The National Curriculum is an almost mythical object of detestation to many home educating parents. It symbolises all that they hate about formal education and schools. Anybody who suggests that home educators should plan a little and be more structured in their approach is routinely accused of trying to 'impose' the National Curriculum'. (For some strange reason, such people are always apparently trying to do this 'by the back door') During Graham Badman's review of elective home education in England, the rumour was rife on the Internet lists that he was going to recommend that home educating parents be forced to follow the National Curriculum. This is the ultimate nightmare in some strands of British home education.
Now I have to say straight away that I did not pay any attention at all to the National Curriculum when I was teaching my daughter. I was of course vaguely aware of the ages at which this curriculum says that children should be acquiring certain skills and learning various things, but I found it wholly irrelevant in a domestic setting. From the age of five onwards, the National Curriculum requires that children are taught English, mathematics, science, ICT and history. This seems to be to be just about reasonable. However, one must also make sure that they are learning geography, art and design and religious education as well, to say nothing of music, citizenship, physical education, design and technology and personal, social and health education. Call me a raving autonomous educator if you will, but this seems a little excessive for five and six year-olds! I do not like either the way that these subjects are typically taught. In history for instance, there is no clear and coherent narrative which will allow a child to understand the context of what he is learning. One term he is doing a project on the Aztecs, then the Tudors and then jumping straight to the Victorians. This is an awful approach and one which I would not have dreamt of following with my own child.
Actually, I have never heard of a home educating parent who did follow the National Curriculum. I simply cannot imagine this being done at home and I would be keen to hear if anybody has ever heard of such a parent. The advice is certainly given by both local authorities and the Department for Education that home educators might wish to be aware of the National Curriculum and be guided by it. This is another matter entirely and not bad advice at all. It wouldn't do anybody any harm at least to know what school pupils of a similar age to your own son or daughter were doing. If nothing else, this would be helpful if one decided to send a child back to school; it would ensure that the child had not fallen too far behind his contemporaries. The idea that some wicked future government could ever try and force home educating parents to follow the National Curriculum, a fear regularly expressed on some forums and blogs, is too grotesque for words. I actually asked Graham Badman about this supposed scheme on his part directly and he seemed to be utterly bemused by the thought. As he pointed out, it is hard enough to make sure that every maintained school in the country adheres to this curriculum; quite how one would ensure that scores of thousands of parents did so is mind boggling.
I quite like the way the National Curriculum is brandished about by home educators as being synonymous with structured teaching. I have myself been accused by some of the loopier people of this type as being a slave to this curriculum, a suggestion which has provided a good deal of innocent amusement in the Webb household, where my views on this bloated and unwieldy instrument are pretty generally known. It is, I suppose, helpful for these parents to have something like this which sums up all that they dislike about education so neatly. I doubt though that their dislike of the National Curriculum is anything like as strong as mine.
'I doubt though that their dislike of the National Curriculum is anything like as strong as mine.'
ReplyDeleteNot sure about that. Like you, I feel the approach of the NC to history lacks coherence, certainly in the way it was taught. Science doesn't seem to have a coherent framework either. A pet hate is the primary literacy framework. When my daughter suddenly and inexplicably lost interest in reading, and I asked about the books that were being read in school, her literacy co-ordinator looked puzzled and said 'They have texts...that they study'. And the way writing is approached is enough to put anyone off for life.
I feel that the fears of home educators are well-founded; the recent NC consultation asked how the needs of different ability groups (high, middle and low achieving and SEN) can be met *through* the NC. I can't see how you can meet anyone's learning needs *through* a curriculum. But the DfE clearly thinks you can.
Interesting post. I hate that being structured is automatically seen as being a follow of NC ideas, its almost laughable.
ReplyDeleteI have never followed the national curriculum but I dont really have an idea of what schooled kids are 'meant' to do either Im afraid. I dont think I need to know that - more usefully to me would a generaly guide of childhood development, not just academic but social, physical and emotional which I could look at if I wished. Doesn't mean I would though!
that should read "....as me being a follower of..."
ReplyDeleteGraham Badman and the department for education want home educators to be made to follow a set Curriculm so that it is easy to box tick if a child is geting the right home education. its all about tick boxes and flow charts for them you pass or fail under this system with your home education at the moment their can not judge under the system their use in schools to say if a child is geting the right home education.
ReplyDelete"The National Curriculum is an almost mythical object of detestation to many home educating parents. It symbolises all that they hate about formal education and schools."
ReplyDeleteIt's more the testing and teaching to the test that came in with the NC that I object to. Even before the NC teachers would have had some kind of planned curriculum. It seems quite a good idea in theory to have a national version for schools, especially when you consider children who move from area to area. It's the lack of flexibility caused by the need to teach to the test that ruins it. If I had intended to send my HE children to school I would have kept an eye on the NC or at least blitzed it just before they went.
