Tuesday, 17 July 2012

'School-at-Home'

Yesterday I posted a light-hearted and purely personal account of my daughter’s early childhood. This was in response to several requests from people commenting here, that it would be nice to get away from ideology and talk about my own methods of home education. Almost incredibly, this innocent tale of visiting zoos and going down mines was interpreted by one reader as a coded attack on the idea of autonomous education! Perhaps I should abandon the idea of a chatty and non-confrontational approach here and resume the normal, endless and sterile  debates on ideology? We shall see.


It is often suggested that those not enamoured of autonomous home education are in the habit of misrepresenting this pedagogic technique. Some readers, principally those who have just arrived on planet Earth or who have been in a coma since 2009, might be surprised to learn that I have myself been accused of this! This topic has been pretty well worked to death and so I want today to look at how structured and methodical home education is caricatured and mocked by those unable or unwilling to undertake it.

When it became known that Graham Stuart, Chair of the Education Committee, was involved in drawing up new guidelines in elective home education, there was great unease among many home educating parents in this country. So vociferous was the opposition, that the idea was eventually dropped. Still, looking at the guidelines which were produced gives us an insight into the thought processes of many high profile autonomous home educators, both in this country and abroad. The guidelines may be found here:



https://www.box.com/shared/6lk1826muy
                                                                                                                                                                       



Now there was at first an attempt in some quarters to portray this document as being produced solely by Alison Sauer. It gradually came to light that many other well known home educators had also had a hand in it, people like Tania Berlow, Mike Fortune-Wood, Imran Shah and Kelly Green in Canada. That being so, it gives us an insight into the prejudices which afflict quite a few home educators in this country; especially with regard to structured home education.

Let us look at page 64 of this document. We find a section headed School-at-Home. The very fact that this ludicrous expression is used in what it was hoped would become an official  document tells us much about the mentality of some home educators. It is perfectly fair to talk of ‘autonomous educators’ because this is actually an expression used and accepted by them. People call themselves autonomous home educators. I have never in my life and nor I suspect has anybody else, ever heard anybody call themselves ‘school-at-home educators‘. This is because ‘school-at-home’ is a pejorative phrase dreamed up by those who are opposed to the  structured teaching of home educated children. ‘Autonomous home educator’ is a neutral term; ;school-at-home’ is a sneering and disapproving expression coined by those who think that this is the best way to describe structured home education. That this is so can easily be tested. Google around a bit and you will soon find people who are happy to call themselves ‘autonomous’ or ‘autonomous educators’. Now try and find anybody who calls themselves ‘a school-at-home type” or claims to do ‘school-at-home’. You will find nobody, because this is not a real description of any kind of home education. It is always used by those opposed to an type of home education which they do not themselves practice.

We are told, also on page 64,  that these ‘school-at-home’ parents use a curriculum to cater for the whole of their children’s education. This is a ridiculous idea. I would be very keen to hear of such a parent. No home educating parent relies on a curriculum to cater for the whole of a child’s education; the very idea is a nonsense. Perhaps readers could tell us of any such parent? As God he knows, I was a fanatically structured home educator who worked his child hard, but the curriculum occupied only 10% or 20% of my daughter’s education. As the post yesterday showed, most of her education was not via any curriculum but was derived from real-life experiences. The same is true of all other structured home educators whom I have known.

What about the idea that, ‘Families maintain a clear distinction between education and leisure, and often keep the school rhythm of terms and holidays’. Who does this? Has anybody ever known a home educating parent who says to her child, ‘Oh, we won’t be learning anything next week, Jimmy; the schools have a half-term holiday.’ Completely grotesque. Of course many home educating families whose children have friends at school might make opportunities for their children to meet up with those on holiday from school, but this has nothing to do with a particular type of home education.

I find it fascinating to see how the term ‘school-at-home’ has become used by those who do not in general favour the regular and systematic teaching of children. It sounds like a neutral description, but is in fact designed to display contempt for other home educators. I think that autonomous home educators using the phrase would do well to think twice before accusing others of misrepresenting a type of home education.

113 comments:

  1. I am utterly outraged by that name and the description. These people actually wanted this to go into a government document? How dare they?

    In 15 years of HE and being among many non-autonomous families, I only ever ONCE encountered anyone who attempted to follow a school at home model and that was because she was here with the US Navy on a temporary basis and needed to have her kids fit right back into the US school system when they returned.

    Even those of us who used bought curricula used them as a path from which we were happy to frequently diverge. A tool rather than a master.

    The description of 'school at home' doesn't apply to anyone I know and is a ridiculous, fraudulent and frankly spiteful representation of those who do not educate autonomously.

    If these guidelines had become official I would have campaigned vigorously to have them removed and would have been the first to complain to my MP!

    Absolutely disgusted!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It does make the point that only a minority home educate in this way, which fits with my experiences. For a short time when we started out (before school age, so about 17+ years ago!) we attended a group largely composed of families home educating for religious reasons and this sounds a fair description. They were lovely people and their children loved their HE - there was absolutely nothing wrong with their choices so I don't personally see the description as negative.

    Unfortunately I must have done something wrong because our children didn't fall in with this style, but initially I would have loved to home educate in that way, they were clearly having a great time. It would in some ways have been less work for me and personally I love the structure of a curriculum.

    As the document says, the majority fall between the two extremes, just as Simon describes for his HE (though they obviously coped with the exam part exceptionally well). And although I've spent time with lots of people who say they use autonomous methods, after spending time with them, it's clear that they really follow a mixed approach with a strong leaning towards the autonomous end of the spectrum. So yes, they use AE, but not exclusively, there will still be a few areas in which the parent leads (and occasionally I think they actually mean informal learning rather than AE). Also, HE often changes over time. Ours certainly did.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "so I don't personally see the description as negative."

