Help re Sixteen year old son not going to School

[Edie]

In all seriousness, I am really, really worried about what our kids are going through now. There is just so much pressure on them - and it's starting younger and younger - plus a whole load of extra, external pressure on all of the adults supporting them, too - at home, at school and beyond.
I can't see, myself, that there's much good that comes from forcing children to remain in education until they pass even a *standard* couple of GCSE's.
I think some of them will get stuck in a pointless loop there, when they could be moving on to stuff that suits them better (or, tbh, just to be moving on altogether and finding their own feet, whether they come back to education later, or they don't) and for others, it's just too overwhelming to know they HAVE to pass - and they screech to a halt before exams even hit.

Same. My eldest is leaving at 16 to do an apprenticeship. I fully approve. He's just not cut out for class (yet).

 

[girasol]

Hello? You mean spanglechick?

yeah, I corrected it straight away, you are quick! (but even the quoted version was already changed). You are both lovely, hence the confusion

 

[sheothebudworths]

Edie - I can see there are some decent apprenticeships, tbf. I've looked myself and seen that some pay comparatively well, that there are real skills being taught and that there is a proper opportunity for future employment, too.
There are also SHIT LOADS though, where the pay is way below minimum wage for 16-17 year olds, even, when they're doing a full working week and where the length of the apprenticeship goes on for ages and where there's the not even the vaguest commitment to them being employed afterwards - so clearly just cheap labour, where they'll just terminate the apprenticeship after 18 months, or whatever, and get another one in for £100 a week - and I just fucking RAGE at that.

 

[spanglechick]

That's true, but 'success' can mean so many things to so many people. She-who-must-be obeyed (aka my mum,) says that the primary purpose of higher education is not 'getting a good job' - the major benefit of tertiary education is making life more interesting, giving you more tools to deal with what life throws at you, and opening doors you might not otherwise even see.

She says, and I can see her point, that if everyone in our society were better educated (had some knowledge of history, the arts, music, etc) there would be less prejudice, and less fear of the unknown. So if one has a Masters or a Doctorate, and never does anything professional with it, that knowledge still has the potential to make your life more interesting and more worthwhile.

And as she also says - wouldn't it be interesting to be able to discuss the art of the Renaissance, the philosophies of Nietzsche, or the music of Gustav Mahler, with the plumber as he was mending your sink?

So what I was talking about had little to do with the modern understanding of financial success.

Except that you defined success in terms of:
- a comfy workplace
- nice clothes
- a flash car
- a big house.

Which is very narrow.

 

[spanglechick]

spangles - what do you reckon to the English and Maths/staying in ed. until 18 business?
I see so many of them burnt out before their GCSE's have even begun now but I'm not sure I wasn't the same. I had the 'luxury' of being able to piss about from 16 on, though, dipping in and out of work/college/signing on if I wanted to, which is quite important I think, when you're not especially driven and you already feel like you've been in education forever.

*rolls up sleeves*

Right. Well, to start with I do think effectively raising the school leaving age to 18 (including vocational training and apprenticeships) is a good idea. And as part of that I would like to see continued numeracy and literacy education for those in need. BUT there is no need at all for that to be a grade C (or the new grade 4 in the 1-9 grading system). To get thos grades you need to do simultaneous equations, and quote Shakespeare from memory. You have to do trigonometry and read at a 17 yr old level identifying rhetorical devices and analysing technical form.

It's bollocks to force every kid to bang away at that until 18. Very few of them get a C in the end anyway. We need the threshold to be some kind of functional literacy and numeracy tests. Percentages and probabilities. Basic algebra. Units of measurement in two and three dimensions.

Functional punctuation. Comprehension of informational text. Detection of bias and opinion vs facts. Confident semi-formal spoken and written language.

 

[sheothebudworths]

*rolls up sleeves*

Right. Well, to start with I do think effectively raising the school leaving age to 18 (including vocational training and apprenticeships) is a good idea. And as part of that I would like to see continued numeracy and literacy education for those in need. BUT there is no need at all for that to be a grade C (or the new grade 4 in the 1-9 grading system). To get thos grades you need to do simultaneous equations, and quote Shakespeare from memory. You have to do trigonometry and read at a 17 yr old level identifying rhetorical devices and analysing technical form.