Obviously everyone will have different ideas about the construction and methods used with the NC, so it's hardly surprising that some here dislike it. I suppose the danger with a NC is that, if it is bad, every child in state schools suffers as a result, though at least they suffer equally!
"However, one must also make sure that they are learning geography, art and design and religious education as well, to say nothing of music, citizenship, physical education, design and technology and personal, social and health education."
ReplyDeleteWhat, no geography? Looking at rivers and mountains, marvelling at how powerful and amazing nature and the world is? How could you miss that out at 5? Seems much more interesting than history to me, though my children enjoyed castles and things like that at that age. I can't see any topic in your list that we did not cover to some extent at that age. Most would be covered in normal family day-to-day life anyway.
"Actually, I have never heard of a home educating parent who did follow the National Curriculum."
ReplyDeleteDo you think you have missed much that is included in the NC in your daughter's education? It seems unlikely given her qualifications. Maybe you covered them in a different order but I'd be surprised if you missed much. We are autonomous and seem to have covered most of the bits of NC I've looked at (thought to be honest, I couldn't be bothered to look at much - it's written so dryly!).
My main issue with imposing the NC on home educators (if it ever happens), is that we have the advantage of being able to personalize our children's education. They can study history when they are interested in history and geography when interested in that. This is obviously not practical in schools but it's one of the main advantages of HE, especially autonomous HE or the child-led parts of the more usual mixed approach.
"I hate that being structured is automatically seen as being a follow of NC ideas, its almost laughable."
ReplyDeleteDo people make this assumption? Seems a strange idea. I suppose it might stem from it being easier for an LA employee to tick NC boxes if the parent follows a structured approach. The information is likely to be clearly laid out with recognisable learning outcomes that transfer more easily to a NC tick list than a more 'natural' or autonomous approach which may not be documented so fully (since it's not prepared beforehand).
C said
ReplyDelete"more usefully to me would a generaly guide of childhood development, not just academic but social, physical and emotional which I could look at if I wished. Doesn't mean I would though!"
This may be more useful than a curriculum if it could really exist.
There are so many aspects of human growth that can not be put on a guide or table.
Of course which children's development would it refer to, Children who grow in different environments grow in very different ways. This should be seen as a good thing, positive diversity, instead it's often seen as inequality.
Elizabeth
http://www.hammarnejd.gr8.se/blog/post/1/208
ReplyDeleteinteresting perspective on curriculum from John Gatto here.
Elizabeth
'I suppose it might stem from it being easier for an LA employee to tick NC boxes if the parent follows a structured approach.'
ReplyDeleteThis assumes that LA's want to tick NC boxes. I'm not sure that they do.
'The information is likely to be clearly laid out with recognisable learning outcomes that transfer more easily to a NC tick list than a more 'natural' or autonomous approach '
We used a so-called structured approach, which was entirely 'natural', and I never once had a 'learning outcome' laid out.
There are all sorts of odd assumptions made by AE parents about non-AE ones.
'We used a so-called structured approach, which was entirely 'natural', and I never once had a 'learning outcome' laid out.'
ReplyDeleteA very good point. I taught my daughter about various things, but with no idea at all of what the information would cause her to think or want to do, nor even if she would understnad it in the same way as I did. Often she didn't. I'm not sure how I would have gone about predicting her 'learning outcome', which is a lot of what the National Curriculum is about. I could certainly measure my teaching pretty exactly, but as for trying to measure her learning; that's another thing entirely.
Anonymous at 23:25, 18 April
ReplyDelete"This assumes that LA's want to tick NC boxes. I'm not sure that they do."
Well admittedly this theory was based on our experiences with just two LAs, so I'll admit that they may be the only LAs in the country that work like this.
"We used a so-called structured approach, which was entirely 'natural', and I never once had a 'learning outcome' laid out."
Interesting. So when you say you follow a structured approach, in what way is it structured? In my experience of people who consider themselves structured (several friends) they call themselves structured because they decide in advance what topic to cover over a particular period (be it a morning, day, week, month or year), and then help their children learn and understand that topic. In this situation the learning outcome is clear in that it's knowledge and understanding of the topic decided on by the parent. How does your 'structured but natural' education differ from this?
"There are all sorts of odd assumptions made by AE parents about non-AE ones."
Not an assumption, but admittedly based on a small sample of friends who class themselves as mainly or partly structured home educators.
"There are all sorts of odd assumptions made by AE parents about non-AE ones."
ReplyDeleteTalking about odd assumptions, you seem to be assuming that AE parents have no contact with non-AE parents so it is only possible for them to make assumptions about non-AE parents! Bit of an 'us v. them' attitude that I don't find in the real world at all.