Tuesday, 5 March 2013
The British home education scene…
I found this little piece, by a home educating parent in Wales, revealing and also profoundly depressing;
http://uk.lifestyle.yahoo.com/decision-home-school-children-190100651.html
Let’s check out those possible reasons for home educating! There’s bullying, special needs, religion, illness and philosophical considerations. Hmmm, what’s missing from this list of motives to home educate? Can anybody tell me? Oh yes, that’s right; to give your child a good education does not seem to be here.
This article says tells us something about home education in this country. It is hard to imagine a piece like this being written by an American home educator which left out education as a motive for home education.
lol, home educating is educating - just not at school. Do you assume that people intend to educate their children *badly* for the reasons stated? Shall we assume the same of you and any of your projects? i.e. that you actually intend to do them badly? You are so funny!
ReplyDeleteMy reason for home educating is to do with the sad state of the school system. I did not feel it was good enough. If it would be better I would be a school gate mum.
ReplyDelete'My reason for home educating is to do with the sad state of the school system.'
ReplyDeleteYes, this is pretty much what I meant to convey. Your motives for home education were related to education, rather than bullying or special needs. There are plenty of parents like you, but sometimes this is forgotten.
Or just taken for granted.
Delete'Or just taken for granted.'
ReplyDeleteBut not, oddly enough, in the United States; where education is cited as a major reason for home education. Besides, there is obviously a difference in removing a child from school because he is being bullied and not sending a child to school because you wish him to achieve high academic standards. These are different motives.
Not necessarily. How good an education is a bullied child getting? The reasons are interlinked.
Delete'Not necessarily. How good an education is a bullied child getting? The reasons are interlinked.'
ReplyDeleteI am obviously not making myself clear. When the National Centre for Education Statistics in America carried out a large survey a few years ago on the motives for home education in that country, around half the respondents gave as their primary reason; 'Can give child a better education at home'. When Paula Rothermel conducted her research, the most important motive for home education among British home educators turned out to be; 'having a close family relationship and being together'.
You may well assume that education is a major motive for home education in this country, but the evidence is against this.
I am obviously not making myself clear. We home educated for philosophical reasons, but behind the philosophy was the belief that this would result in a better education than the one they would have gained at school. The main reason given in Mike's survey was philosophy, closely followed by SEN, bullying, individual attention and academic concerns. A better education is at the heart of all these reasons.
DeleteQuite obviously the parents who answered Rothermel had all read Desforges and understood that 'having a close family relationship and being together' were actually the most important factors involved in good outcomes and that once this had been established a better education would inevitably follow. So I think you may be barking up the wrong tree with this one.
ReplyDelete'obviously the parents who answered Rothermel had all read Desforges'
DeleteWhat on earth are you talking about? I was one of them and had never heard of the bloke (or woman.)
But do you agree with the idea that having a close family relationship helps improve outcomes and that this results in a better education? Someone doesn't need to have heard of a writer to have heard about and agree with their ideas and/or conclusions. Ideas can be written about and discussed by others without mentioning the original authors name (I've heard the name Desforges but have not read anything by them either). But maybe you don't think a good, stable family life will usually improve a child's education?
Delete'But maybe you don't think a good, stable family life will usually improve a child's education?'
DeleteWhy would you think that? How could you possibly draw that inference from my comment?
I HE'd because school had failed my child. Closer family relationships were a nice side benefit to HE.
"Why would you think that? How could you possibly draw that inference from my comment?"
DeleteI didn't think that, I couldn't tell what you thought, that's why I asked you a question.
In your previous comment you said that you had not heard of Deforges. I just pointed out that you don't need to have read a particular book to be influenced by the ideas in it, since those ideas may well have influenced people you have spoken to or other books you have read.
Your reply still leaves us in the dark on about the question I asked, since you simply state that family relationships are a nice side benefit of HE.
Do you think that good family relationships invariably benefit education?
The point of this is that some people may work hard at developing good family relationships partly with the intention of improving a child's education (though clearly there are many other benefits for everyone involved).
'Do you think that good family relationships invariably benefit education?'
DeleteI don't feel qualified to say, since I've never read any research on it. It may well be true. However, I have not developed beliefs about it as you seem to wish I had.
'The point of this is that some people may work hard at developing good family relationships partly with the intention of improving a child's education (though clearly there are many other benefits for everyone involved).'
Quite possibly but what has this to do with my original comment, which was that the person who made this extraordinary remark:
'obviously the parents who answered Rothermel had all read Desforges'
was wrong.
I hadn't.
"I HE'd because school had failed my child. Closer family relationships were a nice side benefit to HE."
DeleteSo what Simon would call a negative reason for HE and possibly one not undertaken in order to provide a superior education. For e.g. Simon seems to think that someone giving a school failing to provide adequately for an SEN as their reason for HE is not choosing to HE in order to provide a superior education. I believe the opposite, since an SEN child without the correct support is unlikely to receive a good education. The act of taking them out of school is an attempt to correct this problem and improve their education. Where do you stand in general and in your particular case?
My views were in another comment below. (It would be a bit odd to put all my views in one comment.):
Delete''I would have thought that if the reasons the parents began home education were connected to failures of schools (eg bullying, school phobia, SENs not being met etc) then that DID constitute 'educational reasons'.''