It's bollocks to force every kid to bang away at that until 18. Very few of them get a C in the end anyway. We need the threshold to be some kind of functional literacy and numeracy tests. Percentages and probabilities. Basic algebra. Units of measurement in two and three dimensions.

Functional punctuation. Comprehension of informational text. Detection of bias and opinion vs facts. Confident semi-formal spoken and written language.

Thankyou, lovely!
Why is it a GOOD idea? If you assume some of them will continue anyway - why is it good for the rest? Is any of that down to their options being more limited anyway, now, iyswim?
I mean I can understand that another two years might do loads for someone's self-confidence if you can shore up some basic stuff and instead of sending them out into the world when they ARE still children, but is any of that purely down to how it is NOW, or do you also think there's a real advantage to having people remain in education, in all of it's current forms, for that extra two years (without the pressure to gain specific marks)?

 

[sheothebudworths]

Anyway - really sorry passenger

My son did well in his mocks but had completely given up by the time his GCSE's came round. He did go to after school revision sessions (only cos I made him, tbf) but he was definitely just going through the motions by then, did nothing outside of school and then freaked about the actual exams.
He had a SEN statement then and his teachers fed back that he was falling asleep during exams (and actually, in maths lessons prior to that!) - but with them thankfully recognising that it wasn't just not trying *head on the desk* stuff but a stress reaction - and they did try their best to help there, so DO speak to them. Really, really, do that.

At his age, his teachers will know him - the ones he's consistently been taught by anyway - and you'll recognise it when they do, too. Take their advice.

My son had a real fear of trying and then failing, so he ground to a total halt - but then always got upset every time his results wouldn't quite take him to the next place
There's a big part of it that is about them learning from their own mistakes, too, but it's an important time - it's just really hard to gauge when to step in and out of that, I know.

 

[Edie]

Edie - I can see there are some decent apprenticeships, tbf. I've looked myself and seen that some pay comparatively well, that there are real skills being taught and that there is a proper opportunity for future employment, too.
There are also SHIT LOADS though, where the pay is way below minimum wage for 16-17 year olds, even, when they're doing a full working week and where the length of the apprenticeship goes on for ages and where there's the not even the vaguest commitment to them being employed afterwards - so clearly just cheap labour, where they'll just terminate the apprenticeship after 18 months, or whatever, and get another one in for £100 a week - and I just fucking RAGE at that.

Yeah. I'm on this. Thanks anyway. I'll be honest though and say that even two years of being taken advantage of but learning that it's a tough world out there in work whilst earning some pocket money, would probably be better than doing fuck all work towards some noddy qualification at sixth form, getting a shit grade and then discovering the above aged 18.

 

[Edie]

Anyway - really sorry passenger

My son did well in his mocks but had completely given up by the time his GCSE's came round. He did go to after school revision sessions (only cos I made him, tbf) but he was definitely just going through the motions by then, did nothing outside of school and then freaked about the actual exams.
He had a SEN statement then and his teachers fed back that he was falling asleep during exams (and actually, in maths lessons prior to that!) - but with them thankfully recognising that it wasn't just not trying *head on the desk* stuff but a stress reaction - and they did try their best to help there, so DO speak to them. Really, really, do that.

At his age, his teachers will know him - the ones he's consistently been taught by anyway - and you'll recognise it when they do, too. Take their advice.

My son had a real fear of trying and then failing, so he ground to a total halt - but then always got upset every time his results wouldn't quite take him to the next place
There's a big part of it that is about them learning from their own mistakes, too, but it's an important time - it's just really hard to gauge when to step in and out of that, I know.

Also, this. My son is the same. He's actually reasonably bright but in a way that doesn't really fit (like his dad really), but he's convinced he's not and he'll fail. So he doesn't try. I'm convinced that the way forward is to let him find his own way in the world.

 

[Leo2]

Except that you defined success in terms of:
- a comfy workplace
- nice clothes
- a flash car
- a big house.

Which is very narrow.

That's a fair point - although one needs to take that in the context of the discussion, and I didn't actually define 'success' in any terms. I suggested that if he valued those things, higher education would make them easier to achieve.

I agree that defining success in purely material terms is very narrow, but I hope you realise from my subsequent comments, that was not what I was attempting to do.

