Atheist Ireland Forum

My children don't go to school. They learn at home. Lots of the other home educators I know here in Northern Ireland, are fundamentalist christians, but many of us have no place for religion.

It's especially important to me that our children are not sorted into one tribe or another. They are now growing up and playing with their friends, and I don't know in most cases what religious background they're from.

We can choose ourselves what to learn and are not constrained by the state curriculum.

My kids are always saying that they hate school as they are bored. I tell them I am thinking of home schooling them and they beg me not to. I wonder why? (genuinely)

What does it take to be a home educator in Northern Ireland? Are there specific curricula you have to comply to? Are you a qualified school teacher or did you you have to undertake some form of training to be allowed to educate your kids at home? Are you allowed to educate other children if you want to?

It's so much easier than that.
I'm not a teacher and you don't have to be or train as a teacher to educate your children yourself. This applies to Ireland, north and south.

The wording of the NI law is;
1. The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise.
(My bold.)

Home-education is legal in the ROI too. Anyone can deregister their children from school, although the law was changed recently so that parents have to register their home-educated children with the Education and Welfare Board, who do an initial check that a minimum standard of education is being met.

So far, UK home-educators have resisted government efforts to effect compulsory registration.

All kinds of people are doing this. It is true that most of the other home-educators here in NI are creationist christians, but not all of us. Increasing numbers of children are being home-educated, for lots of reasons.

We do it because it's the best way of meeting the individual needs of my children, because I can let them learn what they're interested in. They each work at a level that is exactly right for them. We are free to do what we want with our days; we're not constrained by uniforms, school terms, homework, the ridiculous testing of young children, forced religious instruction, segregation, and of course, the school run.

I know it sounds like a totally crazy idea to most people when they first encounter it. But I don't know of a single family who have regretted doing this, even if their children later return to school.

I'd say it's far more difficult to conceive of not going to school as an older child. I have no idea of course, what age your children are, but their response makes me think they're older than my children. They probably think that home-education means sitting around the kitchen table being 'taught' by mum or dad. That's not how has to be, especially not for older children. The parents can act for as facilitators, getting the resources the child needs. So if my daughter continues to be very interested in natural history, I'll show her where to get appropriate books, web sites, DVDs, encourage her to join a conservation group or whatever is most appropriate, or maybe find a course she can take to increase her knowledge.

This thing works best when it's more learner directed.

I've been told that a good book for older children is The Teenage Liberation Handbook, by Grace Llewellyn, though I've not read the whole thing myself.

There's a sizable excerpt from the book here.

I would not agree that a parent is necessarily the best person to judge the individual needs of their children (Although most religious people disagree with me on this point). I would not be against home education, but I do believe that it should be done under some sort of supervision. There may be many things that the parent is unable to teach their children (algebra, compound interest). Also, I would guess that many, if not the majority of parents who choose home-schooling do it for the motive of restricting the child's access to knowledge. As for just covering what they are interested in, that could also have some quite negative consequences. Not everything we may need to learn for life is necessarily interesting.

I wonder who you think is the best person or body to decide what are the best interests of each child? The state? What if the state decided to abolish the teaching of history, or if it was decided that no child should learn the English language, just Irish, or if the state decided that all children must learn creationism as the basis of all life.

Many parents make decisions about what they want their children to learn, and I may disagree with them, but I do think they have more of a right to make that decision that the state. Isn't the state the primary educator in a dictatorship? Parents only have stewardship of their children for a short time, and we can't force our children to be what we want. They grow up and do their own thing, thankfully.

I am trying to raise my children to use reason and logic, to be fair and moral, to have empathy and self respect, to be independent and health conscious. I would prefer to be able to decide what attributes are important, not have them imposed by the state (who probably want them to be merely good consumers, pliable, cogs in the machinary.)

There is the matter of the individual needs of each child to consider too. One of my children is autistic. This child learns best in a particular style and environment that would be very hard to recreate at school. One of my other children learned to read fairly late, she preferred to listen to me read to her. That was OK in the home as I had time to read what she wanted. She then had a much bigger vocabulary when she did learn to read herself and it happened very fast.



Can I first congratulate you for not bringing up the usual old issue of 'socialisation' as if going to a one-tribe school in NI was going to help my children to mix with a wide range of people.

