Crunch raises state school demand

mumps

Davesnave wrote: »

Sorry, but this is all very 1970s to those of us 'trained,' as you call it, during that period. The American de-schooling movement was in full swing then, and its proponents certainly challenged and altered my way of thinking about education.

There may be individual teachers who have some kind of 'blockage' over home schooling, but I think most of us are smart enough to evaluate kids as individuals and work out what to do with/for them. If they're capable and sociably adjusted, why worry? Not all are, but that's also true for kids who've been though the mill!

Where I worked, in the mid-eighties, we had some wealthy artistic folk set up an 'alternative' private school nearby. I don't know how successful it was from their creative standpoint, but some of their 'graduates' switched our school to have their 3Rs sorted out around Year 5. We certainly didn't feel we needed to 'save' them though.

I had two very different kids myself; one of whom was extremely bright, but who, to this day, prefers to let her partner do the PhD while she involves herrself with something more hands-on. So far as she was concerned, school was a bit of a distraction, but the social life made it worth the effort.

Our second child struggled with a specific learning difficulty, which meant that we had to teach her at home after school and, as I was unavailable, that meant my 'untrained' wife taking on the role of remedial teacher. It worked out fine, or at least far better than the alternative: one hour of 'professional' help each week in school. Being in the business, I knew that the county's interpretation of 'adequate provision' was BS.

So, from personal & professional experience, I'd say a mix of home and school teaching can work out fine. I just wish more parents of kids who have learning problems would have the courage to pitch-in, (with support) rather than leave it to the experts who are, of course, totally underfunded.

Perhaps it depends where you trained and where you were in the country? Where I am it really raised eyebrows, it was something the local school hadn't any experience of. As I said most teachers were happy once they got to know her and realised she hadn't suffered by not attending school. The teacher who continued to have a problem with it also had a problem with mothers coming into school to help with things like hearing children read.

I understand some LA's are very supportive (I got this from Education Otherwise literature) and some very anti and I suppose lots fall somewhere in between. I agree with your point about parents having the courage to pitch-in. When you think about it we are the first teachers. I seem to remember at an Education Otherwise get together I went to that lots of teachers seemed to be home educating. I was never sure if this was because they had the confidence to do it or because they were particularly unhappy with the school system or a mixture of the two.

At the end all I can say is I am glad I had the extra years with her, that we had time to do lots together and I felt she went to school at the right time for her which was what was most important for us.

neverdespairgirl

natalie1974 wrote: »

God that's cheap , our school coats are £120 (woollen dry clean only !!!! things that don't keep the kids warm!) , £90 blazers , £15 a shirt , £25 a hat , £20 a school bag and then the skirts , jumpers , PE kits etc .

When I was at secondary school, having shiny new uniform was waaaay uncool.

When my younger sister, Eleanor, started at the school aged 10, my mother bought her 2 school skirts, 2 jumpers, 1 blazer, 4 shirts and an overcoat.

She wore the same stuff for 5 years, then she went into the 6th form (no uniform) and our younger sister, Olivia, started at the school. Lily wore the same clothes all the way through the school as well, for 5 years, so it was very cheap over all! Olivia also inherited my school jumpers and shirts, so she had a wardrobe full.

I went to boarding school for 2 years, from 11 to 13, and the uniform there was ludicrous. I had to have 3 full sets of everyday uniform (including blazer, tie, jumper skirt) and 5 everyday shirts, and then a whole separate Sunday uniform (different blazer, different skirt, different tie) and 3 Sunday shirts (different). And 4 different PE uniforms, uniform trunk, tuck box, Bible, dictionary, Atlas, and a lot of other things I've probably forgotten.

New, the whole lot in 1987 would have cost £2,200. My mother bought it all second hand (as you had so many of everything, nothing got worn out) and having second-hand stuff was great.

MissMoneypenny

caveman38 wrote: »

They may have privelaged home lives compared to most but they work extremely hard at school. Their results are partly down to better teaching but it is largely due to hard graft.

It's a shame that some parents have such little faith in the abilities of their children. I was confident that my children were clever and was therefore happy to send them to state schools, where they were placed in all the top sets.

