wrong idea of homeschooling and being sociable sitying in a class room does not make a child sociable children are sat with 30 40 othr children they dont have personal relatiinships with these other children being siciable is about being able to adapt in any situation they are pkaced in homeschool childrrn have this advantage as they mix with lots of different adults and children in different situations which pre pairs them for life after there efucation there often more self driven as they learn idependantly whuch helps prepair them for the working world/ uni
> 
> *I think you have the wrong idea tbh, some of your points are just not true. The definition of being sociable is enjoying the company of others, you cannot make a child sociable, no, but you can allow them to socialize (by enjoying the company of others).
> Of course children in class rooms have personal relationships with eachother! They don't spend 6 hours in silence just sat staring at the teacher do they? There is working in groups/pairs and break times etc.
> I do agree with your point about being more self driven though, I can definatley see how that's an advantage.
> *
> 
> 
> as for learning together
> theres maths lessons
> sciencevwirkshop lessons ran by the sfience museum
> forest schools
> wood schools or beach schools
> stenier kindgergarden
> homeschol trips picnic swimming
> homeschool hourse ridingn lessons
> libay vists mosque vists
> the lust goes on this is as well as skype lessons with the other chikdren if you want your child to take part its up to you as a parent how pro active you are
> 
> *How many hours a week are these activities or are they are all periodic?*
> 
> onnyop of kids go to the usual clubs scouts beavers ect.
> 
> *Yes, as do schoolchildren. *
> 
> we have not back to school picnic christmas parties discos fundrasing events
> lantern festivals the list goes on.
> 
> just because children go yo svhool does jot make them sociable it depends on the child if your shy you can get lost in a big school as the teachers as hard as they try dont alwaysbhave the time nr here revptiin classes in 70nchildren to 1 teacher and 1 parent helper
> 
> *Never heard of a class of 70 children to 1 teacher. Here it is limited to 30.*

I'm not saying that HSing is a bad thing, I just don't agree with making such a sweeping statement about the socialization of HS vs school kids


----------



## wishuwerehere

I wouldn't purely because i'd be a crap teacher :haha:


----------



## tommyg

I personally wouldn't consider home schooling. 

How can I as a seriously think I could give my son a better education than somebody who has spent years training to teach kids. Any more than a teacher could do my job as a surveyor?
Once you go beyond primary school and into high school with 8 or 9 specilist teachers teaching your child how can anybody claim to be as good as those individual teachers and prepare kids for GCSEs, A levels and uni?

I'm not convinced either the Scottish or English school systems are the best but I seriously don't think I could do any better unless I was to consider private schooling.

Natsku I'm jealous of you being in Finland, is it not considered to have the top school system in the world? I remember watching something on the Finish vs English schools am I right in saying they don't start school until 7 and at that point the Finnish kids were behind the English kids but by the time they reached the age of 10 the had overtaken the English kids.


----------



## Natsku

tommyg said:


> I personally wouldn't consider home schooling.
> 
> How can I as a seriously think I could give my son a better education than somebody who has spent years training to teach kids. Any more than a teacher could do my job as a surveyor?
> Once you go beyond primary school and into high school with 8 or 9 specilist teachers teaching your child how can anybody claim to be as good as those individual teachers and prepare kids for GCSEs, A levels and uni?
> 
> I'm not convinced either the Scottish or English school systems are the best but I seriously don't think I could do any better unless I was to consider private schooling.
> 
> Natsku I'm jealous of you being in Finland, is it not considered to have the top school system in the world? I remember watching something on the Finish vs English schools am I right in saying they don't start school until 7 and at that point the Finnish kids were behind the English kids but by the time they reached the age of 10 the had overtaken the English kids.

One of the top systems (South Korea and I think Singapore are also at the top). Yeah they start at 7 (well 6 for preschool) and generally have caught up/got ahead by 10ish. I like the system here, seems so much more relaxed yet they still do well.


----------



## tommyg

Yes I though it was something like that, you'd be nuts to consider homeschooling when you have the 3rd best in the world, I'd doubt you could compete or come close to it. 

I think the UK system is too pushy for kids but it's what we have. Depending on how ready I feel DS is for school at 4.5 I will consider defering him for a year meaning but will cross that bridge when I come to it.


----------



## Natsku

Which is probably why hardly anyone homeschools here (probably its just people that are just living temporarily here and the children don't speak Finnish, then it makes sense to homeschool)

The UK system isn't bad, at least I thought it was alright when I was in school, but it does start too young in my opinion and of course you get better schools and worse schools (they're all pretty much the same here on the quality level so you don't worry about whether the local school is good enough)


----------



## tommyg

I don't think the UK system is too bad either but I do think that they push kids too young, however if the the politians were to suddenly say we are going to model our schools on Finland, start pre-school at 6 school at 7 smaller class sizes they'd be up roar on the basis of thats another 3 years that parents need to fund nurseries / daycare for LO's. 

I also believe that where parents are caught in the benefits trap, parents lack hope and ambition for their kids, kids loose interest and they then become a nightmare for the teachers esp where the parents won't back the teachers up - my little angel can do no wrong! 

The tale of a headteacher in Glasgow who saw a positive aspect of the number of immigrant children in her school sticks in my head and says it all. It was in one of Glasgows not so nice areas. If I remember rightly the immigrants were from war zone areas (Afganistan / Iraq or somwhere). She commented that the immigrant children saw education as their future, where the local children lacked hope. The immigrant kids attitude was rubbing of on the local kids and as a result the whole school was doing better and getting better results than ever before.


----------



## Dragonfly

I was going to do it before I got pregnant again. That wasnt my reason not to home school I researched my area and realized there was nothing for my kids to do but school for socializing and my family dont take anything to do with me but my parents now and again. So I would make my kids rather lonely. My son wanted to go to school and seemed desperate to make friends and asked could he. People would ask him you see where he was going so I didnt think it was fair to not let him try it at least. I also didnt feel I had a great education or am as bright even my kids are.I have loads of home school stuff on the computer and we are always learning anyway. I just send my oldest to school as he wants to go. If he ever didnt like it in future as I had a rotten time in school and last resort home school will happen as I will have car sorted by then. Other kids will be older ect. Just not right time now. I think he should try it he is sociable and the early years in school here seem all about play. My main reasons where for home schooling where the religious system of the schools here. But I have till p4 till its constant holy communion and my children are not catholic so cant take part. 

I think home schooling is great though. If all is happy go for it. I dont like the judgements on either end and I seen them on both sides too. I was told when I decided not to come school I was "dodging my parenting responsibilities" I lost friends over it too. Then when I was home schooling I was told I was ruining my children lives and wasnt smart enough to do it. Shame every one cant see others lives are different , different things suit different people.


----------



## Natsku

tommyg said:


> I don't think the UK system is too bad either but I do think that they push kids too young, however if the the politians were to suddenly say we are going to model our schools on Finland, start pre-school at 6 school at 7 smaller class sizes they'd be up roar on the basis of thats another 3 years that parents need to fund nurseries / daycare for LO's.
> 
> I also believe that where parents are caught in the benefits trap, parents lack hope and ambition for their kids, kids loose interest and they then become a nightmare for the teachers esp where the parents won't back the teachers up - my little angel can do no wrong!
> 
> The tale of a headteacher in Glasgow who saw a positive aspect of the number of immigrant children in her school sticks in my head and says it all. It was in one of Glasgows not so nice areas. If I remember rightly the immigrants were from war zone areas (Afganistan / Iraq or somwhere). She commented that the immigrant children saw education as their future, where the local children lacked hope. The immigrant kids attitude was rubbing of on the local kids and as a result the whole school was doing better and getting better results than ever before.

Yeah there's no way they'd make the school starting age older when childcare costs so much, if it was cheap like here then maybe they could do it.

Don't know how much intervention there is in the schools over there these days (the way I remember it was that problem kids were shifted from one school to another, or kept in inclusion) but here the staff all meet each week with the school social worker and discuss any problems and figure out the best way to deal with them and parents are very involved as well from what I've heard.

Thats great that the immigrant kids attitudes rubbed off on the local kids, what a positive result!


----------



## Gemie

I can't source it but. I do know there was a study done and home schooled kids came out more sociable than children who went to school.

But if you think about it, going to school doesn't automatically make a child sociable. Children are often discouraged from socialising in the class room and are only permitted to freely socialise during break and lunch time. Home educated children don't have these barriers they are encouraged to interact with their peers (of all ages ) at all times.


----------



## Gemie

This isn't an official study or from the UK but does cover home educated children all over the world so is an interesting read :thumbup:

https://www.michaeljournal.org/homeschooled.asp


----------



## Gingerspice

Its not something we are able to offer really due to work setup. 

However, we have quite bad ideas of home schooling though because we have several friends who were home schooled at them getting to uni was the first time they truly were alone and socialising outside of the same group of people that had the same views and opinions on life as their parents. It took years for one guy to even be able to strike up a conversation with the girls around him and he was always socially awkward. Most of the people I had met at uni and were home schooled (and perhaps a higher proportion than you'd meet elsewhere given we largely revolved around the christian Union, which seemed to be a higher proportion of people who were home schooled because of parents wanting to have complete control over what their children were taught and able to exclude sex ed or evolution etc) then many of them were indeed pretty awkward. They did soon get to grips with things though and after 2 years I'd day they were no more or less normal than anybody else who may indeed could have been a bit eccentric so I don't think there's any long lasting issues with it. 

to me its a last attempt to keep somebody in education because the normal school system is failing them. if you view the school system as failing before even starting it then home schooling is likely to be a good step to you. 

despite OH having a very bad time at school I know he would rather keep trying different schools or indeed private school because of the friends we've come across who may have been equally eccentric had thy gone to standard school, but because they were home ed then its an obvious difference which could have been a contributory factor to it.


----------



## sophxx

Not sure how it works wherebyounkive but my friend just did a highr pgce to teach 1st year degree in phycologybshes not on surply teavhing maths in a high school for the next 6 months shes never dine higher than gcse maths and that was 20 years ago

QUOTE=tommyg;29446655]I personally wouldn't consider home schooling. 

How can I as a seriously think I could give my son a better education than somebody who has spent years training to teach kids. Any more than a teacher could do my job as a surveyor?
Once you go beyond primary school and into high school with 8 or 9 specilist teachers teaching your child how can anybody claim to be as good as those individual teachers and prepare kids for GCSEs, A levels and uni?

I'm not convinced either the Scottish or English school systems are the best but I seriously don't think I could do any better unless I was to consider private schooling.

Natsku I'm jealous of you being in Finland, is it not considered to have the top school system in the world? I remember watching something on the Finish vs English schools am I right in saying they don't start school until 7 and at that point the Finnish kids were behind the English kids but by the time they reached the age of 10 the had overtaken the English kids.[/QUOTE]


----------



## RachA

tommyg said:


> I don't think the UK system is too bad either but I do think that they push kids too young, however if the the politians were to suddenly say we are going to model our schools on Finland, start pre-school at 6 school at 7 smaller class sizes they'd be up roar on the basis of thats another 3 years that parents need to fund nurseries / daycare for LO's.
> 
> I also believe that where parents are caught in the benefits trap, parents lack hope and ambition for their kids, kids loose interest and they then become a nightmare for the teachers esp where the parents won't back the teachers up - my little angel can do no wrong!
> 
> The tale of a headteacher in Glasgow who saw a positive aspect of the number of immigrant children in her school sticks in my head and says it all. It was in one of Glasgows not so nice areas. If I remember rightly the immigrants were from war zone areas (Afganistan / Iraq or somwhere). She commented that the immigrant children saw education as their future, where the local children lacked hope. The immigrant kids attitude was rubbing of on the local kids and as a result the whole school was doing better and getting better results than ever before.


I too don't think the uk system is too bad. Maybe we are just 'lucky' in where we live. Although we did choose when we moved too when we got married based on the schools in the area. 
My main grumble with the UK system is the age the children start and how much they seemed to be pushed pre-school and when they start. 
I believe children shouldn't start school so early. Places like Finland have the right type of system. My brother lives in a Scandinavian county and their children don't start school until they are 7 or 8. When my nephew started school at 7.5 he couldn't read or write a thing. By the time he was 9 he had caught up with and passed the standard of my niece and another nephew (they would all of been in the sand school year in the UK)-this nephew and niece are extremely bright too. 

I would love to see the gov introduce later starting ages but as tommyg says there would be uproar which I think is a shame as I think it's more beneficial for children to stay at home with parent/s and start school later.


----------



## Gemie

sophxx said:


> Not sure how it works wherebyounkive but my friend just did a highr pgce to teach 1st year degree in phycologybshes not on surply teavhing maths in a high school for the next 6 months shes never dine higher than gcse maths and that was 20 years ago
> 
> QUOTE=tommyg;29446655]I personally wouldn't consider home schooling.
> 
> How can I as a seriously think I could give my son a better education than somebody who has spent years training to teach kids. Any more than a teacher could do my job as a surveyor?
> Once you go beyond primary school and into high school with 8 or 9 specilist teachers teaching your child how can anybody claim to be as good as those individual teachers and prepare kids for GCSEs, A levels and uni?
> 
> I'm not convinced either the Scottish or English school systems are the best but I seriously don't think I could do any better unless I was to consider private schooling.
> 
> Natsku I'm jealous of you being in Finland, is it not considered to have the top school system in the world? I remember watching something on the Finish vs English schools am I right in saying they don't start school until 7 and at that point the Finnish kids were behind the English kids but by the time they reached the age of 10 the had overtaken the English kids.

[/QUOTE]

My husband works in education (college) my husband is very knowledgable in the field of photography (old and new school) he was not offered the roll of teaching this subjects to the students as it would have been too expensive to add him to the teaching staff pay roll (he is an art technician although has all the relevant qualifications to teach) instead they chose a teacher who is already on the pay roll to teach another subject who doesn't know half what my husband does about photography, now this teacher comes to my hubby for advise as he is very under qualified to teach in this particular field. As I have a few friends who're teachers they all agree that us is common in schools as its all about funding and not so much about education. I know through home educating my children it will be 100% about their education without the issue if funding coming into it, in that respect I know I can educate my children better than a teacher teaching them who isn't qualified for that subject.

I was also surprised at the amount of my friends who work in education who would rather chose home education over a state education for their own children, one of which is a head teacher and his wife home schools their children. That to me speaks volumes.

I'm not entirely against state education btw I am simply giving another view to the equation, it's not all cut and dried that state ed is better, there are other options that we all are able to consider what works for one simply won't work for another.


----------



## Pearls18

Gemie said:


> sophxx said:
> 
> 
> Not sure how it works wherebyounkive but my friend just did a highr pgce to teach 1st year degree in phycologybshes not on surply teavhing maths in a high school for the next 6 months shes never dine higher than gcse maths and that was 20 years ago
> 
> QUOTE=tommyg;29446655]I personally wouldn't consider home schooling.
> 
> How can I as a seriously think I could give my son a better education than somebody who has spent years training to teach kids. Any more than a teacher could do my job as a surveyor?
> Once you go beyond primary school and into high school with 8 or 9 specilist teachers teaching your child how can anybody claim to be as good as those individual teachers and prepare kids for GCSEs, A levels and uni?
> 
> I'm not convinced either the Scottish or English school systems are the best but I seriously don't think I could do any better unless I was to consider private schooling.
> 
> Natsku I'm jealous of you being in Finland, is it not considered to have the top school system in the world? I remember watching something on the Finish vs English schools am I right in saying they don't start school until 7 and at that point the Finnish kids were behind the English kids but by the time they reached the age of 10 the had overtaken the English kids.Click to expand...

*My husband works in education (college) my husband is very knowledgable in the field of photography (old and new school) he was not offered the roll of teaching this subjects to the students as it would have been too expensive to add him to the teaching staff pay roll (he is an art technician although has all the relevant qualifications to teach) instead they chose a teacher who is already on the pay roll to teach another subject who doesn't know half what my husband does about photography, now this teacher comes to my hubby for advise as he is very under qualified to teach in this particular field. As I have a few friends who're teachers they all agree that us is common in schools as its all about funding and not so much about education. I know through home educating my children it will be 100% about their education without the issue if funding coming into it, in that respect I know I can educate my children better than a teacher teaching them who isn't qualified for that subject.

I was also surprised at the amount of my friends who work in education who would rather chose home education over a state education for their own children, one of which is a head teacher and his wife home schools their children. That to me speaks volumes.

I'm not entirely against state education btw I am simply giving another view to the equation, it's not all cut and dried that state ed is better, there are other options that we all are able to consider what works for one simply won't work for another.[/QUOTE]*

It's not just about how much knowledge you have but your ability to teach, you could have a PhD in a subject but doesn't necessarily mean you would make a good teacher in that field (not saying that the husband would be a bad teacher lol, but I think there is more to it than just having expertise and think knowledge on a subject can grow but usually an ability to teach is there or it isn't, obviously there are good and bad teachers no matter what qualifications they have).

I don't buy the "home schooled children are better socialised than school children" as much as I would buy "school children are more intelligent and have better qualifications" at the end of the day home schooling is only as good as the parent doing it and school is only as good as the teachers in it, what is being taught (in both scenarios) and the support system around the children whether at home or in school. Home schooling would not be best for my children because I don't have the time, energy, and intelligence to teach to the best of their ability as I believe school will do. If the school they end up going to isn't up to scratch I will change my opinion on that and will have to take action, home schooling would be last resort for me though. Like really, really last, I'd bankrupt us through private education first!

I think it makes a special parent to make home schooling effective, I think more children have the kind of parents that would benefit them going to school than being at home, and I am talking about my own children lol.

(Edit: quotes gone funny bolded the bit that isn't my writing to make it clearer!)


----------



## Jchihuahua

MarineWAG said:


> It's not just about how much knowledge you have but your ability to teach, you could have a PhD in a subject but doesn't necessarily mean you would make a good teacher in that field (not saying that the husband would be a bad teacher lol, but I think there is more to it than just having expertise and think knowledge on a subject can grow but usually an ability to teach is there or it isn't, obviously there are good and bad teachers no matter what qualifications they have).
> 
> !)

Totally agree with this. This is not meant to sound like I am blowing my own trumpet. I am really not. It is something I do feel quite strongly about though. We had an ofsted inspection at the end of term in July and I was observed teaching twice and got graded as 'outstanding' both times. I have been graded as outstanding every observation I have had by ofsted and internal observations by the headteacher and senior leadership team for many years. I was assessesd by an external inspector to be an 'advanced skills teacher'. Advanced Skills Teachers are judged through external assessment against a range of criteria to demonstrate excellent classroom teaching practice. The amount of training I have done over the last 19 years and regular courses to keep my knowledge of early years education current and 15 years of on the job experience since I qualified, the amount of time and effort I put into what I do, plus obviously the fact that natural ability is required too makes me a bit sad to think that other people think they could do my job equally as well as me. I couldn't do a doctor/lawyers/dentist/mechanic/engineer etc etc's job and I don't think they could do as good a job as me in doing mine. Parents know their own children best obviously but in many cases I think I could do a better job of teaching them, purely as that is what I'm trained to do.


----------



## Pearls18

Jchihuahua said:


> MarineWAG said:
> 
> 
> It's not just about how much knowledge you have but your ability to teach, you could have a PhD in a subject but doesn't necessarily mean you would make a good teacher in that field (not saying that the husband would be a bad teacher lol, but I think there is more to it than just having expertise and think knowledge on a subject can grow but usually an ability to teach is there or it isn't, obviously there are good and bad teachers no matter what qualifications they have).
> 
> !)
> 
> Totally agree with this. This is not meant to sound like I am blowing my own trumpet. I am really not. It is something I do feel quite stronlgy about though. We had an ofsted inspection at the end of term in July and I was observed teaching twice and got graded as 'outstanding' both times. I have been graded as outstanding every observation I have had by ofsted and internal observations by the headteacher and senior leadership team for many years. I was assessesd by an external inspector to be an 'advanced skills teacher'. Advanced Skills Teachers are judged through external assessment against a range of criteria to demonstrate excellent classroom teaching practice. The amount of training I have done over the last 19 years and regular courses to keep my knowledge of early years education current and 15 years of on the job experience since I qualified, the amount of time and effort I put into what I do, plus obviously the fact that natural ability is required too makes me a bit sad to think that other people think they could do my job equally as well as me. I couldn't do a doctor/lawyers/dentist/mechanic/engineer etc etc's job and I don't think they could do as good a job as me in doing mine. Parents know their own children best obviously but in many cases I think I could do a better job of teaching them, purely as that is what I'm trained to do.Click to expand...

And so you should blow your own trumpet, it sounds like you do a fab job. I would definitely choose you to teach my children over me lol, just because I am their mother doesn't make me an expert. I wouldn't want to try to teach my child full time as much as I would want to perform heart surgery on them, to me it is a profession teachers are specifically trained for that I am not. That is not to say I believe every teacher is fantastic, but I have enough faith in the system to trust it until problems arise rather than the other way around. Teaching is a profession for a reason, and not something I think everyone is naturally up to, or have the intellect to do (that's not to say I don't think some parents couldn't make great home school educators, but as I say above I think they are a special kind of parent and not the default).


----------



## RachA

I too agree with the idea that if a teacher is a good one then they will have the ability to teach anything-up to a certain point of course. There is a reason why a level maths is taught by someone who is good at maths! 
I know it's at a different level but my brother in law taught at uni level without having done the degree himself-he is a very talented lecturer and he did the degree as he was teaching it.


----------



## Pearls18

RachA said:


> I too agree with the idea that if a teacher is a good one then they will have the ability to teach anything-up to a certain point of course. There is a reason why a level maths is taught by someone who is good at maths!
> I know it's at a different level but my brother in law taught at uni level without having done the degree himself-he is a very talented lecturer and he did the degree as he was teaching it.

Yeah I also think the age group people can teach to effectively can change. I looked into teaching myself but always knew it would have to be secondary (history) firstly because it had to be a subject I was passionate about, but also I don't think I connect with children all that well (I'm hoping this will come more naturally as my children grow up ha) there's a reason why there are different qualifications for teaching different ages, and why university students don't have to be taught by people with PGCEs (or equivalent). There are different skills for teaching to 5 year olds and 15 year olds, teachers are obviously taught about the best methods for different age groups.


----------



## freckleonear

I have a lot of respect for teachers, it's a very demanding job and there are some brilliant teachers out there. However, I think it speaks volumes about our education system that we think "teaching" is the only way for children to learn. Parents do not need to teach their children in the same way that a teacher must ensure that a class of 30 children are reaching certain standards. Many home educators see their role as a "facilitator" rather than a "teacher", as children are naturally capable and self-motivated learners. I do not formally teach my children at all, so I do not need a teaching degree (although ironically I am training as an early years teacher). If there is something I don't know then I learn alongside my children. I would also like to point out that home educating parents pour a huge amount of time and effort into research, so after a few years they are certainly experts on their own children's learning if not learning in general.


----------



## Gemie

freckleonear said:


> I have a lot of respect for teachers, it's a very demanding job and there are some brilliant teachers out there. However, I think it speaks volumes about our education system that we think "teaching" is the only way for children to learn. Parents do not need to teach their children in the same way that a teacher must ensure that a class of 30 children are reaching certain standards. Many home educators see their role as a "facilitator" rather than a "teacher", as children are naturally capable and self-motivated learners. I do not formally teach my children at all, so I do not need a teaching degree (although ironically I am training as an early years teacher). If there is something I don't know then I learn alongside my children. I would also like to point out that home educating parents pour a huge amount of time and effort into research, so after a few years they are certainly experts on their own children's learning if not learning in general.

:thumbup:


----------



## Pearls18

freckleonear said:


> I have a lot of respect for teachers, it's a very demanding job and there are some brilliant teachers out there. However, I think it speaks volumes about our education system that we think "teaching" is the only way for children to learn. Parents do not need to teach their children in the same way that a teacher must ensure that a class of 30 children are reaching certain standards. Many home educators see their role as a "facilitator" rather than a "teacher", as children are naturally capable and self-motivated learners. I do not formally teach my children at all, so I do not need a teaching degree (although ironically I am training as an early years teacher). If there is something I don't know then I learn alongside my children. I would also like to point out that home educating parents pour a huge amount of time and effort into research, so after a few years they are certainly experts on their own children's learning if not learning in general.

