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

New Draft Curriculum for September 2014 - well?

Discussion in 'Primary' started by Yogs, Feb 7, 2013.

  1. zugthebug

    zugthebug New commenter

    Fair enough but why limit the curriculum to this. My class find out more about where places are through other vehicles. Presentations, news reports, picture quizzes (where am i type things with pics and clues to well known locations in UK)
    Just want to know the reason why this is essential for 7-11 year olds
     
  2. clear_air

    clear_air New commenter

    And I am interested in the political driving force behind this document - who has decided what is portent for children to learn, and why?
     
  3. mystery10

    mystery10 Occasional commenter

    Dunno. But the thing is whoever you got to decide on a curriculum there are going to be people who disagree as to what is important and what isn't. It's an impossible one really.
    Are you "limited" to this curriculum? History looks pretty lengthy, but is the rest really all that you could cover in primary school? I don't know.
    I don't personally see the speaking and listening and problem solving thing as an issue. Perhaps that is because I take it as an assumption that teachers would do this anyhow. This was very much part of my teacher training in the 1980s before any national curriculum and that was for secondary science of all things. Isn't this just part of the "craft of teaching" as is using discovery approaches, independent research etc. Surely it doesn't have to be specified in a national curriculum?
    It's funny because there are quite a few things which make me go hurray ... including English county names, continents, and oceans. Things like this make it easier to understand factual texts, the news etc.
    Why do people love the old curriculum so much? Presumably there was a bigger outcry when that came on the scene as there hadn't been one before that.
     
  4. clear_air

    clear_air New commenter

    I do remember there being a furore about that one too - but lots of consultation? There doesn't feel to me that there has been a great deal of that this one around - especially with the Rose Review not so long ago... What a waste of public money!!
    This curriculum proposal does feel to me as if it has plenty of opportunity for political soundbites. Which seems a pity, to be point scoring politically on the backs of our children.
     
  5. Learning the names of counties won't help children actually know where they are or be useful in any real sense to their geographical understanding. It's a question of priorities I guess. For me, for my children to know the names of the counties of England is not nearly as important as some of the stuff that's been missed out. Middle class children tend to learn counties/continents etc from travelling about. We are focusing on past teaching, but what we are really talking about is a particular kind of middle-class education. My wholly working class mum who left school at 14 would never have been able to tell you where the counties were (and possibly still couldn't now). Twas ever thus.
    It is absolutely not possible to have any freedom over the content of the curriculum given the list of stuff we would need to legally teach. There simply won't be time. It is extremely disingenuous of the Government to pretend to be giving greater freedom to teachers, when in actuality, this draft is far more constraining than the old NC.
    As usual, nobody has listened to the people who actually teach the curriculum.

     
  6. WolfPaul

    WolfPaul New commenter

    Skills cannot be taught without a context of some kind. If you are teaching map skills then you need to use a map, and there has to be some factual knowledge gained through the use of the skills, or else what is the point of the skills? Therefore, why not teach the map skills in the context of the facts that the curriculum requires?

     
  7. mystery10

    mystery10 Occasional commenter

    I suppose people want to teach map skills in their local environment maybe?

    Is the new curriculum more or less loaded with content than the current one?
     
  8. clear_air

    clear_air New commenter

    It feels like more.
    Personally, I like change of this sort to be incremental. We need to review out nc - but I think it should be done constantly, and constantly refined - small steps, though, because the implications are so huge.
     
  9. zugthebug

    zugthebug New commenter

    Agreed neither knowledge nor skills can be taught in isolation. Just seems to me that the list of knowledge required hasnt been thought out. Since google maps or google earth it is hardly rocket since to find out where places are.
    Teaching history sequentially has no reason behind it. If Gove is going to dictate some subjects in detail then why not a list of artists and composers. MFL is about to be compulsory in ks2 but not PSHE or citizenship. Greater emphasis on competitive sport, learn tables facts to 12, roman numerals and binary.
    There is no cohesion, a heavy 'academic' curriculum, not slimmed down, not thought out and will cost schools to implement.
    Out of 6 units in the current curriculum for history, only 2 will be possible to teach in the new sequential curriculum. My school has had to invest money in resourcing the units, books, artefacts, visits etc. the library service no longer calls at my rural school, nor does it offer project boxes of books to use - budget reasons given. This means the children are reliant on the resources the school can provide. Many staff have built collections using their own money, ebay a godsend for second hand books and artefacts. The changes are to be dropped into school life with a year to prepare, there is no money for extra resources, any spare is spent supporting children who are not making progress or who have special needs. My LA has given 2 children statements for 15 hours but no additional money to achieve this. We apparently have money already in our budget for this. Non specialist teachers need to be trained to teach MFL rather than running it as an extra curricular.
    Pushing towards academies or a different career choice?
     
  10. mystery10

    mystery10 Occasional commenter

    Maybe he thinks all schools are like ours where we have no books connected to the non core subjects! I always wonder why we don't do what France certainly used to do - have s one standard texts hich are passed on secondhand. Or use a visualiser and breach copyright all the time?
     
  11. I've had a quick look through the core subjects seem manageable (a bit old school in a society with growing technological demands)
    foundation subjects will be more challenging to deliver.
    Does anyone know if there will be demos and examples of planning and delivery provided to primary schools nearer the time of implication?
     
  12. Couldn't agree more. I teach in a small, rural school with a small budget which is already stretched to breaking point.
    It's all well and good changing some of the content we have to teach, but this comes at a cost to schools, in terms of both time and money, which we simply don't have.

     
  13. Please tell me this is a spoof!
    Where does Mr Gove expect schools to find the money to replace all the resources needed for history, geography etc. I hope he's going to provide schools with the additional funding needed (hahaha as if!)
     
  14. mystery10

    mystery10 Occasional commenter

    Perhaps the idea is to stop spending it on IT and spend it on books instead! [​IMG]
    Joking apart, most of our school stuff seems to come free off the BBC website - they'll update it for the new curriculum won't they?
     
  15. janmacg

    janmacg New commenter

    I agree - the history is crazy!
    Sharing the history out chronologically between key stages is completely bonkers! And obviously means that we will need some major investment in resources, not least in teacher training for most of us... For those of us educated in state schools from the 1970s onwards, we don't know all that much about the glorious revolution ourselves... (what was it exactly??)
     
  16. akimbo

    akimbo New commenter

    Given that there are over 50 areas listed in the KS2 History curriculum... including 'Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome' as well as all of the British History and that we allocate roughly an hour per week to history... so 39 x4= 156 hours over KS2...
    Can the mathmeticians work out the allocation for me.. in Roman numerals please?
    Looking at it again I think the Goegraphy is equally awful...
    Only UK, Europe and The Americas in KS2? What?


     
  17. lardylegs

    lardylegs Occasional commenter

    Of course not! That would deny the opportunity for all the publishing houses (run by Lord Snooty's pals from Oxford) to push their wares to you from next September onwards. Your school will have to PAY for anything they need. Thousands of pounds will need to be spent on 'new resources' to support this fab new curriculum.
     
  18. Gove moves in mysterious ways, his blunders to perform.
     
  19. bnm

    bnm

    I have submitted my response and equally urge everyone to do the same.
     

Share This Page