Both my children got good A results and went on to university. They are now in their early 20s and one earns 47k and the other earns in the mid 40s.

Davesnave

mumps wrote: »

I agree with your point about parents having the courage to pitch-in. When you think about it we are the first teachers.

Lots of professionals like to keep an air of mysticism around what they do, but teaching isn't rocket science, just blooming hard work. What really separates good teachers from the bulk of the intelligent population is the ability to connect with, and sustain the interest of 25+ children, meeting the majority of their needs, whatever their ability. That's tougher!

Teachers should have faith in parents, but being a partnership is crucial. An example of failure in this respect would be parents teaching different maths processes from the ones used in their child's class. However, on the whole, anything that brings parent and child together in a relaxed & supportive way is to be welcomed.

natalie1974

That's why I always ask my daughters teachers what method they use as at first a couple of times I was doing it differently to her teachers

MissMoneypenny

Davesnave wrote: »

Teachers should have faith in parents, but being a partnership is crucial. An example of failure in this respect would be parents teaching different maths processes from the ones used in their child's class.

My children had two brilliant maths teachers, one at primary school who took them to a level much higher than their years and the other their maths A level teacher. The latter often taught maths by a different process than the one he was meant to teach by as he said this was easier for the pupils to understand. He was so enthusiastic about his subject, had a fantastic sense of humour and got on well with the pupils and the parents. When my daughter left school for university, he was the only teacher that she bought a present for.

silvercar

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

It's a shame that some parents have such little faith in the abilities of their children. I was confident that my children were clever and was therefore happy to send them to state schools, where they were placed in all the top sets.

Both my children got good A results and went on to university. They are now in their early 20s and one earns 47k and the other earns in the mid 40s.

It is not a question about having faith in your children, but having faith in the school. In some areas there are decent state schools, in others there are only sink schools which will bring any child down due to bad peer pressure and teachers spending all their time controlling behaviour rather than teaching.

MissMoneypenny

"England's pupils in global top 10

England's pupils have been placed in the top 10 for science and maths in a global league table of achievement.
The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (Timss) is a major four-yearly comparison of standards in primary and secondary schools.
In tests in 2007, England's 10 and 14-year-olds were among the higher performers in more than 60 regions. But their enjoyment levels had fallen."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7773081.stm

I wonder if the drop in enjoyment is due to parent pressure?
I recall a conversation with another parent who told me that they had got private tutors for their very young child (in addition to infant school) as their daughter was lazy:eek:

MissMoneypenny

silvercar wrote: »

It is not a question about having faith in your children, but having faith in the school. In some areas there are decent state schools, in others there are only sink schools which will bring any child down due to bad peer pressure and teachers spending all their time controlling behaviour rather than teaching.

True, there are some bad areas, but there are some very good schools where some parents still send their children to private schools. It's a shame that they have such little faith in their child's ability.

Davesnave

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

"England's pupils in global top 10

England's pupils have been placed in the top 10 for science and maths in a global league table of achievement.
The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (Timss) is a major four-yearly comparison of standards in primary and secondary schools.
In tests in 2007, England's 10 and 14-year-olds were among the higher performers in more than 60 regions. But their enjoyment levels had fallen."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7773081.stm

I wonder if the drop in enjoyment is due to parent pressure?
I recall a conversation with another parent who told me that they had got private tutors for their very young child (in addition to infant school) as their daughter was lazy:eek:

In both science and maths, the fall in enjoyment might also be linked to the amount of testing we now see, which tends to reduce the amount of time available for practical & experimental activities.

Certainly, in my primary school, once the league tables were published, we spent more time on 'mugging up facts' and discussing semantics.("No, Johnny, the water didn't disappear; it evaporated!') This was understandable because, in the early tests, a child's final mark could be heavily influenced by their ability in English. However, there were less experiments going on to provide the conceptual development behind all those words.

As for the infant child who had to suffer a private tutor, that's exactly the sort of thing I meant when I suggested earlier that children should not have their childhood stolen by pushy adults.