Earlier this week I wrote about the teaching union rep at the end of this clip, and it got me thinking yet again about the problems inherent in people in the government, both local and national, holding similar views about a broad and balanced curriculum, regardless of it not, by its very definition, being suited to the individual child. There's a quote that I love -
“Learning can only happen when a child is interested. If he’s not interested it’s like throwing marshmallows at his head and calling it eating.”
They see a child playing Minecraft for weeks on end? They will miss the reading, the socialising, the creativity, and all the amazing, varied and completely individualised things the child is learning. They will just notice the absence of projectile marshmallows, and assume the child is not learning.
They see a child lying on the grass watching the sky all morning? Again, no marshmallows lobbed relentlessly at the child's head, so no learning. They'll miss the child processing all he learnt the day before.
They see a child watching The Simpsons for a whole afternoon? They will miss the historical and cultural references they're taking in. Because no marshmallows, so no learning.
My home is metaphorical-marshmallow free. (Plenty of the real ones though!) So if these people came in ready to asses using their marshmallow-trajectory-centric beliefs, they would see nothing: not broad and balanced, nor suited to ability and aptitude. They'd miss my children designing and cooking their very own recipe for learning, with me facilitating. Because we don't do marshmallows, and marshmallows are all these people know.
*Disclaimer: I'm well aware that there are some teachers who are supportive of/interested in alternative educational models, and lots who go on to HE their own children. They're not, however, the ones who take jobs voluntarily monitoring and controlling these pesky home educators.