A week ago I was injudicious enough to post a light hearted piece in which I suggested that at either end of the home education spectrum are groups of fanatics whose opinions are diametrically opposed to each other. I gave it as my view that Ed Balls and his cronies are at one end and autonomously educating parents at the other. I also mused that those like the present writer who remain resolutely in the middle of the road are apt to be run over. Ironically, but quite predictably, I was promptly knocked down by a bunch of autonomous educators who took exception to the thesis advanced, which was that they were by way of being extremists!
The fault is of course entirely mine, because I worded a couple of sentences somewhat elliptically and several readers jumped to the wrong conclusions about what I was saying. Referring to autonomous educators, I said that this group thought that children shouldn't be taught. I cannot really complain about readers being literal minded and failing to read between the lines; I am after all a world class pedant in my own right! What I actually meant to imply was, "This group believe that children shouldn't be taught (as a matter of routine and certainly not unless they actually want to be taught)." I did not for a moment suppose that autonomous educators would actually refuse to teach their children if the kids actually asked to be taught.
Mind you, I have to say that in my experience this is a rather rare occurrence. My own daughter has often asked me to take her to the theatre or buy her various magazines. I do not ever recollect her asking me to explain the failure of the Schlieffen Plan in August 1914 or to teach her about the Gallipoli Campaign in 1915. Perhaps she is a very weird and atypical teenager, but I was obliged to arrange this myself and set times when I would teach her that sort of thing. I have a suspicion that had it been left to her, she would not have come to me and asked to be taught about the six specific themes of World War I which she needed for the IGCSE History; I always had to take the initiative. Perhaps other readers have teenagers who are a little more enthusiastic about stuff like that and do actually ask to be taught about it.
To put the case for there being two groups of extremists involved in home educations, I will say this. The vast majority of people, both parents and teachers, believe that children should be taught regularly and that this teaching should take place according to some sort of plan. I myself believe this. I think most of us would agree that this is the commonly held view. Ed Balls and some of his friends go much further than this and believe that teaching can only take place in schools and that a child not at school is a child not being taught, or at least not being taught properly. I imagine that he has reached this conclusion by some exceedingly faulty induction. I guess that he has said to himself, "Teaching takes place in schools, home educated children are not at school; therefore, home educated children are not being taught." That muffled whirring noise which is faintly audible, is Wittgenstein spinning round like a Catherine wheel in his grave.......
In short, the folk at the DCSF are saying that children need teaching and that parents are not really capable of providing it and that the education of their children will suffer as a consequence.
Autonomous educators seem to be saying precisely the opposite. They seem to be saying, from all that I am able to apprehend, that children do not need to be taught, unless they particularly want to be and that they are in any case quite capable of learning without formal teaching or even any sort of plan. Their views thus differ both from that of the Ed Balls faction and also from most ordinary people. My own views lie between both these extremes and firmly with the majority of normal people. I believe that children need to be taught and that this teaching has to be done in a planned and systematic fashion. I don't think it matters much whether the teaching takes place at home or in a school, although it is easier and more effective to do it at home. And that is why I regard myself as a middle of the road type of home educator who has little patience for the extremists whom one finds on the fringes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This speaks volumes. If your daughter had been autonomously home educated you see, she would be likely to ask those kinds of questions - and not only of you, but of many other sources of information. All of my children have and do. In fact, this is the sole reason why many of us choose the autonomous method of home education.
ReplyDelete"I was promptly knocked down by a bunch of autonomous educators who took exception to the thesis advanced, which was that they were by way of being extremists!
ReplyDeleteI wasn't bothered by being considered an extremist, I just thought that you didn't understand autonomous education, and you certainly didn't bother to correct that (possible) mis-conception on my part in the comments that followed.
"Perhaps she is a very weird and atypical teenager, but I was obliged to arrange this myself and set times when I would teach her that sort of thing. I have a suspicion that had it been left to her, she would not have come to me and asked to be taught about the six specific themes of World War I which she needed for the IGCSE History"
But if a child asks to study for IGCSE (because they need it for the career/job they want, for eg) it's fine for autonomously educating parents to do this for their child and they would expect this in much the same way as my child expected me to research reading methods, buy books, and arrange suitable times when they asked me to teach them to read. The same sort of thing happened when a child wanted to follow a creative writing course. One of my children wants to do GCSEs so something similar to your experiences with Simone and IGCSEs will happen here. The only difference (or maybe not?) is that my child has asked to do this.
