Home educate?

FunWithFlags

Errata wrote: »

Joining the debate. Reading some posts on previous threads and in other places, I cringe at the low educational level, demonstrated by their writing and thinking, of some of those who home educate their children. They give every indiacation that they're not competent to educate.
On another point, I feel truly sorry for children who get no respite from their parents' searchlight non-stop observation because they're being educated at home and don't have the daily escape valve of school.

I must admit, there is another forum I visit with a home education thread and I am horrified that some of those people are allowed to educate their children. Some of them can barely type a literate sentence. Maybe for some people home education shouldn't be an option but then, how can this be controlled? It's worrying.

I'll point out again though that children who are home educated properly aren't at home all the time with their parents. Maybe a better title for some home education would be not-at-school education lol. I do agree though that there are those out there who are probably the type of parents you describe.

I can't figure out how to multi-quote (how embarrassing lol) but imagine I have quoted poet123 here

I'll be honest and say I had never even though about the fact that some parents would not access exams etc to ensure their childrens' further education. That's quite a sad situation for those children

Subject knowledge is an interesting area really imo. Like I mentioned in a previous post, a PGCE trained primary teacher is sent into schools with only six months (approx) taught subject knowledge. The rest is learnt on the job. I was asked to teach a French lesson to a class of 30 in my first placement (four weeks into the PGCE) despite not having studied French for six years. I had an evening to prepare and refresh my knowledge necessary for the lesson. I think a parent with a reasonable education can manage that.

If you mean secondary school level of subject knowledge, this is when private tutors who specialise in a subject can be hired by a small group or as an individual. A school teacher might not necessarily be the expert in a subject that some parents think nowadays too. It's common to hear of situations where cover supervisors are being used by schools to cut corners on paying full teacher wages. On a similar vein, a local secondary I volunteered at had a GCSE Maths class of 50 pupils due to staff shortage. Children who asked questions were fobbed off to one of the teaching assistants so that the main class teacher could continue teaching the class. I think the rambling point I'm trying to make is where home education can be lacking, so can schools.

ETA: Long post is long lol!

kafkathecat

poet123 wrote: »

Some parents don't access it though. I have two students who we did allow onto a very basic course via interview without GCSE's (they hadn't sat any) but again and again they will face the lack of these quals if they want to progress. They were advised to try to gain some GCSE's alongside the course, but to date, have not done so.

Of course there is good and bad quality home ed, but it would have to be of a very very good quality to match the depths of knowledge my own kids gained from a school setting in the Sciences, or Maths. It is very hard for one person (probably untrained) to be able to offer that spread of subject knowledge. I know I couldn't do it. Reading around a subject is an adjunct to, not a replacement for, being taught by someone with good subject knowledge and experience.

So how many home ed children have you taught? Because very rarely does 'one person' do the teaching. My own ds does classes and correspondence courses and always has the option of going to school. I do know children who have reached 16 with no formal qualifications but there have been varied reasons for this. I also know children who were taken out of school because they were doing no work there. I don't think home ed is for most people and I myself would have hated it but it works well for my son and his friends.

I am also interested that you earlier stated that anxiety is often learned as this is something that is being researched and not known and one anxiety gene has already been identified - 5htt.

Lastly very many of my home educating friends are qualified teachers and they say that the training is of very little use in a home education setting.

poet123

kafkathecat wrote: »

So how many home ed children have you taught?

Over the years in the region of 45/50 or so at Tertiary level. We have quite an active home ed community locally and, as a college, we do try to accommodate students with less traditional schooling backgrounds, whatever they may be.

kafkathecat wrote: »

Because very rarely does 'one person' do the teaching. My own ds does classes and correspondence courses and always has the option of going to school.

So, do you really contend that you/the majority of those who home ed ensure the number of hours spent/depth studied on the core subjects is equal to that a student would get in a good school?

kafkathecat wrote: »

I do know children who have reached 16 with no formal qualifications but there have been varied reasons for this.

Whatever the reasons (aside from serious illness/SPLD) it is unacceptable and a real issue for their future development. That is true whether the come from a home ed or school setting

kafkathecat wrote: »

I also know children who were taken out of school because they were doing no work there.

Then that is an issue which needed obviously addressing, but not necessarily by home edding.

kafkathecat wrote: »

I don't think home ed is for most people and I myself would have hated it but it works well for my son and his friends.

kafkathecat wrote: »

I am also interested that you earlier stated that anxiety is often learned as this is something that is being researched and not known and one anxiety gene has already been identified - 5htt.

If you are exposed to a parent who is overly and irrationally anxious then it seems obvious that you will pick up on that and take on-board some of those anxieties. That there may be a genetic component does not preclude the above, if anything it would compound it as there may be a genetic pre disposition.

kafkathecat wrote: »

Lastly very many of my home educating friends are qualified teachers and they say that the training is of very little use in a home education setting.

Trained as in subject knowledge, not necessarily training per se. It would seem obvious to me that a Maths teacher would call on her Maths knowledge when home edding her child in Maths for example. However, many aspects of the training will be useful even if that is not always apparent, the ability to try different approaches, structure, evaluation of learning etc etc.

I also think that most teachers would agree that teaching their own children in a school setting is not ideal, why that would change in a home ed setting escapes me.

However, as I said, it is a very personal decision, and the proof of the pudding is only apparent years down the line, so as long as you (not you personally, the general you) think it is the right avenue for your child then it is your right as a parent to do that.

pinkclouds

FunWithFlags wrote: »

On a similar vein, a local secondary I volunteered at had a GCSE Maths class of 50 pupils due to staff shortage. Children who asked questions were fobbed off to one of the teaching assistants so that the main class teacher could continue teaching the class.

That's nothing. At the state primary school I attended, myself and another pupil read through every book in the school reading scheme and were told to amuse ourselves in the school library for the last 2 years or so - in lieu of participating in reading/comprehension lessons. And at the state secondary school I attended, being considered "clever" earned you the opportunity to "self-study" i.e. forgo teaching for some lessons. One year, I memorably received a teacher's syllabus notes for a particular subject and was invited to self-study that subject in the school library for the rest of the academic year. Needless to say, I switched to a private school that was willing to provide both teachers and classrooms! Although, I admit, due to my own diligence, I could have continued with the self-study - at state school or homeschool. I switched to a private school because I was hacked off, wished to make a statement of protest and my parents were willing to pay for it.

Frankly, those that are willing to learn, WILL learn. It doesn't matter what the environment is.

Errata

kafkathecat wrote: »

I am also interested that you earlier stated that anxiety is often learned as this is something that is being researched and not known and one anxiety gene has already been identified - 5htt.

.

So what? Plenty of women have the BRCA1 or 2 gene for breast cancer. All that means is that there is a susceptability, not that they will without fail develop the disease.

poet123

pinkclouds wrote: »

Frankly, those that are willing to learn, WILL learn. It doesn't matter what the environment is.

I agree, but if what they learn is not structured and does not fit into areas that they can pass exams in they will be hampered in later life.