      To be clear, I meant the description of the home education approach in the document, not the use of the name. I can see why you might dislike that as it's often used to describe what some LA inspectors want/expect to see. As it was a document that would have been consulted on if it had gone forward, what name would you have preferred for that end of the spectrum? Maybe 'parent-led HE', but that would not necessarily involve a curriculum. What about 'curriculum based HE'?

      Delete
    2. "so I don't personally see the description as negative."

      Of course you don't. Such is the attitude of most AE'ers and clearly of those responsible for drafting the guidelines.

      Delete
    3. So you don't like the phrase even if it's used in a positive way and some home educators living in this country and covered by our laws and guidelines use the description themselves about their own home education?

      Delete
  3. I must be strange because I would have no problem with someone who chose to do 'School-at-home'. I would also not have a problem with someone who chose to keep timetables, or use a boxed curriculum, and have 'school' type breaks and holidays. Even if a parent were to enforce an extremely rigorous, academically challenging book-based timetable, and used a brass bell to signal break times, I still fail to see how it could equate in any way to school.

    My children are studying for exams in several subjects. The 10 year old is studying biology. I have no degrees in these subjects, so I'm afraid I have to stick to the books quite closely. One tries to make things as practical and exciting as possible, but this cannot always be done. Never-the-less it simply doesn't resemble school. There are no 'assemblies', no having to address me as 'miss' or ask permission to go to the loo, no need to put their hands in the air when they want to ask a question, no fear of getting answers wrong, no having to move on to something else when they are really fired up about something.

    They have ready access to hot choclate; can make their pizza or whatever for lunch; can ride their bicycles down to the park on their own if they want to.

    Having a schedule and high expectations isn't school. Personally I think it is awful that 'school at home' is used in a derogatory way. But I've had it thrown at me too: I've been told I 'might as well put my kids in school' for 'forcing' my children to do grammar in the mornings with Bond Workbooks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Never-the-less it simply doesn't resemble school. There are no 'assemblies', no having to address me as 'miss' or ask permission to go to the loo, no need to put their hands in the air when they want to ask a question, no fear of getting answers wrong, no having to move on to something else when they are really fired up about something."

      I've never taken the phrase to mean school-like to this extreme. I've taken it to mean that the parent largely directs the education in a similar way to a teacher in school with limited time for diversions, at least during 'lessons'. The phrase applies to the actual education, rather than the other bells and whistles of schools and as far as I can see there are similarities in how education is approached.

      "I've been told I 'might as well put my kids in school' for 'forcing' my children to do grammar in the mornings with Bond Workbooks."

      I'm sorry you've had to put up with that. There is clearly no comparison between your HE and much of what happens in schools. Though having to sit down and work through worksheets is what ended one of my children's experiment with school!

      Delete
  4. 'There are no 'assemblies', no having to address me as 'miss' or ask permission to go to the loo, no need to put their hands in the air when they want to ask a question, no fear of getting answers wrong, no having to move on to something else when they are really fired up about something. '

    You mock? I have seen it suggested that some 'school-at-home' types have a schoolroom in their home and also a bell to signal the end of lessons! One struggles to imagine the scene. Here I am, talking to my daughter about atoms or something in which she is currently fascinated and then I realise it is 4: PM. School's over for the day and I can ring the bell. There really are people who think that structured home education is carried out in this way!

    ReplyDelete
  5. 'The phrase applies to the actual education, rather than the other bells and whistles of schools and as far as I can see there are similarities in how education is approached.'

    There are few similarities, but that is in any case not the point. 'School-at-home' is a derogatory expression dreamed up by those who oppose structured home education and invariably used by them in a negative way. We read things such as references to 'School-at-home types' or somebody will claim, 'We don't do school at home'. It is never used by home educators to describe themselves and is very irritating to many people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "There are few similarities"

      The main similarity is that adults choose a body of knowledge that the child needs to learn and then sets out to teach it, mainly from books/curriculum materials, along with trips out to relevant places of interest - much like schools (though I suspect private schools provide more in the way of relevant trips). I'm not saying that you followed this approach, but this was how the first group I attended approached HE and is the approach I think of when I hear the phrase, school-at-home.

      I agree it has been used in a negative way, but then, I don't think you use 'autonomous education' in a complimentary way! The description of school-at-home HE in the document seemed fine - it doesn't seem to be being used in a negative way there. What name would you prefer be used for the more parent-led, structured end of the spectrum?

      Delete
    2. BTW, the curriculum materials I saw being used included lots of practical activities - it wasn't all just reading from a book.

      Delete
  6. 'The description of school-at-home HE in the document seemed fine - it doesn't seem to be being used in a negative way there. '

    Apart that is from the fact that I have never heard of anybody but a teacher following the National Curriculum, or of a home edcuator who used a curriculum to satisfy the whole of a child's educational needs, or any parent who maintains a strict division between education and leisure or one who keeps to the rhythm of school terms. Apart from that, it is fine!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I have never heard of anybody but a teacher following the National Curriculum"

      As I've already mentioned, I have met a group that followed a curriculum (the document says it *may* be based on the NC or other curricula).

      "or of a home edcuator who used a curriculum to satisfy the whole of a child's educational needs"

      Most school using parents don't use schools to satisfy the whole of a child's educational needs either. This would presumably relate to the education provision sufficient to fulfil legal requirements. But maybe this part is overstated in the document - a candidate for change during the consultation that was intended to follow possibly.

      "or any parent who maintains a strict division between education and leisure or one who keeps to the rhythm of school terms."

      I'm met these parents.

      What would you prefer this HE style be called? Though maybe we should ask them, since you didn't follow this style? And likewise, maybe we should ask them if they agree or disagree with the description?

      Delete
    2. 'What would you prefer this HE style be called? Though maybe we should ask them, since you didn't follow this style?'