TBH, I am not sure whether it is being done in jest, or I am perceiving something that isn't there - but I am having trouble understanding the attitudes I am encountering in this thread. I have treated everyone with respect, and have not set out to offend anyone, but I seem to be experiencing gratuitous aggression and insult (not, I hasten to add, from you - but from certain other elements here). And I don't know why.

 

[spanglechick]

Thankyou, lovely!
Why is it a GOOD idea? If you assume some of them will continue anyway - why is it good for the rest? Is any of that down to their options being more limited anyway, now, iyswim?
I mean I can understand that another two years might do loads for someone's self-confidence if you can shore up some basic stuff and instead of sending them out into the world when they ARE still children, but is any of that purely down to how it is NOW, or do you also think there's a real advantage to having people remain in education, in all of it's current forms, for that extra two years (without the pressure to gain specific marks)?

Education and training (free at the point of access) should be a right for all people until adulthood. It is a mark of societal development across the decades and centuries that we have striven to protect and lengthen childhood, and access to education as part of that. It is the best foundation we can give young people, the best chance of transcending the expectations of class. Fighting back against inherited privilege and global inequality. As far as I'm aware, we have lagged behind much of the wealthy part of the world by effectively encouraging our working class kids to finish education at 16. Even the usa, which has one of the worst education provisions of the western world, has a standard expectation of education until 18... there is no equivalent to GCSEs in most of these countries.

TYpical of the education reforms of the last ten years, though, it's been implemented with no thought or resources to make it work. Vocational training needs lots more development. Sixth forms are bearing the brunt of school budget cuts, with no classes under fifteen running - but if we are to make post sixteen meaningful, we should be facilitating more wide choice of subjects, not just the populist options...

I think it will take ten years to filter into the kids' minds. Our kids have had enough at sixteen, in large part because they've had that age associated with the possible end of education from as long as they can remember. But more than ever, 16 year olds are miles away from adulthood. The nature of education, with teachers not being allowed to let kids fail, has made our 16 year olds completely dependent and much more immature than in years past. They therefore need a couple of years of structures, safe growing up, much more than our generation did.

 

[spanglechick]

That's a fair point - although one needs to take that in the context of the discussion, and I didn't actually define 'success' in any terms. I suggested that if he valued those things, higher education would make them easier to achieve.

I agree that defining success in purely material terms is very narrow, but I hope you realise from my subsequent comments, that was not what I was attempting to do.

TBH, I am not sure whether it is being done in jest, or I am perceiving something that isn't there - but I am having trouble understanding the attitudes I am encountering in this thread. I have treated everyone with respect, and have not set out to offend anyone, but I seem to be experiencing gratuitous aggression and insult (not, I hasten to add, from you - but from certain other elements here). And I don't know why.

The other thing you're overlooking, is that education for it's own sake, for personal development - while i agree is a wonderful thing - is increasingly a luxury reserved for those whose parents are able to pay for their tuition. If you're an 18 year old staring down the barrel of 50K debt before you're 25, you need a rationale with more substance than it being 'improving'. If you're really new here, you may be unaware that I teach in a lambeth secondary. Hand-waving aspirations about the social benefit of a higher-educated populace means absolutely nothing to my students. It's offensively clueless.

 

[spanglechick]

Yeah. I'm on this. Thanks anyway. I'll be honest though and say that even two years of being taken advantage of but learning that it's a tough world out there in work whilst earning some pocket money, would probably be better than doing fuck all work towards some noddy qualification at sixth form, getting a shit grade and then discovering the above aged 18.

New apprenticeships are so much better than before. Much wider range of professions, much more meaningful. The biggest change is degree-level apprenticeships, but thre is a knock on effect of the admin implications which means loads of organisations are being compelled to offer apprenticeships. It's not just the trades, hairdressing and childcare available to 16 year olds any more, and that has to be a good thing.

 

[trashpony]

yeah, I corrected it straight away, you are quick! (but even the quoted version was already changed). You are both lovely, hence the confusion

I just happened to be reading the thread at the very wrong/ right time

 

[Leo2]

The other thing you're overlooking, is that education for it's own sake, for personal development - while i agree is a wonderful thing - is increasingly a luxury reserved for those whose parents are able to pay for their tuition. If you're an 18 year old staring down the barrel of 50K debt before you're 25, you need a rationale with more substance than it being 'improving'. If you're really new here, you may be unaware that I teach in a lambeth secondary. Hand-waving aspirations about the social benefit of a higher-educated populace means absolutely nothing to my students. It's offensively clueless.

