International Freedom in Education Day 15 Sep 2009

[Julie T]

Any objections, Alec and Rosemary, to my putting your queries (nameless) on a Home Ed forum?

By all means!

Well, most of the thread seems to be concerned with Alec's points, and gone off on a tangent, but there was this:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OLD CHESTNUT NUMBER 1 - Brainwashing

One group levels the charge of brainwashing at another group. Each group
considers that only it has the access to Truth. So the secularists accuse the
religious of unscientific brainwashing, and the religious accuse secularists
amoral humanist brainwashing. Which group is in the right?

Well, as a Muslim vegetarian who believes in evolution, and attends Quaker
meetings, I know what the right answer is...

but that is between me and my God.

Now do I brainwash my children to abstain from pork, or all meat? Or do I let my
Christian wife brainwash them to eat anything they like, including, dare I say,
the flesh of the swine?

OLD CHESTNUT NUMBER 2 (Slightly less frivolous than the above chestnut) - Should
parents pursue a teacher training course before they can HE their children?

1 - A teaching qualification is no guarantee of teaching ability. I have had
plenty of teachers who although qualified, left me bored uninspired, and
learning little.

2 - HE operates in a different paradigm to schooling. What applies in one
context will not apply to another.

3 - Managing a class of 30 children is a very different proposition to
one-to-one personalized instruction.

4 - To paraphrase John Taylor Gatto: teaching is a function; education is an
intrinsic process that cannot be forced extrinsically.

5 - 1000's of SAT results in the US have shown that there is no significant
difference in the academic performance of HE children whose parents do not have
a teaching qualification to the performance of HE children whose parents do have
a teaching qualification. Thus the idea that a teaching qualification is
essential to HE is nothing more than a myth.

6 - US courts have examined this issue and determined that whether parents have
a teaching qualification or not, has no bearing on the attainment of their HEd
children.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Julie T]

So Julie T, you can count Jamelia (sp?) amongst your number. Anyone else watch 8/10 Cats?

Just saw it on 'catch-up' yesterday evening. Yes, didn't know it before, but if she Home Eds then she's one of us!

Jimmy Carr made a quip in very bad taste (well, it is his style) about calling social services as she hasn't got a teaching qualification. Ignorant arsehole (Jimmy, that is!).

Jamelia presented herself admirable, I thought

I saw her live at a recording of 'Would I Lie To You?' last spring, and, although all the other panelists were professional comedians, she fared extremely well.

[Charlie Reams]

Jimmy Carr made a quip in very bad taste (well, it is his style) about calling social services as she hasn't got a teaching qualification. Ignorant arsehole (Jimmy, that is!).

How is that bad taste?

[Julie T]

Jimmy Carr made a quip in very bad taste (well, it is his style) about calling social services as she hasn't got a teaching qualification. Ignorant arsehole (Jimmy, that is!).

How is that bad taste?

Ah, I didn't really give the whole comment. He actually said that social services should come and take her kids away from her.
A horrendous thing to happen to any family, which IMNSHO really shouldn't be joked about.

[Jon Corby]

Jimmy Carr made a quip in very bad taste (well, it is his style) about calling social services as she hasn't got a teaching qualification. Ignorant arsehole (Jimmy, that is!).

How is that bad taste?

Ah, I didn't really give the whole comment. He actually said that social services should come and take her kids away from her.
A horrendous thing to happen to any family, which IMNSHO really shouldn't be joked about.

That's pathetic.

You, I mean, not the joke.

[Lesley Hines]

Jimmy Carr made a quip in very bad taste (well, it is his style) about calling social services as she hasn't got a teaching qualification. Ignorant arsehole (Jimmy, that is!).

How is that bad taste?

Ah, I didn't really give the whole comment. He actually said that social services should come and take her kids away from her.
A horrendous thing to happen to any family, which IMNSHO really shouldn't be joked about.

Meh, he was only laughing as she was being astonishingly arrogant about being invited to Downing Street. And everyone was laughing.