I don't doubt this for a second, you sound like an inspiring home educator, but I would think you are in the minority (not within home educators but within society in general). For me I would like my children to get a formal education, I trust teachers, I trust the curriculum and I trust the qualifications we get out of it, so for me somebody does need to be qualified to teach my child so yeah I do think teaching is the only way my child should learn. But this is my preference. I don't doubt for a second that you wouldn't do a lot of research, I think it would be mandatory.


----------



## bumpy_j

I love home-schooling - it's not something I can consider as I'm hopefully off to Uni next year, but I am totally jealous of mothers or fathers that have the means to do this. My personal opinion is that learning surrounded by other children is not necessarily needed for early primary school as long as the child is regularly meeting children outside of home lessons in the form of clubs/groups and experiencing field trips. 

That being said, I think there is certainly an age I would go up too (possibly about 9/10) before I would send them to school. This being that they had a little experience of school before going off to secondary of which I would not consider withholding from personally.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

No.

I think a lot of ideas about school is from other people too (and the internet!). I loved the idea of homeschooling at the start. I researched it lots and lots. I also nearly considered it many times while my children actually started school too.

I just came to the conclusion that no, I can not do a better job. Actually, in some areas I probably could but with the pros and cons it was in a school environment favour as opposed to me. I loved the idea of working at our own pace. Day trips/museums etc! however, when I actually really put thought into it I realised it wouldn't be that simple in realistic terms. 

My children are now in years 5 and 3. So both in Juniors now. My son has autism and many times I have had sadness with the school system and his needs BUT I have worked with them progressively I make it work for him. I also dont think him being with me would benefit either because its not as easy as it seems. Sometimes I hate the 9-3 routine but most of the time I thrive on it. So do my children. They know what they are doing. 

Schools are not just sitting in classroom! Mine are now in older years and so yes they do have more formal work but its still fun! They visit working farms, the forest weekly, museums, walks around the village, boat rides and also have outside partys coming into school. I think school has given them more opportunity than I could have and if I did want them to do something then we do it on weekends or in the holidays and we love that time. They really dont just sit in a classroom 24/7.

I dont like the term times etc but its a small factor. I think my children benefit from routine/structure and being around other children. I sometimes think matthew would benefit with all my attention but he definitely wouldn't get it at home anyway. 3 children has made it impossible for me really as Jade is quite demanding!


----------



## lhancock90

Thanks everyone. It's so much to consider!


----------



## Gemie

As you can see Lauren it's a very personal choice and not one to be entered into lightly :)


----------



## lhancock90

Gemie said:


> As you can see Lauren it's a very personal choice and not one to be entered into lightly :)

Haha just a bit! Some in depth research required!


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Yep it gives you brain ache lol x


----------



## Dragonfly

[Dues to some posts being removed this quote has been edited by Admin]

Moving along. As someone said it is a personal decision, may not suit you could suit someone else. 

I like my sons school though, I liked the ethos. Its positive parenting to and very understanding towards children. They gave a hell of a lot of info which I found a lot of what they said was true. Also its a new school made from anold one and each classroom has its own play yard too. I loved my sons class rooms big door out in to a yard of their own and their time table was fun looking. Nothing like when I was at school. Most of it was playing rest was stories and fun stuff. My son seems to like it. So schools here have changed they where very regimented when I was at school., only one break you had outside and that was your lunch and you didnt get to play.


----------



## Wobbles

Some posts have been removed and action has been taken if felt necessary. 

A reminder of the forum rules:


> Antisocial, discriminatory or offensive messages (intended or otherwise) aimed at the community at large, certain demographics (including parenting styles) or specific members, are not permitted.


----------



## Tacey

We're home educating. Alice would have started school this year. I'm an ex primary teacher, and have huge reservations about the way the education system works in this country. I'm not ruling out school in the future, but for now I feel she'll have a richer and more balanced education out of school than in it.


----------



## tommyg

Tacey said:


> We're home educating. Alice would have started school this year. I'm an ex primary teacher, and have huge reservations about the way the education system works in this country. I'm not ruling out school in the future, but for now I feel she'll have a richer and more balanced education out of school than in it.

What are your reservations on the school system?


----------



## Dragonfly

shocking the amount of school teachers that home ed. I have an old school teacher on my facebook and he shares home school quotes and he just retired.


----------



## Tacey

tommyg said:


> Tacey said:
> 
> 
> We're home educating. Alice would have started school this year. I'm an ex primary teacher, and have huge reservations about the way the education system works in this country. I'm not ruling out school in the future, but for now I feel she'll have a richer and more balanced education out of school than in it.
> 
> What are your reservations on the school system?Click to expand...

I don't want to do down schools and what they offer, so I'll phrase it in terms of why I think home ed is the better choice for us.

The biggest draw is that there's no set curriculum - we can follow our interests, taking up a wide variety of opportunities as they arise. Most things are then learnt in a real life context. The children then take responsibility for their learning. The learn for a clear reason rather than because it's a particular term, for example.

We parent without rewards and punishments, and schools do not. That would be a big conflict for us, especially in the early years.

There is less chance of competition, or ranking ability against others. This will hopefully inspire a desire to learn and do for its own sake.

Lots of time outdoors or in a variety of environments.

Focus on practical skills.

Ability to assess their own progress, and have confidence in their assessment.

Less emphasis on rules/procedures. 

More time to develop friendships with children (and adults) of all ages.


----------



## RÃ³sa

For those parent's that were home schooled , were you able to pursue your career that you wanted or did you feel you were held back because you were home schooled? For those parents who are home schooling will you be able to teach your child enough so they can pursue their own career choice? For example, say your child wanted to be a vet, would you be confident enough that they will obtain ALL A*'s at GCSE level and A grade at A level (UK school system) to enable them to have a chance of a university place? ( Using a vet as an example as such a high academic standard is required for university)


----------



## nevernormal

Rosa, my brother (3 years older than me) performed the same on the ACT (a U.S. standardized test before entering college/university) and performed as well as the valedictorian of the best school in the country (NOT the U.S. -- we were living overseas) on the same test. I performed higher than that. We were both homeschool about half of our school years, him maybe a bit less. My husband, who was homeschooled all of his life, got a score in between mine & my brothers, and the 2 of his siblings who have since reached the age to take the test have outperformed him. One got a nearly perfect score.

After that, I think it's just up to the individual child, personality, goals, etc. My brother has not yet completed a higher degree; I think he just doesn't have the motivation or a clear view of where he wants to end up. I did finish my degree, and worked a couple of years but have always wanted to be a SAHM so that's what I'm doing right now. I could not care less about a career. DH changed what he wants to do career wise, but he's working right now while getting more/different education so we can go in that direction. His sister graduated as a nurse and is working. His brother is getting paid to go to college (by the college) for a degree, and as far as we can tell it looks like he'll finish, and finish well, with a degree in a high paying field.

Overall, I just think it's a personal decision. I've seen a lot of homeschooling families over the years, and it's true some parents don't really do it even though they are "convicted" (in religious circles) to do so. If you want to do it, then do it. There is a lot of flexibility in it, but it should be done in a way that does prepare your child for the real world, including college/university should they want to attend. I've seen a lot of families for whom homeschooling worked brilliantly, and even families where homeschooling worked for some of their children and not for others. My family is an example of that -- homeschooling worked best for me, and for my sister when she was in the younger grades, but my mom & my brother never got along about schooling, so my parents did send us back to school for a couple of years because of that. Once my sister got into higher math she started fighting my mom about that too, so my mom sent her back to school.

OP, whatever you decide, remember you can just commit to one year of it, and see how it works. If you end up hating homeschooling with one or all of your children, you can reevaluate. If you (and they) end up hating the particular school they are going to, you can reevaluate and see if you should homeschool.


----------



## Dragonfly

The schools failed many people I know here, branded them in classes they couldnt pass GCSEs so a lot just left and didnt do a thing. But I know several that went to further education to do the GCSEs and pass them , A levels too and got in to uni . Home school students do exams that way too here. I do worry the schools will not give my children a chance to pass and they will have to do that. And they use rewards here in schools and time outs but most at least is positive and understanding. I am not a fan of rewards and learning or punishing like Tracey.


----------



## tommyg

Ok you now have me intrigued. Does anybody have any statistical evidence that home schooled children will do better on the career ladder than schooled children?

I could understand schooled kids doing better in college / uni as it's possibly closer to what they have experienced but in the big world beyond that?

Or give me examples of successful home schooled kids?

Ie I could dig out lists of successful dyslexics, Richard Branson and I could give you lists of people who succeeded with Montessori, Maggie Thatcher. Who has succeeded with homeschooling?

Who gets the better jobs? And who is most likely to be promoted beyond that?


----------



## Dragonfly

In my research I seen loads of home schooled kids that went far, kinda makes me sad now I cant do it and worry for my sons future giving the job situation where I am here. I am hoping the home schoolers can give you some info as my hands are full now. I dont know why you think collage kids get further . I know some home schooled people that are adults now and all own their own businesses, one is a friend and he is lovely and owns a recording studio and has produced some excellent talent. 
I see some kids on the internet home schooled running places, one had a real estate business and was unschooled I think. Was impressive. Not everyone gets on in school though, only a few are successful. I know none of my school friends that are successful. even that one that went on to uni after regaining her qualifications has no job. The way things are in places you may well have to make your own job as there is none. Scary stuff and all parents want their children to get somewhere in life.


----------



## freckleonear

Rósa;29470151 said:

> For those parent's that were home schooled , were you able to pursue your career that you wanted or did you feel you were held back because you were home schooled? For those parents who are home schooling will you be able to teach your child enough so they can pursue their own career choice? For example, say your child wanted to be a vet, would you be confident enough that they will obtain ALL A*'s at GCSE level and A grade at A level (UK school system) to enable them to have a chance of a university place? ( Using a vet as an example as such a high academic standard is required for university)

I was home educated for secondary school. I got a university place aged 16, having taught myself for my A levels, and am now doing a second degree. Home education allowed me to work at my own pace and fulfill my potential in a way that school never could. Having experienced the academic benefits myself, I am absolutely confident that my children will be able to get good qualifications if that is what they want to do.



tommyg said:


> Ok you now have me intrigued. Does anybody have any statistical evidence that home schooled children will do better on the career ladder than schooled children?
> 
> I could understand schooled kids doing better in college / uni as it's possibly closer to what they have experienced but in the big world beyond that?
> 
> Or give me examples of successful home schooled kids?
> 
> Ie I could dig out lists of successful dyslexics, Richard Branson and I could give you lists of people who succeeded with Montessori, Maggie Thatcher. Who has succeeded with homeschooling?
> 
> Who gets the better jobs? And who is most likely to be promoted beyond that?

The biggest study on home educators to cover careers and life after education is an American one: https://www.hslda.org/research/ray2003/HomeschoolingGrowsUp.pdf.

The Cambridge Primary Review (a very famous piece of research about the English education system from 2006-2012) mentioned home education:


> In the midst of the many differences in philosophy, outlook and practice of home schoolers, from those who follow the national curriculum pretty rigidly to those whose approach makes Summerhill seem like a model of mainstream pedagogical rectitude, home schooling appears to consistently offer children a more efficacious educational experience even as measured by the standards of normative performativity. One constant in the midst of much complexity is the better than average performance of home schooled children when compared to age cohorts in the general population.

There is a huge list of famous and successful people who were home educated here: https://www.home-education.org.uk/resources-famouspeople.htm.


----------



## PepsiChic

Im home schooling for pre-school, and will decide on Kindergarten when the time comes.


----------



## lhancock90

freckleonear said:


> Rósa;29470151 said:
> 
> For those parent's that were home schooled , were you able to pursue your career that you wanted or did you feel you were held back because you were home schooled? For those parents who are home schooling will you be able to teach your child enough so they can pursue their own career choice? For example, say your child wanted to be a vet, would you be confident enough that they will obtain ALL A*'s at GCSE level and A grade at A level (UK school system) to enable them to have a chance of a university place? ( Using a vet as an example as such a high academic standard is required for university)
> 
> I was home educated for secondary school. I got a university place aged 16, having taught myself for my A levels, and am now doing a second degree. Home education allowed me to work at my own pace and fulfill my potential in a way that school never could. Having experienced the academic benefits myself, I am absolutely confident that my children will be able to get good qualifications if that is what they want to do.
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> Ok you now have me intrigued. Does anybody have any statistical evidence that home schooled children will do better on the career ladder than schooled children?
> 
> I could understand schooled kids doing better in college / uni as it's possibly closer to what they have experienced but in the big world beyond that?
> 
> Or give me examples of successful home schooled kids?
> 
> Ie I could dig out lists of successful dyslexics, Richard Branson and I could give you lists of people who succeeded with Montessori, Maggie Thatcher. Who has succeeded with homeschooling?
> 
> Who gets the better jobs? And who is most likely to be promoted beyond that?Click to expand...
> 
> The biggest study on home educators to cover careers and life after education is an American one: https://www.hslda.org/research/ray2003/HomeschoolingGrowsUp.pdf.
> 
> The Cambridge Primary Review (a very famous piece of research about the English education system from 2006-2012) mentioned home education:
> 
> 
> In the midst of the many differences in philosophy, outlook and practice of home schoolers, from those who follow the national curriculum pretty rigidly to those whose approach makes Summerhill seem like a model of mainstream pedagogical rectitude, home schooling appears to consistently offer children a more efficacious educational experience even as measured by the standards of normative performativity. One constant in the midst of much complexity is the better than average performance of home schooled children when compared to age cohorts in the general population.Click to expand...
> 
> There is a huge list of famous and successful people who were home educated here: https://www.home-education.org.uk/resources-famouspeople.htm.Click to expand...

You are a fountain of knowledge! Thank you so much! Xx


----------



## freckleonear

You're welcome! It's something I'm passionate about so I try to make sure there is good information available whenever I can. :)


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Hmm, not all schools have a reward/punishment system. I would find out first as its so easy to be led in one direction over the internet. x


----------



## freckleonear

The vast majority of primary schools use some kind of reward system or token economy such as "golden time". I spent a lot of time researching it for an essay last term. I would be very surprised to find a state school not using rewards and punishments to be honest.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I wouldn't say ours use rewards but I dont have a problem with some achievements being rewarded? Not usual stuff like "being good" but managing something that was a personal struggle. Why is it bad to be praised for trying your best?!


----------



## lhancock90

freckleonear said:


> The vast majority of primary schools use some kind of reward system or token economy such as "golden time". I spent a lot of time researching it for an essay last term. I would be very surprised to find a state school not using rewards and punishments to be honest.

This is a big issue for me! I'd describe myself as an AP parent so the rward/punishment/gender focused activites etc. make me uncomfortable.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

People get rewards all through life though? Pay bonus, slimming world rewards, certificates & promotion to name a few randoms.


----------



## Tacey

Midnight_Fairy said:


> People get rewards all through life though? Pay bonus, slimming world rewards, certificates & promotion to name a few randoms.

It's a bit of a tangent from the OP. This is a good summary of why we don't.


----------



## vaniilla

They always get a bit carried away when writing the 'famous homeschooled people' lists, because really some are just plain ridiculous. Joan of Arc? really? some on that list are clearly only assumptions. I think only socially relevant people should be on there , people from a totally different age/era don't compare.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Thank you for the link. Interesting but I dont really agree. I dont think praising kids is wrong?! Infact I think I praise hundreds of times a day just to get things done. My son thrives on it. 

And Joan of arc. say what!


----------



## chickenlegs

My issue with the "better than average performance" of homeschooled children is that I don't believe that the actual homeschooling is the only, or even the main reason for this. Nobody can argue against the fact that homeschooled children have dedicated and often well educated parents. If a similar "cohort" of schooled children were used in the comparison (as children from similar backgrounds also attend school) then I would be more impressed should they still be outperforming. However, the "general population" would also include children who have little support, few positive role models, no one to help with homework etc. Therefore it is possible that the performance is also down to background and genetics rather than simply the homeschooling.


----------



## lhancock90

I think theres a massive difference between praising a child at home and seperating them at school into smarter/less smart etc when its done in a group it can seriously affect the desire to learn and self esteem.


----------



## Jchihuahua

lhancock90 said:


> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> The vast majority of primary schools use some kind of reward system or token economy such as "golden time". I spent a lot of time researching it for an essay last term. I would be very surprised to find a state school not using rewards and punishments to be honest.
> 
> This is a big issue for me! I'd describe myself as an AP parent so the rward/punishment/gender focused activites etc. make me uncomfortable.Click to expand...

I agree that most schools would have a reward system. I for example do use stickers and certificates with my kids at work but if a parent asked me not to do that I would be more than happy to go with their wishes and to do my research into why they didn't want me to do something a certain way. School really isn't a one size fits all thing. Things work best in school when the parents and the teachers work together.


----------



## Tacey

Midnight_Fairy said:


> Thank you for the link. Interesting but I dont really agree. I dont think praising kids is wrong?! Infact I think I praise hundreds of times a day just to get things done. My son thrives on it.
> 
> And Joan of arc. say what!

You're certainly in the majority, and there's no doubting it gets results, which is why most schools will use it. It's counter productive for us, so we don't.

I agree about the list. It would be nice to have a list of modern day people. Having said that, the way people will home educate is hugely varied. Some take their children out because they are bullied in school, some object to elements of the curriculum, some want to push their children further, some want to take off academic pressure - the reasons and methods are as numerous as the people doing it. To talk about 'home education' encompasses so many approaches, I think statistics about achievement would be pretty useless. What other home educators have achieved doesn't really affect us. The course we take will be altered by what my children want in life. They may choose to go to school later on, or they may not. They may take exams or they may not.


----------



## freckleonear

chickenlegs said:


> My issue with the "better than average performance" of homeschooled children is that I don't believe that the actual homeschooling is the only, or even the main reason for this. Nobody can argue against the fact that homeschooled children have dedicated and often well educated parents. If a similar "cohort" of schooled children were used in the comparison (as children from similar backgrounds also attend school) then I would be more impressed should they still be outperforming. However, the "general population" would also include children who have little support, few positive role models, no one to help with homework etc. Therefore it is possible that the performance is also down to background and genetics rather than simply the homeschooling.

There was a small study by Paula Rothermel (unfortunately there is a lack of large-scale research about home education) which showed that home educated children from lower socio-economic backgrounds actually outperformed their middle-class school-educated peers. Obviously parental involvement is important whether the child is educated at home or at school, but that would suggest that the difference isn't simply due to the child's background.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

There is definitely less focus on ability in schools these days and our school does not use "sets" as such. Ive never know a school to be really gender stereotyping though? My son plays violin and my daughter is in the after school rugby club!? When I was at school I was always in the football team! 

Its a case of what's best for YOU as I honestly do not think that one is actually better than the other! At least your 3 will be close in age. There is absolutely no way on earth I could do it with my age gap and the cry whinge monster Jade LOL. x


----------



## ellismum

lhancock90 said:


> I think theres a massive difference between praising a child at home and seperating them at school into smarter/less smart etc when its done in a group it can seriously affect the desire to learn and self esteem.

Sorry to jump in at a late stage, this has been a really interesting thread but I would like to say that I feel grouping children based on their "smartness" can be a good thing. It allows those who are doing well to continue to do so at their own pace and without distraction whilst those who do need assistance are able to get that at the level they require. My secondary school used "sets" and you were able to move around and no one was bullied or pressured because it. Certainly not anyone I know. Of course, this may be different as it was 20 *cough* years ago.


----------



## Dragonfly

vaniilla said:


> They always get a bit carried away when writing the 'famous homeschooled people' lists, because really some are just plain ridiculous. Joan of Arc? really? some on that list are clearly only assumptions. I think only socially relevant people should be on there , people from a totally different age/era don't compare.

 Never came across her name on a list but Will Smiths kids are home schooled. Albert Einstein. 


Tacey said:


> Midnight_Fairy said:
> 
> 
> People get rewards all through life though? Pay bonus, slimming world rewards, certificates & promotion to name a few randoms.
> 
> It's a bit of a tangent from the OP. This is a good summary of why we don't.Click to expand...

I go with that link too. I dont care who does it, I wasnt raised that way and dosnt feel right to do on my kids. However I cant stop schools from doing it but I dont have to like it. I dont like how a reward is at the end of learning something, the learned thing is forgotten and the target is the reward. We had a reward chart in school and it made me feel worse too. Painfully shy and always at the bottom of it with no stars. Did not help self esteem. I hope to help my child out at home there is loads we can learn online we are always looking things up and have loads of books. I take an active interest in their education, I learn too that way.


----------



## RachA

It's funny as we've just met the new head teacher at my sons school. He is quite big on rewards and sanctions from what he's said and OH and I are really pleased. 
I think it's great that if a child puts a lot of effort into a piece of work that they are rewarded for it. Similarly if a child is deliberately late for school on lots of occasions then there should be some sort if sanction 

Iro sets etc: I work as a parent helper and having children split into ability groups really helps in helping those children. They are not in these groups all the time and it is not made into a big deal. A child can be in the 'top' set for maths and the 'bottom' for English. This helps the teacher to set work specific for the child.


----------



## PepsiChic

ellismum said:


> lhancock90 said:
> 
> 
> I think theres a massive difference between praising a child at home and seperating them at school into smarter/less smart etc when its done in a group it can seriously affect the desire to learn and self esteem.
> 
> Sorry to jump in at a late stage, this has been a really interesting thread but I would like to say that I feel grouping children based on their "smartness" can be a good thing. It allows those who are doing well to continue to do so at their own pace and without distraction whilst those who do need assistance are able to get that at the level they require. My secondary school used "sets" and you were able to move around and no one was bullied or pressured because it. Certainly not anyone I know. Of course, this may be different as it was 20 *cough* years ago.Click to expand...

I agree with this,

Im doing pre-school homeschooling with Barry, but he already knows everything im teaching him, I may end up starting Kindergarten with him and skip pre-school.

If I put him into a pre-school, he would be more advanced then some of his peers, having seen how he is easily getting bored of me trying to teach him what he already knows at home, I can see how he may get bored and even act up at pre-school if they persisted in him having to sit and read the alphabet when he can tell you it backwards. 

if they had the option to put separate him and put him with peers on a similar level he'd be more inclined to pay attention and learn something new


----------



## Dragonfly

Grouping children on smartness not good for people who need help unless its actually going to help people that need help. We where not allowed to go on school trips in school,. school plays and where say doing cross words on most our classes and most teaches didnt teach us as we where not in the smart group. I rather home school my child if that happens in secondary schools here by the time they get there. They would be better off. I dont believe they group in primary here just secondary.


----------



## lhancock90

We were grouped setwise but i felt the standard/oppurtunitys and desire to help those in lower ones was poor compared with higher sets.


----------



## Gemie

lhancock90 said:


> We were grouped setwise but i felt the standard/oppurtunitys and desire to help those in lower ones was poor compared with higher sets.

My experience of high school was the same.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I think there is much for help for the children who need help now compared to my school years! You will also find schools get more funding for additional help too. My daughter has dyslexia and has never had less support (infact she gets more!) 
It is easy to be led into home school idea and I was but its not the answer to everything and does have some negatives. I also do not think praise is wrong!


----------



## lhancock90

Midnight_Fairy said:


> I think there is much for help for the children who need help now compared to my school years! You will also find schools get more funding for additional help too. My daughter has dyslexia and has never had less support (infact she gets more!)
> It is easy to be led into home school idea and I was but its not the answer to everything and does have some negatives. I also do not think praise is wrong!