      It's called Home Education.

      Why are those who call themselves Autonomous Educators so obsessed with labelling the rest of us?

      Delete
    3. "It's called Home Education."

      So is autonomous education, but I'm pretty sure that Simon doesn't want to be lumped in with an education method that he believes is causing incalculable harm to children.

      Delete
    4. This discussion has nothing to do with what Simon believes. It is about what a group of autonomous educators (the authors of these draft guidelines) decided is true about people who do not educate as they do and their desperate need to label them in a disparaging and belittling way.

      Delete
    5. Discussions move on. It was an attempt answer your question about why autonomous educators are, "so obsessed with labelling the rest of us?" I suggested a reason why people (including non-autonomous educators) might want to label different types of home educator.

      I'm sure that Simon uses autonomous education as a disparaging label, but as an autonomous educator, I don't find it disparaging. So I'm struggling to see why someone who uses school type methods (curriculum, adult-led, timetable) would find the school-at-home label disparaging. The description in the document did not sound disparaging and if I followed that style of HE, I don't think it would upset me. What in particular about the description upsets you?

      Delete
    6. Um, the fact that they don't exist?

      Delete
    7. Well J appears to have met some and so have I, but if you have convinced yourself they don't exist I don't suppose you'll chose to believe us!

      Delete
    8. Imagine how you would feel if you were an autonomous home educator and someone gave you the label, 'Lazy Home Educator'. Would you be upset? Why? Surely it's accurate? Why not embrace the term?

      I met a group of Lazy Home Educators once 17 years ago who didn't bother to teach their children anything. They were very nice people and I considered joining them and using their methods but I realised it wouldn't work for me so I became an Active Home Educator instead.

      I'm sure they wouldn't mnd the term 'Lazy Home Educators' because that's what they were.

      I know they exist, because I met them. Why are you so annoyed? They certainly do exist. I met them.

      Now OBVIOUSLY that was an attempt to explain how outraged I feel by turning the tables and showing how ridiculous the term 'school at home types' is, as ridiculous as labelling AE Lazy Home Education.

      Delete
    9. Well this is how autonomous education is used by some. Why should it bother me if I know they are wrong? Sure, I'll correct the error in case other people start to believe that it's an accurate description of AE, but that doesn't mean I don't like the name even though it is synonymous with Lazy Home Education in some people's eyes.

      But if you don't practice school at home, why are you bothered about use of the term? Just say, 'no, that phrase doesn't apply to our HE, we follow a xxxx approach'.

      Your over reaction to the phrase seem to suggest you think there's something very wrong with the school at home approach. I disagree and think it's a perfectly valid approach to HE. I can imagine that someone who follows a school at home approach might be a little offended by your negative over reaction.

      Delete
    10. So, you'd be happy for a group of 'Active Home Educators' writing official guidelines labelling and describing your practices as 'Lazy Home Education'? Okay I've tried to explain but I'm clearly getting nowhere.

      Delete
    11. I wouldn't mind if it were an accurate description. And if it were an inaccurate description I might contact them and suggest alternative descriptions. I wouldn't just go on the warpath and claim that nobody else is allowed to write about my style of HE.

      But you haven't convinced me that home education, primarily provided via an adult directed curriculum with use of a timetable doesn't exist, and also that people who follow this approach object to the name, school-at-home. If they do object to the name, I would very much like to hear their preferred description so that I can stop upsetting them because that is not my intention. Do you follow a curriculum and timetable? If so, how do you describe yourself?

      Constantly repeating the mantra that 'we don't like that name', or, 'why label anything', doesn't help. People are always going to discuss HE methods (how else do we explore what might work for us) so we'll always need shorthand names.

      Delete
    12. It does exist. It is what we do. I still object to the term 'SCHOOL' at home in the same way someone primarily autonomous would certainly object to 'laissez faire home education', and were I to continue classing them as such, I would certainly be bloody minded.

      The term school-at-home is often used sarcastically by those who object to such methods being used in home education. This is why I, for one, refuse to embrace it. Even with a timetable and curriculum, it is still virtually impossible to replicate the same environment that one would find in school.

      There is nothing difficult about using the term 'structured home education' or 'eclectic home education' to describe those using curriculum or a timetable as an aid in their home education. To insist on using a term which is primarily employed for derogatory purposes is insulting at best. I cannot see what is difficult to understand about this.

      Delete
    13. "There is nothing difficult about using the term 'structured home education' or 'eclectic home education' to describe those using curriculum or a timetable as an aid in their home education."

      I suppose structured home education fits, thanks for agreeing to a term you like, I'll start using it from now on and avoid school-at-home. Thank you. I guess calling a whole method, 'structured home education', doesn't rule out structure used within other methods such as AE, or mixed approaches.

      I'm less sure that eclectic home education fits though since that seems to be more a mixed approach. Do you agree with this description of eclectic home education, for instance, http://homeschooling911.com/how-to-home-school-eclectic-method/ This doesn't sound like a 'parent-directed curriculum studied using a timetable' type approach, though clearly it can be included within the eclectic approach. It's all about the amount of time using particular styles and also who decides the subjects and style, the parent or child.

      What do you think of the term, traditional method, as described here, http://homeschooling911.com/how-to-home-school-traditional-methods/

      Delete
  7. 'or any parent who maintains a strict division between education and leisure or one who keeps to the rhythm of school terms."

    I'm met these parents.'

    I am intrigued by this. I have certainly known home educators whose children see more of friends during the school holidays because their friends are not at school. This is common to both autonomous educators and others who adopt a more structured approach. You seem to be saying though that you have known home educating parents who stop teaching their children because the local schools are having a half term holiday that week. Could you tell us more about this, as I have never even heard of such a thing? in this country?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was a long time ago and I only attended the group regularly for a few months, but I'll do my best!

