1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Current issues in primary education

Discussion in 'Primary' started by deleted303, Feb 20, 2009.

  1. Facts, please? Definition of 'too many'? Whose definition? How defined? Statistical basis for definition, including international correlations? Definition of 'well enough'? Well enough for what? Again, facts?
    You are clearly not a primary practitioner as any practitioner would have identified a large list of other items as 'main' before this, such as:
    Single Level testing v KS2 tests
    The personalisation agenda
    Implementation of VLEs
    Managing breadth and balance of curriculum
    amongst others.
    If you can provide clear facts to your statement, I will read them with great interest. If you can't, please avoid making such general and unsubstantiated Daily Mail type comments.

  2. [​IMG] well said!
  3. The just published Primary Review identifies many issues, but I sent the following to one of the papers who has an editorial on it today:

    <font face="Times New Roman">Sir: You overlook what most sets us apart from the rest of Europe, is responsible for so much preoccupation with how children learn and leads to cycles of bloom and blight in our primary schools: our awful spelling system. We have the world&rsquo;s worst orthography which necessitates that our children have to spend an exceptionally long and mind-numbingly tedious time on learning to read and write. </font><font face="Times New Roman"> </font>
    <font face="Times New Roman"> </font> The best and only real solution to this is to copy our Continental neighbours. Over the past 200 years they have all tried to make learning to read and write easier by improving their spelling systems. Those who have done so most now have the happiest and best achieving pupils. We have not amended our exceptionally inconsistent orthography since roughly 1660 in any way. That is the biggest difference between us and other Europeans.ndependent literacy researcher and writer
  4. You are factually incorrect in your references to Plowden. HMI 1978 report found that only five per cent of English primary schools had fully embraced the recommendations of that report, so your statement has no basis in fact. Furthermore, and on a more general note, your writing is full of vague and inconclusive phrasing, such as 'woefully little.' Use FACTS and EVIDENCE, not your own half-baked opinions, and you might be taken seriously. Until you do so, I'd be careful about calling yourself a 'researcher'.
    Besides this, this forum is not a place to advertise your wares. Please stop. By all means, post a link to your website, but leave it at that. As you are an 'independent literacy researcher and writer', you are breaking TES T&C's by posting your work on here.
  5. <font size="3">Robin Alexander and the Editor of The Independent both thought that Plowden changed primary education.</font> <font face="Times New Roman"><font size="3">I learned first hand that learning to read and write English is much harder than other languages. After I stopped teaching I began to establish exactly why this was. The facts of my research are now freely available for all to see and use at </font>www.englishspellingproblems.co.uk</font> <font face="Times New Roman">I am not trying to sell anything, just to educate people about how English spelling makes learning to read and write exceptionally difficult. Most people understand now that it does. The facts I have compiled show what&rsquo;s difficult about it. </font>
  6. er,no. Alexander has written extensively on HMI (1978) and Plowden (1967) and how no Plowden 'revolution' really ever happened in schools. Read Alexander, Rose & Woodhead (1992).
    You are insulting a whole culture and heritage by thinking that a language can just be played around with because of your own personal experience. Just because you find somethiing hard, doesns't mean it is. Most people understand that. It just means that you are not that bright.

  7. As another poster has observed more generally about your uninformed postings:
    It seems to me from all your posts that you just wish to change
    English spelling to accommodate the difficulty you had learning it
    yourself at 14 (according to your atrocious website).
    Leave our
    language alone. It has a long and distinguished history and represents
    a rich cultural heritage from the Britons, Romans, Norse people,
    Saxons, Normans, Indian subcontinent, Scots, Dutch, German, Ancient
    Greek etc etc etc. That is why is it such an expressive language, with
    a fantastic facility for shades of meaning, nuance and subtelty with
    other languages lack. It is more than just words. Much more. It is a
    reflection of who we are as a people.You are suggesting this be taken
    away from us. We don't want to be like everyone else - we are English.
    was a similarly barmy attempt at this in the 1960s in England, which
    thankfully failed, but not before the damage was done. As a
    researcher, I am sure you are entirely familiar with it. It suggested
    such ridiculous spellings as 'peepl', for 'people', for example.
    Sadly, it made it into schools. What you may not be so familiar with
    is the damage it did to those children who suffered it. My brother was
    unfortunate enough to experience it and it has taken him many years
    into adulthood and a constant effort to learn how to spell correctly
    and feel confident around reading a
    If spelling were such a
    problem, it would have evolved into something easier naturally over the
    years, as it has done through many different periods. It is as it is -
    a living language which develops through use on the tongue and in the
    streets, not through some 'researcher's' personal quest. There is
    nothing in our glorious language that a bit of hard work and
    application at school with support at home can't conquer. If you can
    manage it, then so can English native children.