"Perhaps other readers have teenagers who are a little more enthusiastic about stuff like that and do actually ask to be taught about it."
It isn't always necessary for the child to be enthusiastic about the subject matter if they want a qualification and decide freely to follow the course to get that qualification.
"They seem to be saying, from all that I am able to apprehend, that children do not need to be taught, unless they particularly want to be and that they are in any case quite capable of learning without formal teaching or even any sort of plan."
That's about it, though I would add that we believe it's impossible for them not to learn and, because they are their own interests and/or choices, they learn more quickly and easily than they would if they were following an imposed curriculum. Don't you find that you learn things better if you have chosen to study it yourself? I doubt many children reach adulthood without some kind of structured study or formal teaching and this will inevitably include a plan. But it's a plan initiated by the child and worked out with them. Maybe the difference is that Balls etc do not expect children to want to learn and assume they need to be coerced and autonomous educators expect them to want to learn.
Simon, I don't really understand why you put so much time and effort into trying to fit us all into arbitrary categories.
ReplyDeleteHave you actually done a research study on how many home educators are sensible and think like you, and how many are mad extremists like most of the people who post comments here? Or do your categories exist only in your imagination?
I could do the same thing with regard to journalists. Some are ordinary sensible people who just want to get to the truth and inform the general public, others are sad obsessives with an axe to grind and no integrity.
I will leave it to you do decide which category you fit into.
Golly, that's a tough one, Anonymous! You seem to be saying that all home educators belong in one group and cannot be differentiated by their views on the use of curricula, whether teaching is necessary and so on. You also seem to be saying that Ed Balls and his staff at the DCSF do not have substantially different views to autonomous educators and all can be lumped together. It is an interesting hypothesis, but not one to which I subscribe. I think most people would feel that Ed Balls is a different sort of fish from the average autonomous educator, for reasons which I outline above. Once again, one cannot help but observe that you seem more anxious to discuss my character than the idea of home education per se. This is fine, but I find myself at a distinct disadvantage because of course I know nothing at all about you. If we are going to be rude to each other, you might at the very least give me your name, age and gender, so that I might personalise my offensive remarks a little.
ReplyDeleteI don't really understand why you put so much time and effort into trying to fit us all into arbitrary categories.
ReplyDelete__________________________________
To be fair one of the first things that struck me when I started looking into HE was the prevalence of self-labeling. I'm not sure if dissent came about because labels were prevalent or the labels were a result of dissent (wearing colours as it were) but both here and in the States I find that HEs tend to give their "flavour" a fairly significant level of importance in their identity as a HEing parent.
I too have noticed this, Sarah. It is common for home educating parents to say, "We're autonomous" or describe themselves as AE or semi-structured and so on. I rather assumed that many of them did view themselves as belonging to particular strands within the home educating world. Anonymous apparently thinks that this is not atually the case.
ReplyDeleteIt is common for home educating parents to say, "We're autonomous" or describe themselves as AE or semi-structured and so on.
ReplyDelete______________________________________
It's actually very interesting from my perspective. From my initial discovery of the existence of homeschooling in the USA some eight or nine years back I could see the divisions drawn and underlined between those with religious reasons to HE and those without. So I was rather expecting something similar, that the labeling, the falling into tribes, would be based on ideology (or lack of) that was external to the actual process of education.
What is fascinating is that it is given so much more prominence in the immediately visible identity compared to any staff room I have ever been in. And I say this as a person who once got a paperclip flung at her during a particularly rabid debate over grammar-translation versus the "new fangled" communicative approach. It's not that I don't recognize the passion for or the attachment to a particular "flavour" of approach or philosophy, I do. It's just the overt and consistent self-labeling grabbed my attention.
I'd never walk into a staffroom and introduce myself as Sarah, principled eclectic whereas I have found myself acquiring the habit when posting on forums or blogs about HE. Not sure if I thought it was etiquette or over the years it has become second nature to me to replicate what I see in order to stand out less.
Do you know if it was always this way ? Was there any particular upheaval that preceded it or did it just creep in over time ?