      They used a religious curriculum as far as I recall and the group sessions were based around parts of this curriculum. They were run so that people not following the curriculum could also join in which was great. One meeting was about Australia, so it included a talk about Australia in general and then various activities were available. For example, an outline map along with glue, sand, pebbles and other materials that could be stuck on according to the natural geography of Australia (sand for desert, pebbles for mountains, etc). The sand gradually fell off the maps on the fridge doors over several weeks!

      At the time I asked a few people how they worked. Most seemed to follow the curriculum during the morning and they also tended to follow school terms, one because their partner was a teacher, and others because they were ready for a break and it fit in well with school going friends. The group also met during school holidays but these were less educational meetings (the Christmas party, for instance). Some of the families also met in each others homes for the morning study periods if they had children at similar levels.

      As I say, it was a while ago and we began attending other groups after a few months, though we remained on good terms with the group, members of which occasionally attended the more educational organised trips run by the other groups and we, along with others, attended their Christmas party meeting for about 10 years! I've no idea how common this approach is. I suspect it's a minority as it suggests in the document, but it may be more popular than we realise - they generally seemed pretty self sufficient as a group.

      Delete
    2. I certainly knew a family like this in our local group. The children had work time and play time, had a test on Fridays and if they did well, got Friday afternoon off. The father was a teacher and do, when he had school holidays, they stopped all of this. Of course they didn't stop learning, and I'm sure the family did "educational" stuff on holiday too, but they definally stuck to the rhythms of school terms and didn't come to any local group activities in the holidays.

      Another local family wore uniform during the school day and changed at "home time"

      Not my style at all, but each to his own.

      Delete
    3. I certainly knew a family like this in our local group. The children had work time and play time, had a test on Fridays and if they did well, got Friday afternoon off. The father was a teacher and do, when he had school holidays, they stopped all of this. Of course they didn't stop learning, and I'm sure the family did "educational" stuff on holiday too, but they definally stuck to the rhythms of school terms and didn't come to any local group activities in the holidays.

      Another local family wore uniform during the school day and changed at "home time"

      Not my style at all, but each to his own.

      Delete
    4. Do you know if they would object to their HE being called, school at home?

      Delete
  8. Of course the commenter hasn't met parents like this. She met a few people 17 years ago and made assumptions based on her outsider's impressions. 'School at home' seems perfectly reasonable to her.

    My own style was criticised as 'school at home' when it was nothing of the sort.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Of course the commenter hasn't met parents like this. She met a few people 17 years ago and made assumptions based on her outsider's impressions."

      So they haven't met any parents like this, but they did meet a group 17 years ago. Very logical.

      Delete
    2. By saying 'very logical' do you mean that you didn't understand my comment? I'll explain again.

      The commenter seems to have met a few people 17 years ago who appeared to her, from her outsider's standpoint, to be doing 'school at home'. I very much doubt they were. They probably just used a curriculum as one of several tools in their children's home education. This is not, in fact, 'school at home'.

      Delete
    3. That surely depends on how you define, 'school at home'. I have always thought of it as parent-led education, usually involving a curriculum and some kind of timetable. It doesn't require bells and doesn't rule out other learning methods, just as school does not.

      Delete
  9. The document in question was designed only as a very rough draft, which was then meant to be discussed, altered and made into a workable document. As it happened all the fuss surrounding it led to nothing productive coming from it. I think the term 'school-at-home' was probably used because they were words that LA types would understand rather than because that is what the writers of the document really meant.

    Anyway, I actually know of people who do use a curriculum as the soul source of their 'school-at-home'. They have a school room, set times for certain things and behave in a very schooly fashion.It is rare but definitely does exist. We personally use many workbooks/books and fewer other resources. I have been criticized for doing 'school at home' when in fact we are more of the semi-structured eclectic type, some will never understand that having a sort of structure or using a workbook does NOT mean we do 'school at home' *sigh*

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There's that other nasty adjective applied to home educators who don't educate autonomously, 'schooly'.

      What's an LA 'type'?

      It's ridiculous to seek to apologise for a group of people who were tasked with drafting legal guidelines for using such insulting language. Shame on them.

      Delete
    2. "What's an LA 'type'?"

      Someone who works to the LA?

      Delete
    3. What is someone who works 'to an LA?'

      Delete
    4. LOL, I blame predictive text - that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it! (not really sure how it got from 'for' to 'to' though, to be honest...)

      Delete
    5. Oh, so it's someone who works for an LA? Then why call them 'LA types'? That's about as pointless a label as 'school at home types'.

      Delete
    6. Oh dear, Im not apologising for anyone. And the wording 'LA types' is a terminology I tend to use personally, it didn't occur to me anyone would nitpick - what it meant was those in government agencies who would possibly have an understanding of 'school' as being a certain way so would therefore understand the term 'school-at-home' to mean textbooks, set hours and the like.
      As for the term 'schooly' it was a term atually used by one of the families in question to discribe themselves, I see no reason not to use it when Im thinking of them.

      Delete
    7. 'The document in question was designed only as a very rough draft,'

      Are you trying to say that the words were not chosen extremely carefully, including the desciption of 'school at home' home educators? How do you know this? Are you one of the people responsible for it?

      Delete
    8. I had to chuckle at this. Have you been reading Simon's blog long? If you have you may recall that last year I had a baby, it has been a taxing time and I had no time to write on here let alone help draft a possible policy document, so NO I am not responsible for it. However, when I saw it in print I did talk to a couple of those involved to ask what it was all about (as opposed to accusing or criticizing in the way some did.)
      The wording was chosen to try and explain it in ways that those unfamiliar with HE would understand so that they could grasp the different styles. What other way could they have put it?

      Delete
    9. Why the need to label and describe a way of home educating that they don't use, in the first place?