I don't think that praise is wrong, but i went to a school were the "top" "promising" pupils who would make the school shine were really really focused us and it left others, with talents that weren't as desired or who were struggling left behind. And i went to an excellent school! But i did feel that although i was excellent at History and English my Math struggles were completely ignored.
Of course children deserve praise when they achieve something amazing, but i went to a school that felt very praise focused but didn't seem to do much for those who were struggling, it felt that the praise came at the expense of all the kids left behind. I felt it needed more balance, and seeing the schools my sisters attend i still feel the same. I don't think ignoring weakness is a good thing and yet many schools seem to do that, if a kid excels at English but fails at Maths, the maths is ignored and the English is pushed. Of course everyone should nurture their talents but they should put time into areas of difficulty too. 
Obviously that's just my experience though!
But i really struggled with maths and still do and the standard of teaching i received in a lower math set was completely ridiculous. 
Of course class sizes add to the problem which is where home schooling is better, at home there is plenty of one on one whereas overworked and overstretched teachers just don't have the time anymore, because they are weighed down with large classes and paperwork.

My worries are not even necessarily teachers tbh, i know that for every sub par teacher who has lost all desire for the job is 4 more amazing and devoted ones. In sixth form my English teacher, theatre teacher and history teachers were incredible, they gave so much to the school and the pupils but the school itself was completely letting its pupils down. Kids were running wild with little respect, resources like the library were completely unused! There was so much focus on trying to appear to be an incredible school that not much time went into actually making it one. When ofsted rolled around it was all about keeping up appearances. 

I would love my children to have an enriching school experience that they can enjoy, where they can learn, socialize, have fun etc but at the moment it feels very much like a lottery pick school wise. You don't know what your childs in for until they actually go. My sister was forced to move from a "good" ofsted reported school because they were completely adamant she was thick, couldn't read etc. The next school she went to, she shone in! They completely nurtured her, she could read, she was strong in some subjects, she just needed the encouragement.

More than that, i genuinely in my area, worry about other pupils, the behavior is shocking, at a primary school down the road, 2 pupils snuck in after hours and set fire to the roof. The nearest primary school is constantly broken into and robbed my its own pupils! The behavior in schools isn't much better, violence, swearing etc. In sixth form there were times that searching for weapons was discussed and i won't lie that completely terrify me. I want to feel like my children go to school and are safe. I don't want them to fear being attacked, or racially abused. 

My area is a mix, of families who work, who have money and time for their kids, who raise them to be politely and unfortunately a growing amount of families, who work/dont work with a complete disrespect for schools, for the law, for the beliefs of others. I've been catcalled, racially abused, attacked by a completely drunk man. This area it feels is at war with two very different "side of the tracks" 

Sometimes it feels like all the rules, the regulations, the government and the bureaucracy of schools these days has taken the away what it should be about. Teaching children, showing them how wonderful education can be, how fun and exciting, how hands on it can be for science and p.e. 

I'm completely undecided on homeschooling at the moment. Yes i think i have so much to offer my children, i agree i could offer that alongside a school education but i think its going to take a while to decide exactly what works best for us, as a family.


----------



## Natsku

They did sets when I was in school and it was stupid because you were organised into the different sets based on how good you were at French. I was put in the bottom set because I moved from a school where I had only just started French that year but at the new school everyone had been studying it for 4 years so they assumed I was stupid. I had to fight to be moved to the top set where I belonged. 
They don't do sets in the schools here but they have small class sizes so those struggling can get extra help.


----------



## lhancock90

Natsku said:


> They did sets when I was in school and it was stupid because you were organised into the different sets based on how good you were at French. I was put in the bottom set because I moved from a school where I had only just started French that year but at the new school everyone had been studying it for 4 years so they assumed I was stupid. I had to fight to be moved to the top set where I belonged.
> They don't do sets in the schools here but they have small class sizes so those struggling can get extra help.

I would love your school system!


----------



## tommyg

Midnight_Fairy said:


> I think there is much for help for the children who need help now compared to my school years! You will also find schools get more funding for additional help too. My daughter has dyslexia and has never had less support (infact she gets more!)
> It is easy to be led into home school idea and I was but its not the answer to everything and does have some negatives. I also do not think praise is wrong!

Really good to hear your daughter is getting plenty of support. The extent of the support I was given in primary school which was pleaded for by my mum, who is the opposite to me she is a very talented speller, was a bashed up spelling book with pages missing. However at least I was spared the humiliation my dad suffered in school. I guess as time, research and knowledge goes on things get better for those that don't quite conform to the norm.
Don't forget there is advantages in being dyslexic too.


----------



## tommyg

Curiosity has got the better of me the UK school system is apparently rated 6th in the world. So it can't really be that bad.


----------



## vaniilla

That does sound very similar to some of the schools that were close to us when we lived in London and I don't blame you for not wanting to put your children in that environment. Have you considered moving closer to a good school or it not feasible?


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I went and viewed many schools. Yes, we had a few problems with the infants but not with the care or teaching, more about adapting for my son but that was everyone learning. He is in juniors now and yes sometimes stuff goes wrong and me and the SENCO are not best friends ;) but I trust what they have got him to achieve, he has done amazing! 

For secondary though I completly agree! I am not set on Secondary yet and I am not even sure if there is one that suits my son. I have a few in mind but I have a year to decide it yet. Secondary is a whole new ball game that I dont like :(

I think home-schooling is good for Infants but definitely im for school in the Junior years. Mine are becoming young independent people and I am glad they are with their peers right now while they juggle hormones and the likes...


----------



## lhancock90

Midnight_Fairy said:


> I went and viewed many schools. Yes, we had a few problems with the infants but not with the care or teaching, more about adapting for my son but that was everyone learning. He is in juniors now and yes sometimes stuff goes wrong and me and the SENCO are not best friends ;) but I trust what they have got him to achieve, he has done amazing!
> 
> For secondary though I completly agree! I am not set on Secondary yet and I am not even sure if there is one that suits my son. I have a few in mind but I have a year to decide it yet. Secondary is a whole new ball game that I dont like :(
> 
> I think home-schooling is good for Infants but definitely im for school in the Junior years. Mine are becoming young independent people and I am glad they are with their peers right now while they juggle hormones and the likes...

I don't want to think about having 3 teenagers in one house yet :rofl:


----------



## freckleonear

Research has shown that the brightest children benefit from ability sets, but it has a negative effect for all the other children. I was one of the bright children at school and my experience would have been much worse without sets, but I can understand how it could be damaging for others.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

In primary they dont do much "set" work. I think thats much more of a secondary thing.


----------



## Dragonfly

I am glad that there is help now for dylexia. My partner has that and he cant read most things or write a sentence. Instead of helping him they had someone read his exams out to him in a room of his own to which he failed as he had to still write and back then they just ignored you if you had problems. My brother was the same never helped with dyslexia and a few class mates I remember had it too. Improvements have been made to the school system on some fronts.


----------



## Gemie

lhancock90 said:


> Midnight_Fairy said:
> 
> 
> I think there is much for help for the children who need help now compared to my school years! You will also find schools get more funding for additional help too. My daughter has dyslexia and has never had less support (infact she gets more!)
> It is easy to be led into home school idea and I was but its not the answer to everything and does have some negatives. I also do not think praise is wrong!
> 
> I don't think that praise is wrong, but i went to a school were the "top" "promising" pupils who would make the school shine were really really focused us and it left others, with talents that weren't as desired or who were struggling left behind. And i went to an excellent school! But i did feel that although i was excellent at History and English my Math struggles were completely ignored.
> Of course children deserve praise when they achieve something amazing, but i went to a school that felt very praise focused but didn't seem to do much for those who were struggling, it felt that the praise came at the expense of all the kids left behind. I felt it needed more balance, and seeing the schools my sisters attend i still feel the same. I don't think ignoring weakness is a good thing and yet many schools seem to do that, if a kid excels at English but fails at Maths, the maths is ignored and the English is pushed. Of course everyone should nurture their talents but they should put time into areas of difficulty too.
> Obviously that's just my experience though!
> But i really struggled with maths and still do and the standard of teaching i received in a lower math set was completely ridiculous.
> Of course class sizes add to the problem which is where home schooling is better, at home there is plenty of one on one whereas overworked and overstretched teachers just don't have the time anymore, because they are weighed down with large classes and paperwork.
> 
> My worries are not even necessarily teachers tbh, i know that for every sub par teacher who has lost all desire for the job is 4 more amazing and devoted ones. In sixth form my English teacher, theatre teacher and history teachers were incredible, they gave so much to the school and the pupils but the school itself was completely letting its pupils down. Kids were running wild with little respect, resources like the library were completely unused! There was so much focus on trying to appear to be an incredible school that not much time went into actually making it one. When ofsted rolled around it was all about keeping up appearances.
> 
> I would love my children to have an enriching school experience that they can enjoy, where they can learn, socialize, have fun etc but at the moment it feels very much like a lottery pick school wise. You don't know what your childs in for until they actually go. My sister was forced to move from a "good" ofsted reported school because they were completely adamant she was thick, couldn't read etc. The next school she went to, she shone in! They completely nurtured her, she could read, she was strong in some subjects, she just needed the encouragement.
> 
> More than that, i genuinely in my area, worry about other pupils, the behavior is shocking, at a primary school down the road, 2 pupils snuck in after hours and set fire to the roof. The nearest primary school is constantly broken into and robbed my its own pupils! The behavior in schools isn't much better, violence, swearing etc. In sixth form there were times that searching for weapons was discussed and i won't lie that completely terrify me. I want to feel like my children go to school and are safe. I don't want them to fear being attacked, or racially abused.
> 
> My area is a mix, of families who work, who have money and time for their kids, who raise them to be politely and unfortunately a growing amount of families, who work/dont work with a complete disrespect for schools, for the law, for the beliefs of others. I've been catcalled, racially abused, attacked by a completely drunk man. This area it feels is at war with two very different "side of the tracks"
> 
> Sometimes it feels like all the rules, the regulations, the government and the bureaucracy of schools these days has taken the away what it should be about. Teaching children, showing them how wonderful education can be, how fun and exciting, how hands on it can be for science and p.e.
> 
> I'm completely undecided on homeschooling at the moment. Yes i think i have so much to offer my children, i agree i could offer that alongside a school education but i think its going to take a while to decide exactly what works best for us, as a family.Click to expand...

Your reasons for thinking about HE are more or less identical to ours.


----------



## Gemie

lhancock90 said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> They did sets when I was in school and it was stupid because you were organised into the different sets based on how good you were at French. I was put in the bottom set because I moved from a school where I had only just started French that year but at the new school everyone had been studying it for 4 years so they assumed I was stupid. I had to fight to be moved to the top set where I belonged.
> They don't do sets in the schools here but they have small class sizes so those struggling can get extra help.
> 
> I would love your school system!Click to expand...

Trust me.... One is enough! :rofl: 
We're heading for what will be 2 teens together but thankfully not for a good few years yet lol btw congratulations on your pregnancy :flower:


ETA quoted the wrong comment I'm Saying congratulations to Lauren haha!


----------



## lhancock90

Thanks Gemie, if i have another girl the teenage years are going to one dramatic hormonal time :haha:


----------



## Jchihuahua

In terms of setting we do it at our school (not in early years where I work obviously) but further up and the planning is very differentiated to the exact ability and needs of the children in that set and it is taught at the pace a particular group of pupils need and the children flourish within their sets as it is at their exact level of ability and the teacher/teaching assistant can go as slow or as fast as that group of children need. Our planning in key stage 2 is differentiated to 7 different levels of ability, and then children with specific SEN have their Individual Education Plan and their work is set from that so we really do ensure that every child is well and truly catered for.


----------



## RachA

The school my two nieces and two nephews go to puts the children into different sets. All 4 of them are middle of the road children (3 out of the 4 did the exam for the grammar school and none got in). The school encourages all of the children regardless of ability. Under the school system there they are all shinning. My eldest niece came out of junior school and was ok. She was put in middle sets and has worked her way up and is now doing amazingly well. It wasn't that she wasn't 'pushed' at junior school, it's more that the senior school has a way of making all the children feel like they can achieve. Obviously there are children in the lower sets but even these children improve loads. 

I do agree though that sets are bad if they school are only going to focus on the gifted children. This however is the fault of the school and not the system.


----------



## Pearls18

I think sets are important, we weren't setted in year 7 just put into our form groups and I remember being sat in Maths class being taught about odd and even numbers.....at 12....it was horrendous, my class was full of people who were either trouble makers or understandably needed more help which did hold the class back. Thankfully from year 8 onwards it was much better as we were setted until A level but tbh by A level you were only really in the class if you were good enough so ability was less important. My brother and I were always top set so I don't have experience of lower sets, I think the problem in my school was the correlation between lower sets and poorer behaviour by a small number which must have caused issues. The system worked well for me and tbh until I am in the position of experiencing how it is for my children if it is negative I'm not going to fret about it. If my children were low set I would be getting them private tutors anyway.

In primary school we weren't setted but some classes were mixed with the "top" achievers of the lower year and bottom achievers of the higher year. I don't really know what impact it had on anyone else but worked fine for me! Some of the rural schools by me are literally divided into infants (4-8ish) and Juniors (8-11ish)....part of the reason a lot of rural schools aren't achieving well IMO.


----------



## chickenlegs

freckleonear said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> My issue with the "better than average performance" of homeschooled children is that I don't believe that the actual homeschooling is the only, or even the main reason for this. Nobody can argue against the fact that homeschooled children have dedicated and often well educated parents. If a similar "cohort" of schooled children were used in the comparison (as children from similar backgrounds also attend school) then I would be more impressed should they still be outperforming. However, the "general population" would also include children who have little support, few positive role models, no one to help with homework etc. Therefore it is possible that the performance is also down to background and genetics rather than simply the homeschooling.
> 
> There was a small study by Paula Rothermel (unfortunately there is a lack of large-scale research about home education) which showed that home educated children from lower socio-economic backgrounds actually outperformed their middle-class school-educated peers. Obviously parental involvement is important whether the child is educated at home or at school, but that would suggest that the difference isn't simply due to the child's background.Click to expand...

Fair play, but then I would still argue that parental involvement, support and general interest in education is more likely to be the key rather than the homeschooling. Provide those state schooled children with the same home support as the home schooled children and then I would be more likely to accept that the type of education itself is the factor.


----------



## chickenlegs

I have been teaching for 15 years, 11 of those of SEN children or lower sets in numeracy and literacy. I find it slightly offensive that lower set teaching is considered substandard or ridiculous. A LOT of thought and consideration is put into the impact of setting on the confidence / self esteem of the lower ability children and hence a LOT of effort is put into the delivery of lessons to ensure that confidence and self esteem are still maintained. We aren't miracle workers and lower ability children can lack confidence, although I doubt that this is primarily due to setting. Often moving down a set can increase confidence and often this strategy is used deliberately. Lower ability children are a HUGE priority and are not forgotten about in any way.


----------



## Jchihuahua

chickenlegs said:


> I have been teaching for 15 years, 11 of those of SEN children or lower sets in numeracy and literacy. I find it slightly offensive that lower set teaching is considered substandard or ridiculous. A LOT of thought and consideration is put into the impact of setting on the confidence / self esteem of the lower ability children and hence a LOT of effort is put into the delivery of lessons to ensure that confidence and self esteem are still maintained. We aren't miracle workers and lower ability children can lack confidence, although I doubt that this is primarily due to setting. Often moving down a set can increase confidence and often this strategy is used deliberately. Lower ability children are a HUGE priority and are not forgotten about in any way.

Agreed completely!


----------



## lhancock90

chickenlegs said:


> I have been teaching for 15 years, 11 of those of SEN children or lower sets in numeracy and literacy. I find it slightly offensive that lower set teaching is considered substandard or ridiculous. A LOT of thought and consideration is put into the impact of setting on the confidence / self esteem of the lower ability children and hence a LOT of effort is put into the delivery of lessons to ensure that confidence and self esteem are still maintained. We aren't miracle workers and lower ability children can lack confidence, although I doubt that this is primarily due to setting. Often moving down a set can increase confidence and often this strategy is used deliberately. Lower ability children are a HUGE priority and are not forgotten about in any way.

I don't think you should be offended. I wrote about my OWN personal expierence. I can assure you being in lower set maths the teaching i, personally recieved WAS sub standard.


----------



## chickenlegs

_I don't think ignoring weakness is a good thing and yet *many schools* seem to do that, if a kid excels at English but fails at Maths, the maths is ignored and the English is pushed. Of course everyone should nurture their talents but they should put time into areas of difficulty too. _

Many schools? Hence being mildly offended.


----------



## lhancock90

chickenlegs said:


> _I don't think ignoring weakness is a good thing and yet *many schools* seem to do that, if a kid excels at English but fails at Maths, the maths is ignored and the English is pushed. Of course everyone should nurture their talents but they should put time into areas of difficulty too. _
> 
> Many schools? Hence being mildly offended.

I went to two primary and two secondry schools. My sisters have had the same problems. Hence the many schools.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I do think we are lucky in the UK :)


----------



## lhancock90

I'm sorry but the fact is not all schools and teachers are brilliant. You are picking on the parts of my post that point out the negitives and ignoring the positives i said! I understand why you are taking it this way, but the fact is there are bad teachers and schools just as there are good.


----------



## freckleonear

tommyg said:


> Curiosity has got the better of me the UK school system is apparently rated 6th in the world. So it can't really be that bad.

Out of interest, can I ask where you found that statistic? This is something we studied extensively at uni last year and in all the main research over the last ten years the UK has performed quite poorly, especially compared to other European countries. For example, the OECD index currently ranks the UK's education at number 26 out of 34.


----------



## Jchihuahua

freckleonear said:


> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> Curiosity has got the better of me the UK school system is apparently rated 6th in the world. So it can't really be that bad.
> 
> Out of interest, can I ask where you found that statistic? This is something we studied extensively at uni last year and in all the main research over the last ten years the UK has performed quite poorly, especially compared to other European countries. For example, the OECD index currently ranks the UK's education at number 26 out of 34.Click to expand...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20498356


----------



## tommyg

freckleonear said:


> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> Curiosity has got the better of me the UK school system is apparently rated 6th in the world. So it can't really be that bad.
> 
> Out of interest, can I ask where you found that statistic? This is something we studied extensively at uni last year and in all the main research over the last ten years the UK has performed quite poorly, especially compared to other European countries. For example, the OECD index currently ranks the UK's education at number 26 out of 34.Click to expand...

It was one of the "posh" papers websites the independent or somewhere. I notice someone has linked to the BBC site with same info.


----------



## Dragonfly

chickenlegs said:


> I have been teaching for 15 years, 11 of those of SEN children or lower sets in numeracy and literacy. I find it slightly offensive that lower set teaching is considered substandard or ridiculous. A LOT of thought and consideration is put into the impact of setting on the confidence / self esteem of the lower ability children and hence a LOT of effort is put into the delivery of lessons to ensure that confidence and self esteem are still maintained. We aren't miracle workers and lower ability children can lack confidence, although I doubt that this is primarily due to setting. Often moving down a set can increase confidence and often this strategy is used deliberately. Lower ability children are a HUGE priority and are not forgotten about in any way.

Yes but you teach ,a lot of my teachers put us down saying we where not going any where in life *yes I complained and got them in trouble* We had classes we done crosswords in and classes we had no teachers for and that was the low classes in my secondary school. I dont assume all are like this and probably not are now a days. In some schools they are or where forgotten. I left a good school over bullying to go to the one I did and got put in the low class from a high one where I would have been in the top band because they said they had no room in the higher classes. I fought a lot with the teachers for equality and was separated during my exams in case I started a rebellion as I disagreed we where all failed grades and not given a fair chance or educated for them. I choose music and art as my gcses *among others* I had no teacher for them subjects and I was very good at them subjects so I got a certificate saying I attended the class thats all. :shrug:


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

School 10+yr ago is very different to school now!


----------



## tommyg

Dragonfly surely your parents should have complained to the school about the lack to teaching provison and taken it higher, ie to your MP, if the school didn't resolve the issue of lack of teachers? It's also wrong that the new school put you in the lower classes because they didn't have space for you. That should have been discussed with your parents before the decided to accept the place at the school could offer.

That sounds like a funding issue or something yes blame the school system but not the teachers - it's not their fault they weren't employed to do the job of teaching kids.


I personally had a reasonable school experience, yes I'm sure I would have done better had I been given support with dyslexia. And I do wonder if while the sever dyslexics are being given help if the moderate ones like me who survived but struggled are still just left to struggle on alone? 

I know I could have done better in school than I did, if failed in school but suceeded in college and uni. How much of that was a diffrent learning enviroment, a diffrent attidute from me, and subjects that came more naturally to me I'll never know.


----------



## Pearls18

Dragonfly I think I would move, the way you describe where you are from on lots of different threads from policies to etiquette sounds just horrid lol, I think I would give up! :flower:


----------



## Dragonfly

tommyg said:


> Dragonfly surely your parents should have complained to the school about the lack to teaching provison and taken it higher, ie to your MP, if the school didn't resolve the issue of lack of teachers? It's also wrong that the new school put you in the lower classes because they didn't have space for you. That should have been discussed with your parents before the decided to accept the place at the school could offer.
> 
> That sounds like a funding issue or something yes blame the school system but not the teachers - it's not their fault they weren't employed to do the job of teaching kids.
> 
> 
> I personally had a reasonable school experience, yes I'm sure I would have done better had I been given support with dyslexia. And I do wonder if while the sever dyslexics are being given help if the moderate ones like me who survived but struggled are still just left to struggle on alone?
> 
> I know I could have done better in school than I did, if failed in school but suceeded in college and uni. How much of that was a diffrent learning enviroment, a diffrent attidute from me, and subjects that came more naturally to me I'll never know.




MarineWAG said:


> Dragonfly I think I would move, the way you describe where you are from on lots of different threads from policies to etiquette sounds just horrid lol, I think I would give up! :flower:

My mum never wanted me to go to that school it was the same one she went to and it was the same when she was there. But it was the only other school near me as the rest where grammar and I couldnt get in them. You had to do an 11 plus and pass it to get in to them I never did mine. I did have a place in a school far away but my uncle was and still is a teacher there and I we dont get on and havnt spoken since childhood. And I went to school in the 90s not like we had the great big internet to voice you just get on with it here and get out of it to a job. The religious policy has slightly changed where at least one catholic school *thats all there is in my area* will take my son on. And its not the systems fault its the schools. I loved science and read a lot of books at home my dad got me all the time, I never had a science class as my teacher would walk out when we came in and wasnt seen till end of the lesson. 99 % of class didnt care they just done their make up only myself and a few others did speak out to no notice of the school. Weirdly they came looking for me when I bunked off class. And used to call my home when I was ill and accuse me of bunking when I was sat beside my mum claiming to have seen me walk out of the school. The principal and my mum did not get on, they had history. I am only angry about this as I age but back then as I said you just wanted out of school. Even if you had of complained its all covered up as I have many friends work in schools now. And I tried to complain about my sons pre school and I got shot down.


----------



## tommyg

That is a real shame that nobody fought the school to improve there standards even in the days pre-internet it's wasn't that hard to write or call your MP or local councillor to get some out side support against the system. 

I think sometimes complaining to a school is pointless you have to take it higher. But it does sound you were very unfortunate to have been landed with a science teacher who didn't do their job and wasn't disiplined for it. 

I know my school sacked a teacher who had a drink problem for his lack of professionalism and not paying enough attention to the kids he was teaching and smelling of drink at work. The attitdue of kids doesn't help but at the same time a strong teacher can control any class. I remember a very flustered and poofy RE teacher coming into my classroom one day asking my teacher "please can you come in and control my class the children are on top of their desks" my class all laughed, our teacher stormed out to sort the other class out. But I can also say that they were teachers in my school who you wouldn't dare mess about in their class - a steel eyed look was all that was required of them.


----------



## Dragonfly

My mum was a narcissist she didnt care. She cared more about how I made her look than what I had to say. She didnt come to any parents evenings or my record of achievement I didnt even go to as no one was there to see me receive it. Its a good job I care about my childrens education, I take a lot to do in it and help them. I like it as I like learning too. This will not happen to them I take to do with their school. And was well impressed with my sons school and the information they sent me . Long as they are happy I am too.


