Academic literature on the topic 'Home schooling Home schooling Academic achievement'

Education has conventionally been given a central role in understanding mobility, but qualifications are only a necessary but not sufficient requirement, and connecting the two is not straightforward. The schooling system is very complex and has changed; many desirable jobs require non-academic characteristics. Two alternative models are contrasted: the more common sociological one which Saunders has called the SAD thesis based on social advantage and disadvantage, and the DIM thesis which sees mobility outcomes as being due to individual merit. Evidence, of later school under-achievement among initially high achieving children from disadvantaged homes, supports SAD. Problems of defining intelligence, ability and merit weaken the DIM thesis. We do not live in a meritocracy where, as demonstrated, selective secondary education, private schools and extensive home tutoring favour those from advantaged backgrounds. A false meritocracy which excessively demonises the less academically successful is undesirable.

In today’s education, occupational (economic) life is the focus of our attention. We want every child to succeed, and this has come to mean that every child should be pre­pared for college and the sort of work that requires a col­lege education. What of all the children who will become bus and truck drivers, retail sales clerks, appliance repair people, construction workers, materials handlers, heavy equipment operators, railway engineers and conductors, house painters, plumbers, bakers, farm workers, beauti­cians, postal workers, cooks, waiters, hotel clerks, house and office cleaners, auto mechanics and sales people, dog and horse groomers, telephone/ electric line work­ers, prison guards, hospital attendants, grounds keepers, maintenance workers, managers of laundromats and dry cleaning shops, installers of burglar alarms, carpet layers, window washers, steel workers, fishermen, sailors, cater­ers, cashiers, chimney sweeps, roofers, makers of china and glassware, decorators, musicians, florists, entertainers, moving men . . . and what would happen to our society if no one were willing to do this work? Do these people represent failures of schooling, or do we fail them when we lead them to believe that only economic success is suc­cess? Teachers and parents can lose perspective when achievement is narrowly defined. What messages are we sending students when grades, test scores, and academic achievement are the criteria for “success” during their twelve plus years of schooling? Many students who struggle in school thrive in their families, communities, and jobs once they leave school. For some, leav­ing school may be the first time they experience real success and a sense of personal, task- related satisfaction. As we teach them and before they leave us, have we given these “non- achieving” students hope that they will have the tenacity to excel? Confidence that they will find their path? Courage to trust their ability to figure it out? Many students struggle with undiagnosed anomalies that limit their capacity to learn school subjects. For those students whose minds cannot adjust to the “book learning” of schools, do we still communicate that we want the best for them? Do we let them know that they are worthy of our support and encourage­ment for their future? Do we let students know they are valued whether or not they meet our academic expectations?