      Delete
    10. "Why the need to label and describe a way of home educating that they don't use, in the first place?"

      Why do humans name or describe anything? It's human nature.

      Delete
  10. Some of us do use curriculum from America. I do; simply because a lot of the materials are specific to home educators, and more rigorous and better written than the sort of stuff one finds in Waterstones or WHSmith or those structured around the National Curriculum.

    Sometimes in order to get the best out of a curriculum you have to decide what parts you will cover when and draw up a schedule. I suppose this sort of structuring instantly qualifies one as doing 'school-at-home'?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why don't you like, 'school-at-home' as a phrase? It doesn't seem automatically negative to me. Is it just the way some people use it? Your description (curriculum, schedule, etc) sounds similar to the approach a school might take to education (though a few schools take an AE approach). Obviously there are differences between school and school-at-home, hence the 'at-home' bit.

      Delete
    2. When people who aren't part of the home educating community use it, they don't usually mean it at all negatively. But when it is used by other home educators it is often used as an insult. A way of casting aspersions on those who try to directly 'teach' certain things or subjects to their children, the suggestion being that this is some sort of negative and bad thing to do to children.

      I don't do 'school' at home. What would be the point? Neither have I ever met anyone else who does 'school' at home.

      Delete
    3. As I've said above, Simon uses autonomous education as a disparaging label and I'm sure he's not the only one, judging by some of the comments here. But use of the label doesn't upset me as an autonomous educator. Why is it different for those who use school type techniques (curriculum, timetable, etc)? Why not claim the name and rejoice in it?

      Delete
    4. Because it's not accurate. [Head hits desk]

      Delete
    5. But it clearly is in some cases.

      Delete
  11. "I don't do 'school' at home. What would be the point?"

    Someone might see nothing wrong with school teaching methods but just feel they could do a better job at home themselves. What's so wrong with school-at-home in your view?

    ReplyDelete
  12. 'As I've said above, Simon uses autonomous education as a disparaging label and I'm sure he's not the only one, judging by some of the comments here.'

    It is not hard to understnad the difference. Autonomous educator is a term devised by those who practice this pedagogic method; people actually describe themselves as 'autonomous educators'. School-at-home, on the other hand, was an expression coined by people who disapprove of structured home education. Nobody calls themselves school-at-home educators, it is a pejorative phrase dreamed up to belittle a certain type of home educator.

    The nearest comparison would be with terms like 'Bible Basher'. Those who read the Bible a lot and try to spread the word of scripture usually call themselves Christians or evangalists. They would not describe themselves as 'Bible Bashers', because the expression was devised to be sneering about them and their activities. In precisely the same way, no structured home educator would call herself a 'school-at-home type', because this is the sort of vaguely disparaging thing that others call them; generally those who don't like what they are doing.

    Of course, I may be wrong about this. Can anybody provide us with a link or reference to a structured home educator who calls herself a 'school-at-home type'?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 'School-at-home, on the other hand, was an expression coined by people who disapprove of structured home education. Nobody calls themselves school-at-home educators, it is a pejorative phrase dreamed up to belittle a certain type of home educator.'

      Precisely.

      Autonomous Home Educators know this.

      They tried using 'structured' home educator for a few years, but it wasn't nasty enough and that word tended to be more acceptable to some non-autonomous families so some started using it themselves. Then they tried 'formal' home educators, but that just sounded silly as if we were all dressed in dinner jackets and bow ties, so now they are using 'school at home' to try to belittle those who home educate differently from themselves.

      Delete
    2. Another label they tried to stick on us was 'LA dependent' home educators. What a joke.

      Delete
  13. " School-at-home, on the other hand, was an expression coined by people who disapprove of structured home education. Nobody calls themselves school-at-home educators, it is a pejorative phrase dreamed up to belittle a certain type of home educator."

    You know this for a fact?

    " Of course, I may be wrong about this. Can anybody provide us with a link or reference to a structured home educator who calls herself a 'school-at-home type'?"

    Oh, clearly not.

    You've been asked several times what phrase you would prefer people to use to describe an education based mainly on an adult determined curriculum with regular use of a timetable or schedule. It's quite a mouthful so it would be easier it you could coin a phrase you do like.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Home educators.

      Delete
    2. That's already been covered, catch up at the back there...

      Delete
    3. It needs repeating. We're called home educators.

      Delete
    4. Of course we are. But if you meet a new home educator and they ask you how you go about it on a day to day basis, it's handy to have a shorthand description like, mainly informal, mostly structured, autonomous, etc. You may not choose to use such shorthand descriptions but you're not going to stop me doing so.

      Delete
    5. You are most welcome to describe your own style of home education with whatever words you like. (I've never needed to define myself to new friends in that way.) The main point however, is how some home educators were describing others in what was to be a legal document. This is what had so many people here irritated.

      Delete
    6. It was never going to be a legal document. They were guidelines that have no power in law. You do realise that the same phrase is used in the current government guidelines on elective home education? It also crops up on many local council web sites. You may end up attacking people who genuinely do not know that some home educators feel insulted by the phrase. Imagine reading a phrase on a council web site and using it online, only to be attacked as though you intended to use it insultingly. It's no fun, I can assure you.

      I also found at least one home educator who applies the phrase to their own HE. You may not like the phrase, but that doesn't mean the nobody does and it doesn't mean that everyone who uses it intends it to be derogatory. I certainly didn't for one.

      http://www.home-ed.co.uk/schoolathome.html

      http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/education/schools/42389.asp

      http://education.staffordshire.gov.uk/Curriculum/Services/HomeEducation/FAQs/

      If you feel so strongly about it, maybe you should be contacting the web site owners to let them know?

      Delete
    7. This site is owned by an American woman living in the UK, but doing HE in the American way. The 'school at home' writer is from South Africa. This is hardly an example of UK home education. You are going to have to try harder than that to prove that people here call their home education 'school at home'.