Do parents have regular supervision when their children are aged 0-4 or 5? No. They can see health visitors for advice, but it isn't compulsory. It is assumed that the parent knows how to raise their child. Also, parents decide what to feed their children. There are unfortunately, children who suffer from neglect or very poor diets, but the state does not send inspectors in to each house to check out what's in the larder.

Anyway, while schools continue to fail so many children, the state should spend its time getting its own house in order before tackling elective home-education.
The UK and NI law (that I'm most familiar with) states that the education board can only act if it appears that there is evidence that a suitable education is not taking place.



Brian, have you come across the Internet?
The parent does not have to instruct the home-educated child, (once the child can read, write and do basic maths anyway) but guides the learning and helps get the resources the child needs. Do you know just how many learning resources are online? There are full classes in almost any subject you can think of. Couple that with the library, evening classes, college courses, special interest groups and museums (to give just a few examples) there are so many ways to find out what you need to know.

As for your last point, I can only speak for my family. I do not just cover what they are interested in. I do follow their individual learning styles and allow them to spend more time on their interests. My children are still young (between 5 and and most of the time they don't even know they're leaning, because we're playing card games or baking or chatting or reading stuff, but I know how much they learn from all these activities.

This has turned into a bit of an essay, but I could waffle on about HE all day.

It is fine if the parents have the skills and the open minds to do this task, but a huge number would not have this. I would suggest that public education can open children to a wider range of opinions. Although I do have a low opinion of the standard education available, I suspect that some parents would provide an even lower standard. The arguments you are putting forward are the exact same as those being put forward by religious groups - "we have the right to teach the children what we see fit". That tends to polarise communities. I agree that autocratic governments will use education to control the minds of the population, but remember that the parent has influence outside the school. I am constantly telling my children to be skeptical about things their teacher's tell them. Home schooled children have only one influence - their parents.

I have never agreed with the socialisation argument for schooling. "Lord of the Flies" argued a long time ago that children are essentially savage and grouping them together is not a good idea. I think that mixing in wider age groups is more beneficial. I have often argued that full-time third level education is an extravagence and that the apprenticeship model is better. People say "what about the socialisation of college life" - they seem to be suggesting that people who never went to college are not properly socialised.

Sharon, I'm going to have to pull rank on you with this one. I work fulltime now on the development of online learning. The vast majority of parents do not have the skill to access and use educational resources on the Internet. However, if they are committed they can acquire such skills. However, it has generally been shown that using electronic materials without suitable human guidance by someone who understands the topics is not very effective (there is a company in India who will provide english speaking tutors for your child). So in a way the parent has to learn to be a teacher. Not all have the ability or knowledge to do this although most parents who go this route probably have the motivation to achieve this (there are also networks of home school parents on the Internet - you probably already know that).

TO be honest, I worry more about the motivation rather than the ability of home school parents. I suspect that most choose home schooling because of what is taught in school rather than what is NOT taught. In other words they wish to censor what information their child has access to

Can I ask you a few questions?

Do you intend to cover secondary schooling from home?

Are you sure you are covering all the pre-requisites for secondary school?

You probably are, but I am interested as I would worry that all parents might not do this. I personally think it would be a dawdle if you know what you are doing. And you would probably do it better.

By the way here's a great learning tool for kids. It's called Scratch - it's the follow-on from the kids programming language Logo (that I used to teach to kids after school years ago) http://scratch.mit.edu[/url]

Despite this, I know loads of children who are learning at a high level without traditional instruction. When I refer to the internet, I don't mean to restrict it to on-line lessons. If you consider any topic at all, there is something online to help you. For example, my daughter enjoys nature programs, so I found a resource with with all the 'Life on Earth' programs online. For myself, when it came to buying a house, I hadn't a clue, but I spent some time reading through various financial advice sites.

There are so many leaning resources online that are self explanatory. My children use a few, the BBC has loads of fantastic pages, there's an American learn-to-read site called Starfall. I honestly don't know what training a parent would need to help their children to use these sorts or sites. You did make the point that 'most parents who go this route probably have the motivation to achieve this' and I agree with you there. Parents who decide for whatever reason to help their children learn out of school, are motivated and there are so many support networks that we can use for advice from other parents. There are skills to being a good home-educator, and you develop those skills. It's not at all the same skills needed by a school teacher, because you don't have to deal with large class sizes, discipline problems (beyond normal parenting ones) and all the bureaucracy of the school system.