Well, I'm not a sock, if that's what you are implying - I have been posting on various fora (principally games oriented,) and a couple of US political ones, since I was 12. And no, I was not aware that you are a high school teacher - you have my respect.

I was brought up by a single mother (my dad died when I was little,) and we are not wealthy. Although my father left a trust for my education, my mum has no doubt had to go without certain things to provide me with that education. I only mention this to obviate the impression that you are dealing with a 'spoilt rich brat', and to indicate that I am not unfamiliar with budgeting.

So yes, while we both agree that further education is its own reward, I am aware that many are precluded from tertiary education by certain fiscal limitations - which is why I believe that all education should be free at the point of delivery, much as healthcare is, and we should all pay sufficient tax to ensure that it is.

I would have thought the social (and material) benefits of a better educated populace are obvious, with or without hand-waving, and your putting it in those implicitly pejorative terms is a little surprising. Were I to express the view that only the well off be provided with tertiary education, I could understand your disdain.

To address the matter as one of principle seems to me to be neither clueless nor offensive, and I have made no assumptions as to its significance to your students.

 

[spanglechick]

Well, I'm not a sock, if that's what you are implying - I have been posting on various fora (principally games oriented,) and a couple of US political ones, since I was 12. And no, I was not aware that you are a high school teacher - you have my respect.

I was brought up by a single mother (my dad died when I was little,) and we are not wealthy. Although my father left a trust for my education, my mum has no doubt had to go without certain things to provide me with that education. I only mention this to obviate the impression that you are dealing with a 'spoilt rich brat', and to indicate that I am not unfamiliar with budgeting.

So yes, while we both agree that further education is its own reward, I am aware that many are precluded from tertiary education by certain fiscal limitations - which is why I believe that all education should be free at the point of delivery, much as healthcare is, and we should all pay sufficient tax to ensure that it is.

I would have thought the social (and material) benefits of a better educated populace are obvious, with or without hand-waving, and your putting it in those implicitly pejorative terms is a little surprising. Were I to express the view that only the well off be provided with tertiary education, I could understand your disdain.

To address the matter as one of principle seems to me to be neither clueless nor offensive, and I have made no assumptions as to its significance to your students.

Offensively clueless is right. A trust for your education? "No doubt" your mother made sacrifices? More than 70% of my students are on free school meals. Significant numbers in local authority care. Kids being fed from food banks. Kids staying out until their mum has stopped turning tricks or living eight to a room with your dad and six other Romanian economic migrants. You undoubtedly knew richer families, but you were and are the 1%, and your ignorance of that if unforgiveable.

 

[Edie]

It's not unforgivable if he's 19 or 20. It just is what it is mate. His heart is clearly in the right place.

I admire your belief in education until 18 and your reasons. I feel differently because I see a lot of 16yos (especially lads) who are just gagging to get out and earn a living. My boy included, although he's only 14. He just wants to earn. That's why apprenticeships are such a good idea imo to combine the both.

 

[spanglechick]

It's not unforgivable if he's 19 or 20. It just is what it is mate. His heart is clearly in the right place.

I admire your belief in education until 18 and your reasons. I feel differently because I see a lot of 16yos (especially lads) who are just gagging to get out and earn a living. My boy included, although he's only 14. He just wants to earn. That's why apprenticeships are such a good idea imo to combine the both.

Oh I totally back apprenticeships as part of the 16-18 provision. School is really not the right place for lots of kids by 16. In fact, if I had the power and a blank cheque I'd make the splitting point between vocational and academic 14.

 

[Edie]

My lad says he wants to be a copper. There's an apprenticeship for that at Leeds College. But he's kind of umming and ahhing. If he continues then I'll recommend he gets a trade (plumbing or sparky). That way, a few years in then even if he packs it in he'll always have skills to fall back on if needed. Much better than spending £50k on a useless degree. My youngest (12) studies quite hard and is already talking about Uni. If he wants that, fine, will fund him as far as possible as debt isn't something I want for them. If the money gets unequal then will balance it by giving eldest same no matter what he does.