      Delete
    8. So because they originally came from a different country they are not UK home educators? That sounds a bit racist.

      Delete
    9. "This site is owned by an American woman living in the UK, but doing HE in the American way. The 'school at home' writer is from South Africa. This is hardly an example of UK home education."

      The guidelines were aimed at LA employees who might have contact with home educators, including this family. Our education laws apply to them as much as they do to people born in this country. I don't see your point. They live in this country now so they are UK home educators.

      Delete
    10. It's a US term, for a style of education that occurs there. That's the point. I'm sure you wouldn't like your HE being described as 'homeschooling' in offical guidelines, would you?

      Delete
    11. To be honest, I'm not that bothered what they call home education. Why are you so obsessed with names?

      Delete
    12. You're not quite following, are you? The objection was to one group of home educators trying to label and define the approach of another.

      Delete
    13. They were labelling and defining a group that you clearly do not belong to, so why are you so bothered? Should they have mentioned only autonomous education and left LA employees to conclude that this is the only approach followed in the UK? The intention was to put the document out for consultation. This would have given those who follow the approach described under the school at home label an opportunity to correct any errors and choose an alternative name if desired. And likewise, you could have corrected any errors for your style of HE if you wished.

      Delete
    14. 'They were labelling and defining a group that you clearly do not belong to, so why are you so bothered?'

      I haven't explained what 'group' I belong to. I'm actually not sure I am in one.

      That's interesting that you believe the intention was to put the document up for consultation. I hadn't read that.

      Delete
    15. " I haven't explained what 'group' I belong to. I'm actually not sure I am in one."

      Exactly, you don't belong to the described group so why are you so bothered?

      I think it was Tania Barlow who made it clear repeatedly on various email lists and forums at the time that the document was intended only as a basis for consultation. Sorry if I've got the name wrong.

      Delete
    16. 'Exactly, you don't belong to the described group so why are you so bothered?'

      Belonging or not to a particular group has no bearing on whether it was wrong for the writers to do what they did. Several people have expressed their annoyance in this thread. Not all anonymouses are the same person.

      What some have already explained is that 'the described group' is probably a fiction. However, we are only going over old ground, so I will leave it there.

      I am sure you will want to continue, however.

      Delete
    17. " What some have already explained is that 'the described group' is probably a fiction."

      Some have also explained that they have met home educators who follow this approach so I can only assume you're decided they are liars or have not bothered to read their comments.

      Delete
    18. BTW, they have described the autonomous education approach incorrectly in the document in my view, but I didn't get all hot and bothered despite following this approach myself. If the consultation had not happened or they had failed to correct their error I may have felt differently, but we are all human and humans make mistakes, which is presumably why they planned to consult further.

      Delete
  14. 'You know this for a fact?'

    I have not coem across example of it being used in a positive way and it is most commonly used by autonomous educators. Some local authorities use the expression, but I think that they have lifted it from sites like HE-UK or EO. If structured home educators do not call themselves by the phrase and the only people who use it regualrly are those who spealk slightingly of structured home education, then it is a fair guess that it was devised by those who wanted a sneering put-down to use. I am always interested in the origins of language and if anybody has another explanation, I should be glad to hear it.

    'You've been asked several times what phrase you would prefer people to use to describe an education based mainly on an adult determined curriculum with regular use of a timetable or schedule.'

    Once again, the prejudices slip out. There can have been few more determined and structured home educators than I, but the idea of a timetable would have seemed absolutely bonkers to me. If it was a nice day, we would go to a zoo or the beach. On other days, we would stay in and do written work, but never according to a 'schedule'; it depended what we felt like doing that morning. I do not recognise this description of home education. I suppose that if somebody really did adhere to the National Curriculum, observe school terms and holidays, have a timetable and stop work promptly when the schools kicked out, then one might feel justified in devising a special expression to describe it. I would be curious to hear more about this. Timetables!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Once again, the prejudices slip out. There can have been few more determined and structured home educators than I, but the idea of a timetable would have seemed absolutely bonkers to me."

      Then I was clearly not talking about you since I was talking about those who *do* use a timetable (and we know some do, they've commented here and there's nothing wrong with that!). We are talking about a phrase to describe the small minority at one end of the range, whereas you clearly fit with the majority in the middle and follow a mixed approach (do you object to the phrase, 'mixed approach', should we be looking for an alternative for that too?). You and others clearly don't like the school-at-home name for this minority, so why don't you (collectively) suggest an alternative that you do like instead of just moaning about it?

      "I suppose that if somebody really did adhere to the National Curriculum, observe school terms and holidays, have a timetable and stop work promptly when the schools kicked out, then one might feel justified in devising a special expression to describe it."

      We've heard from people who use a curriculum (the school-at-home or alternative description wouldn't need to be limited to the NC since private schools do not have to follow it). We know that some home educators also follow school terms and holidays and use timetables. I'm not sure if it would ever be necessary to work for the same hours as schools since there is so much wasted time at schools from an education point of view. I think someone working to that extent would be classed as a hot-houser (another name I'm sure you dislike).

      It's human nature to name things. It makes life so much easier to be able to say, school-at-home, instead of, 'a home educator who follows an adult-determined curriculum and follows a timetable most of the time, who may or may not also follow school term-times'. If you were describing the range of HE in a document, what terms would you have used?