I'd have to say, I've got very mixed feelings about Home Ed. I've tutored two girls (14 and 15) whose Mum took them out of school after they were being bullied, and, awful as it sounds, I can so see why they were bullied. Very overweight, outrageously badly dressed, and were never really encouraged to join in. I did feel that a makeover, a diet and some of the TV that they'd been banned from watching would have helped them mix enormously. Not getting on with people is a fact of life, and everyone needs to learn how to cope with that: bullies and victims.

Another concern is the enormous gaps they had in their knowledge. I was teaching maths and science, and they didn't know stuff like what a graph shows, or how to record data, or even the importance of titles. Pretty basic stuff. They hadn't been allowed to use a computer! What they had done seemed such a random selection at entirely the wrong (usually far too low) level. I asked for their curriculum and was informed that they didn't have one - they weren't under any obligation to prove they were learning something specific, just that they were learning something. Surely the beauty of Home Ed should be that you can tailor the process to future ambitions (within a broader curriculum framework)? There didn't seem to be any forethought or drive towards any sort of future. It should be noted, too, that they lived in a rural area with little access to other facilities.

The other children who are HE are friends of friends. Their parents don't believe in vaccinations, think external exams are pointless, and as it's the elder girl's ambition to work for the family business (she's 9) it's also been agreed that the son (6) will too. Therefore they won't need qualifications.

I do think that children need input from people other than their parents so their environment isn't limited to their parents' field of experience. I've considered HE for my little one, but I have so many concerns about not being able to teach him things he might want to learn and had some great facilities at school. A wide range of musical instruments to try, if not to learn. Fully equipped science labs, technical lego, electronic components, chemicals, extensive and various art materials, the school play, choir (as well as the external choir I was in), orchestra, CDT workshops, the gym, tennis courts, sports teams, lunch hour clubs, the library where I could request books be purchased, that contained books bought at the suggestion of teachers suitable for my courses instead of the one-size-fits-all of the public library. Other people to practice languages with, under supervision. Other people's ideas and interpretations about literature, or anything come to that, plus book recommendations from peers. Break times for gossip, fashion, news, games, and all the other social tit-bits that make our societies gel.

I strongly feel that children should be stimulated at home, and included to take an active role in everyday activities. I also think it's my responsibility to supervise what my child's learning, and broaden that too, and take an active role in his social and emotional development; but on the whole I think that school works best for academic preparation for the society we live in.

YMMV

[Derek Hazell]

Is there anybody at all on the forum who has been home educated themselves? Would be interesting to hear a first-person perspective.

[Charlie Reams]

Ah, I didn't really give the whole comment. He actually said that social services should come and take her kids away from her.
A horrendous thing to happen to any family, which IMNSHO really shouldn't be joked about.

So when Barry Chuckle hits Paul Chuckle over the head with a ladder (oho!) do you turn off in disgust that something as awful as being hit with a ladder could be joked about? It might be bad taste if her kids had been taken away from her, but since it's purely hypothetical I'd say it was amongst his more harmless material.

That's pathetic.

You, I mean, not the joke.

Jon, I think you're only doing this because Julie T is on my shit list. I have no basis on which to second guess your motivations but I'm going to do it publicly anyway.

[Jon Corby]

You're on my shit list now Reams.

[Michael Wallace]

Guys, can we keep these weird ass-fetishes to PM, this is a family forum.

(omg raccoons omg)

[Julie T]

I know that some might use this post to have a dig at me, simply because they dislike me.

However, others may actually be interested to learn that the petitioning and lobbying of MPs by Home Educators and the hard work in committee meetings and letter writing by Education Otherwise and others has worked!

On the run up to the election, the government has dropped the proposed new rules for Home Edders due to opposition from the other parties.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/hi/ ... 167412.stm

"House of Lords

Peers are completing the remaining stages of the Children, Schools and Families Bill.

The government has dropped several of the key measures from the bill owing to opposition demands, including: guarantees of one to one tuition for children who fall behind, mandatory sex education for those over 15 and a new registration system for home-educated children.