----------



## PepsiChic

I hated school, I was bullied relentlessly, and because its all local school, every time you move up from infant to junior, or junior to senior, its the same kids going with you, so the bullying never stops. I attempted suicide, and when i didnt succeed i was truant from most of my senior school years. When I did go, i drank heavily.

My parents tried to deal with the issues, i had therapists like you wouldnt believe. hated them all too. but the schools unwillingness to do anything about the bullies ruined my entire school life.

For me, its not the teachers I worry about, but the other students. How mean kids are now goes way further then when i was at school, especially as there is now all this social media.

I read a new suicide story in the news every day from school kids bullied at school and online. 

It worries me so much.


----------



## KittyVentura

Strongly considering it here too. Only until junior school mind, but the thought of sending either so young makes me feel ill. Xx


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I found first years really nurturing if you pick right school xx


----------



## Dragonfly

Midnight_Fairy said:


> School 10+yr ago is very different to school now!

Indeed it is I have said a few times about my sons school in here. :flower:


----------



## freckleonear

I expect most people have already seen this on the news, but thought I would link to it here as it is relevant. I thought it was fascinating that 71% of people think schooling should begin at 6 or 7, whilst only 6% think that school should begin at age 4 as it currently does for most children.

Start schooling later than age five, say experts
Too Much Too Soon campaign with a link to the petition


----------



## tommyg

Now you've given me a dilemma, do I as a Scot have a right to sign the petition? Baring in mind that education is a devolved issue. However if the campaign is successful in England then Scotland is likely to follow suit.

The youngest kids starting school in Scotland are 4.5 but I think it is still too young. And the Jan / Feb babies have an automatic right of deferral to the following year. So as a Feb mum I may well exercise that right.

So do I have a right to petition for change in England?


----------



## Pearls18

I'm surprised by those statistics, I don't know anyone in my immediate friends, family etc that have a problem with the school age the only time I hear it discussed is on here. Maybe it's because my son is September but it doesn't concern me at all, I'm originally from Wales where we all started school at 4 and no one batted an eye lid at this. I would be a lot more worried if my children were later on in the school year, but being Autumn/Winter babies doesn't phase me in the slightest so far, maybe il change my mind in 2 years time but I doubt it, I figure all the children are in the same situation.


----------



## chickenlegs

I don't think the government would take the chance that attainment at the end of year 2 would be dramatically reduced, despite the fact that attainment later on is far greater. The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc. No history past WW1. Sounds like Gove has thought back to his childhood and popped in everything that he can remember. Our chair of governors LOVES him and has now decided that we need to teach our 11 year olds to country dance. Brilliant. That's once we have convinced them to stop beatboxing and perfecting their own style of graffiti. Im sure they'll take to "Lord of the Dance" like ducks to water.


----------



## lovelylaura

thanks for link to the petition. i am the only person i know who thinks that 4 year olds are too young. maybe thats to do with both my girls being end of year children so will have only turned 4 a few weeks before. it doesnt feel right to me. sorry for awful spelling ect freya is fast asleep on me so its difficult x


----------



## freckleonear

chickenlegs said:


> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.

Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:


----------



## Dragonfly

freckleonear said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...

That sounds like the one we done in primary school. I think it depends on school my sons school seems all play, no maths lessons. Reading I seen in there and more play. They have their own playground on each class room *new built school*. I hear a lot of schools are like this now. It looks fun and my son loves going. I hated school.


----------



## Rags

tommyg said:


> Now you've given me a dilemma, do I as a Scot have a right to sign the petition? Baring in mind that education is a devolved issue. However if the campaign is successful in England then Scotland is likely to follow suit.
> 
> The youngest kids starting school in Scotland are 4.5 but I think it is still too young. And the Jan / Feb babies have an automatic right of deferral to the following year. So as a Feb mum I may well exercise that right.
> 
> So do I have a right to petition for change in England?

I'm in Scotland and have had all of the teachers I know tell me how lucky I am that DS is a March baby and as so will be 5 and a half when he starts school. I myself am one of the ones who thinks even this is to young. I would be much happier if that was the start of a pre-schooling organised play phase for a year of 2 (more like the Scandinavian system) with his formal education starting nearer 7. I am well aware that many children 'cope' well with formal education from much earlier than this, my own son is more than keeping up with his peer group in all aspects of his life and I am not concerned about how he will cope, socialise and learn at 5, however I don't personaly see the problem with allowing him more time to develop and enjoy his young childhood, he will never be able to get this time back at any other point in his life. He will have many years of formal education ahead.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

4 is too young for exams but from my experience year Reception was all learn through play x


----------



## JASMAK

Kindergarten starts in the year you turn 5 here, but parents ca hold back for an additional year. Kindergarten is mostly play here too. Its funny, in Canada, or at least my city, the are pushing for more the other way! Sounds like uk might push the academics a bit earlier tho?


----------



## Rags

JASMAK said:


> Kindergarten starts in the year you turn 5 here, but parents ca hold back for an additional year. Kindergarten is mostly play here too. Its funny, in Canada, or at least my city, the are pushing for more the other way! Sounds like uk might push the academics a bit earlier tho?

It's interesting getting an overview of other countries education systems and expectations. Where I am in Scotland if I decided to not send ds to school in his 5th year the authorities would be looking at why and wanting proof that I was home schooling.


----------



## Jchihuahua

Midnight_Fairy said:


> 4 is too young for exams but from my experience year Reception was all learn through play x

And Year 1 is a lot of learning through play too.


----------



## JASMAK

Rags said:


> JASMAK said:
> 
> 
> Kindergarten starts in the year you turn 5 here, but parents ca hold back for an additional year. Kindergarten is mostly play here too. Its funny, in Canada, or at least my city, the are pushing for more the other way! Sounds like uk might push the academics a bit earlier tho?
> 
> It's interesting getting an overview of other countries education systems and expectations. Where I am in Scotland if I decided to not send ds to school in his 5th year the authorities would be looking at why and wanting proof that I was home schooling.Click to expand...

Oh dear!! Yes, well homeschooling is quite popular here, but holding a child back is not unheard of, espesially for children born later in the year. Like my youngest turns 5 in August. School starts in September, so she will be a 'young' kindergarten. It would be totally normal for me to wait until the following year. My friend held her son, who turned 5 in November, back an additional year. I probably won't wait with K because at 3 she is very emotionally advanced. And that is what matters here... If they are emotionally ready, not academically.


----------



## chickenlegs

freckleonear said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...

No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.


----------



## chickenlegs

lovelylaura said:


> thanks for link to the petition. i am the only person i know who thinks that 4 year olds are too young. maybe thats to do with both my girls being end of year children so will have only turned 4 a few weeks before. it doesnt feel right to me. sorry for awful spelling ect freya is fast asleep on me so its difficult x

No I agree! Just cant see the government buying it, that's all.


----------



## Natsku

chickenlegs said:


> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...
> 
> No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.Click to expand...

I did up to 12 in primary school (year 6)


----------



## chickenlegs

Natsku said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...
> 
> No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.Click to expand...
> 
> I did up to 12 in primary school (year 6)Click to expand...

Me too!


----------



## nevernormal

I am not sure really how I feel about sending small children to school for a formal education, but I guess that's part of the draw of homeschool for me. I can remember writing my cousin a letter at age 3, maybe young 4. I had to ask my mom how to spell the words, but could write the letters. Well I suppose I could spell my name at that point, because I asked her how to spell my cousin's name and she said I knew it already as it was my middle name. My mom didn't do any formal education with me but I was just interested in it. I can also remember figuring out fractions at a very young age. I didn't necessarily know the names of them, but like I could ask for "half of a half" piece of something, meaning a quarter of it. My husband and I both were early readers.

I'm not saying my children will be doing anything early, but I like the idea that from now, when my son is a baby, I can make learning fun & interesting, and if he WANTS to do that at 3, then I'll just go with it rather than not even considering it a possibility because he is "too young." I would feel that he was too young to start going to school then, but I won't ever feel that he's too young to learn something if he has the drive for it!


----------



## freckleonear

chickenlegs said:


> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...
> 
> No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.Click to expand...

The 12 times table does have practical uses though. I dread to think of a generation of adults who cannot instantly recognise that 48 hours is 2 days or that 36 inches is 3 foot. As for Roman numerals, I was taught them in primary school (along with all my tables) but wish we had done more work on them as I still struggle with larger numbers. Truss and Gove may be clueless about child development, but it seems they have a point about education being dumbed down.


----------



## JASMAK

freckleonear said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...
> 
> No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.Click to expand...
> 
> The 12 times table does have practical uses though. I dread to think of a generation of adults who cannot instantly recognise that 48 hours is 2 days or that 36 inches is 3 foot. As for Roman numerals, I was taught them in primary school (along with all my tables) but wish we had done more work on them as I still struggle with larger numbers. Truss and Gove may be clueless about child development, but it seems they have a point about education being dumbed down.Click to expand...


I agree. My son knows all his times tables and can say them without thinking...all the way to the 12 times. I dont know about Roman Numerals, but I want my kids knowing this stuff.


----------



## Rags

JASMAK said:


> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...
> 
> No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.Click to expand...
> 
> The 12 times table does have practical uses though. I dread to think of a generation of adults who cannot instantly recognise that 48 hours is 2 days or that 36 inches is 3 foot. As for Roman numerals, I was taught them in primary school (along with all my tables) but wish we had done more work on them as I still struggle with larger numbers. Truss and Gove may be clueless about child development, but it seems they have a point about education being dumbed down.Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I agree. My son knows all his times tables and can say them without thinking...all the way to the 12 times. I dont know about Roman Numerals, but I want my kids knowing this stuff.Click to expand...

Funnily enough my ds (3 & 6 months) has a better grasp of roman numerals up to 10, than he does our modern ones, my bedside clock has them. He asked what they were and I told him.


----------



## tommyg

I think I learned the 12 x table in school but don't remember beyond 4x12.

Roman numerals were done as part of history. Im sure the Romans were covered about 3 /4 times going through school.

I can't see the government buying the later start to school either as too many people will be "eh who's 
paying for.my childcare". Not sure if anybody spotted it but a report came out the other day backing a later school start.

As for the comment on the LA chasing you down about your kid if you decide to home ed. I knew of someone who just never registered their kid for school or nursery and therefore fell off the LA radar. A loophole that could leave kids in a vulnerable postition.


----------



## m_t_rose

I think school starts ridiculously early here. In Ontario, Canada they start the September of the year they turn four. My friends birthday is December 30th so for 1/3 of the year she was only 3! School only used to be half days and now it is all day every day and I think it is way too much so I bring my son at lunch everyday and if he doesn't want to go I keep him home.


----------



## chickenlegs

freckleonear said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> The new national curriculum now seems to be going back to the dark ages - children need to learn roman numerals, times tables to 12 x 12 etc etc.
> 
> Um... you mean that wasn't in the old curriculum?! :shock:Click to expand...
> 
> No. Can't say as I feel it essential for primary aged children. Once they are older, the system becomes easier to understand. It is a difficult concept for little everyday use, in my opinion. Teaching tables is currently up to 10 x 10. In theory, up to twelves is pointless. Once children can partition, providing they know up to 10 x 10, they can multiply any two numbers.Click to expand...
> 
> The 12 times table does have practical uses though. I dread to think of a generation of adults who cannot instantly recognise that 48 hours is 2 days or that 36 inches is 3 foot. As for Roman numerals, I was taught them in primary school (along with all my tables) but wish we had done more work on them as I still struggle with larger numbers. Truss and Gove may be clueless about child development, but it seems they have a point about education being dumbed down.Click to expand...

I don't believe that children need to know the 12 times tables to know how many hours in 2 days. They know this through doubling, surely? The same way as they know that 2 hours is 120 minutes? I don't believe they need to know the 60 times table to do that? And I appreciate that roman numerals have their place at some point, but when we are being told that children are underachieving in maths, surely concentrating on the current numerical system would be far more beneficial than spending hours teaching an old system which is generally only seen on clocks or when talking about the monarchy?


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

..sigh..


----------



## chickenlegs

Midnight_Fairy said:


> ..sigh..

Why the sigh? I thought it was quite a decent argument! Just people with different opinions. I was quite enjoying it!


----------



## Pearls18

I think Roman numerals aren't really a priority in the curriculum either, I was never taught them but managed to teach myself easily enough and have only been formerly taught about them in the last week for my masters as it is pertinent to my career as I deal with historic documents, other than that the only time I find myself needing to know Roman numerals is when deciphering tattoos and seeing when a programme was made as its displayed as a Roman numeral at the end!


----------



## pandacub

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I saw something about the government backing later school starts and they said the idea was that children would still technically be in a school (and therefore it would be free) but it would be more of a nursery environment, where children who showed interest in numbers/words etc could be encouraged but not have it forced upon them? I know in yr R, I loved learning about english and writing.
Sorry if this has been mentioned before, I haven't read through!


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Its a good argument. I just cant help but feel that some how its sensed that school is wrong/failing children/to much.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

https://www.school-portal.co.uk/GroupDownloadFile.asp?GroupId=934063&ResourceID=4731665


----------



## freckleonear

Midnight_Fairy said:


> Its a good argument. I just cant help but feel that some how its sensed that school is wrong/failing children/to much.

Don't get me wrong, we are very fortunate to have such a great education system that is freely available to all children. Of course it has its flaws, but they are relatively minor and many of them are down to individual perception and ideals. I simply disagree that state education should be the default choice for all children when there are other perfectly valid options out there.


----------



## lhancock90

freckleonear said:


> Midnight_Fairy said:
> 
> 
> Its a good argument. I just cant help but feel that some how its sensed that school is wrong/failing children/to much.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, we are very fortunate to have such a great education system that is freely available to all children. Of course it has its flaws, but they are relatively minor and many of them are down to individual perception and ideals. I simply disagree that state education should be the default choice for all children when there are other perfectly valid options out there.Click to expand...

I completely agree with this.


----------



## Rags

lhancock90 said:


> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Midnight_Fairy said:
> 
> 
> Its a good argument. I just cant help but feel that some how its sensed that school is wrong/failing children/to much.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, we are very fortunate to have such a great education system that is freely available to all children. Of course it has its flaws, but they are relatively minor and many of them are down to individual perception and ideals. I simply disagree that state education should be the default choice for all children when there are other perfectly valid options out there.Click to expand...
> 
> I completely agree with this.Click to expand...

This is exactly my feeling. I am looking for a flexibility that just isn't there.


----------



## lhancock90

Did anyone watch Educating Yorkshire?


----------



## RÃ³sa

My nephew who went up to secondary school last year, was struggling with maths as was most of his year, the teacher had a word with my brother and basically said, it's because children aren't taught the times tables anymore in primary school, and therefore struggle when they move up, my brother taught him the times tables and now he doesn't struggle


----------



## chickenlegs

Rósa;29558317 said:

> My nephew who went up to secondary school last year, was struggling with maths as was most of his year, the teacher had a word with my brother and basically said, it's because children aren't taught the times tables anymore in primary school, and therefore struggle when they move up, my brother taught him the times tables and now he doesn't struggle

Aren't they? They should be. It is part of the curriculum. Up to 10 x 10.


----------



## chickenlegs

lhancock90 said:


> Did anyone watch Educating Yorkshire?

Yeah I did - it was hilarious. I'm thinking of shaving my eyebrows off. I could never be a secondary teacher!


----------



## lhancock90

chickenlegs said:


> lhancock90 said:
> 
> 
> Did anyone watch Educating Yorkshire?
> 
> Yeah I did - it was hilarious. I'm thinking of shaving my eyebrows off. I could never be a secondary teacher!Click to expand...

I'd love to be but I don't think I have th patience! I was wondering about what people thought of isolation as a discipline technique for teens?


----------



## tommyg

I was reading the paper today and their was an articial in it trying to lobby the government to set a limit the amount of homework primary kids can be given per night and some had suggested banning it altogether as some schools were setting over an hour of homework which was really eating into kids "playtime" in the evenings and causing kids to stress out. 
Limiting it kind of makes sense to me as LOs have a long day in school and teachers should be doing their job. Banning it seems a bit extream to me. But it astounded me one of the arguments for banning it was the it gave "better of kids" an unfair advantage. Surely poorer families should be able to support their kids homework sessions as well if not better than better of families.

I'm sure tables still are part of the primary curriculum but they are skimmed over in certain schools. But if schools are skimming over them what are they spending their time teaching.

I was surprised to read that Canada has kid starting school at just 4. I thought Canada was kindergarten at 5 and starting school at 6?


----------



## Natsku

I don't think they should give homework at all in primary school, the school day is long enough as it is for those youngsters without adding homework onto it.


----------



## dgirllamius

I have considered homeschooling, but considering it's actually illegal here (I have no idea why) then that idea kind of flew out the window when I found that one out.

I'm not sure what the education system here is like. I haven't really looked into it. I do know that LO will go to kindergarten when she is 3 and will start proper school when she is 6. I hear sending kids off to school at a later age such as 6 is so much more beneficial.


----------



## bumpy_j

Natsku said:


> I don't think they should give homework at all in primary school, the school day is long enough as it is for those youngsters without adding homework onto it.

I totally agree


----------



## RachA

I wouldn't mind my son not having homework (he's just started in year 2). Even doing his reading book with him is traumatic enough. 
He is so tired by the end of the school day that reading with him/doing his homework actually is stressful as he really doesn't want to do it. It was suggested that I read in the morning when he's fresh-I agree it would be better-but I have Esther to sort of too so unless I woke him up earlier than she gets up (7am mostly) then there is no way I can do it. 
Thankfully his homework isn't too bad-it's usually 1 piece of either maths or English per week. He has a week to do it. But it would be nice if I could just concentrate on reading with him or working on spelling or times tables etc. 


Iro the times tables. I think that children should be taught as much as they can handle. Why stop at 12 x if they are able to do more. Sometimes I think it's good to learn things by rote. 

I definitely agree that starting at 4/5 is too young but tbh so much of Reception and Yr1 is learning through play that it might as well still be pre-school. It would be nice to see those first two years at school more flexible. Maybe shorter days or something.


----------



## RachA

A question for those considering deferring:

If you defer by a whole year are you planning on your child starting in Reception but a year behind or are you planning on the going straight into Yr1?


If they are going into yr1 with their direct peers then I can't work out the benefit of deferring them.


----------



## tommyg

I'm in Scotland so we don't have a reception class the primary years are labelled P1-7.
If I defer he will enter Primary1, the equivalent of the English reception year, a year later than he technically should. 
The Scottish cut of is kids who are 4 before the 28th of Feb normally start the following August, so the year youngest will be 4.5 years. However Jan / Feb parents have an automatic right to defer. From what I understand more and more parents are exercising that right.
There is a bot of flex the other way too if March / April parents really feel their kids are ready a year early some primarys will let them sit a test / discusses with pre school nursery about letting them in a year early.

I know a mum who did this but LO is now 10 and mum regrets as emotionally the girl isn't as mature as her classmates who because of the deferral thing a couple of them are 15/16 months older than her.

I am surprised at the English system doesn't have the same flexibility.


----------



## RachA

You can do that here. The main reason I chose not too (my son was 4 on 10th Aug and had to start school on 12th Sept) was because we chose a specific school and that school, most schools are the same as far as I know, would not guarantee him a space if he didn't take it from the Sept. That meant that he would be placed in a school that had a space and for our area it's a really bad school and way undersubscribed because its so bad (hence why it'd have spaces). 

Had we done that I'm not sure I would of sent him into Reception as I wouldn't want him to be in a different class to him direct peers. But sending him into year 1 would of been pointless as he'd of just been behind them. 

The ideal for me would of been to of sent him mornings only for at least the first term or two. He did mornings only until the week after half term. My gut was to carry on with half days and the school would of supported us in this as they could see he was struggling with being tired. But I didn't want to make him feel different to sent him full time. 

My daughter is the opposite end if the scale birthday wise-she will start school Sept 14 and is 5 a month later. But she has a speech delay. If she had been an Aug birthday she would of started school last week. As she doesn't even talk in basic sentences yet there is no way we could of sent her to school. 

Schooling is a real nightmare. I think one big problem is that they took away the staggered start dates. Even as little as 10 years ago the school that my son goes to had starts in Sept, Jan and after Easter. Then it dropped down to Sept and Jan. then just Sept, but those children who were born between March and Aug only went part time until after the Christmas. Then they've been gradually moving the full time start date until now the younger ones start full time straight away. Personally I feel that if children didn't have to start in the Sept and/or could be part time for a certain amount of time then it wouldn't be such an issue.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

RachA said:


> You can do that here. The main reason I chose not too (my son was 4 on 10th Aug and had to start school on 12th Sept) was because we chose a specific school and that school, most schools are the same as far as I know, would not guarantee him a space if he didn't take it from the Sept. That meant that he would be placed in a school that had a space and for our area it's a really bad school and way undersubscribed because its so bad (hence why it'd have spaces).
> 
> Had we done that I'm not sure I would of sent him into Reception as I wouldn't want him to be in a different class to him direct peers. But sending him into year 1 would of been pointless as he'd of just been behind them.
> 
> The ideal for me would of been to of sent him mornings only for at least the first term or two. He did mornings only until the week after half term. My gut was to carry on with half days and the school would of supported us in this as they could see he was struggling with being tired. But I didn't want to make him feel different to sent him full time.
> 
> My daughter is the opposite end if the scale birthday wise-she will start school Sept 14 and is 5 a month later. But she has a speech delay. If she had been an Aug birthday she would of started school last week. As she doesn't even talk in basic sentences yet there is no way we could of sent her to school.
> 
> Schooling is a real nightmare. I think one big problem is that they took away the staggered start dates. Even as little as 10 years ago the school that my son goes to had starts in Sept, Jan and after Easter. Then it dropped down to Sept and Jan. then just Sept, but those children who were born between March and Aug only went part time until after the Christmas. Then they've been gradually moving the full time start date until now the younger ones start full time straight away. Personally I feel that if children didn't have to start in the Sept and/or could be part time for a certain amount of time then it wouldn't be such an issue.

I agree, my son was not full time till after Christmas. This year they seem to have started them almost immediately! 

I actually went to tribunal about my son starting when I did and lost. They basicly said he couldn't be delayed a year and would have to start in year 1 which I didnt see the point in so I just started him when he was meant to. Hes surprised me though and he now has a full statement so it doesnt matter now but I hated it at first x


----------



## tommyg

In Scotland you can only start at the start of the school year hence a bit of flexibility in the system They used to do a Christmas intake but that was done away with in the mid 70's. Parttime isn't an option either or at least it's not one I've heard of.

I can fully understand that it would be a nightmare for a teacher to have kids starting at various points in the year or for some kids only to be there in the morning. That would possibley mean them missing out on the best bits of the school day. I could be wrong but we seemed to do the academic stuff in the morning and the fun, painting, arty craft, type stuff in the afternoon. It's that still the same in schools?

Unless a kid is exceptionally bright effectively skipping a year would be daft and just lead to a manic year trying to catch up so I could fully understand why nobody in their right mind would want to do that.

I find the lack of flex in the English system shocking when you consider that kids could be born early or late and all kids develop at different rates. 

As far as I am aware if you defer in Scotland you have the same rights to get your kid into the local primary school as any other parent. The thing that isn't guaranteed is that you'll get another year of nursery funded. Which is a bit unfair when you consider the youngest kids are only entitled to a year and a bit of nursery funding, starting end of March.


----------



## RachA

Funny how different places are. At my sons school they went down to one intake the year my youngest niece started-that was 7 years ago. At that time they still did part time for a term so my niece was part time until half term as her birthday was Jan. 

TBH I don't think it's that bad for the teachers to have different children doing different hours-it's what they do at play schools and they manage it. Obviously as they get older it gets harder but certainly Reception and yr1 is still mainly play so it shouldn't impact too much.