      Delete
    2. "I have not coem across example of it being used in a positive way and it is most commonly used by autonomous educators."

      some links you may find interesting:

      http://www.home-ed.co.uk/schoolathome.html

      http://www.northantshe.org.uk/?page_id=5

      Here's also a family that follows the NC and uses a loose timetable.
      http://home-ed.info/he_days/Paula.htm

      According to to a Birmingham Council questionnaire, the most popular response when asked about their approach to HE was 'school at home' (tied 1st with project based), but maybe that had more to do with a lack of suitable alternative options than a genuine desire to accept the name!

      http://tinyurl.com/d5ghg4q

      Delete
  15. ' usually involving a curriculum and some kind of timetable'

    'with regular use of a timetable or schedule'

    ' those who use school type techniques (curriculum, timetable, etc'

    Time now to ask, has anybody here ever used a timetable? By that, I mean getting up in the moring and consulting a document which tells them that at 11:00 AM they will be doing history and that at 2:00 in the afternoon it is time for maths? I have never met or heard of anybody like this, but am open to the possibility. Has anybody seen such a timetable, as allegedly used by home educators? I am quite enchanted with the whole idea and feel that perhaps I was a little too laid back in my approach!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have *ducks to avoid the negative onslaught* I draw one up usually 2-3 times a year for times when we need to be sure we are covering certain things. Helps us keep perspective when we feel we arent getting work done.

      Delete
    2. "I have *ducks to avoid the negative onslaught*"

      Well as an autonomous home educator who loves and uses timetables herself, I'm not sure how people who plan to cover a specified body of knowledge with their children can manage without them, so please don't duck on my account ;-) I think I'm actually quite jealous of those who manage to direct their children's education. AE has worked fine for us and it was the only method that worked, but in my heart I think I'm a school-at-homer!

      Delete
  16. "By that, I mean getting up in the moring and consulting a document which tells them that at 11:00 AM they will be doing history and that at 2:00 in the afternoon it is time for maths?"

    We did for a short while, before going over to the dark side (AE). It evolved as a result of LA visits and their need to complete tick boxes (and I also quite like to be organised and produce timetables for my own study as an adult learner). But it didn't work for HE, so we gave up on it.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 'But it didn't work for HE,'

    So I would imagine! Thanks for that.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "'But it didn't work for HE,'

    So I would imagine! Thanks for that."

    Probably should have said, 'our HE'. I wouldn't rule it out for other HE families. If it works for adults (as it does for me), there's no reason to believe it can never work with HE children. Is there? It must be very difficult to study for 8+ GCSEs without a timetable, for instance. Can't imagine it myself, but then, I don't suppose that's impossible either.

    ReplyDelete
  19. 'It must be very difficult to study for 8+ GCSEs without a timetable, for instance'

    Not a bit of it! We had no overall structure or plan. We would for instance know that it was necessary to learn calculus, but all that I did was bought my daughter a book about it from which she taught herself. If we were covering photosynthesis for bilogy, then that could be done at Kew Gardens or perhaps at some time in a spare evening. There was never anything even remotely like a timetable. Suppose that it was a glorious, sunny day in May? We would simply nip off to the forest for a picnic.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No way I could work like that. I produce a list of the material I have to cover, then divide it over the days I have left before the exams, after marking off any rest days and days I have other things planned. I then make a rough timetable to make sure I can fit all the work in (so I list particular chapters or a number of pages to read against each day and try to allocate study times, for instance), and then tick them off as they are completed (very satisfying).

      Obviously life gets in the way sometimes and I might fall behind or get ahead, but I couldn't survive without the timetable - much too stressful! I'd worry that I'd get to the end of the time and still have a couple of books left to read. My autonomously educated daughter produced something similar recently for her summer reading in preparation for her second degree year, so maybe it's genetic ;-)

      Delete
    2. My daughter forms a timetable because it helps her. Otherwise, she finds the day runs away with doing a bit of make up, mucking about on the piano, watching a film, visiting friends or family.

      She has objectives and to meet them, she finds it easier to have a plan that she sticks to by dividing up the work that needs to be done by the number of weeks and sticking to it.

      Not a bad real world skill to be honest! There are plenty of business and project planning jobs out there.

      Sometimes, studying formally isn't so much about the material you study, as the skills you learn whilst doing so.

      Delete
  20. Most people falling into the so-called 'school-at-home' category are quite happy to be referred to as structured home educators, or eclectic home educators. I have no objection to being described as either of these, since it allows for the fact that a range of different educational methods may be used along with a core of linear study.

    As Simon says the term Schooly types or 'school at home' is often used in a derogatory way by other home educators who disagree with structured education.

    I have no objection from being asked if I do school at home by people not home educating. I do when it is said in such a way as to infer me doing something negative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I completely agree with this.

      Delete
    2. I would have placed eclectic in the middle between the two extremes, but maybe you mean eclectic in sense that the adult chooses the varied methods and subjects? And do schools never use these other methods either? I doubt it's that clear cut. Maybe education is just too varied to name an approach with a simple phrase, though obviously in a chart like the one in the document you need to put something.

      Could the two minority extremes be described as completely parent-directed, and completely child-directed with the vast majority of home educators using a mix of both these approaches, possibly leaning towards one direction or the other? Neither extreme seems to rule out any particular learning method, since children receiving a primarily parent-directed education learn things not covered by their parent's curriculum informally, and a child-led education can obviously include lots of structure.

      An interesting discussion.

      Delete
    3. "since children receiving a primarily parent-directed education learn things not covered by their parent's curriculum informally,"

      And re-reading that, obviously the parent-directed education can purposely include informal learning by guiding play and conversations in pre-planned directions in order to cover particular subjects. If parent-directed and child-directed can both include informal and structured learning, is the balance of control over the education process between the parent and the child the main difference between different HE families?

      Delete
    4. That balance of control could easily change over time too. Parent led (ultimate) control at first, gradually backing off when I know the child has a good handle on where they are going and how to get there.

      It can also differ between siblings. Some childing need less intervention than others, perhaps especially those wiht significant special needs.

      This is why trying to label families is fruitless.

      Delete
    5. "That balance of control could easily change over time too."

      Absolutely.

      "This is why trying to label families is fruitless."