Historically the government is forced to make concessions to opposition parties during the so-called "wash-up" period to ensure that its legislation is passed before Parliament breaks up for the general election.

The provisions that remain in the bill are concerned with special education needs pupils, excluded pupils and allow greater access to the media in Family Court proceedings. "

Here is a run down of what's staying in and what's being left out of the bill:

http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/news/index.cfm?e ... ilies_bill

[Charlie Reams]

The government has dropped several of the key measures from the bill owing to opposition demands, including ... mandatory sex education for those over 15

Great news!

[Helen Andrews]

However, others may actually be interested to learn that the petitioning and lobbying of MPs by Home Educators and the hard work in committee meetings and letter writing by Education Otherwise and others has worked!

That's great to hear, Julie! I've often thought I would consider home educating any kids I might end up having, so it's good to hear the government has backed down in this latest debate.

[Charlie Reams]

However, others may actually be interested to learn that the petitioning and lobbying of MPs by Home Educators and the hard work in committee meetings and letter writing by Education Otherwise and others has worked!

That's great to hear, Julie! I've often thought I would consider home educating any kids I might end up having, so it's good to hear the government has backed down in this latest debate.

It's not like they were going to outlaw home education, they just wanted more regulation. But hooray, we can now carry on educating our kids at home as poorly as we like. Trebles all round.

[Helen Andrews]

However, others may actually be interested to learn that the petitioning and lobbying of MPs by Home Educators and the hard work in committee meetings and letter writing by Education Otherwise and others has worked!

That's great to hear, Julie! I've often thought I would consider home educating any kids I might end up having, so it's good to hear the government has backed down in this latest debate.

It's not like they were going to outlaw home education, they just wanted more regulation. But hooray, we can now carry on educating our kids at home as poorly as we like. Trebles all round.

It's just a case of how much regulation, though, and if I understand rightly these latest plans were taking far too much power from the parents and giving it to the state.

[Julie T]

However, others may actually be interested to learn that the petitioning and lobbying of MPs by Home Educators and the hard work in committee meetings and letter writing by Education Otherwise and others has worked!

That's great to hear, Julie! I've often thought I would consider home educating any kids I might end up having, so it's good to hear the government has backed down in this latest debate.

Thanks, Helen!

And your right to choose to do so, without arbitrary refusal of permission from your LEA or unnecessarily intrusive inspections of your home and children, has now been protected.

http://www.freedomforchildrentogrow.org/pr080410.pdf

[Julie T]

That's great to hear, Julie! I've often thought I would consider home educating any kids I might end up having, so it's good to hear the government has backed down in this latest debate.

It's not like they were going to outlaw home education, they just wanted more regulation. But hooray, we can now carry on educating our kids at home as poorly as we like. Trebles all round.

It's just a case of how much regulation, though, and if I understand rightly these latest plans were taking far too much power from the parents and giving it to the state.

Exactly so, Helen. Home Edders often Home Ed because the LEA has failed their children. Daft to then let the LEA interfere too much to tell them how to educate their children. There are still enough checks in place to make sure that education is taking place.

The proposed new rules would have also given the LEAs powers to undertake child protection style investigations simply because a family Home Eds, not because there were any genuine concerns. It makes you wonder whether the govt would've started insisting on cameras in every family home if they'd got away with this.

[Helen Andrews]

Exactly so, Helen. Home Edders often Home Ed because the LEA has failed their children. Daft to then let the LEA interfere too much to tell them how to educate their children. There are still enough checks in place to make sure that education is taking place.

The proposed new rules would have also given the LEAs powers to undertake child protection style investigations simply because a family Home Eds, not because there were any genuine concerns. It makes you wonder whether the govt would've started insisting on cameras in every family home if they'd got away with this.

Definitely, yes. Well whilst it's not really an issue for me for the (immediate!) future, it's good to know that if I do end up deciding to go that way it remains a viable option