You have no evidence for this. I am friends with lots of home-educating parents and none of those HE to censor information. That's not evidence either, but my sample size is larger than yours.

I would contend that the state school system is much more restrictive, especially since the instruction of the national curriculum (I am really only familiar with the NI and UK system).



Sure! I don't know if we will keep doing this when the child are 11 and over. It depends on several things, most importantly, whether the children still prefer to HE. They may want to try school and if so, they will.
In that case, I can take a look at the national curriculum to check that they've covered whatever topics are typically taught at primary school.
However, I would prefer that they continue to learn at home.



We've already got it!

Sharon,

you may be underestimating your own skill level relative to the population at large. It seems easy for you but maybe not for others. I have read that in the US the home-schooling community is dominated by those with religious motivations. By the way, I think that home-schooling is a good thing. It requires great commitment and effort. I might worry that it would have bad effects in some cases (both intended and unintended) and that is why I would suggest that some sort of supervision, however minimal should be in place. You might claim that you're covering the maths curriculum but what if you've made some mistakes in spite of your commitment. I'm sure you would not tell your children the historical lies that the Christian Brothers told me but how can we be sure (or should you be free to tell whatever historical tales you wish?).

The basis of freedom and democracy is education and free speech. If we feel we live in a fairly good democracy, can we not trust government to ensure that all children get a dood education and to ensure that we can speak freely?

Hello again Brian.



I understand why people think this. We are lead to believe that learning is a difficult process, that only clever and highly qualified people could lead children through. I don't agree. If you think about driving a car; it's a complicated task. Car drivers are in charge of huge, heavy machines, rattling around the country at high speeds, every one of then capable of causing terrible damage in an accident. Yet most adults can drive. Even those you did abysmally at school can turn out to be good drivers. Driving is an important skill to acquire in this society and it's expected that all kinds of people can do it, irrespective of how clever they are. (It takes some people much longer to learn than others; I had to take the test 3 times.)

Now while I agree that to teach a class requires training, to help your own child to learn how to learn does not. Parents will not know as much about all subjects as secondary school teachers with degrees in their subject. (Lets ignore for a while the many teachers teaching subjects they do not have degrees in.) Therefore the parents help their children find sources of knowledge beyond their own.

I have heard many parents whose children were floundering in the system, labelled as failing and having lost all interest in learning, describe how they flourish again when they are home-educated. There are undoubtedly stories where it doesn't work out, but I don't personally know any.



It seems that the religious homeschoolers are more vocal. But there are a huge number of secular HE folk out there too. There have been new support groups, forums and blog rings set up, as the secular home-educators got a bit fed-up with the constant god talk of the fundies.



Good! It does take commitment. Raising children always does!



I understand your suggestion about supervision. There is now some supervision of Irish home-education, but I think it's a waste of time and money. How can the state really monitor HE properly? Home inspections are flawed. Home-education is not the same as school, and inspector may have different expectations of what the education should comprise. One inspector might see a tidy home and report that it appears to be a 'stifling environment for the child', another might see a messy home with books and toys lying everywhere and say it appears to 'lack structure'. I wouldn't want any inspector meeting with my children either and making snap judgements on their attainments and welfare based on how timid or outgoing they appear to be.

One of my children is known to the education authorities here. I deregistered him from a special school over a year ago. I wrote a letter detailing my 'educational philosophy' and showing how I was going to implement it. That was considered to be good enough evidence that an education was taking place. We have not been contacted by them since.


Who should decide what anyone needs to know?
I want to help my children to be numerate and able to use the maths they need in their lives. If they choose to be physicists, they'll need to know more maths than if they became musicians. I want them to know enough science to be able to at least discern nonsense and quackery. Undoubtedly they will face the hoop jumping exercises of exams to be able to get on, so we'll examine the relevant syllabus and help them do their best to pass the tests.



I agree with your first sentence. I'm not sure that the conditions of the second have been met by the NI or Irish governments. I still think that parents need to be able to have the ultimate say over what a child is taught. This is enshrined in Irish, UK and European law. I retain the right to 'indoctrinate' my children to be free thinking, rational, liberal and secular.
Other people do have the right to indoctrinate their children with all sorts of nonsense too though I disagree with what they teach, and object to my taxes being used to fund their efforts.