I wasn't saying that we all belong in the same group. I was objecting to being put into a group which you have categorised as mad extremists purely because they believe that children learn better if they are intrinsically motivated, and practice a style of education which prioritises intrinsic motivation. I am quite happy to describe myself as an autonomous home educator, but I am not happy to be described as a mad extremist. I am also very happy, indeed absolutely determined, to stand up for the right of all home educators to provide the best education they can for their children, in the style that works for them. And that includes you, Simon. I only wish you felt the same about me.
ReplyDeleteAnd I don't know where you got the idea that I was anxious to discuss your character or what made you think that we are going to be rude to each other. My half-joking remark about journalists was not referring to you personally. I made no comment about which category I thought you belonged in, but left it up to you to decide, which is more than you did for me.
I think Sarah, that autonomous educators are always particularly keen to identify themselves in this way. It is almost like an AA meeting on some of the lists, "Hi, I'm Mary and I am an autonomous educator!". A lot of those who are methodical and organise their children's education don't seem quite so ready to announce their credentials from the word go.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why you're discussing this. On home ed lists it is helpful for people to know about your philosophy and practice so that they can respond to you properly. For example, if a "structured" home educator asks about improving their child's spelling, it would be irrelevant for an autonomous educator to tell them not to worry because their spelling would sort itself out as they read more. It would be a waste of everyone's time and energy. To use another example, if I was on a list devoted to discussing rugby, it would be useful for people to know if I was interested in League or Union rugby, because the rules are different. It's no big deal. In fact it's a non-issue. Nothing to do with "tribes", just common sense.
ReplyDeleteI think Anonymous was objecting to the fact that you placed all autonomous educators in an arbitrary category called "mad extremists". I object to that as well. It should be obvious why.
The use of the term "mad extremists", combined as it was with the suggestion that our Secretary of State for Education should be placed in the stocks and pelted with mouldy fruit, might have suggested to some that this was a somewhat light hearted post. In any case, as I have already said, to refer to a group in this way is not really insulting to any individual member of the group. I am myself a mad home educator, I cannot see anything much wrong wit the expression.
ReplyDelete""We're autonomous" or describe themselves as AE or semi-structured and so on. I rather assumed that many of them did view themselves as belonging to particular strands within the home educating world.."
ReplyDeleteOr it could just be shorthand to give someone asking a general idea of your approach to home education. I have belonged to groups of home educators and have friends from most 'strands'. I don't see the description as a way of separating myself from others, it just saves words when someone casually asks how you approach home ed. whilst you push your children on the swing next to each other or help your child at the craft table at a meeting.
"It is almost like an AA meeting on some of the lists, "Hi, I'm Mary and I am an autonomous educator!".
How strange. Whenever I've had conversations at meetings or visits it's more a question of casually asking how you home education and invariably this would be latter in the conversation after introducing or pointing out your children, how long you've been home educating,etc. The answer is usually along the lines of, we follow an autonomous approach, or mainly autonomous, or a mixture between structured and autonomous, etc., etc. A description of their educational approach rather than a definition of the person. Lists do seem different in that respect (these days anyway) and people do seem more likely to say they are an autonomous or structured home educator. Not sure why it's different on-line, maybe because there are less to talk about when your not speaking in person with children running around asking for help.
"A lot of those who are methodical and organise their children's education don't seem quite so ready to announce their credentials from the word go."
Not in my experience in person at meetings and visits. In fact, I have at times said things like, we are mostly autonomous rather than fully autonomous in an effort to fit in more easily.
My experience has been similar, Sharon. Several times I have seen people who follow a structured approach join an unstructured social group and try very hard to impose their beliefs. I have heard people tell autonomous educators that they don't know how to home educate properly, and that they are damaging their children. I have been told that free play is a waste of time and we should insist that all the children participate in structured activities, and sit down for lunch at the same time. I have even heard someone say that we should ring a bell to let everyone know that it's time for lunch. I have seen people storming out in anger because we wouldn't change the group to fit in with their ideas.
ReplyDeleteI have never seen an autonomous educator join a structured group, make judgements about its members and insist that it should be changed to fit in with their ideas, and I wouldn't dream of doing so myself.
Sorry, that sounded as if I think all structured HErs are like this. Nothing could be further from the truth. I have some very good friends who follow a structured approach, and in general I find HErs to be some of the most tolerant and non-judgemental people I know.
ReplyDelete