      Very true. This is why I tend to name the method we currently use. We started with the school at home method and then moved gradually towards a mixed approach.

      Delete
  21. 'I have *ducks to avoid the negative onslaught* I draw one up usually 2-3 times a year for times when we need to be sure we are covering certain things. Helps us keep perspective when we feel we arent getting work done.'

    I confess myself surprised. Not just a rought plan, like Do science in the enxt month or so and also work on maths', but actually with the time of day pencilled in? I can see that I was a good deal less organised than I thought. I am beginning to think that I might really be one of those autonomous edcuators of whom one reads!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL, maybe Simon!
      Yes I did timetables with actual times and days with start and finish times. As long as you realize though, they are not exactly set in stone nor to we stick to them long. Maybe its for my own benefit rather than theirs.

      Delete
  22. I think the elephant in the room is ACE - Accelerated Christian Education:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerated_Christian_Education

    "The workshop is organized like an ACE classroom, allowing the supervisor to experience the ACE system as a student and learn how to implement the system."

    I know two families currently using this. They do indeed have a 'classroom' and one family definitely has their children in school uniforms. Not only that, they do the lessons every day, even if they are visiting someone else's house.

    One of these families stopped their children from playing with other home educated children using the local swimming pool at the same time, and these families tend to only socialise within their own Church, hence other home educators may have no idea that these people exist.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We use ACE, and yes there are some that you describe, but actually most are like me.
      I pick and choose, skip bits, do what suits and dont follow the rules that are in the manual- for is it wouldnt work to do it that way, FAR too regimented.

      Delete
    2. Why, 'elephant in the room'?

      Delete
  23. Rubbish. I've known several ACE families. NONE of them use the curriculum in the way in which it's written about. I know them because our kids used to do swimming lessons together.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "Rubbish. I've known several ACE families. NONE of them use the curriculum in the way in which it's written about."

    So what? The people you knew didn't use it in the designed way, but this doesn't rule out other people using it as designed. And if they tend to stick together, you would be less likely to know about them.

    It sounds as though there are a very small number of home educators who use a curriculum and follow a timetable much as a school would. For all we know they have absolutely no objection to the phrase, school at home. They are probably so convinced that their method is the best method for their children (as we all should be) that discussions such as this would be water off a ducks back.

    Then we have the vast majority in the middle who use a mixed approach, some of whom really, really, take offence at any suggestion that they might possibly be using a school at home approach (even though there's nothing wrong with that approach if it suits your family). They seem to react to any discussion about methods as a criticism, much like a few school using parents who hear any mention of HE as a criticism of their choice to use schools. They have decided, on little evidence, that it is always used derogatively. Maybe it is sometimes, but I've heard it used purely in the spirit of enquiry when new home educators meet. When we started HE, we were often asked what approach we planned to use. If you don't follow a school at home approach, why not just say, 'no, we don't use a school at home approach, we use a mixed/eclectic/varied (or whatever name you feel best describes your HE) approach to HE'.

    Also, what message do you think your reaction to the phrase, school at home, is giving to people that actually do use a school at home approach?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ACE is a curriculum based upon Christian fundementalist indoctrination.

      Delete
    2. In 2001, the BBC made a report concerning a home schooler that had been convicted of child cruelty. The child had been home educated through the ACE curriculum since the age of 10, and had experienced little contact with the outside world..

      Delete
    3. OFSTED described ACE teaching practice as 'a modern version of a monks cell in a medieval monestary'

      Delete
    4. In the past ACE was both racist and homophobic.

      Delete
  25. Describe your own way of home educating in legal guidelines if you like, but don't attempt to label and describe methods you don't use or understand.

    ReplyDelete
  26. The one thing that I have discovered in my 12 years in the
    HE world is that every one does it differently!

    Last week there were 280 home educators at Marwell Zoo. Some were strangers to me, but quite a lot would consider me a friend, and out of that crowd there are a wide variety of approaches. At one end some are completely autonomous, at the other end of the spectrum there was a large group from an ethnic minority who are entirely taught in groups by tutors. There was the family with a governess, the homeschoolers, the home educators and the unschoolers. Call them what you will - it rained on us all!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very true, Julie.

      I had no idea that governesses still existed!

      Delete
  27. 'OFSTED described ACE teaching practice as 'a modern version of a monks cell in a medieval monestary'

    To be fair, this was the curriculum being taught in a school. There are partitions to separate the children and those with questions for the teacher, raise a little flag to attract attention. This is less to do with the curriculum and more the method of teaching it in some particular schools.

    ReplyDelete
  28. 'I think it was Tania Barlow who made it clear repeatedly on various email lists and forums at the time that the document was intended only as a basis for consultation. Sorry if I've got the name wrong.'

    She did, but I don't think that it can have been true. Otherwise, why was it being sent to MPs, with instructions for the Department for Education to fill in various bits?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As I understand it, it was true once. Then became untrue as it seemed that the government decided not to run with the idea.
      The instruction to fill in bits was put it to enable discussion on the right wording which, as we are all well aware, is a huge problem for some people.

      Delete
    2. Of course the unwashed masses would never have been allowed anywhere near such a document to correct it.

      Delete
    3. My that's a big chip on you shoulder.

      Delete
  29. 'The instruction to fill in bits was put it to enable discussion on the right wording which, as we are all well aware, is a huge problem for some people.'

    It was not really to enable discussion, those instructions were to Graham Stuart, asking him to get civil servants to research the taking of examinations and put together a glossary. I have the final draft of the document and it is all but identical to the one to which I posted a link.

    ReplyDelete
  30. " She did, but I don't think that it can have been true. Otherwise, why was it being sent to MPs, with instructions for the Department for Education to fill in various bits?"

    You think a government would produce government guidelines without the involvement of a government department? This seems highly unlikely.

    ReplyDelete