----------



## tommyg

Baring in mind nurseries have a bigger teacher child ratio they can manage to have kids only in for part of the day but if you have one teacher trying to teach a class, then you could easily have kids missing stuff, remembering its over 30 years since I entered P1, if today's letter is "g" then at what point in the day does the teacher do it, morning missing the afternoon part timers, afternoon missing the morning part timers or do they do it twice boring the full timers to death?

I do agree when they start formal school they have to be in set hours but the age they start across the UK should be later. Then it crossed my mind that the starting age probably hasn't changed much in the last 120 years since compulsary education was introduced around 1880? the leaving age has gradually increase from 12 to the current 16 although their seems to be discussion about increasing it to 18. The starting age of 5 was probably set as that was the age kids previously started work. So maybe as they are increasing the leaving age they should be looking at increasing the starting age. Esp as the single intakes seem to have put 4 year olds into the system both sides of the border.

And then I think this thread has gone kind of of topic, it's no longer about Homeschooling but more about where we all think the education system should / could be improved esp for the younger children meaning parents will no longer feel the desire to opt out of the system.


----------



## nevernormal

Homeschooling is illegal in Germany?? I'd be ticked if the government took that parenting choice away from me. I can see having tests and checks maybe to make sure that homeschooled children are on par academically with their peers, but to say that parents can't even have that choice??? :grr:


----------



## freckleonear

A German family recently had their 4 children forcibly removed by social services simply because they homeschool. :( https://www.lifesitenews.com/mobile...ing-family-raided-four-children-seized-by-gov


----------



## Natsku

Thats sad that the kids were removed like that :( But that family continued to break the law after already knowing it was illegal. I don't agree with it being illegal but they knew the law and broke it hoping they wouldn't be found out. They were warned that if they didn't send their children to school that they would lose custody and still they didn't send them. They had even already had custody taken away from them but were told the children wouldn't be removed as long as they sent them to school. They could have prevented this happening.


----------



## Pearls18

Natsku said:


> Thats sad that the kids were removed like that :( But that family continued to break the law after already knowing it was illegal. I don't agree with it being illegal but they knew the law and broke it hoping they wouldn't be found out. They were warned that if they didn't send their children to school that they would lose custody and still they didn't send them. They had even already had custody taken away from them but were told the children wouldn't be removed as long as they sent them to school. They could have prevented this happening.

Yeah I can't say I would personally risk losing custody of my children just so I could home school, I would either move country or accept the laws of the country I am in. It's all very well being righteous, but at the cost of your children? Presumably they thought homeschooling was best for their children, but to what end....for them now be without their parents? Hmm...


----------



## Natsku

MarineWAG said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> Thats sad that the kids were removed like that :( But that family continued to break the law after already knowing it was illegal. I don't agree with it being illegal but they knew the law and broke it hoping they wouldn't be found out. They were warned that if they didn't send their children to school that they would lose custody and still they didn't send them. They had even already had custody taken away from them but were told the children wouldn't be removed as long as they sent them to school. They could have prevented this happening.
> 
> Yeah I can't say I would personally risk losing custody of my children just so I could home school, I would either move country or except the laws of the country I am in. It's all very well being righteous, but at the cost of your children? Presumably they thought homeschooling was best for their children, but to what end....for them now be without their parents? Hmm...Click to expand...

Its too big a risk to take. I'm all for opposing unjust laws but not at the expense/risk of your children.


----------



## tommyg

Continuing to homeschool knowing their family was at risk makes me wonder if they were genuinely feeling homeschool was so much better or if they had some sort of hidden agenda. 

Were they trying to push extreme views or trying insulate their kids from the outside world for whatever reason obsessed with avoiding germs and bugs or hiding child abuse.

While the vast majority of homeschoolers will do it for the right reasons their will be some who do it for the wrong reasons and from that point I can understand a country banning home schooling.


----------



## Natsku

tommyg said:


> Continuing to homeschool knowing their family was at risk makes me wonder if they were genuinely feeling homeschool was so much better or if they had some sort of hidden agenda.
> 
> Were they trying to push extreme views or trying insulate their kids from the outside world for whatever reason obsessed with avoiding germs and bugs or hiding child abuse.
> 
> While the vast majority of homeschoolers will do it for the right reasons their will be some who do it for the wrong reasons and from that point I can understand a country banning home schooling.

Makes me wonder that too, well not the hiding child abuse thing (although I am sure there are homeschoolers who do it for that reason) because that would have come up in the news I'm sure after the children were removed but I do wonder if they were pushing extreme views or something like that.
The children were supposed to be tested to check their educational attainment but they refused to go - thats another concerning factor.

Just looked at wiki, homeschooling is illegal in quite a lot of countries actually and the European Court of Human Rights backs that up saying "children are unable to foresee the consequences of their parents' decision for home education because of their young age.... Schools represent society, and it is in the children's interest to become part of that society. The parents' right to educate does not go as far as to deprive their children of that experience."


----------



## tommyg

If the family wouldn't allow their kids to be tested either they didn't exactly help their case that homeschooling was better.

I worked with a guy who's stepchild was homeschoolled. SD wasn't convinced the kid wouldn't be better in school and tried to get them to sit the SATs informally at home. Neither the mum or child were up for it. SD was convinced it was because they both felt the kid would fail and add fuel to his argument the kid should be in school.

This family sound a bit the same. If your 100% convinced your kid is better educated at home then you'd be happy to check they are keeping up with or doing better than their peers.


----------



## Natsku

Yeah surely you'd want to show how well you are educating your child to counteract the negative attitudes towards homeschooling.
I think homeschoolers should be regularly assessed by education authorities to make sure the kids are doing ok (also helps prevent people homeschooling for nefarious purposes). The rights of parents should never exceed the fundamental rights of the child which include a certain level of education.


----------



## vaniilla

Natsku said:


> Yeah surely you'd want to show how well you are educating your child to counteract the negative attitudes towards homeschooling.
> I think homeschoolers should be regularly assessed by education authorities to make sure the kids are doing ok (also helps prevent people homeschooling for nefarious purposes). The rights of parents should never exceed the fundamental rights of the child which include a certain level of education.

They thought about introducing some sort of monitoring in Wales (they might still be considering it) and the HE community had a protest over it.


----------



## freckleonear

Many home educators are passionately against testing, it doesn't mean they have extremist views or something to hide. I would never allow my children to be tested because I don't believe it would benefit them, and I strongly disagree with any state monitoring of home education.


----------



## Natsku

I can understand being against testing in general but I think society owes a duty of care to children to make sure they are receiving a decent education and without an outside authority monitoring it that cannot be guaranteed by homeschoolers (I am sure the majority of homeschooling parents are making sure their children are well educated but we have to protect the children of the minority)


----------



## tommyg

But how else does the state ensure that kids are being educated to an acceptable standard?

The SD I spoke about was very concerned that the child wasn't being adequately educated and didn't think he was ever going to be able to pass his GCSEs when the time came. And therefore was doubting the child's future either getting into college or getting a job.

I was surprised there wasn't any external monitoring or any input from the LA.


----------



## freckleonear

The law clearly states that parents are responsible for ensuring that their child receives an appropriate education, not the state. Parents who send their children to school have the same legal responsibilities as parents who home educate. Should parents of schooled children be held legally responsible if their child can't read by the age of 7 or fails their maths GCSE?

Parents have been successfully preparing their children for adult life in society for hundreds and thousands of years. They are not required to demonstrate compliance with any other aspect of parental responsibility, so why should education be any different? Why should parents who choose to home educate immediately be under suspicion, despite a legal system based on the principle "innocent until proven guilty"? School is not compulsory, it is simply a free service provided by the state that parents may choose to use or not.

Local Authorities do have a duty to identify children who are not receiving a suitable education, but that is the limit of their responsibilities. Compulsory registration or monitoring would be likely to impact negatively on a child's education and interfere with natural learning processes. Home educators follow a diverse range of educational philosophies which may differ considerably to the views of the individuals working for each Local Authority. Parents and health visitors do not always agree about the best ways to bring up children, so imagine if your HV had the power to regularly monitor your parenting and decide whether or not an aspect of your parenting was acceptable? Your ideas and my ideas about being "educated to an acceptable standard" are probably very different, and I believe that we should have the freedom to make those decisions for our own children without interference.


----------



## Abigailly

Freckleonear- Are you ever 'checked out' as a HE? 

Up here in Scotland, I know local authorities do something that I've heard people call 'drop in days', which I suppose is a bit like a care commission inspection. Where they aren't there to test the children, but to ensure children are receiving the opportunities they deserve. Anything like that down your end?


----------



## Rags

freckleonear said:


> The law clearly states that parents are responsible for ensuring that their child receives an appropriate education, not the state. Parents who send their children to school have the same legal responsibilities as parents who home educate. Should parents of schooled children be held legally responsible if their child can't read by the age of 7 or fails their maths GCSE?
> 
> Parents have been successfully preparing their children for adult life in society for hundreds and thousands of years. They are not required to demonstrate compliance with any other aspect of parental responsibility, so why should education be any different? Why should parents who choose to home educate immediately be under suspicion, despite a legal system based on the principle "innocent until proven guilty"? School is not compulsory, it is simply a free service provided by the state that parents may choose to use or not.
> 
> Local Authorities do have a duty to identify children who are not receiving a suitable education, but that is the limit of their responsibilities. Compulsory registration or monitoring would be likely to impact negatively on a child's education and interfere with natural learning processes. Home educators follow a diverse range of educational philosophies which may differ considerably to the views of the individuals working for each Local Authority. Parents and health visitors do not always agree about the best ways to bring up children, so imagine if your HV had the power to regularly monitor your parenting and decide whether or not an aspect of your parenting was acceptable? Your ideas and my ideas about being "educated to an acceptable standard" are probably very different, and I believe that we should have the freedom to make those decisions for our own children without interference.

I ws half way through a similar post to this when DS jumped on my lap and deleted it. As I have previously said I am not yet at the point of making the home education decision. I am however at the point of receiving negative comments about my choice not to send my son to nursery at 3, again an option provided by the government not a necessity or requirement. I think it is wonderful that all of our children have access to free, quality education, however I really feel it is up to parents what method they choose for their child, this is part of the way we maintain the diversity that we have.


----------



## tommyg

A HV's comments on my parenting is one thing, how I feed or get my child to sleep at a semi sensible time is one thing. It's not going to affect my child in 20 years time.

How a child is educated will affect them for the rest of their life. Which doors or other wise will open for them. Socity has a duty to make sure all kids get the best start in life possible for that child. 

If a child hits the age of 18 without any formal qualifications to their name they are going to struggling in life and question their educators who ever that may have been.


----------



## nevernormal

Yes, overall I agree with freckleonear about it all. I don't think the government really has a right to interfere with it. However, I would be much more understanding of testing than a complete ban. However, I do think there are other ways to help that minority of homeschooled kids who really aren't learning anything. Some of my cousins were "home schooled", but did NOTHING in the way of school, resulting on one of them being like 10 or 11 years old without a clue of how to read. Someone (a neighbor or another family member, I don't know) called the state on them, and they got checked out (and were then motivated to start actually teaching their kids). I know there are some approaches to homeschooling that might look like to the untrained eye that there is nothing being done (when there actually is), so it might end up with some unnecessary calls, but really if people close to the family/child were paying attention then it might be caught when they are falling through the cracks. By the way, kids in "real" school fall through the cracks all the time, and I'd be really curious to see what the percentage is in each group that doesn't really receive a quality education. 

As far as going to school because it's part of society... well that's just bull. Home educators have plenty of opportunities to socialize their children. I've know a LOT of homeschoolers, and I can't think of any as adults that feel like a social outcast, even those who were not provided a lot of social opportunity as children. Adult society requires diversity for different functions as far as how we learn, how we think, etc. WHY on earth would it be beneficial to ensure that everyone receives the same style of education?? I think embracing that diversity in our children would be much more beneficial!


----------



## nevernormal

How you feed your child or get them to sleep may affect them. How can you know? Some parents don't try to feed their child the healthiest foods possible (most of the time anyway), so maybe their child will be at a higher risk for heart disease, obesity, diabetes, etc. I've read stories from adults who feel like their parents' approach to sleep is why they still struggle with sleep as an adult. Those things COULD be extrapolated to adulthood, and giving our kids the best start, etc. and you could apply the same line of thinking.

Just a made up example: If giving your child a piece of candy every day is not the best start for them, especially because every other child only gets a piece of candy once a week (as that's the max recommended or the risks of health problems go up), then could we start regulating how much candy people buy? How much they feed their children? How? Would giving excess candy be grounds for the state taking your kids away, if you refused to comply with the one-a-week standard because that's what everyone else is doing and the government has decided on that as the best frequency of candy giving? What about not giving your children candy at all? Would the government interfere there because now those children are missing out on something, and are not like every other child who gets their Sunday treat? Or because it's been shown that when kids are banned from certain things they tend to go overboard with it later, when they have access to it? (Ok, I don't really know if that's been show, I've just observed that a lot).

Obviously that example is a bit excessive, but the fact is how much candy we feed our kids WILL affect them. Making it a staple in their diet may predispose them to health problems. Banning it completely may give them a desire to go overboard once they are outside of your control. So now is the government allowed to regulate that, too? Do we have compulsory blood sugar tests to check that every child received their allotted candy on the right day, at the right time, just like every other child? If parents choose to make homemade candy rather than feed their kids the store bought stuff, are there compulsory checks to make sure it meets the exact standards of everyone else's candy? :shrug:


----------



## Natsku

freckleonear said:


> The law clearly states that parents are responsible for ensuring that their child receives an appropriate education, not the state. Parents who send their children to school have the same legal responsibilities as parents who home educate. Should parents of schooled children be held legally responsible if their child can't read by the age of 7 or fails their maths GCSE?
> 
> Parents have been successfully preparing their children for adult life in society for hundreds and thousands of years. They are not required to demonstrate compliance with any other aspect of parental responsibility, so why should education be any different? Why should parents who choose to home educate immediately be under suspicion, despite a legal system based on the principle "innocent until proven guilty"? School is not compulsory, it is simply a free service provided by the state that parents may choose to use or not.
> 
> *Local Authorities do have a duty to identify children who are not receiving a suitable education, but that is the limit of their responsibilities*. Compulsory registration or monitoring would be likely to impact negatively on a child's education and interfere with natural learning processes. Home educators follow a diverse range of educational philosophies which may differ considerably to the views of the individuals working for each Local Authority. Parents and health visitors do not always agree about the best ways to bring up children, so imagine if your HV had the power to regularly monitor your parenting and decide whether or not an aspect of your parenting was acceptable? Your ideas and my ideas about being "educated to an acceptable standard" are probably very different, and I believe that we should have the freedom to make those decisions for our own children without interference.

How are they supposed to identify children who are not receiving a suitable education if they don't monitor/assess that education? 

I view this as a child welfare issue, just as we accept that the authorities can investigate children at risk of neglect/abuse we should also allow the authorities to investigate children at risk of educational neglect (please note that I am not trying to suggest that homeschoolers are neglectful parents, just that there is a greater chance for educational neglect by a small minority if that education is not being monitored). Education is such an important thing in today's society that we cannot risk letting children losing out on it.
Once a year testing (or assessment by other less formal means) should not be that inconvenient to homeschoolers and surely its worth it to protect the children that need it?


----------



## tommyg

That's it exactly test once a year or even every couple of years would avoid the pp 10 year old cousin not being able to read.

I don't know about Scotland and I know England homeschoolers don't need to tell or register with the LA how can they monitor a child's progress or welfare if they don't know the child exists? Agencies, HV and LA don't pass info between them.


----------



## nevernormal

The biggest problem I see with the testing I guess, is if the child isn't up to par according to government standards, what then? Does the government take the children away unless the parents send them to school? Surely we could come up with more solutions than that. Why not put things into place that would support a homeschooling parent, rather than just cut it out completely? Perhaps networks of homeschoolers could be encouraged, where parents could barter and trade for help with different areas of their child's education, if they struggle in one area. 

I'll have no trouble teaching my children higher math & science when they get to that point. However, musically, I know the basics of several instruments, reading music but wouldn't be able to teach them beyond that as I've never learned it. So my options would be learn it alongside them or sometime between now & then, and then teach them, or trade with another parent, where I help with math/science and they give my children music lessons. Or maybe just find a parent who teaches music lessons for a fee. Having a homeschooling network really adds resources! Perhaps the kids who didn't test well have parents who don't know about the resources. 

I've got to go get my boy down for a nap, but I guess my point is, once you start the testing, you open up another set of problems, which would be how you approach children who don't pass. Kids in schools who are struggling (ideally) get the extra support they need, so would home educators be given that same kind of support? Or just have the choice taken away?


----------



## tommyg

I would like to think if a kid fails the testing then the parents get pointers as to where the kid needs to improve, whither that be put more effort in, trade with another parent to help the child or pay for a tutor. (not at the tax payers expense) However if they continue to fail and fall behind their peers then clearly home ed isn't working and the kid should return to mainstream education and get the support that goes with that.

That said their needs to be something to ensure that kids with learning difficulties or dyslexia aren't disadvantaged by the testing processes.

I only know of 2 people who have home schooled one being the guy at work who felt it was failing his stepchild but felt powerless to change it and a someone who home schooled her dyslexic child as she felt he didn'r get enough support in school. The first mum though she'd be fine to home school for high school level too the second one recognized her limitations and though her child would be better in high school her aim was to make sure the basics were there for her child to return to mainstream school.
The first child could be prevented from falling through a gap the second one could be forced back into a gap. And I wouldn't want to see that happen.


----------



## Natsku

Yeah I think that it should be a case of the LA offering support to the parents if the monitoring shows issues, like directing them towards more teaching resources, suggesting tutors etc and then reevaluating more often to see if there's improvement and if after a few evaluations there isn't then putting the child(ren) into mainstream education. No taking kids off the parents or anything drastic like that.


----------



## chickenlegs

Private schools aren't obliged to test either. Some do, but they aren't obliged to. So if home schoolers were made to test their kids, so should private schools. What if a homeschooled kid was SEN? They "failed" the test due to dyslexia? Would they have to be sent to mainstream?


----------



## Jchihuahua

chickenlegs said:


> Private schools aren't obliged to test either. Some do, but they aren't obliged to. So if home schoolers were made to test their kids, so should private schools. What if a homeschooled kid was SEN? They "failed" the test due to dyslexia? Would they have to be sent to mainstream?

Private schools are generally ofsteded though (although I know not all are).


----------



## lhancock90

chickenlegs said:


> Private schools aren't obliged to test either. Some do, but they aren't obliged to. So if home schoolers were made to test their kids, so should private schools. What if a homeschooled kid was SEN? They "failed" the test due to dyslexia? Would they have to be sent to mainstream?

I didn't know this. Thats quite interesting.


----------



## Natsku

chickenlegs said:


> Private schools aren't obliged to test either. Some do, but they aren't obliged to. So if home schoolers were made to test their kids, so should private schools. What if a homeschooled kid was SEN? They "failed" the test due to dyslexia? Would they have to be sent to mainstream?

If they were SEN then that would surely be taken into account in just the same way as it would be in a mainstream school. And if there was no improvement at all (I don't mean meeting the standards of the average but no improvement at all over a length of time) then they would need intervention or at least evaluation for extra help that might be available.


----------



## Pearls18

I thought private schools were also allowed to hire teachers that aren't technically qualified?


----------



## chickenlegs

Natsku said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> Private schools aren't obliged to test either. Some do, but they aren't obliged to. So if home schoolers were made to test their kids, so should private schools. What if a homeschooled kid was SEN? They "failed" the test due to dyslexia? Would they have to be sent to mainstream?
> 
> If they were SEN then that would surely be taken into account in just the same way as it would be in a mainstream school. And if there was no improvement at all (I don't mean meeting the standards of the average but no improvement at all over a length of time) then they would need intervention or at least evaluation for extra help that might be available.Click to expand...

SEN children are generally picked up in mainstream due to their poor performance in comparison with other children. So my issue with the "testing" idea would be that if a homeschooled child was underachieving in comparison to the average schooled child, it would be difficult to establish whether this was due to a specific educational need or whether this was due to the education.


----------



## tommyg

There would need to be something in the testing system as I said to make sure that dyslexic kids aren't disadvantaged by a testing system.

But even if a dyslexic child is tested while their written and reading work will be behind, their should still be areas where they are equal to their peers. And their teacher / parent should be able to demonstrate what materials they are using to teach the child and the work that the child is doing to over come the challenges that dyslexia brings.


----------



## freckleonear

Abigailly said:


> Freckleonear- Are you ever 'checked out' as a HE?
> 
> Up here in Scotland, I know local authorities do something that I've heard people call 'drop in days', which I suppose is a bit like a care commission inspection. Where they aren't there to test the children, but to ensure children are receiving the opportunities they deserve. Anything like that down your end?

Home educators who deregister their children from school are usually involved with the LA. This may be in the form of yearly letters, phonecalls or visits. Children who are never sent to school may not be known to the LA as there is no requirement to register.



tommyg said:


> That's it exactly test once a year or even every couple of years would avoid the pp 10 year old cousin not being able to read.
> 
> I don't know about Scotland and I know England homeschoolers don't need to tell or register with the LA how can they monitor a child's progress or welfare if they don't know the child exists? Agencies, HV and LA don't pass info between them.

But not everyone would view a 10 year old being unable to read as a problem. I know of many examples of unschooled children who did not learn to read until far later than the norm, but when they did eventually show an interest in reading they very quickly caught up. An LA with no understanding of autonomous education might view this as a problem and try to interfere with the natural learning process.

Regarding welfare, multi-agency safeguarding hubs mean that any concerns about a child from any source will be shared with all other agencies and the LA would be involved if necessary. Home education is not a welfare risk factor, so why should home educated children be monitored before there is a problem?


----------



## chickenlegs

tommyg said:


> There would need to be something in the testing system as I said to make sure that dyslexic kids aren't disadvantaged by a testing system.
> 
> But even if a dyslexic child is tested while their written and reading work will be behind, their should still be areas where they are equal to their peers. And their teacher / parent should be able to demonstrate what materials they are using to teach the child and the work that the child is doing to over come the challenges that dyslexia brings.

You cannot test homeschooled children to evaluate the effectiveness of the education. You can only test groups of children to evaluate effectiveness of teachers as you have a varied cohort. How are you going to decide whether underachieving homeschooled children would do better in school? Maybe they are just slow? Don't get me wrong, as a teacher I am pro schooling. I am not anti homeschooling, I just wouldn't choose it and I don't always agree that it is better. But testing would not identify good and bad home educators.


----------



## Natsku

chickenlegs said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> Private schools aren't obliged to test either. Some do, but they aren't obliged to. So if home schoolers were made to test their kids, so should private schools. What if a homeschooled kid was SEN? They "failed" the test due to dyslexia? Would they have to be sent to mainstream?
> 
> If they were SEN then that would surely be taken into account in just the same way as it would be in a mainstream school. And if there was no improvement at all (I don't mean meeting the standards of the average but no improvement at all over a length of time) then they would need intervention or at least evaluation for extra help that might be available.Click to expand...
> 
> SEN children are generally picked up in mainstream due to their poor performance in comparison with other children. So my issue with the "testing" idea would be that if a homeschooled child was underachieving in comparison to the average schooled child, it would be difficult to establish whether this was due to a specific educational need or whether this was due to the education.Click to expand...

Then maybe testing would actually help the parents find out that their child(ren) has SEN and then make the best decision for their child(ren).


----------



## Natsku

chickenlegs said:


> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> There would need to be something in the testing system as I said to make sure that dyslexic kids aren't disadvantaged by a testing system.
> 
> But even if a dyslexic child is tested while their written and reading work will be behind, their should still be areas where they are equal to their peers. And their teacher / parent should be able to demonstrate what materials they are using to teach the child and the work that the child is doing to over come the challenges that dyslexia brings.
> 
> You cannot test homeschooled children to evaluate the effectiveness of the education. You can only test groups of children to evaluate effectiveness of teachers as you have a varied cohort. How are you going to decide whether underachieving homeschooled children would do better in school? Maybe they are just slow? Don't get me wrong, as a teacher I am pro schooling. I am not anti homeschooling, I just wouldn't choose it and I don't always agree that it is better. *But testing would not identify good and bad home educators.*Click to expand...

