KEY POINTS:
Like many parents, I am constantly searching for new ways to increase my children's chances of being successful in the big wide world. I want to give them all the opportunities I once had, before I squandered them.
My boy and girl are only 3 and 1 respectively and already I see huge potential in them so I'm in three minds to educate them.
Should I send them to a regular school, a private school, or educate them myself at home with the help of the inter-web and Sky Digital?
With the regular school system, quality can vary greatly, depending on what school zone your fictitious apartment is located in, and as a parent, you are more likely to get dragged into school funding initiatives that mean you have to meet people you don't really want to meet.
The same can be said of a private schools, but its biggest negative is that it costs a lot more, and that is money that could be used for improving the grounds, buildings and lifestyle of the staff of the home education model.
I attended a private, all-boys' boarding school which, for the most part, I enjoyed, but not for the reasons its detractors would have you believe.
They would have you believe that in an all-boys' boarding school, homosexuality is rife. I didn't see any homosexual acts, but that's not to say they weren't going on. I believe there was about as much homosexuality as in any other school, and why shouldn't there be?
When I say "other schools" I am not including Catholic boarding schools as their track record, including the actions of many of the teaching staff, makes a mockery of the statement I just made. Ours was an Anglican school, and we only had two staff members fired for sexual misconduct when I was there.
The detractors would also have you believe that the so-called sheltered environment of a private boarding school creates unbalanced individuals. I left that school a nymphomaniac heterosexual with a penchant for alcohol abuse, traits that don't always go to well together, but are common and accepted in today's society, especially if you have enough money.
Home education is beginning to look more like the option for us so I have started designing the curriculum.
I recently attended a six-week psychology course at Cambridge, just south of Hamilton. This course has enabled me to establish a system to identify my kids' core strength.
I believe my kids are at the age where I need to identify their strengths and weaknesses so I can recognise whether they are going to be the next Tiger Woods, or whether they are going to be a genius like Ray Charles.
Once I have identified this, I can focus my education accordingly.
After just six months of using this programme, I can attest that it works, as my son can already play golf like a young Ray Charles, and my daughter, who is only one-and-a-half, can already play the piano like Tiger Woods at the same age.
By all accounts, Tiger was average-to-good on the piano and had he not found an interest in golf, there is no reason to think that he might not have made it all the way to grade six or seven. This is early proof, to me, that the programme works and I look forward to the future results. Who knows, my kids may end up singing country and western like Kelly Slater, or surfing like Dolly Parton.
The point is, when you identify their strengths early you give them more opportunities. What they do with those opportunities is up to them. Sadly, this kind of programme wasn't around when I was a child, and my potential was wasted.
I was a child prodigy but unfortunately, by the time this was recognised, I was 36. You can no longer be recognised as a child prodigy at 36. Adult prodigies are far less common or popular and are more likely to be identified as those boring know-alls you sometimes get stuck with at parties.
