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.
Discussion in 'History' started by dasboy, Feb 7, 2013.
...and your research?
You've got me, I have none. Other than years of experience.
3 pages ago you were moaning that primary teachers are not history specialists, and will struggle to find 1 hour a week to teach history. Now based on an outdated OFSTED survey, you are saying that everything is fine and has been for years.
Which is it?
Primary education has been dumbed down.
You've just confirmed that.
So your view is anecdotal at best - no need to be ashamed of that, just admit it!
Commenting - because the proposed (Gove created) NC demands too much of non-specialists (one of its many failings) IMHO...
Purely a factual observation, confirmed by many primary teachers, given the stress son literacy & numeracy...
Actually I was using it to show that your comments about primary school history, despite your 'years of experience' was factually incorrect, or in colloquial terms, 'rubbish'...
how did I do that? Was it my predictive text??
What do you believe to be good primary history - the sort that isn't dumbed down? Is there a progression in learning - or is it just a linear set of facts to be learned, saving the 'gorier' bits for the older children?
I think this is one of the most ill thought out statements I have ever read. " Pupils should be taught about simple vocabulary relating to the passing of time such as ?before?, ?after?, ?past?,?present?, ?then? and ?now? the concept of nation and of a nation?s history concepts such as civilisation, monarchy, parliament, democracy, and war and peace that are essential to understanding history the lives of significant individuals in Britain's past who have contributed to our nation's achievements ?"
It makes me wonder if the writer ever met a small child! How are the final few ideas relevant to small children???? How have they ever been? These are complex (and very interesting) ideas - involving lots of lovely debate, research, reading etc, etc to gain understanding. All very interesting - but not for a 7 year old!!
Give them 'my granny's holidays', 'toys in the past', 'who used to live where I do now' - go from the known to the unknown - and wait until they are a bit more grown up before you ask them to attempt to make sen of 'civilisation (such a value-laden term!), monarchy (l'etat, c'est moi!), parliament, etc.
This is not dumbing down - it is taking into account child development, and educating appropriately.
What do we want for our young children in terms of their historical learning at primary school? (Sorry, I can't comment on secondary.) This seems to me to be the essential point we are arguing over.
Clear air you are spot on. I'm worried about exactly the same things as you. I feel very sorry for the teachers and children in KS1 (age five, six and seven) who, if this goes ahead, will lose all the enjoyment of learning that goes alongside relevant teaching ie, subjects they can relate to because they can talk to granny or grandad who lived it all.
Sadly the youngest children are being overlooked in this debate - or swept along in the wake of certain secondary teachers who haven't a clue about KS1 in particular.
Dumbed down? What a joke.
Thanks, Earl David's Wife. The History proposals make me feel very sad indeed. It feels like so much more of the 'too much, too soon' we have going on.
Not all of us - I suggest you have listen to the discussion to this discussion from Radio 3 last Tuesday:
The secondary teacher (Stephen Drew) showed a good understanding of the problems...
Sadly some of the other contributors showed no understanding of the issue all, IMHO...
With apologies to penguin1212 who posted the thead below on the Primary forum (sorry penguin) but it illustrates a point I made earlier about Primaries being pushed into acting before anything has became law.
Primaries (as those who work in them will know) are (sadly) very easy targets.
PS (above) I did say certain secondary teachers
Forgive me if this link has already been posted.
I hope that Mr Bage publishes the reply from the Secretary of State for education. I am sure he is fully aware that the proposed History curriculum has been devised by Civitas and is just playing devil's advocate.
Brilliant letter from Mr Bage...Thanks for the reference..
In looking at the consultation documents drawn up in 2011 it would appear that Gove et al have paid little credence to the views of parents who took part in the consultation. The fourth point is very telling.
Q6b What do you think are the key things that should be done to improve the
current National Curriculum?
There were 2277 responses to this question.
1109 respondents to this question (49%) expressed concern that the current National
Curriculum was too prescriptive and was a barrier to teachers being able to teach
creatively. They stressed that schools and teachers must be allowed more flexibility
to implement the National Curriculum, and a number expressed the view that the
National Curriculum should act as a guide rather than a rule book. The following
suggestions were put forward as ways to improve the National Curriculum:
? have a set of key skills for core subjects linked with the Assessing Pupils?