 

[spanglechick]

My lad says he wants to be a copper. There's an apprenticeship for that at Leeds College. But he's kind of umming and ahhing. If he continues then I'll recommend he gets a trade (plumbing or sparky). That way, a few years in then even if he packs it in he'll always have skills to fall back on if needed. Much better than spending £50k on a useless degree. My youngest (12) studies quite hard and is already talking about Uni. If he wants that, fine, will fund him as far as possible as debt isn't something I want for them. If the money gets unequal then will balance it by giving eldest same no matter what he does.

If you want to do that, you could put the money away for G. He might want a deposit, or help setting up as a sole trader, or to return to education as a adult. Those boys are so lucky to have you.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Anyway - really sorry passenger

My son did well in his mocks but had completely given up by the time his GCSE's came round. He did go to after school revision sessions (only cos I made him, tbf) but he was definitely just going through the motions by then, did nothing outside of school and then freaked about the actual exams.
He had a SEN statement then and his teachers fed back that he was falling asleep during exams (and actually, in maths lessons prior to that!) - but with them thankfully recognising that it wasn't just not trying *head on the desk* stuff but a stress reaction - and they did try their best to help there, so DO speak to them. Really, really, do that.

At his age, his teachers will know him - the ones he's consistently been taught by anyway - and you'll recognise it when they do, too. Take their advice.

My son had a real fear of trying and then failing, so he ground to a total halt - but then always got upset every time his results wouldn't quite take him to the next place
There's a big part of it that is about them learning from their own mistakes, too, but it's an important time - it's just really hard to gauge when to step in and out of that, I know.

I read something a few weeks ago about sleep being a reaction to stress. And totally recognised that in myself, in that I'll often wake up and be facing a 'regular' day, so far so good, but then something will crop up that will make me stressed out and then I will feel totally exhausted, and I'll often end up having a cheeky afternoon siesta. Feeling stressed out will make me want to fall asleep. And that totally tallies with what I read in an article about stress making people want to sleep.

 

[Leo2]

It's not unforgivable if he's 19 or 20. It just is what it is mate. His heart is clearly in the right place.

I admire your belief in education until 18 and your reasons. I feel differently because I see a lot of 16yos (especially lads) who are just gagging to get out and earn a living. My boy included, although he's only 14. He just wants to earn. That's why apprenticeships are such a good idea imo to combine the both.

Thanks for that.

I have no idea what spanglechick finds so offensive about my views, but my experience of these discussion boards leads me to believe it is quite difficult to understand the precise meaning intended - when imparted by simply words on the screen (in the absence of tone of voice, facial expression, and body language). I try to use the language as accurately as I can (I will need to if I am to follow a career at the bar,) but I am obviously not expert enough, if some of the the reactions here are to be taken as a measure thereof.

Nevertheless, I appreciate spanglechick's concerns and compassion for those in our society who are disadvantaged socially and economically, and I share to some extent her seeming disapproval of the class system so entrenched in our society.

There is a certain irony (if that's the right word - I suspect it isn't,) in the fact that I am considered a 'bleeding heart liberal' and a card carrying socialist in the US political board whereupon I habitually post.

Thanks again for your understanding, and yes, it's been a couple of years since I finished school, and to put it in your words - I was 'gagging to get out'.

 

[Leo2]

Offensively clueless is right. A trust for your education? "No doubt" your mother made sacrifices? More than 70% of my students are on free school meals. Significant numbers in local authority care. Kids being fed from food banks. Kids staying out until their mum has stopped turning tricks or living eight to a room with your dad and six other Romanian economic migrants. You undoubtedly knew richer families, but you were and are the 1%, and your ignorance of that if unforgiveable.

As you wish, there is obviously little point in my further attempting to rectify your impressions of my situation. We are not as far apart in our value systems as you assume - but cheers for the discussion.

 

[Mattym]

I haven't had time to read everything properly, but I would suggest....
1) Does he have a close friend(s) at all in his year group who can help to escort him in/out? It's very embarrassing (but sometimes necessary) for a parent to do it, although you could do it and drop him off nearby, but then, can you guarantee he'll safely make it in?
2) Can you ask the school if he can sit the exams in a separate place from the rest of the pupils? If that's causing anxiety, then a safe place could really benefit his chances.
3) If you can convince him to return to lessons, does the school have a policy for pupils who are going through such difficulties? Some schools have the 'safe' place for normal lessons & things like a quick exit scheme, allowing pupils to leave the classroom when stressed/anxious/angry. To that end, pupils are given a card, which they show at the time.