Sharon, you have so much there to agree and disagree with:

I'm not convinced. HAve you data to back this up? Let me put it to you this way. Say we closed the schools in working class areas in Belfast and told the parents they would have to educate their children at home? How do you think they would get on? What would be the major problem? Knowledge? Skills? Motivation? Prejudice?
I will not defend the inadequacies of and incompetence in the public service (including supervising authorities). I am in public education myself and I know how bad it can be.


Will you teach them enough statistics to be able to esimate risk in their own lives or to estimate the risk in public decisions (eg GM crops)? HAving said that, existing secondary school syllabii are not currently good enough to prepare people for life. But my point is that if the professional educators can't do it, why would amateur, if motivated, parents be able to do it.[/quote]

If you compare democracies over the world, the UK would come out very well although you could say it is undermined in NI. However, the secondary school syllabii of NI and scotland are reputed to be better that England. In fact the UK universities rate the leaving certificate in Ireland as better than the A levels in educational terms.

And in this all the fundies agree with you (except for the last 4 items).

This argument is hard work. Would it be accurate for me to say that your position is something like: People should have the right to educate their children as they see fit, even if this runs the risk of them not being properly educated or that some people might deliberately educate their children in philosophies that could be anti-social.

Great, I appreciate the discussion.



There's a link hereto some research on HE. There was a study a few years back, carried out for a PhD by Paula Rothermel in Durham. She collated data from over 400 questionnaires and used standardised tests on almost 200 home-educated children. They all performed well, especially those whose parents were manual or unskilled workers. I don't think this was published anywhere so it's not very convincing evidence.
Regarding your Belfast school scenario, if all the parents were forced to home-educate, it would probably be disastrous. Parents and children have to want to HE if it's to work out. Here, motivation would be the main problem. If individuals in working class areas of Belfast choose to HE for whatever reason, they have a good chance of doing well, especially if they can forge links with other home-educators.



I don't claim that I will provide my children with a perfect education. I know more about statistics than most people, but even if I didn't, the aim, for us, is to teach the children how to learn and think for themselves. Then anything they need to know at any stage in their lives, they should be able to find out. The technology we have today should, I think, change the focus of education from acquiring knowledge and remembering the accumulated wisdom of the ages, to being constantly able to learn.



Not exactly. I don't know who else but the parents should make the decisions about individual children. Society has a duty to intervene when it is apparent, or even suspected, that a child is suffering from neglect or abuse. The state has a duty to intervene id it appears that a child is not receiving an education 'suitable to his age, ability and aptitude and to any special educational needs he may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise' (NI Education Order 1986). English case law has defined a ‘suitable education’ as one able;

'1. to prepare the children for life in modern civilised society, and
2. to enable them to achieve their full potential.'

Article 42 of the Irish Constitution says:

1 "The State acknowledges that the primary and natural educator of the child is the family and guarantees to respect the inalienable right and duty of parents to provide, according to their means, for the religious and moral, intellectual, physical and social education of their children".

2 "Parents shall be free to provide this education in their homes or in private schools or in schools recognised or established by the State".


3.1 "The State shall not oblige parents in violation of their conscience and lawful preference to send their children to schools established by the State, or in any particular type of school designated by the State".


3.2 "The State shall, however, as guardian of the common good, require in view of actual conditions that the children receive a certain minimum education, moral, intellectual and social".

I think that the only way for me to be able to continue to teach my children to be free thinking, rational, liberal and secular, is to accept that others will teach their children that the animals really did go in 2 by 2, or that god spoke to mohammad in the desert or that the wafer turns into the body of some bloke who died 2 millenia ago. We can't dictate the specifics of what children are taught. I think people still have to be free to teach their children whatever flavour of religion they fancy. It's our duty then to try to make society more secular, especially schools paid for through our taxes.

I'm liable to change my mind about this; god knows (I still think in terms of such phrases ) that I've changed my mind on loads of things as I've grown older and had access to more data.

DO you think that the state should decide how and what home-educated children are taught? How do you think we can help the children of very religious parents?
My own parents were very devout, I went to convent schools and was the one my family least expected to drop out of religion. It may not have happened until I was thirty something, but it happened.