"It would be a bit odd to put all my views in one comment"
DeleteTrue, but that's the problem with us all signing in anonymously ;-) We certainly agree on the SEN/bullying/school phbia issue then, if not the other.
I think I view the family life thing in a similar way to the SEN issue. A child with a poor home life will struggle in much the same way as an SEN child might without appropriate support at school. A good family life seems to imply good support of the child. But I supose it's possible that a child might feel so cozy at home and not feel the need to work hard at improving themselves educationally, so it could potentially go either way! Don't think I would risk giving my child a poor home life in the hope that they work hard at their education in order to get away from us though :-)
Sorry, still not getting the relationship of all this to my comment that the poster who said we'd all read Desforges.
DeleteI think either you have taken the original comment too literally and the original writer intended us to read it as, 'Desforges and/or their ideas', or the original writer was too narrow when he wrote about Desforges. I think it's very unlikely that the writer really believed that all of those taking part in the survey had read one particular author. I don't think they meant it to be taken so since it’s such an obvious exaggeration.
DeleteEither way, your reading or not reading Desforges doesn't disprove the general idea the writer was putting forward that a child in a happier situation, be it either because of appropriate support for SEN, removal from a bullying situation or a happier, closer family life, is likely to result in improvements in education.
"I don't think they meant it to be taken so since it’s such an obvious exaggeration."
Deleteshould be,
I don't think they meant it to be taken so *seriously" since it’s such an obvious exaggeration.
It's one piece, by one person, with one set of views. I know I keep saying this, but every child is different, so surely everyone's reasons and methods also have to be different? So why read so much into one piece?
ReplyDeleteIf we're talking reasons and views, I came to HE because I can't fit 2 square pegs into a round hole system. The fact that I've come to love it and be fascinated by what I'm learning about the universe, my children and myself is something I'm very grateful for.
Because we're 2/3 my scheduling and 1/3 following their interests with me facilitating I've ended up knowing about things it never occurred to me to wonder about. Sometimes, I've learned more than I perhaps wanted to, but it's the breadth of the HE universe that's it's great point for me; and why I'll do all I can to keep it that wide.
Is that less depressing?
Anne
'It's one piece, by one person, with one set of views. I know I keep saying this, but every child is different, so surely everyone's reasons and methods also have to be different? So why read so much into one piece?'
ReplyDeleteIt is not one piece. Every bit of research into British home education shows the same picture. I mentioned the findings of Paula Rothermel. More recently, Education Otherwise has conducted its own research about this. In 2003, they distributed 2500 questionnaires to their members. The commonest reasons given for home education were bullying and school phobia. A third of those responding said that the strongest influence upon the decision to home educate related to family lifestyle.
In 2006 both the National Foundation for Educational Research and York Consulting carried out research about this. The conclusion is plain. British families tend to home educate for reasons relating to problems that their children have or because they feel that home education is a lifestyle that appeals to them. Only a minority choose to do so for educational reasons.
'I mentioned the findings of Paula Rothermel. '
ReplyDeleteI thought that you took the view that PR's findings weren't proper research and were therefore untrustworthy?
You can't have it both ways.
I would have thought that if the reasons the parents began home education were connected to failures of schools (eg bullying, school phobia, SENs not being met etc) then that DID constitute 'educational reasons'.
'I thought that you took the view that PR's findings weren't proper research and were therefore untrustworthy?
ReplyDeleteYou can't have it both ways.'
You are confused. Paula Rothermel sent out many questionnaires and collated the information from them. She then conducted a tiny number of academic tests; the PIPS and literacy ones. I have drawn attention to the fact that the numbers were so small for these as to render her conclusions statistically meaningless. I said nothing about the original information gathering exercise
So how many answered the question about why they HE and how was the question asked? Was it a tick box exercise, or did Paula classify written answers into categories? Without access to the research or much more detail it's impossible for anyone else to debate with your conclusions (or those of the researchers).
DeleteDo you think it's something to do with a very British reluctance to criticise public services? There's a huge taboo around complaining about state schools - it's as if anyone who does so has ideas above their station. I've been party to so many conversations where someone who complains about their local school is told that it's somehow their responsibility to fix it.
ReplyDeletePerhaps in the US it's more acceptable to say, "Actually, my local school is crap, the curriculum is massively dumbed-down and my kids deserved much better, and that's what I'm giving them."
Sorry - also meant to say: I know that filling in a questionnaire about why you home educate is a bit different to a dinner-party conversation, but you do get so used to giving the more "politically correct" answer about the lovely closeness of your family that it's possible to forget what drew you to home ed in the first place!
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. I think we also probably get into the habit of finding acceptable reasons that school using parent's don't feel is a criticism of their choices. Saying that, 'we HE because my individual child had problems with SEN/bullying etc, but I'm sure school is great for your child', seems more acceptable than saying bluntly that we think HE is better than school. It's an empathy thing.
DeleteIt is perfect time to make some plans for the future and
ReplyDeleteit is time to be happy. I have read this post and if I could I wish to suggest you some interesting things or
suggestions. Perhaps you can write next articles referring to this article.
I desire to read more things about it!
my webpage :: page