But the testing wouldn't be to identify good or bad home educators but to identify the children that are at risk of falling behind educationally.


----------



## Natsku

freckleonear said:


> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> Freckleonear- Are you ever 'checked out' as a HE?
> 
> Up here in Scotland, I know local authorities do something that I've heard people call 'drop in days', which I suppose is a bit like a care commission inspection. Where they aren't there to test the children, but to ensure children are receiving the opportunities they deserve. Anything like that down your end?
> 
> Home educators who deregister their children from school are usually involved with the LA. This may be in the form of yearly letters, phonecalls or visits. Children who are never sent to school may not be known to the LA as there is no requirement to register.
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> That's it exactly test once a year or even every couple of years would avoid the pp 10 year old cousin not being able to read.
> 
> I don't know about Scotland and I know England homeschoolers don't need to tell or register with the LA how can they monitor a child's progress or welfare if they don't know the child exists? Agencies, HV and LA don't pass info between them.Click to expand...
> 
> But not everyone would view a 10 year old being unable to read as a problem. I know of many examples of unschooled children who did not learn to read until far later than the norm, but when they did eventually show an interest in reading they very quickly caught up. *An LA with no understanding of autonomous education might view this as a problem and try to interfere with the natural learning process.*
> 
> Regarding welfare, multi-agency safeguarding hubs mean that any concerns about a child from any source will be shared with all other agencies and the LA would be involved if necessary. Home education is not a welfare risk factor, so why should home educated children be monitored before there is a problem?Click to expand...

That is an issue with the testing/assessing idea. Not sure how that could be overcome, possibly with the LA being better informed on autonomous education and the parents themselves explaining how they are going about their education.

Regarding welfare, children that aren't in mainstream schools and aren't being monitored have a greater chance of not being noticed if there are welfare issues as there aren't teachers/school nurses etc to spot any signs of abuse/neglect. (Which is why I think yearly health check ups ought to be mandatory for children but thats another debate!)


----------



## tommyg

Natsku said:


> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> Freckleonear- Are you ever 'checked out' as a HE?
> 
> Up here in Scotland, I know local authorities do something that I've heard people call 'drop in days', which I suppose is a bit like a care commission inspection. Where they aren't there to test the children, but to ensure children are receiving the opportunities they deserve. Anything like that down your end?
> 
> Home educators who deregister their children from school are usually involved with the LA. This may be in the form of yearly letters, phonecalls or visits. Children who are never sent to school may not be known to the LA as there is no requirement to register.
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> That's it exactly test once a year or even every couple of years would avoid the pp 10 year old cousin not being able to read.
> 
> I don't know about Scotland and I know England homeschoolers don't need to tell or register with the LA how can they monitor a child's progress or welfare if they don't know the child exists? Agencies, HV and LA don't pass info between them.Click to expand...
> 
> But not everyone would view a 10 year old being unable to read as a problem. I know of many examples of unschooled children who did not learn to read until far later than the norm, but when they did eventually show an interest in reading they very quickly caught up. *An LA with no understanding of autonomous education might view this as a problem and try to interfere with the natural learning process.*
> 
> Regarding welfare, multi-agency safeguarding hubs mean that any concerns about a child from any source will be shared with all other agencies and the LA would be involved if necessary. Home education is not a welfare risk factor, so why should home educated children be monitored before there is a problem?Click to expand...
> 
> That is an issue with the testing/assessing idea. Not sure how that could be overcome, possibly with the LA being better informed on autonomous education and the parents themselves explaining how they are going about their education.
> 
> Regarding welfare, children that aren't in mainstream schools and aren't being monitored have a greater chance of not being noticed if there are welfare issues as there aren't teachers/school nurses etc to spot any signs of abuse/neglect. (Which is why I think yearly health check ups ought to be mandatory for children but thats another debate!)Click to expand...

Well done Natsku able to put into words what I was trying to say, had about 3 goes replying to that post.

If parents choose to home ed they should all be monitored on both a educational standard and welfare basis.
School children are seen by somebody out with the home daily and have opportunities to speak to another adult about any problems or issues they may be having. 
Home ed kids don't have that and their is less opportunity for somebody to spot any welfare issues.

That's not saying that home ed parents are bad parents but I guarantee they'll be some rotten people out there keeping their kids at home for the wrong reasons.


----------



## pinkie77

IMO when tests are introduced then teaching to pass the test becomes necessary. That is one of my major issues with schools so that is not acceptable to me. 

Three separate schools have let my son down as far as his education goes, because he is quiet and well behaved. He's got top marks for behaviour and effort, way below average for attainment. How does that make sense? The teachers are too busy dealing with all the behaviour problems from other children to make sure he's understood what he has to do and can actually do it. After all these years the school he's at now (he's in y8 now) has finally admitted maybe there is a reason. Dyslexia was mentioned by them at the end of the last school year, something I've questioned before but been told no, he just struggles. But because he's not a nuisance and is making some progress albeit very slowly they won't test him now. I'm strongly considering pulling him out to HE after Christmas because he's not getting anywhere and the school don't want to know. The majority of kids in his lower-set groups are badly behaved, him and the others who do behave get picked on (the school says it's not bad enough to consider as bullying!) by them. How is this environment any good to him? Why would I want him 'socialised' with kids who get excluded on a regular basis? So he can behave like them? He's said a few times that he's tempted to get into trouble so he fits in! That, in my experience, is what schools are teaching. 

And for those worrying about GCSE's and other exams, it is possible to sit them as a private candidate and many HE kids go to college and university with no formal qualifications at all


----------



## freckleonear

Natsku said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> There would need to be something in the testing system as I said to make sure that dyslexic kids aren't disadvantaged by a testing system.
> 
> But even if a dyslexic child is tested while their written and reading work will be behind, their should still be areas where they are equal to their peers. And their teacher / parent should be able to demonstrate what materials they are using to teach the child and the work that the child is doing to over come the challenges that dyslexia brings.
> 
> You cannot test homeschooled children to evaluate the effectiveness of the education. You can only test groups of children to evaluate effectiveness of teachers as you have a varied cohort. How are you going to decide whether underachieving homeschooled children would do better in school? Maybe they are just slow? Don't get me wrong, as a teacher I am pro schooling. I am not anti homeschooling, I just wouldn't choose it and I don't always agree that it is better. *But testing would not identify good and bad home educators.*Click to expand...
> 
> But the testing wouldn't be to identify good or bad home educators but to identify the children that are at risk of falling behind educationally.Click to expand...

I still think it is arrogant to assume that there is a particular educational standard which all children should meet. One of the benefits of home education is that there is no set curriculum and the education can be tailored to the individual child. Parents may choose for their child to study completely different subjects or focus on particular skills. With so many different styles and goals of education, how can someone who doesn't share the same educational philosophy possibly decide whether a child is making progress or falling behind?



tommyg said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> Freckleonear- Are you ever 'checked out' as a HE?
> 
> Up here in Scotland, I know local authorities do something that I've heard people call 'drop in days', which I suppose is a bit like a care commission inspection. Where they aren't there to test the children, but to ensure children are receiving the opportunities they deserve. Anything like that down your end?
> 
> Home educators who deregister their children from school are usually involved with the LA. This may be in the form of yearly letters, phonecalls or visits. Children who are never sent to school may not be known to the LA as there is no requirement to register.
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> That's it exactly test once a year or even every couple of years would avoid the pp 10 year old cousin not being able to read.
> 
> I don't know about Scotland and I know England homeschoolers don't need to tell or register with the LA how can they monitor a child's progress or welfare if they don't know the child exists? Agencies, HV and LA don't pass info between them.Click to expand...
> 
> But not everyone would view a 10 year old being unable to read as a problem. I know of many examples of unschooled children who did not learn to read until far later than the norm, but when they did eventually show an interest in reading they very quickly caught up. *An LA with no understanding of autonomous education might view this as a problem and try to interfere with the natural learning process.*
> 
> Regarding welfare, multi-agency safeguarding hubs mean that any concerns about a child from any source will be shared with all other agencies and the LA would be involved if necessary. Home education is not a welfare risk factor, so why should home educated children be monitored before there is a problem?Click to expand...
> 
> That is an issue with the testing/assessing idea. Not sure how that could be overcome, possibly with the LA being better informed on autonomous education and the parents themselves explaining how they are going about their education.
> 
> Regarding welfare, children that aren't in mainstream schools and aren't being monitored have a greater chance of not being noticed if there are welfare issues as there aren't teachers/school nurses etc to spot any signs of abuse/neglect. (Which is why I think yearly health check ups ought to be mandatory for children but thats another debate!)Click to expand...
> 
> Well done Natsku able to put into words what I was trying to say, had about 3 goes replying to that post.
> 
> If parents choose to home ed they should all be monitored on both a educational standard and welfare basis.
> School children are seen by somebody out with the home daily and have opportunities to speak to another adult about any problems or issues they may be having.
> Home ed kids don't have that and their is less opportunity for somebody to spot any welfare issues.
> 
> That's not saying that home ed parents are bad parents but I guarantee they'll be some rotten people out there keeping their kids at home for the wrong reasons.Click to expand...

I find the suggestion that home educators need to be monitored for welfare reasons very offensive. What about parents who decide not to send their children to nursery or preschool? Should they be monitored to make sure they are not abusing their children? Why are parents capable of caring for their own children until they reach school age and then suddenly treated with suspicion?

School attendance does not protect from abuse or neglect, as recent news stories have made obvious. In fact, home education is far safer than attending school! Allegations of abuse are made against 2-3000 teaching staff every year, not to mention bullying from other children! A report in 2010 suggested that 20,000 children were at risk of neglect in bad nurseries. To put this into scale, at the time of the Badman report the government knew of only 3 serious case reviews involving home educated children.

I'm not saying that home educated children are never abused or neglected, but statistically it is extremely rare and LA involvement is unlikely to make any difference. Abusive parents are good at hiding the abuse, whether their children attend school or not, and the occasional monitoring visit from the LA is unlikely to prevent or pick up on abuse. The focus should be on improving existing child safeguarding systems, rather than singling out a particular group of families. Should all black children be monitored because they are at a higher risk of child abuse? Of course not!

One final point. Children who suffer serious abuse are not hidden or invisible to society, kept at home with nobody to spot problems. In almost all cases, they are known to multiple child protection agencies long before the situation becomes a tragic news story. This indicates that our multi-agency safeguarding system is actually very effective at identifying children at risk. The failings happen afterwards and therefore have nothing to do with whether a child is educated at home or at school.


----------



## tommyg

pinkie77 said:


> IMO when tests are introduced then teaching to pass the test becomes necessary. That is one of my major issues with schools so that is not acceptable to me.
> 
> Three separate schools have let my son down as far as his education goes, because he is quiet and well behaved. He's got top marks for behaviour and effort, way below average for attainment. How does that make sense? The teachers are too busy dealing with all the behaviour problems from other children to make sure he's understood what he has to do and can actually do it. After all these years the school he's at now (he's in y8 now) has finally admitted maybe there is a reason. Dyslexia was mentioned by them at the end of the last school year, something I've questioned before but been told no, he just struggles. But because he's not a nuisance and is making some progress albeit very slowly they won't test him now. I'm strongly considering pulling him out to HE after Christmas because he's not getting anywhere and the school don't want to know. The majority of kids in his lower-set groups are badly behaved, him and the others who do behave get picked on (the school says it's not bad enough to consider as bullying!) by them. How is this environment any good to him? Why would I want him 'socialised' with kids who get excluded on a regular basis? So he can behave like them? He's said a few times that he's tempted to get into trouble so he fits in! That, in my experience, is what schools are teaching.
> 
> And for those worrying about GCSE's and other exams, it is possible to sit them as a private candidate and many HE kids go to college and university with no formal qualifications at all

It really upsets me to think kids are still sat struggling in schools with no support. 
I'm a cynic and think schools leave kids struggling on as average because they know if they get them tested it costs money and the kid will then be entitled to extra tuition


----------



## tommyg

I hit post too quick.

If you can afford to I would get him tested by an educational psychologist yourself. Then the school has to help him.
It will also give him a huge boost to know he's not thick.
I was formally tested as an adult as I just needed to know. I still get a huge kick out of my visual skills being in the top 5% of the population, me Miss Average! Wish I'd known that when I was in school I would have taken a different road. My mum long suspected it, but only knew half a story so only gave me the down side, my English teacher in high school suspected it to. I was very embarrassed and ashamed of it so was kind of in denial of it. It wasn't until I was an adult I got the full picture and formally tested and realized short term memory is a part of it too.
Good luck with him.


----------



## Natsku

freckleonear said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> There would need to be something in the testing system as I said to make sure that dyslexic kids aren't disadvantaged by a testing system.
> 
> But even if a dyslexic child is tested while their written and reading work will be behind, their should still be areas where they are equal to their peers. And their teacher / parent should be able to demonstrate what materials they are using to teach the child and the work that the child is doing to over come the challenges that dyslexia brings.
> 
> You cannot test homeschooled children to evaluate the effectiveness of the education. You can only test groups of children to evaluate effectiveness of teachers as you have a varied cohort. How are you going to decide whether underachieving homeschooled children would do better in school? Maybe they are just slow? Don't get me wrong, as a teacher I am pro schooling. I am not anti homeschooling, I just wouldn't choose it and I don't always agree that it is better. *But testing would not identify good and bad home educators.*Click to expand...
> 
> But the testing wouldn't be to identify good or bad home educators but to identify the children that are at risk of falling behind educationally.Click to expand...
> 
> I still think it is arrogant to assume that there is a particular educational standard which all children should meet. One of the benefits of home education is that there is no set curriculum and the education can be tailored to the individual child. Parents may choose for their child to study completely different subjects or focus on particular skills. With so many different styles and goals of education, how can someone who doesn't share the same educational philosophy possibly decide whether a child is making progress or falling behind?Click to expand...

I don't think its arrogant to assume that there is an educational standard in the core subjects at least - maths, English and science. We have to have a minimum standard in those as children who don't learn the minimum in maths and English are really going to struggle in life and having standards in science helps prevents parents teaching things like creationism instead of accepted scientific theory. Beyond the core subjects is where the flexibility should come in. 



tommyg said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> freckleonear said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> Freckleonear- Are you ever 'checked out' as a HE?
> 
> Up here in Scotland, I know local authorities do something that I've heard people call 'drop in days', which I suppose is a bit like a care commission inspection. Where they aren't there to test the children, but to ensure children are receiving the opportunities they deserve. Anything like that down your end?
> 
> Home educators who deregister their children from school are usually involved with the LA. This may be in the form of yearly letters, phonecalls or visits. Children who are never sent to school may not be known to the LA as there is no requirement to register.
> 
> 
> 
> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> That's it exactly test once a year or even every couple of years would avoid the pp 10 year old cousin not being able to read.
> 
> I don't know about Scotland and I know England homeschoolers don't need to tell or register with the LA how can they monitor a child's progress or welfare if they don't know the child exists? Agencies, HV and LA don't pass info between them.Click to expand...
> 
> But not everyone would view a 10 year old being unable to read as a problem. I know of many examples of unschooled children who did not learn to read until far later than the norm, but when they did eventually show an interest in reading they very quickly caught up. *An LA with no understanding of autonomous education might view this as a problem and try to interfere with the natural learning process.*
> 
> Regarding welfare, multi-agency safeguarding hubs mean that any concerns about a child from any source will be shared with all other agencies and the LA would be involved if necessary. Home education is not a welfare risk factor, so why should home educated children be monitored before there is a problem?Click to expand...
> 
> That is an issue with the testing/assessing idea. Not sure how that could be overcome, possibly with the LA being better informed on autonomous education and the parents themselves explaining how they are going about their education.
> 
> Regarding welfare, children that aren't in mainstream schools and aren't being monitored have a greater chance of not being noticed if there are welfare issues as there aren't teachers/school nurses etc to spot any signs of abuse/neglect. (Which is why I think yearly health check ups ought to be mandatory for children but thats another debate!)Click to expand...
> 
> Well done Natsku able to put into words what I was trying to say, had about 3 goes replying to that post.
> 
> If parents choose to home ed they should all be monitored on both a educational standard and welfare basis.
> School children are seen by somebody out with the home daily and have opportunities to speak to another adult about any problems or issues they may be having.
> Home ed kids don't have that and their is less opportunity for somebody to spot any welfare issues.
> 
> That's not saying that home ed parents are bad parents but I guarantee they'll be some rotten people out there keeping their kids at home for the wrong reasons.Click to expand...




> I find the suggestion that home educators need to be monitored for welfare reasons very offensive. *What about parents who decide not to send their children to nursery or preschool? Should they be monitored to make sure they are not abusing their children? *Why are parents capable of caring for their own children until they reach school age and then suddenly treated with suspicion?
> 
> School attendance does not protect from abuse or neglect, as recent news stories have made obvious. In fact, home education is far safer than attending school! Allegations of abuse are made against 2-3000 teaching staff every year, not to mention bullying from other children! A report in 2010 suggested that 20,000 children were at risk of neglect in bad nurseries. To put this into scale, at the time of the Badman report the government knew of only 3 serious case reviews involving home educated children.
> 
> I'm not saying that home educated children are never abused or neglected, but statistically it is extremely rare and LA involvement is unlikely to make any difference. Abusive parents are good at hiding the abuse, whether their children attend school or not, and the occasional monitoring visit from the LA is unlikely to prevent or pick up on abuse. The focus should be on improving existing child safeguarding systems, rather than singling out a particular group of families. Should all black children be monitored because they are at a higher risk of child abuse? Of course not!
> 
> One final point. Children who suffer serious abuse are not hidden or invisible to society, kept at home with nobody to spot problems. In almost all cases, they are known to multiple child protection agencies long before the situation becomes a tragic news story. This indicates that our multi-agency safeguarding system is actually very effective at identifying children at risk. The failings happen afterwards and therefore have nothing to do with whether a child is educated at home or at school.

Thats why I'm in favour of mandatory health checks up for children.

The safeguarding systems do need improving but that doesn't detract from the need to protect children who aren't being seen regularly by an outside authority.


----------



## nevernormal

We can't constantly infringe on the rights of everyone for the needs of a few. I also find the implication that home educators and/or their kids need watching/monitoring for abuse from the government offensive.

As for the testing, where do you decide the minimum is? Basic math & language is basic addition, subtraction, multiplication, & division, and then reading & writing. There are a lot of jobs that don't require more than that as far as math & language goes, so after a child has proven they can do those, would there be no testing for higher math? Who determines that these children are _going_ to struggle? As for the science/creationism/evolution thing... well lets just say that I studied science in college. My professors all taught evolution. And the students who believed in evolution were the ones constantly pointing out flaws in the teaching! So not exactly a standard that I'm wanting to hold my kids up to...


----------



## Natsku

The educational authorities decide what the minimum standards are.

I am not implying that homeschoolers are more likely to neglect/abuse their children, just that children that are aren't being regularly seen by outside authorities are the ones that are more likely to slip through the safeguarding cracks _if_ they are being neglected/abused. 

We shouldn't infringe on the rights of children to receive quality education for the needs of the few parents who want to homeschool without monitoring. I care more about defending the rights of children who cannot defend their own rights than the rights of adults who can.


----------



## Abigailly

I think of of the major things that concerns me is that school is often where issues at home are discovered. Whether it be abuse, neglect or things more sinister. Now I'm by no means saying that this is what home educators do. I'm saying that home educators should be checked up on regularly, not for the standards of educations, but to ensure children are being regularly monitored. All it takes is one person to abuse the rights of home education to cover up the goings on at home. 
And if that saves one child and offends a few hundred adults then so be it.
I also think home educators should be required to have Care commission checks in the same way schools and child minders etc do. I'm not sure if they already do.


----------



## Gingerspice

to be honest I'd be wanting to make sure my child is not missing out or falling behind so I'd be all for open days once a year where perhaps a general check is carried out, like the development checks that HV do for pre-school age. 

I wouldn't want the fear that m child may be disadvantaged because I had failed to ensure that they were educated to curriculu levels and so then leave them struggling to follow 'normal route of getting GCSEs or A levels and getting to uni. I'd need to the external reassurance that what I was offering was of comparable levels so that at any time if my child said they did not want to be homeschooled an wanted to go into mainstream ( i should imagine that does happen) then how could they possibly then slot into the system if they may actually be at that point in time working at, for example, age 8 level when they should be at age 10 or equally working at age 10 and aged 8. 
I can understand while HE is maintained it may not matter if they are at a differnt leve nitially as seems to be the philosophy they'd probably level out in a year or 2 for example but must make interchanging from one to the other awkward. 

I can't imagine telling my child they have to stay HE if they wanted to try mainstream.


----------



## chickenlegs

tommyg said:


> pinkie77 said:
> 
> 
> IMO when tests are introduced then teaching to pass the test becomes necessary. That is one of my major issues with schools so that is not acceptable to me.
> 
> Three separate schools have let my son down as far as his education goes, because he is quiet and well behaved. He's got top marks for behaviour and effort, way below average for attainment. How does that make sense? The teachers are too busy dealing with all the behaviour problems from other children to make sure he's understood what he has to do and can actually do it. After all these years the school he's at now (he's in y8 now) has finally admitted maybe there is a reason. Dyslexia was mentioned by them at the end of the last school year, something I've questioned before but been told no, he just struggles. But because he's not a nuisance and is making some progress albeit very slowly they won't test him now. I'm strongly considering pulling him out to HE after Christmas because he's not getting anywhere and the school don't want to know. The majority of kids in his lower-set groups are badly behaved, him and the others who do behave get picked on (the school says it's not bad enough to consider as bullying!) by them. How is this environment any good to him? Why would I want him 'socialised' with kids who get excluded on a regular basis? So he can behave like them? He's said a few times that he's tempted to get into trouble so he fits in! *That, in my experience, is what schools are teaching*.
> 
> And for those worrying about GCSE's and other exams, it is possible to sit them as a private candidate and many HE kids go to college and university with no formal qualifications at all
> 
> It really upsets me to think kids are still sat struggling in schools with no support.
> *I'm a cynic and think schools leave kids struggling on as average because they know if they get them tested it costs money and the kid will then be entitled to extra tuition*Click to expand...

Are you serious? Ha ha ha! Have you ANY idea how schools work? At all? In the slightest? I think perhaps not! Why don't you get a job as a teacher and come and show us all how it is done!


----------



## pinkie77

Chickenlegs if that was aimed at me, yes I do have experience in schools thank you. I've volunteered and done extensive work experience at schools. I've also done an early years degree as I wanted to go into teaching. I would still like to teach but not under our system


----------



## chickenlegs

pinkie77 said:


> Chickenlegs if that was aimed at me, yes I do have experience in schools thank you. I've volunteered and done extensive work experience at schools. I've also done an early years degree as I wanted to go into teaching. I would still like to teach but not under our system

Then as I said, come and show us how it is done. All of us who teach children to misbehave so that they fit in.


----------



## pinkie77

I think you are deliberately misreading my comments to find offence tbh. My issues are with schools and the system in general, not individual teachers who have no choice but to toe the line and conform to the system themselves. But I will apologise and say I meant no offence to any teachers, just the system in general. I'm sorry if my posts were unclear.


----------



## lhancock90

chickenlegs said:


> pinkie77 said:
> 
> 
> Chickenlegs if that was aimed at me, yes I do have experience in schools thank you. I've volunteered and done extensive work experience at schools. I've also done an early years degree as I wanted to go into teaching. I would still like to teach but not under our system
> 
> Then as I said, come and show us how it is done. All of us who teach children to misbehave so that they fit in.Click to expand...

I understand that as a teacher you are paticuarly bothered by the issue but wanting to homeschool isn't a dig at teachers and i do think parents should question what is happening in schools and try get involved. I do think you are completely refusing to accept that unforunately there are SOME bad teachers. Just like there are SOME bad doctors, dentists, health visitors. Those of us who have expierenced this are bound to be more skeptical about our own childrens futures.