  8. Still far too much paper work. My weekly forecast is 2,200 words !.I have just done a word count !. Some schools allow far less, others even more.
    Can planning be more regulated ?
    PPA still being cancelled, reduced at a whim !
    Too much/ too little parental involvement Parents coming to complain when you have moved their off-spring to another seat but then not having the time to hear their child read despite not having a job.
    Unsuffcient resources.
  9. tafkam

    tafkam Occasional commenter

    I'd argue that these are problems of school management locally than national issues.

  10. I'd argue that these are problems of school management locally than national issues. Maybe school management should be a national issue ?!.
    Surely one badly maintained/run/organised educational establishment regardless of where it is reflects badly on the education system in general !.

  11. I hope not! It is my understanding that there is currently no expectation for set planning formats etc as a planning document is meant to mean something to the teacher teaching from it. As such, I believe, head teachers cannot insist on planning done in a partlicualr way. If planning were more regulated, workload would invaiably go up and it would be yet another way to reduce the <u>profession</u> of teaching.

    Against your contract terms and conditions. Talk to your union if you see it as a problem if I were you.
  12. Can you tell our LA that then please, who have insisted that all teachers use the same planning sheets for all subjects. And it's something that a teacher teaches from? lol - I don't think anyone in the school uses it to teach from, purely for the LA people to tick off each fortnight (disclaimer: I am not primary trained, but filling a gap no-one else wants, and the school is in special measures. This probably has a lot to do with things....but it's still a right royal pain in the rear....)

  13. tafkam

    tafkam Occasional commenter

    Who told you that?
    LAs have no say in such matters. It is up to the Headteacher to organise such things.
    Is your school in an Ofsted category? (In which case, the LA have much more say and can appoint governors, etc. to have more impact)
  14. Hi
    I have an interview on Tuesday and am trying to get as much knowledge of current issues as possible. Could you please explain the difference between app and single level testing - as I understand that both assess the pupils when the teacher feels they are ready at the level they feel - am I right or have I got the wrong end of the stick?
    Also, without sounding too thick- what is slcn and agt?
    Just to add to the ongoing discussion on here - I think the english language should be maintained - it may be hard to grasp rules and exceptions some times but we got there why cant todays kids - why should we dumb it down -it is part of our heritage. I have enough of marking work that is written in text language without making it acceptable !!


  15. Acc. to last year's SATs results, 1 in 5 11-year-olds still don't read well enough to cope with secondary schooling, although the Durham cem group who did not change their tests when the government did in 1998 have concluded that it's closer to 1 in 4. They also concluded that the Literacy Strategy has made no difference to literacy standards at all. They think there has been no significant change up or down since 1950.
    U can find all this in earlier interim reports release by the Cambridge Primary Review.
    I am sorry but I won't be able to comment any more on this for the next 2 weeks. If u are really interested, contact me after that: mashabell@aol.com.
  16. tafkam

    tafkam Occasional commenter

    So many errors in one statement...
    Firstly, the test results for Reading in 2008 showed that 86% of students reached level 4. I presume that this is what you meant when you said "read well enough to cope with secondary schooling".
    So in fact, a more accurate statement would be that 1 in 7 eleven year olds did not achieve the expected level at the end of Year 6 in Reading.
    Let us also remember that 20 years ago when the NC was set up, level 4 was not the expected level, but the average level. Now, since you're happy to refer to change over 50 years, let's consider an alternative statement that could be made on the basis of the data:
    According to last year's SATs results, just 1 in 7 students are below average readers.
    In comparison to the normal definition of average, by which we would expect around 50% of students to be 'below average', that sounds like a bloody marvellous system to me.
    Of course, it's not a statement that will help to promote your website, so you may disagree.
    Lies, damned lies....
  17. Back to the original poster who was looking for some advice....Personalised learning, APP, foundation stage approach being used in KS1 to ease transition, AfL, Gifted and Talented (AGT), SLCN (Speech, language and communication needs), Every child matters...these are just a few off the top of my head. Hoep it helps.
  18. One of the biggest things at the moment has to be the two Primary reviews going on, and the change in the National Curriculum in 2011.

    One is run by Jim Rose (the chap who did the early reading review and came up with the Simple View of Reading) and the Government. He's saying we should restructure the curriculum into 6 areas, but wasn't allowed to include how we test students in the review.

    The other is run by Robin Alexander and Cambridge University. He's trying to restructure the curriculum into 8 areas...

    I don't have the links, but both have published interim reports now.
  19. There was an article on the above in the TES paper this week.
  20. Thanks for your help. Much appreciated.

Share This Page