Progress framework, giving teachers greater freedom to implement and teach
in an inspiring way;
? less specification and greater simplification of curriculum content;
? the ?core? subjects should contain only the irreducible core and not try to cover
the whole subject; for example, English could have a compulsory core but with
the addition of locally decided content;
? make the curriculum less fact-based;
? remove the prescriptive and repetitive QCDA schemes of work; and
? make the school curriculum less subject to prescriptive examination
824 (36%) said that the National Curriculum should be less knowledge-based and
more focused on the learning of skills, for example stating that children needed
access to a wide range of experiences and opportunities. It was mentioned that a
skills rather than knowledge-based curriculum might be considered for primary level
as pupils can quickly acquire knowledge later if they had the skills to do so.
However, respondents defined skills in different ways and emphasised different types
of skills such as practical skills, life skills and critical thinking skills. Similarly, what
respondents understood by knowledge differed markedly, making it difficult to draw
any clear conclusions. Some respondents also emphasised that there needed to be
a balance of knowledge and skills and that an emphasis on one over the other was
This quote demonstrates your lack of understanding entirely. Of course, all history is quite straightforward really, if you want it to be.
I say we follow this model and scrap all History teaching until after Sats. After all, it's basically just story- telling isn't it? I reckon three weeks should be long enough to get through a HH box set, shouldn't it?
As long as you spend part of those weeks dressing up and colouring in
In today's Telegraph, Terry Deary (author of HH) is quoted as saying this
"Teachers are just the mouthpiece for those Eton boys down in Whitehall telling them, 'You will teach this, this and this.' I don't care. Let them wreck the lives of the children. I can't stand up to them. All I can do is come up with an alternative which will show my young readers that history isn't actually boring and that when you talk about real people in the past - not statistics and dates and battles and kings and queens - it is the most fascinating subject in the world."
"The problem with the way it (history) is taught, he said, is that teachers have to follow strict rules laid down by the Government.
"You are supposed to do what the numpties from Eton tell you to do ...But it's the obession with dates and the obsession with the big people ... rather than the little people."
Let's hope Mr Gove choked on his Sunday morning latte as he read it. Let us also hope that the reason why his publisher, Scholastic, have not invited Mr Deary to write any more HH books is because they believe that there will be more bucks to be made from authors who do follow the strict rules laid down by Gove-rnment.
Heard TD on the radio the other day - he seemed to say that it was a mutual decision to end the HH series because it had reached the end of the road... Certainly didn't seem angry about it...
Despite all the good TD has done to encourage the learning of History (& I encouraged my own children to read HH as well as pupils, it has to be said he has a bee in his bonnet (to put it politely) about teachers - the two comments quoted here, for example, are as inaccurate as most of Gove's pronouncements...and that isn't a compliment!
I am fully aware of Mr Deary's opinion of teachers, reflecting his own childhood experiences.
Although, the article I read today further qualifies Scholastic's decision:
"The truth is that his publisher will not risk putting out any new ones, he said, admitting the decision left him feeling like David Beckham being dropped from a football team...after a few games he doesn't get picked and eventually he gets the message."
Setting Mr Deary's opinions and inaccuracies aside, we cannot shy away from the fact that if we get it right in primary school; engendering children's curiousity about the past by learning about things that make 'human sense' to them, then this will foster a life long love of history. The draft revised primary history curriculum needs to strike that balance: some facts coupled with a deeper understanding of how people lived.
I have a theory that the reason why the majority of people visit museums is not through their thirst for the dates of major political events, but the exhibits which depict how people used to live. I am certain that if the British Museum were to survey visitors to the current Pompeii exhibition my theory would stand.
(As a social Historian by training, I'd have to agree...!)
I thank you.
I would also like to point posters in the direction of the Cambridge Primary Review website and in particular a letter written by Andrew Pollard, an erstwhile educational adviser to the Gove-rnment, regarding the draft National Curriculum.
I would also encourage every teacher to add their voice to the consultation process via the DFE website.