----------



## lhancock90

Abigailly said:


> I think of of the major things that concerns me is that school is often where issues at home are discovered. Whether it be abuse, neglect or things more sinister. Now I'm by no means saying that this is what home educators do. I'm saying that home educators should be checked up on regularly, not for the standards of educations, but to ensure children are being regularly monitored. All it takes is one person to abuse the rights of home education to cover up the goings on at home.
> And if that saves one child and offends a few hundred adults then so be it.
> I also think home educators should be required to have Care commission checks in the same way schools and child minders etc do. I'm not sure if they already do.



So parents after 5 years of raising their children without danger suddenly need a care commison check. To look after their own children?!


----------



## tommyg

chickenlegs said:


> tommyg said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pinkie77 said:
> 
> 
> IMO when tests are introduced then teaching to pass the test becomes necessary. That is one of my major issues with schools so that is not acceptable to me.
> 
> Three separate schools have let my son down as far as his education goes, because he is quiet and well behaved. He's got top marks for behaviour and effort, way below average for attainment. How does that make sense? The teachers are too busy dealing with all the behaviour problems from other children to make sure he's understood what he has to do and can actually do it. After all these years the school he's at now (he's in y8 now) has finally admitted maybe there is a reason. Dyslexia was mentioned by them at the end of the last school year, something I've questioned before but been told no, he just struggles. But because he's not a nuisance and is making some progress albeit very slowly they won't test him now. I'm strongly considering pulling him out to HE after Christmas because he's not getting anywhere and the school don't want to know. The majority of kids in his lower-set groups are badly behaved, him and the others who do behave get picked on (the school says it's not bad enough to consider as bullying!) by them. How is this environment any good to him? Why would I want him 'socialised' with kids who get excluded on a regular basis? So he can behave like them? He's said a few times that he's tempted to get into trouble so he fits in! *That, in my experience, is what schools are teaching*.
> 
> And for those worrying about GCSE's and other exams, it is possible to sit them as a private candidate and many HE kids go to college and university with no formal qualifications at all
> 
> It really upsets me to think kids are still sat struggling in schools with no support.
> *I'm a cynic and think schools leave kids struggling on as average because they know if they get them tested it costs money and the kid will then be entitled to extra tuition*Click to expand...
> 
> Are you serious? Ha ha ha! Have you ANY idea how schools work? At all? In the slightest? I think perhaps not! *Why don't you get a job as a teacher and come and show us all how it is done*!Click to expand...

Hahaha thats the funniest thing I've ever read - the parents would love their kids to come home with my dizzy spelling - 13 years of school, 1 year of college and 5 years of uni and I still change sentences as its easier than trying to get the the word I wanted to use to look right! 

Seriously why 20 years down the line are kids still being left to struggle on alone never reaching their potental? Not getting at the teachers its the system that is letting kids down. 

We are 1 in 10 - if you have 30 kids in your class it means you'll have 3/4 dyslexics have they been screened or formally tested - what extra help are they given?

Please tell me they don't still tell kids to look stuff up in a dictionary - I was about 30 before I could use the word certain, I could never decide if it began with a c or an s - fat chance did I have of finding it in a dictionary.


----------



## pinkie77

tommyg said:


> I hit post too quick.
> 
> If you can afford to I would get him tested by an educational psychologist yourself. Then the school has to help him.
> It will also give him a huge boost to know he's not thick.
> I was formally tested as an adult as I just needed to know. I still get a huge kick out of my visual skills being in the top 5% of the population, me Miss Average! Wish I'd known that when I was in school I would have taken a different road. My mum long suspected it, but only knew half a story so only gave me the down side, my English teacher in high school suspected it to. I was very embarrassed and ashamed of it so was kind of in denial of it. It wasn't until I was an adult I got the full picture and formally tested and realized short term memory is a part of it too.
> Good luck with him.

Thanks  unfortunately I'm not in a position to get him tested myself although I do have a meeting at the school early next month so I'll be doing my best to get some real answers and help for him. Last time it was such a big shock that I didn't get brushed off yet again or accused of being an over-anxious mother who wanted to label her child that I was taken by surprise really! 

(on pc now so I can quote lol)


----------



## tommyg

Good I really hope you get help for him. And make sure to tell him the positives of it as well as the negitaves. 
At first I miss read your post and thought he was 8 years, not year 8 - am I right in thinking year 8 is 2nd year in high school?
There may well be technical and science subjects that will come very natuarally to him. 
Languages may be a nightmare. My primary school was aiming to be progressive and did a couple of hours per week of French in our 2nd last year, and a couple of hours of German in our last year. Followed by 2 years of French in high school. The extent of what I remember of both languages is the numbers 1-10! 
I also remember going into a music test the cord we were ment to play was G7 and G Major - I asked before the test which way round they were on the fret board and was told "no can't tell you that you wouldn't be able to ask in any other test" I still don't know which is which!

If I knew in school what I know now I would have taken physics rather than chemistry, and should have kept Art up - visual skills in top 5% and I dropped Art - duh! 

Oh another though for you, a digital dictionary with a spelling function is worth the expense. I bought mine before computers were common place at work, hardly use it now but I wouldn't part with it.


----------



## chickenlegs

lhancock90 said:


> chickenlegs said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pinkie77 said:
> 
> 
> Chickenlegs if that was aimed at me, yes I do have experience in schools thank you. I've volunteered and done extensive work experience at schools. I've also done an early years degree as I wanted to go into teaching. I would still like to teach but not under our system
> 
> Then as I said, come and show us how it is done. All of us who teach children to misbehave so that they fit in.Click to expand...
> 
> I understand that as a teacher you are paticuarly bothered by the issue but wanting to homeschool isn't a dig at teachers and i do think parents should question what is happening in schools and try get involved. I do think you are completely refusing to accept that unforunately there are SOME bad teachers. Just like there are SOME bad doctors, dentists, health visitors. Those of us who have expierenced this are bound to be more skeptical about our own childrens futures.Click to expand...

I don't believe that homeschoolers in general are having a dig. And of course there are bad teachers! I would never argue against that. But when someone suggests that people who work in schools would allow children to struggle because testing them costs money and then they have to pay for tuition, I am absolutely going to argue back. The whole idea of that is insulting. I dont believe that homeschooling is bad, but I will defend schools / teachers if it is suggested that GENERALLY they are not acting in the best interest of the child, therefore homeschooling would be better.


----------



## tommyg

I would LOVE to believe you Chicken that money doesn't come into testing kids. But it's the only logical explanation I can come up with as to why me as a fairly bright 9 year old who couldn't spell my own name was never tested.

I can give you other words that I couldn't get my head round adding "ing" to sing, ring and bring confused me lots - and taking it away again - confused me even more.
I remember the first time I opted to change a sentence than stick with the word I wanted, it was be, "b" on the page didn't look right, but I was about 10 and my 
teacher told me I should know how to spell it, I hadn't a clue sounding it out didn't help me either. 
Surely that should have been picked up, tested and supported? Esp with my mum in the background doing her best to support me.

The other poster has described her son going through simpler to me. I'd have hoped things have changed in 20 years.

By the way im not anti schools I just believe much more should be done to support dyslexic kids and I'd go as far as to say every kid should be screened at least with thought who show up as potentially dyslexic then formally tested and supported.

What's the reason that doesn't happen ?


Ps I dropped immensely out of above as the phone couldn't find it as I was trying to spell it with an e!


----------



## chickenlegs

tommyg said:


> I would LOVE to believe you Chicken that money doesn't come into testing kids. But it's the only logical explanation I can come up with as to why me as a fairly bright 9 year old who couldn't spell my own name was never tested.
> 
> I can give you other words that I couldn't get my head round adding "ing" to sing, ring and bring confused me lots - and taking it away again - confused me even more.
> I remember the first time I opted to change a sentence than stick with the word I wanted, it was be, "b" on the page didn't look right, but I was about 10 and my
> teacher told me I should know how to spell it, I hadn't a clue sounding it out didn't help me either.
> Surely that should have been picked up, tested and supported? Esp with my mum in the background doing her best to support me.
> 
> The other poster has described her son going through simpler to me. I'd have hoped things have changed in 20 years.
> 
> By the way im not anti schools I just believe much more should be done to support dyslexic kids and I'd go as far as to say every kid should be screened at least with thought who show up as potentially dyslexic then formally tested and supported.
> 
> What's the reason that doesn't happen ?
> 
> 
> Ps I dropped immensely out of above as the phone

It is really really difficult to get a dyslexia diagnosis in primary aged children. The term now is "specific learning difficulty" which is ridiculous. We are not allowed to use the term dyslexia to parents. This is apparently to do with emotional and intellectual maturity in children, who may overcome the problems with time (which they don't). It genuinely is a joke. However, as so many people are in agreement that it is ridiculous, schools are just starting to use the term more openly, provided that the diagnosis seems obvious. The current standard support is provided by pupil and school support but they are not able to provide a diagnosis, they can only identify reading age / spelling difficulties and arrange / deliver programmes specifically for that. So every child can be screened for difficulties, but not for dyslexia as PSS workers cannot diagnose. Neither can GPs as dyslexia is not supported by the NHS. Only educational psychologists can do that but as I said not until they are older. Not sure if that makes complete sense?
While we are on the subject of dyslexia support, a child who I taught last year has just moved to secondary school. We had a 2 and a half hour meeting about his dyslexia needs (he doesn't have a diagnosis but it is very obvious) and it was guaranteed that every teacher would be made aware. The SENCO forgot, and he received 2 detentions in the first week - one for only writing a paragraph instead of a two page essay, and the other for not learning his spellings (conqueror, establish were two of them). So yes. I know that some teachers need beheading.


----------



## tommyg

Thanks Chicken that does make a bit of sense. I knew schools could only "suspect" dyslexia it was an educational psychologist that diagnosed me. I knew they wouldn't be able to pick it up in early primary school but I would have thought that after 4/5 years of schooling they'd be able to pick it up. Can they not come up with a blinking title for it that's easy to spell "specific" is another trip hazard LOL. What ever they call it they have to explain that their may well be areas that a child is naturally talented and point out some of the famous dyslexics to kids too - Richard Branson being one,

Poor kid, I bet the parents were going off their heads, establish I can get with thinking about it slowly conquere, I've just checked and got it wrong. That's the SENCOs fault for not doing their job or taking the kids issues seriously, you can't blame the teachers if they didn't know. But there must also be other dyslexics in that class who'll have struggled with the spelling of those words.

You are probably aware it has a tendency to run in families, I remember looking at a bundle (20/30 of them) of tech drawings belonging to my dad, they were nearly all marked 9/10 with the lost mark for spelling in the title box of the drawing. I'm glad I was at least spared that in school.


----------



## Natsku

Can they really not just diagnose dyslexia anymore? When did that change? I remember being tested (no idea why though as my spelling as fine)


----------



## GracieGoo

I havent read all of this. I agree 100% with the ethos of home schooling. I love the idea that as parents we have had sole responsibility of teaching our children up until they hit school age, so why as parents can we not continue to teach them? I love the idea of all the home schooling groups. And I genuinely do not think there is a problem with social interaction for home schooled children. At the end of the day, at school we do things based on role play, we pretend situation (maths class - if I had 1 litre tin of blue paint, and mixed it with .5 litre tin of yellow paint blah blah blah), but home schooling can teach based on real life and in my opinion that is a fantastic thing surely.

But.... as much as I love being a parent, and I really really do, my children are my life... I could not home school. I am confident in being a parent, but I have wobbly days, I have days where I need some time to clear my head, re group, and re think... I would not be confident in teaching them true education. As a parent I want to teach them to be good people, help them with their homework, be a friend, a supporter, but a teacher in every aspect of the work I dont think I can be....

Its a sad realisation to be honest. To all who do home school I have nothing but admiration for you. I want to send my children to school, but be fully involved in every aspect of their education in every way.

If you feel you can home school, go for it!


----------



## SerenityNow

chickenlegs said:


> ...We had a 2 and a half hour meeting about his dyslexia needs (he doesn't have a diagnosis but it is very obvious) and it was guaranteed that every teacher would be made aware. The SENCO forgot, and he received 2 detentions in the first week - one for only writing a paragraph instead of a two page essay, and the other for not learning his spellings (conqueror, establish were two of them). So yes. I know that some teachers need beheading.


I've known several parents who have decided to homeschool because their child's learning disability was being treated as a behavior problem. To me, this is one of the best reasons to pull your child out of a traditional school. Anything is better than being punished for your own neurology. 

I'm not in the UK, so can't really contribute to the conversation except to say that I've been really lucky to send my children to schools where I know the teachers pour their hearts into their work. I know my kids are loved and respected there and that the adults who work with them care deeply about what they are doing and, most importantly, have the freedom and autonomy to teach in the way that makes the most of their talents. 

I have family members who had taught in schools and districts where the teachers have no control over what they do in the classroom. Everything is set by the administration. My cousin teaches 3rd grade (8 and 9 year olds) and she managed to carve out time for her students to make Mother's Day cards. Many of her students were using two hands to use scissors. They had never had time at school to do any sort of art project because the district was dictating the curriculum down to the minutes spent each day on each activity, all geared toward improving test scores. If my only option was to send my child to that school I would absolutely opt to homeschool instead. Some places really are doing it so wrong that no teacher is passionate or talented enough to make up for bad decisions from the top.


----------



## Abigailly

lhancock90 said:


> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> I think of of the major things that concerns me is that school is often where issues at home are discovered. Whether it be abuse, neglect or things more sinister. Now I'm by no means saying that this is what home educators do. I'm saying that home educators should be checked up on regularly, not for the standards of educations, but to ensure children are being regularly monitored. All it takes is one person to abuse the rights of home education to cover up the goings on at home.
> And if that saves one child and offends a few hundred adults then so be it.
> I also think home educators should be required to have Care commission checks in the same way schools and child minders etc do. I'm not sure if they already do.
> 
> 
> 
> So parents after 5 years of raising their children without danger suddenly need a care commison check. To look after their own children?!Click to expand...

Yes. How does anyone know that the first 5 years were without danger? Have you any idea how many cases of abuse are discovered within the first 3 months of education? More than the other 13 years combined! 
I think that you also need to remember that some communities use home schooling as a guise to not educate. The traveling communities particularly. A lot don't see education as necessary, therefore keep their children at home with them. However, a varied education is a child's right. And people need to protect that.

Organisations like the CC aren't there to assess the children, they're there to ensure the child is getting a basic level of education.

And before you jump on that, I'm incredibly for home education. I was a homer from the ages of 7-11 and again 13-14 as we traveled a lot.


----------



## tommyg

Natsku said:


> Can they really not just diagnose dyslexia anymore? When did that change? I remember being tested (no idea why though as my spelling as fine)

Inconsistent Spelling is just one sign of it, others can be slow reading / reading stuff mechanically but not taking any of it in. I can remember doing comprehension you know where you are meant to read the passage then answer the questions. I used to go straight to the questions then look for the answers in the passage. I could never keep up with dictation. 

But I would rather all kids were screened so all can get required help.


----------



## lhancock90

Abigailly said:


> lhancock90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> I think of of the major things that concerns me is that school is often where issues at home are discovered. Whether it be abuse, neglect or things more sinister. Now I'm by no means saying that this is what home educators do. I'm saying that home educators should be checked up on regularly, not for the standards of educations, but to ensure children are being regularly monitored. All it takes is one person to abuse the rights of home education to cover up the goings on at home.
> And if that saves one child and offends a few hundred adults then so be it.
> I also think home educators should be required to have Care commission checks in the same way schools and child minders etc do. I'm not sure if they already do.
> 
> 
> 
> So parents after 5 years of raising their children without danger suddenly need a care commison check. To look after their own children?!Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. How does anyone know that the first 5 years were without danger? Have you any idea how many cases of abuse are discovered within the first 3 months of education? More than the other 13 years combined!
> I think that you also need to remember that some communities use home schooling as a guise to not educate. The traveling communities particularly. A lot don't see education as necessary, therefore keep their children at home with them. However, a varied education is a child's right. And people need to protect that.
> 
> Organisations like the CC aren't there to assess the children, they're there to ensure the child is getting a basic level of education.
> 
> And before you jump on that, I'm incredibly for home education. I was a homer from the ages of 7-11 and again 13-14 as we traveled a lot.Click to expand...

Firstly the HV service is a failing one if statistics are that high. That's part of their purpose but no, I still don't think that parents should need a care comisson to look after their children. I think that is absurd. I wouldn't object to involvement from a local organisation to make sure that the education supplied is proficient. But that's where I draw the line. I would be incredibly insulted and upset if I was required to have a care commission check. I already object to th level of interference, especially with some of the information to HVs and midwives request.

Some "communities" may use it as a guise but a community is a completely differnt situation to one parent! 

I wasn't going to "jump" on anything :shrug:


----------



## Abigailly

lhancock90 said:


> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> lhancock90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Abigailly said:
> 
> 
> I think of of the major things that concerns me is that school is often where issues at home are discovered. Whether it be abuse, neglect or things more sinister. Now I'm by no means saying that this is what home educators do. I'm saying that home educators should be checked up on regularly, not for the standards of educations, but to ensure children are being regularly monitored. All it takes is one person to abuse the rights of home education to cover up the goings on at home.
> And if that saves one child and offends a few hundred adults then so be it.
> I also think home educators should be required to have Care commission checks in the same way schools and child minders etc do. I'm not sure if they already do.
> 
> 
> 
> So parents after 5 years of raising their children without danger suddenly need a care commison check. To look after their own children?!Click to expand...
> 
> Yes. How does anyone know that the first 5 years were without danger? Have you any idea how many cases of abuse are discovered within the first 3 months of education? More than the other 13 years combined!
> I think that you also need to remember that some communities use home schooling as a guise to not educate. The traveling communities particularly. A lot don't see education as necessary, therefore keep their children at home with them. However, a varied education is a child's right. And people need to protect that.
> 
> Organisations like the CC aren't there to assess the children, they're there to ensure the child is getting a basic level of education.
> 
> And before you jump on that, I'm incredibly for home education. I was a homer from the ages of 7-11 and again 13-14 as we traveled a lot.Click to expand...
> 
> Firstly the HV service is a failing one if statistics are that high. That's part of their purpose but no, I still don't think that parents should need a care comisson to look after their children. I think that is absurd. I wouldn't object to involvement from a local organisation to make sure that the education supplied is proficient. But that's where I draw the line. I would be incredibly insulted and upset if I was required to have a care commission check. I already object to th level of interference, especially with some of the information to HVs and midwives request.
> 
> Some "communities" may use it as a guise but a community is a completely differnt situation to one parent!
> 
> I wasn't going to "jump" on anything :shrug:Click to expand...

The HV service is failing drastically in this country. It's why (as long as Salmond gets his way) there is going to be a huge over hall of the system. Because too many children are being failed by the system and it's not until the are out with their home situation that it's discovered.

It's not to do with the looking after of their children, it's to do with the education of your child. I know there is a very fine line, however there is a line. They have a duty to ensure that children are getting t least the basic levels of education. Any children's organisation is required to have government checks (schools, nurseries, play groups, child minders etc) why should home schooling be any different? They're not there to test your skills as a parent or an educator. They're there making sure the child gets what they're entitled to.

And of course a community, with an entirely different set of beliefs, is different to one person. But they can't let a child slip through the net, the consequences could, potentially, be too high. So they should be checking every single person out. As I said, if that means pissing off a few adults who don't think they need checked up on for the sake of one child's life then so be it.


----------



## Natsku

tommyg said:


> Natsku said:
> 
> 
> Can they really not just diagnose dyslexia anymore? When did that change? I remember being tested (no idea why though as my spelling as fine)
> 
> Inconsistent Spelling is just one sign of it, others can be slow reading / reading stuff mechanically but not taking any of it in. I can remember doing comprehension you know where you are meant to read the passage then answer the questions. I used to go straight to the questions then look for the answers in the passage. I could never keep up with dictation.
> 
> But I would rather all kids were screened so all can get required help.Click to expand...

My only issue was terrible handwriting. But they tested my brother too because he had the same handwriting issue and he was given extra time in exams in the end. 

I think it would be good to screen all kids too or at the very least screen any child that has any issue with reading or writing. My dad is dyslexic and they did nothing to help back in those days so he didn't even learn to read or write in school (his local church ended up teaching him)


----------



## Gemie

I'm interested in what everyone's views and take is on this article

https://m.psychologytoday.com/blog/...ction_type_map=["og.likes"]&action_ref_map=[]


----------



## tommyg

Mince, the first paragraph talks rubbish, yes everybody would like be rewarded with top marks without having to put any work into learning the stuff to get the top mark. 

Just the same as an offer of a £100k a year for a doing nothing or get £20k a year for working your arse off and being stressed out. Give me the £100k who would knock that back???

It seems to be talking about grades forgetting that you have to learn to get grade. Yes the grade is a mark of achevment just as anything else is. People get promoted in life because they work hard.

Yes their is an element of parents like to boast about their offspring and how well they are acheving you know the sort, junior was walking at 9 mths (round the furniture) and sleeping through the night at 3 weeks (he only got up a few times to feed). 

But at the end of the day the normal course of events is you learn either by being gifted or working your arse off and your knowledge or ability will show up when you get a test.

If schools don't test how do they know if Johnny at the back is taking stuff in or if he is sat letting it all go over his head. So that the teacher can then focus some extra attention on the kid who's struggling. The kids themselves don't need to be told who got what marks in a class test.

And I can't imagine home schoollers not testing either? 

I can tell my 2 year old that Thomas the Tank is blue as many times as I like but until the day I ask him "what colour is Thomas?" and he answers blue how do I know he has taken it in? That is a form of testing.


----------



## Natsku

Gemie said:


> I'm interested in what everyone's views and take is on this article
> 
> https://m.psychologytoday.com/blog/...ction_type_map=["og.likes"]&action_ref_map=[]

I think there's some good points there. I wouldn't be happy with a high pressure system with lots of testing but (as far as I can tell) thats not what the schools are like here.


----------



## fides

Haven't had time to read this whole thread, but we will certainly be homeschooling, so long as neither of the boys have any major learning disabilities. We're pretty lucky - where we live there are a lot of really good homeschool co-ops, as well as a few cottage programs within the charter schools - not sure exactly what kind of mix we'll be doing when the time comes, but i do know will be homeschoolers.

Good luck on whatever you decide is best for your family. :flower:


----------



## Button#

I have been following this thread and have found it really interesting and useful. Not because I plan to home school but because it has given me loads to think about when choosing a school for LO.

I think home schooling is great for one on one education and attention to a child's educational needs but I would like to go back to work when my children reach school age so it's not for me.

As for points raised about welfare, social services have enough on their plate without being sent out to assess people who are home schooling. Despite their huge caseload some areas require social workers to visit children in traveller groups even if there is no reason to suspect any neglect or abuse and I think this is unfair and likewise it would be unfair to subject homeschoolers to the same treatment. Also home schooled children will still be around other adults, see doctors, have dental check ups etc and problems can be picked up then.

I agree education is important but if someone when they are older feel they are lacking in certain areas they can revisit those areas independently. You're never too old to learn.


----------



## Button#

Also my grades in school did not reflect what I had learned, they reflected what I had memorised. I can't remember a lot of what I was taught in school anymore.


----------



## Dragonfly

Sorry for dragging this up again I cant find the home school thread that was in this forum in searches ? is it gone?


----------



## SarahBear

I'm not in the UK, but I plan to homeschool. I don't know much about the school here in my area, but I don't think mainstream schools are ideal environments for learning and healthy child development.


