Hi all

Sorry for not replying to everyone’s replies - forgot to check.

Gatogato thanks for your thoughts/concerns re school / university.

Definitely a big consideration and something I have given a lot of thought to. I would agree with you 100% if the girls were interested in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math).

(This may be a little long winded but its probably the only way to explain it and also may be of interest to others in a similar position )

We have two older sons and their experiences factor into my thinking. Our oldest son is 26 and is a doctor of electrical engineering in power systems and transmission. He did primarily STEM and achieved an ATAR of 93 in his final year. I think he needed an ATAR of 76 to get in to engineering. For him, finishing high school with a good result was critical.

Second son is 19 and has just finished his first year of an arts degree in politics and international relations. He did non STEM subjects, primarily humanities, and achieved a 72 ATAR. Here is where Australia has done something that really is BS. Because he did non STEM subjects his final score was actually lowered as there is a penalty for not doing the STEM ones. All his friends who did humanities had the same outcome.

His ATAR is enough to get him into his arts degree, but here is the silly part. You can start studying humanities and non STEM subjects at university via open universities from the age of 16 without an ATAR. So our now 19yo could have actually started studying his degree three years ago and would be studying his third year of his degree now, not his first. In effect, he wasted at least two years at high school trying to get an ATAR when it isn’t needed. I can only speak to the two high schools our boys went to, but there is something fundamentally dysfunctional with our schooling system ATM. Virtually everyone, students, teachers, parents, are not happy.

Our oldest daughter, now almost 15, wants to be a lawyer so she can stay at high school and try to get a high enough ATAR to enter university to do a law degree. She can also start studying a diploma in paralegal studies through open universities instead of doing year 10 or higher, and this then enables automatic entry into a law degree. In reality, because the diploma is eight subjects and for a high school aged student two subjects per semester should be achievable, by the end of what would normally be high school, she will already have a diploma, which counts towards 1/3 of the degree and auto entry. No ATAR needed.

Even if we dont go OS, our oldest daughter will probably start the diploma in year 10, and do school part time. Or she may simply start an arts degree while we travel.

Our younger daughter has mild ADHD and struggles to fit into primary school socially, though she is quite smart and is into STEM. How we approach her schooling is probably going to be a harder road than I care to think, as it is a struggle.

Cheers

Homer

An interesting assumption that any alternative to getting thru university in the least possible time or at the youngest possible age is by definition a “waste.” That may well be true in some cases, but it’s definitely not in others. There is value in education—make that, “there *should* be value in education”—aside from whether it gets you into a certain program, career, lifestyle, income bracket, or whatever else.

Of course I have no clue how the Australian system works, but I’m assuming the above holds true in your country as it does in mine.

Not an assumption to get thru university quicker, but why would you spend two years with the aim of gaining entry to university when that is not needed.

The difficulty with the current Australian system, at least in my state, is there is virtually no correlation between the school curriculum and university - the two are are two different worlds, however the final two years of high school are viewed as preparatory for university. That is virtually its total focus.

IF the experience, both socially and educationally, was a positive experience I would support doing those extra years 100%. But as I mentioned, there is something not quite right with our education system here atm. My kids are very switched on when it comes to education, but none are having, or have recently, had good experiences with it.

Cheers and thanks

Homer

Well, I think you’re missing my point entirely, but that’s as likely my fault as yours.

Regardless of the stated academic goals of high school or college (or pre-school, middle school, graduate school…), a LOT of the value is actually in other realms, unrelated to academics. I’m thinking mainly of socialization—for better or worse—plus developing work habits, learning to be productive in groups, and forming the networks of friends and peers which tend to shape much of later life.

Any smart kid, presumably including yours, can accelerate to at least 300 or 400% of normal high school pacing once they get motivated. The difficulty is not about learning the subject matter—it’s more about growing up. I’ve seen 15 year-old kids in college, and many (I was going to say most, but I’m trying to understate my case) remain 15 developmentally despite verging on 20 intellectually. That’s not necessarily a healthy thing for them.

I’m also drawing on my own experience—accelerated to the point where I was perpetually socially immature until I took a couple of decades off—and that of my parents, who were accelerated 2 and 3 years respectively, displayed their immaturity in their disastrous marriage, and never quite managed to figure things out. They, at least, were very good students even while much younger than the other students, proving that there’s more to life than being smart and jump-starting a career.

Of course there are exceptions—lots of them. I hope I’ve clarified what I meant to some extent, but in any case I’ll bow out of your thread, which originally was about something else. Besides, I don’t want to give the impression that I’ve anything nice to say about standard secondary educational systems, about which I can rant angrily and incoherently for hours on end.

That's pretty much my position on the UK system and I see my two kids having got to where they are despite the system rather than because of it. I've often wondered whether that's the case for most families, that the system is optimal for next to nobody and children succeed or fail via mechanisms that are outside that which is provided for.

A comment perhaps based on my misunderstanding re "4WD Vehicle probably VW Transporter 4Motion dual cab...Cant sleep in it - requires paid accommodation ".

You can sleep in any reasonable sized 4x4 vehicle, or at least we have done so on long(ish) trips with no problems.

OP's situation is such that although 4 people can't realistically sleep in such a vehicle, 2 can, and a RTT provides for the other two. Alternatively a ground tent would work, although I suspect that a RTT will be a more attractive option.

Thought #2 - you can buy two 4x4 vehicles for the price of most "Expedition Style Trucks" so you could do this and have the advantage of a back-up vehicle (each for the other) as well as being able to sleep inside each. YOu'd need a 40 ft container and not a 20 ft container, however the marginal cost compared with a container capable or handling the truck is not much.

PS: I don't envisage Lawrence of Arabia in a truck - which brings me to the last thought - 8 camels - four to ride and four for kit...

Speaking as someone who was once a teenage girl I can safely say the best choice of vehicle / travel will be whatever allows private space and access to a shower. Also, having internet access for keeping up with friends would be important.

I was out the door at 16 and subsequently moved around a lot, at that time I dreamed of being able to just live in one place and have stability, though I know not all teenagers are like that.