Hello one & all,
My bit about home education being a privilege of the wealthy has certainly touched a nerve. Would be interesting to see some stats if available. I’m sure there are many average working class families educating their kids at home, but I’m talking about the majority here. These are the numbers that are the base of my question-
Average blue collar wage (Sydney) - $520- $750 after tax
Av house mortgage or rent pw (Sydney) - $300- $600.
Hence the need for the second income. Even if working hours are staggered thru shiftwork, I cannot believe that there remains enough time for a correct education.
Tired, stressed parents are not teachers.
It did cross my mind that full-time social security recipients may have some chance, but this, once again, does not represent the majority. Home business may offer possibilities, but again falls outside working class. I also ask what legal home business offers the income & time required for home ed? Believe me, one works harder at self-employment than as an employee.
We live in an insecure, competitive, untrusting, self-centred, materialistic society.. Parents are more concerned than ever about the welfare of their kids, for now & for the future. To have ones offspring under their own guidance & protection 24hrs is almost essential for some, almost to the point of irrationality. I blame the mobile phone.
All I ask is for those considering home ed to consider ‘all’ the reasons for such a move, & to realise the greater social consequences of such a decision

May I add -
Every time a child is removed from the public school system, the school system is the loser. The public school system is the domain of the average aussie, therefore the average aussie is the loser. Not good.
I speak for the whole.

Yes, Swilkie, you did touch a nerve with your comments about home ed being a privilege of the wealthy! Those of us who have been involved with home ed over the years know from experience just how far off the mark these comments are.

1. We know many, many home ed families, and very few of these could be described as comfortably off, let alone wealthy!

2. Your comments have elicited strong reactions because many of us have really struggled to give our children the best opportunity possible. Our family, for example, has never been able to afford to buy a house. We are still renting, and my children are now adults.

3. I could never afford to pay for my children to enjoy extra activities, so I organized contras for as many as possible. In order for them to do ballet, I became the cleaner of the ballet school. For music lessons, I did secretarial work for the piano teacher. For German lessons, I did the German teacher's garden. And so on.

4. If you understood the true nature of home education you would not refer to the parent as 'teacher'. It is the children who teach themselves, and parents are the facilitators rather than the teachers. Parents can busy themselves with part-time work, or running a small business, as I did, Home educated children are mostly independently busy with their own self-generated activities.

5. It was because I was concerned with my responsibilities to society that I decided to home educate. That was the best contribution to the future I could ever make.

Addressing some myths:
It's been postulated that removing children from school somehow hurts schools. When school is hurting children physically, emotionally or academically, (particularly when it is the schools that do not believe in the potential of the children) one of the only options for those children to grow into their full potential is home education. Children whose potential and ability is stunted in the school system can, through home education become the kind of citizens who contribute socially, intellectually and economically to our society. It is possible to give children exceptional education in poverty although funding would make it more available to those who would most benefit. Exemption for homeschoolers on the pension to seek work has just been introduced to Social Security legislation.

The Office of the Minister for Education appears to have a good attitude towards the issues of our education system and the innovative solution of home education if the letter to me is anything to go by. It can be found at www.rosiereal.blogspot.com

If only George Orwell was alive today. Swilkies last posts would have given him enough material for a novel that would’ve eclipsed 1984. The type of social responsibility swilkie suggests would not be out of place in a totalitarian state.
Swilkie claims to speak for the whole, and begs parents to consider the greater social consequences of such a decision as home educating their own children. It is a brave leap in logic to suggest that removing children from an already overburdened system, will in someway harm the system. Home education actually provides significant relief to strained school facilities.
I think this tirade against home education springs more from an antagonism towards diversity, and a desire for uniformity, than for any real concern for the social good.

Hi Rosie, I read the Minister’s letter. I only wish Victoria’s Minister for Education was as enlightened and approachable on the topic of home education as yours.