----------



## HKateH

lhancock90 said:


> MarineWAG said:
> 
> 
> I would absolutely not consider homeschooling for practical and ideological grounds. I think the media blows things up too much for one thing, but also I think parents need to be more hands on with their children's education. No I don't want to home school, but that doesn't mean I am going to cart my boys off to school every day and keep my fingers crossed for parents evening, I will take an active role in their education, knowing what they're doing in school, helping with home work, bringing in extra help if needed and doing educational family things out of school, by being hands on my boys will not fall through the net, I will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, what problems the schools are having etc and be proactive in intervening before problems arise. Ok I know I sound like a naive first timer with the best intentions like all first time mums sound, but I am a pretty determined, opinionated and obnoxious person when I want to be, I have looked into teaching in the past and indirectly work in education in the heritage sector so it is something I am passionate about.
> 
> Whether you home school or not, parents should be proactive in their child's education, that is what I am trying to say!
> 
> This would always be my intention. But having attended schools in this area and watched my Mom pull my sister out of them i recognize they they are extremely below par.Click to expand...

What makes you think they are below par? Is it observation or are they schools requiring improvement?

I think with a bit of research, parents can find decent schools. I do think though that lots of people are guilty of thinking that because they went to school, they know how to teach, and thus make snap decisions about teachers and schools based on assumptions.

The Tories have it in for public sector workers at the moment. Teachers, doctors, nurses... The education system is failing our children and the NHS kills babies. The press sensationalises to get a reaction and it bloody works.


----------



## lhancock90

HKateH said:


> lhancock90 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MarineWAG said:
> 
> 
> I would absolutely not consider homeschooling for practical and ideological grounds. I think the media blows things up too much for one thing, but also I think parents need to be more hands on with their children's education. No I don't want to home school, but that doesn't mean I am going to cart my boys off to school every day and keep my fingers crossed for parents evening, I will take an active role in their education, knowing what they're doing in school, helping with home work, bringing in extra help if needed and doing educational family things out of school, by being hands on my boys will not fall through the net, I will know what their strengths and weaknesses are, what problems the schools are having etc and be proactive in intervening before problems arise. Ok I know I sound like a naive first timer with the best intentions like all first time mums sound, but I am a pretty determined, opinionated and obnoxious person when I want to be, I have looked into teaching in the past and indirectly work in education in the heritage sector so it is something I am passionate about.
> 
> Whether you home school or not, parents should be proactive in their child's education, that is what I am trying to say!
> 
> This would always be my intention. But having attended schools in this area and watched my Mom pull my sister out of them i recognize they they are extremely below par.Click to expand...
> 
> What makes you think they are below par? Is it observation or are they schools requiring improvement?
> 
> I think with a bit of research, parents can find decent schools. I do think though that lots of people are guilty of thinking that because they went to school, they know how to teach, and thus make snap decisions about teachers and schools based on assumptions.
> 
> The Tories have it in for public sector workers at the moment. Teachers, doctors, nurses... The education system is failing our children and the NHS kills babies. The press sensationalises to get a reaction and it bloody works.Click to expand...

God this thread is old. Most of the schools near me have a really low Ofsted rating, falling GCSE grades etc.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Question. I want to homeschool Jade. We have been offered a place in a montessori nursery for 2 mornings a week. Anyone done this?


----------



## lhancock90

Midnight_Fairy said:


> Question. I want to homeschool Jade. We have been offered a place in a montessori nursery for 2 mornings a week. Anyone done this?

I'd assume you can mix both at that level? I think its when it gets to full time school you make a choice?

xx


----------



## Dragonfly

SarahBear said:


> I'm not in the UK, but I plan to homeschool. I don't know much about the school here in my area, but I don't think mainstream schools are ideal environments for learning and healthy child development.

They arnt. Sorry if it offends any one but its not working out for my kids. 

I found this for helping kids de school 
www.livingjoyfully.ca/unschooling/getting_started/what_is_deschooling.htm

https://sandradodd.com/joyce/steps


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Yeh thats what I was thinking. The new forest has an amazing HS group so il go with the flow x I was hoping I could attend the preschoolb too and not leave her x


----------



## TwilightAgain

I don't have children yet but i'd love to home school them in the future. If my partner have the means to do so then we probably will. Funnily enough we spoke about this only a couple of nights ago and I told him that i'd like to do that if we had the ability to and he agreed and said one of his good friends have children who are homeschooled and they thrive from it because their learning style is different.

Personally I had an ok experience of school but I wouldn't want it for my kids. I made friends and on the main I did fine in exams. But I was also bullied from during primary school until the end of high school, when everyone cried on the last day, I walked out with a massive smile on my face. Now i'm older i've had a chance to reflect on my experience from a different point of view.

I encountered a lot of nasty people and was even attacked outside of school for absolutely nothing because some of my 'classmates' were just vile animals. Unfortunately the greater population of my year group (i'd say about 80%) were absolutely horrible and had no interest in anything other than making those who worked hard miserable. The teachers did try but there wasn't much they could do really.

For certain subjects were had sets and I was 9 times out of 10 in the top one which was great, I always did better. But with the subjects that weren't set allocated, the experience was awful because no could learn because of those being disruptive. Lessons whereby I was with people who name called and bullied were really unpleasant and I felt awkward and threatened quite a lot of the time. Occasionally we had a really good teacher but on the main the whole experience was just horrid, including the staff (how can you expect to promote a good attitude when the staff themselves found it hard to say something simple like "excuse me" in order to get past, instead just barging their way past. My primary school experience was even more horrendous because the bullying was repetitively ignored and it seemed like the teachers didn't care - another school I left with a smile on my face, though obviously we all moved up to the high school together).

I did get a few As and Bs but I got mainly Cs which I feel was down to the poor teaching standards. Everyone was told of how important GCSEs were, but no one was really taught about how to go about revising, I didn't have a clue what I was doing at 15 and felt the support was lacking (my marks excelled greatly once I got to university when I discovered more about how I learn personally).

On top of that, I also felt that a lot of what we learnt was completely pointless and I stand by that opinion today. I agree that certain core subjects are important but the others I think are open to negotiation which i'd like to give my children the opportunity. Don't even get me started on the foulness of doing P.E lessons and marinating in your sweatiness for the rest of the day (god knows how I survived those years :lol:). I also like the idea that you aren't stuck to a strict schedule with a ton of rules.

I appreciate that school can be good and it very much depends on the teaching standards of X school and luck of the draw of who will be in your child's year group. I know plenty of people who had a fabulous experience of school (including my OH) but i'd feel pretty bad sending my own to school knowing that there is a possibility that they will have a pretty rubbish time of it, i'd rather have them socialise in other ways. Plus I feel I could offer a better experience and learning at home - though who knows if this will ever happen :shrug: providing it was financially possible, i'd totally go for it. But it's completely a personal choice, I don't think either side is right or wrong.


----------



## Dragonfly

2 of my neighbors are ex primary school teachers and another was a secondary school teacher. All are very pro home schooling.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

People say to me 'wow, you wony get a break'&#128552;&#128552; wow, just wow. Since when was parenting based on parents needs


----------



## chickenlegs

Dragonfly said:


> 2 of my neighbors are ex primary school teachers and another was a secondary school teacher. All are very pro home schooling.

Fair play to them. I am a primary school teacher. Having taught in foundation stage, infant school, junior school and special education, I continue to be anti home schooling. But each to their own. I wouldn't put individual opinions down as part of an argument, personally.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Anti? Thats a bit harsh lol. Every child is different.


----------



## chickenlegs

Midnight_Fairy said:


> Anti? Thats a bit harsh lol. Every child is different.

Fair play. But it is hard to find the opposite of "pro" without sounding disrespectful. "Non pro" didn't sound right!


----------



## Dragonfly

I keep forgetting I am in the thread for debate and not the actual home schoolers thread where I wont see anti people. Anti people which I really dont care about as they dont know my children ,our lives or what we all have been through.


----------



## SarahBear

delete


----------



## TwilightAgain

Midnight_Fairy said:


> People say to me 'wow, you wony get a break'&#128552;&#128552; wow, just wow. Since when was parenting based on parents needs

I get this. I told my mother about my desire to home school and she said "Oh no, by the time they're 4 you can't wait to ship them off to school". :rolleyes: explains it all really that she was absent for my childhood (and reinstated when I was 18) but what a daft attitude to have.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

^ its shocking. Do some people really use school as a baby sitter lol x


----------



## Dragonfly

All my friends say how hard it will be for me now I have one home a few hours more and how they love having them out, some cant wait till kids get older to get them away. So yes I believe they do.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Shocking :(


----------



## tinkerbelle93

I haven't thought about it too much but I like the idea of it, it probably wouldn't be financially an option for us though. Does anyone have stats on how common it is? For some reason I think it's more common in America but might be wrong.


----------



## Noodlebear

Unless my OH suddenly has a massive pay raise there is no way I'd be able to homeschool even if I wanted to. Fortunately I think he'd be better off at school with my support than if I tried teaching him myself lol.


----------



## Pennyb

I find the idea of home eduction very exciting, having the ability to make learning I depth and fun.

It's something we are strongly considering..


----------



## Dragonfly

Seriously though I cant wait. So if there are home school groups around here would love to share projects in with other mums. I have so many things planned.


----------



## SarahBear

Anyone here consider Un-schooling? If you don't know what that is, it's basically a child-led approach where you don't enforce that certain things must be learned by a certain time and you don't use curricula or time-scales. You COULD use a curriculum, but only if your child was interested in it. Your child is empowered to learn what they want, when they're interested in it.


----------



## emyandpotato

I wouldn't home school because I don't have the strength of character to do it brilliantly. And yes in a way I look forward to not being the 24/7 carer because I think that when he's at school and I work I could be a better parent in our time together than if I was trying to school him alone for 6 hours a day and continue to parent for another 18 hours (and yes, I know we 'parent' 24/7 but I couldn't think of a better word). I don't feel I'd be able to be patient enough or motivated enough. Similarly I couldn't teach only one school class all day every day. I don't think it's a shocking attitude to have, just people have different dispositions and are unable to do certain things as well as others might. I do also wonder about every home schooling parents ability to teach all the 'necessary' GCSE subjects to a high grade. And I mean like A*, not just C. Or is that not how it works? 

I've only been working in a teaching role for a very short time and I can already see that a huge problem in state schools is a lack of individual support because there just are not enough teachers and resources per student! I work with just two children and can tailor the lesson to their needs but I know that the most successful lessons wouldn't work on a large scale, and there is a huge problem there. I totally get why some people home school, especially in areas where the education is appalling. I understand the argument of supporting the local school but I lived that ideology and was stuck at my most local school, which was awful, and was not allowed to choose another nor go to the grammar school as my dad was very much about supporting your community etc. and I'm dubious as to whether there was anything to that argument. I will, however, send Rory to a state school, and hopefully be involved as a parent within the school but also continue his learning as far as possible at home.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I think me and my children get on sooouch better in the holidays. I dont mind it at all. I detest school days. Im excited too dragonfly and to rhe PP I have thought of unschooling my son x


----------



## Pennyb

I don't think un schooling would work of me. I'm thinking of taking more a semi-strutted approach, so there is the ability there to divert for one thing to another with ease if he expresses an interest in learning something. But we will be losing following a curriculum and it will be my intention for him to do igcses. I thought for the later years I may use an online school liked interhigh. However there is currently some people trying to set up a free school but it will be an online one so that could be interesting but it depends how it would work really.

But there are so many options to home eduction I think you have to go in with your eyes open and be prepared to change styles of it does not work for you and your child to find a style that will :)


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

Pennyb said:


> I don't think un schooling would work of me. I'm thinking of taking more a semi-strutted approach, so there is the ability there to divert for one thing to another with ease if he expresses an interest in learning something. But we will be losing following a curriculum and it will be my intention for him to do igcses. I thought for the later years I may use an online school liked interhigh. However there is currently some people trying to set up a free school but it will be an online one so that could be interesting but it depends how it would work really.
> 
> But there are so many options to home eduction I think you have to go in with your eyes open and be prepared to change styles of it does not work for you and your child to find a style that will :)

Great post. Im looking forward to learning what works for us and being super hands on. She will still attend after school groups if she wants and I do not worry about social as many Hs kids have more social time if they want it than mainstream kids. No sitting in silence boy girl boy girl order for us xx


----------



## Dragonfly

SarahBear said:


> Anyone here consider Un-schooling? If you don't know what that is, it's basically a child-led approach where you don't enforce that certain things must be learned by a certain time and you don't use curricula or time-scales. You COULD use a curriculum, but only if your child was interested in it. Your child is empowered to learn what they want, when they're interested in it.

I dont know, since I am only starting I am using curriculum as a guide line. We could end up doing that. I go with the flow and see what works for my ones. Its not going to be strict scheduled stuff. I have to make sure my son is calm, relaxed and learns at his pace as school has made him frustrated with learning. So I am de schooling when he finishes school. Hes getting to a topic he loves, farming. Even more. Hes learned so much at home anyway that he never would in school. I got loads of stuff at world of books for cheap and even tesco I got stuff. I am going to make a room in this building outside of our normal territory later down the line so all the kids can do there, store our stuff and do projects.


----------



## TwilightAgain

SarahBear said:


> Anyone here consider Un-schooling? If you don't know what that is, it's basically a child-led approach where you don't enforce that certain things must be learned by a certain time and you don't use curricula or time-scales. You COULD use a curriculum, but only if your child was interested in it. Your child is empowered to learn what they want, when they're interested in it.

I'd like to do this to a degree. There would be a time scale to an extent because I do believe it's important to achieve some qualifications by the age of 16, though it would be good if they progressed quicker if thats what they wanted. I'd use certain parts of the curriculum e.g. maths and english because they're always asked for with a-levels and uni as a minimum. But the rest i'd like my children to choose, e.g. interest in cooking/whatever sport/fitness activity they like. So a bit of what's important and the rest made up of what interests them :thumbup:

It's definitely a more personalised approach, I believe it would probably encourage a lot of character building as well in terms of getting good at what they're interest in and not forced to learn something just because. I view it as pointless to waste a few hours a week in school on something like art (for example) if they didn't enjoy it - yet maybe they had an interest in photoshop or video editing which they'd have an opportunity to develop at home.


----------



## Dragonfly

You know where my friends got their qualifications? after school. None of them got it in school as you where not allowed to achieve pass marks. You can do them in the tech here its called.


----------



## TwilightAgain

emyandpotato said:


> I wouldn't home school because I don't have the strength of character to do it brilliantly. And yes in a way I look forward to not being the 24/7 carer because I think that when he's at school and I work I could be a better parent in our time together than if I was trying to school him alone for 6 hours a day and continue to parent for another 18 hours (and yes, I know we 'parent' 24/7 but I couldn't think of a better word). I don't feel I'd be able to be patient enough or motivated enough. Similarly I couldn't teach only one school class all day every day. I don't think it's a shocking attitude to have, just people have different dispositions and are unable to do certain things as well as others might. *I do also wonder about every home schooling parents ability to teach all the 'necessary' GCSE subjects to a high grade. And I mean like A*, not just C. Or is that not how it works?*
> 
> I've only been working in a teaching role for a very short time and I can already see that a huge problem in state schools is a lack of individual support because there just are not enough teachers and resources per student! I work with just two children and can tailor the lesson to their needs but I know that the most successful lessons wouldn't work on a large scale, and there is a huge problem there. I totally get why some people home school, especially in areas where the education is appalling. I understand the argument of supporting the local school but I lived that ideology and was stuck at my most local school, which was awful, and was not allowed to choose another nor go to the grammar school as my dad was very much about supporting your community etc. and I'm dubious as to whether there was anything to that argument. I will, however, send Rory to a state school, and hopefully be involved as a parent within the school but also continue his learning as far as possible at home.

I think this is such an important point to make. I don't think any parent should consider homeschooling if they genuinely don't believe they have the capacity to do so. I'm confident I would be able to do most things efficiently, but the one thing i'd struggle with immensely is maths, i've always been shocking at it so I wouldn't even attempt to teach my children anything more than the basics (I'm talking early years :lol:). However my partner is incredibly good at it so i'd let him take the reins for that subject.

I mentioned a few posts up that I got mainly Cs at GCSE but I blame that as a result of poor guidance. Now however, I think they'd be much easier because i've taken the time to explore how I learn (and the evidence is in my university marks). For my own children it would be a case of doing the same thing because i'd have the time to, and they wouldn't be entered into exams unless they were ready which may be another reason kids don't always achieve the best results because they're not ready.


----------



## Dragonfly

If my kids want to go to a secondary school when they are of that age we can talk about it then.


----------



## Kassy

I need some help ladies. Me and my daughter's dad are complete opposites when it comes to school. I want to homeschool her as i feel it would be best for her. I would also take her to groups so she'd socialise.

The problem her dad has is that she needs to socialise with kids her own age/ experience things etc. These things i can do without sending her to school. 

I'm losing my mind over this as i am constantly being questioned about it and told to stop being so stupid. What do i do?


----------



## TwilightAgain

Kassy said:


> I need some help ladies. Me and my daughter's dad are complete opposites when it comes to school. I want to homeschool her as i feel it would be best for her. I would also take her to groups so she'd socialise.
> 
> The problem her dad has is that she needs to socialise with kids her own age/ experience things etc. These things i can do without sending her to school.
> 
> I'm losing my mind over this as i am constantly being questioned about it and told to stop being so stupid. What do i do?

I'd go with your gut instinct and home school. Education trumps socialising in my opinion (though socialising is very much important too) so if you feel you'd do a better job homeschooling including meeting her social needs too then i'd go for it. But maybe go over things in detail with him? Or could you talk to people who do this so they could put his mind at rest?


----------



## Pearls18

Kassy said:


> I need some help ladies. Me and my daughter's dad are complete opposites when it comes to school. I want to homeschool her as i feel it would be best for her. I would also take her to groups so she'd socialise.
> 
> The problem her dad has is that she needs to socialise with kids her own age/ experience things etc. These things i can do without sending her to school.
> 
> I'm losing my mind over this as i am constantly being questioned about it and told to stop being so stupid. What do i do?

You and her dad are going to have to come to an agreement, it's such a big issue to disagree on it's not like it's discussing weaning methods for example, both of you are going to have to research the opposition method to what you want to do as well as the favoured option. Perhaps a compromise can be met with part time schooling etc but both of you will have valid opinions, this isn't a case of you or him being absolutely right as you can see from the thread. I don't know what the answer is if both of you are unwilling to move an inch but I don't think you can homeschool with a strong disagreement with the father (your OH?) but nor do I think you should just send her to school, especially if he hasn't fully researched.


----------



## tommyg

It's something that you must agree on 100% and both be committed to. And that includes the financial burdens of it too.

If one of you is not committed to it, it is bound to result in arguments later when the going gets tough. Whither it be financial, you not able to earn and the cost of books, internet access, and the cost of sitting exams or a stroppy teenager who doesn't want to listen or Learn.


----------



## jenkins

The lack of 'socialisation' seems to be the biggest myth, that people who do not know much about homeschooling, cling to.

In my experience many people have an idea in their minds of what homeschooling looks like and it is based on presumptions or things they've heard and not based on actual real life experience or research. Please note I am saying many people do - not all - and I'm sure that some people have valid negative experiences of homeschooling. The 'many' is what I have found in my everyday life.

I think the most useful thing to do would be to get involved with your local homeschooling community. They will be an invaluable support and will be very knowledgable about local 'socialisation' opportunities (I am cringing typing that lol).

It's a big decision and I personally feel it is wrong to just dismiss homeschooling as nonsense/cruel/lacking just as it is wrong to dismiss school as crowd control/obedience training/ whatever your objection.


----------



## Kess

emyandpotato said:


> I wouldn't home school because I don't have the strength of character to do it brilliantly. And yes in a way I look forward to not being the 24/7 carer because I think that when he's at school and I work I could be a better parent in our time together than *if I was trying to school him alone for 6 hours a day and continue to parent for another 18 hours (and yes, I know we 'parent' 24/7 but I couldn't think of a better word)*. I don't feel I'd be able to be patient enough or motivated enough. Similarly I couldn't teach only one school class all day every day. I don't think it's a shocking attitude to have, just people have different dispositions and are unable to do certain things as well as others might. I do also wonder about every home schooling parents ability to teach all the 'necessary' GCSE subjects to a high grade. And I mean like A*, not just C. Or is that not how it works?
> 
> I've only been working in a teaching role for a very short time and I can already see that a huge problem in state schools is a lack of individual support because there just are not enough teachers and resources per student! I work with just two children and can tailor the lesson to their needs but I know that the most successful lessons wouldn't work on a large scale, and there is a huge problem there. I totally get why some people home school, especially in areas where the education is appalling. I understand the argument of supporting the local school but I lived that ideology and was stuck at my most local school, which was awful, and was not allowed to choose another nor go to the grammar school as my dad was very much about supporting your community etc. and I'm dubious as to whether there was anything to that argument. I will, however, send Rory to a state school, and hopefully be involved as a parent within the school but also continue his learning as far as possible at home.

Re. the bolded, home edders certainly don't school their children alone for 6 hours a day! If they're structured types, perhaps 2-3 hours a day for primary at the absolute most, more likely an hour or two, and the unstructured home edders who are more common in this country wouldn't do that much even. And not alone, generally - siblings of course, and often learning in groups with friends or out at museums, events, libraries etc.

Education at home can be so different; maths can be learnt on a shopping trip (multiplication and division for working out what's cheapest, mental arithmetic for checking the change, what quantity of this do we need for x people? etc) or whilst baking (ratios, multiplication, division, weighing - also basic chemistry), for example. Our local HE group arrange things like a series of talks by The Animal Man that cover all the species families and where the animals come from, what they eat etc - fun group learning that covers biology, geography, zoology, and more.

I think believing we sit our children down at the kitchen table, break out the worksheets or the whiteboard and teach for 6 hours a day is at the root of so many people's negativity about home ed - when would we have time for social stuff or general development if that was the case? How would we get and keep our kids' interest, and how would we cope with teaching everything our children need to know? Luckily, that's not how home ed is.


----------



## cat_reversing

anyone else thinking about doing this or already do?

lo turned 2 in December and everyone seems to be talking about nursery and preschool etc, in the uk we get 15 hours free nursery from age 3 and if I want to send her I need to start thinking about it but i'm just not sure.
I can't stand the politics of schools, the big classes - honestly, how can any child get the attention they need in a class of 35?!
I need to get the confidence to meet up with the local home ed groups but I find it so hard meeting new people. I've also looked into flexischooling but with the recent changes to schools attendance codings it seems so difficult to find a school that would be willing.


----------



## SarahBear

(only read first post)

I'm in the US, but I fully intend to unschool.


----------



## Pennyb

cat_reversing said:


> anyone else thinking about doing this or already do?
> 
> lo turned 2 in December and everyone seems to be talking about nursery and preschool etc, in the uk we get 15 hours free nursery from age 3 and if I want to send her I need to start thinking about it but i'm just not sure.
> I can't stand the politics of schools, the big classes - honestly, how can any child get the attention they need in a class of 35?!
> I need to get the confidence to meet up with the local home ed groups but I find it so hard meeting new people. I've also looked into flexischooling but with the recent changes to schools attendance codings it seems so difficult to find a school that would be willing.

My LB was 2 in November and we are definetley going to home educate him. I've seen some highly recommended nurseries in my area but I don't see how nursey / schools would be more beneficial than keeping my LB home for me to HE. I can offer him one to one and Taylor his learning to his needs, skills, interests, school cannot do that in a class of 30 or more. I know of the HE groups in my area but have not been to any yet. I'm much happier now we have made our decision :)


----------



## SarahBear

Oh, and also wanted to mention that Unschooling is a philosophy, not a specific practice. I intend to put things in her environment that lend themselves to learning, but I intend to follow her lead in learning. While I'm considering pre-school for the social aspect, I'm being selective with the preschool and I will not default to putting her in regular school or default to using a curriculum. If she would like to use a curriculum, we can certainly do that if it's not too expensive... and if she wants to go to school, we can talk about what it is she's looking to get out of school, discuss a commitment period, and give it a go.


----------



## Midnight_Fairy

I attended a homeschool group for under 5. Was refreshing to not have people asking me when she starts playschool or childcare. We had a absolutely fantastic time being social AND exploring. No worries on that side of things. The new forest has a HUGE homeschooling network :D


----------

