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

Rant

Discussion in 'Education news' started by Jane Austen, Apr 16, 2016.

  1. palmtree100

    palmtree100 Lead commenter

    Chelsea2, that is exactly the sort of thing I did when I worked in the 1:1 tuition programme funded under the labour government. When taking children out individually for an hour each it was easy to spot huge gaps in the basics and fill these, with the luxury of having only one child to teach. I taught all the wrong things, like add zero when you multiply by 10, and they made huge progress
     
  2. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    It's not merely my 'attitude' - it's statutory as per the National Curriculum. The point of Secondary is not to be Remedial Primary.


    This is my 'attitude'.
     
  3. palmtree100

    palmtree100 Lead commenter

    I think it would be good to do more of the quick-fire oral recall stuff, in the form of games etc. But it doesn't seem to be common now. I'm secondary trained and only working in primary as a TA so I don't know what is encouraged in terms of primary methodology to be honest. Maybe too much oral stuff doesn't provide enough evidence in books and doesn't lend itself to independent work?
     
    -myrtille- likes this.
  4. palmtree100

    palmtree100 Lead commenter

    Well then maybe the secondary curriculum needs revising as I'm sure it contains many other things that have been introduced in primary but need reinforcing in secondary such as grammar. Too many teachers, in both phases, find they have to ignore the fact that lots of children are not secure on the basics.

    I agree with sporty that if we were left to teach them how we wanted they would be better prepared for secondary school/ life.
     
    SportyK and Jane Austen like this.
  5. Shedman

    Shedman Star commenter

    Could we do any worse?
     
    SportyK likes this.
  6. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Knowledge of multiplication tables are reinforced through Secondary use. It is not the statutory responsibility of Primary to teach these tables.


    Securing the basics is, at least, the point of Primary school.


    Spotted this (to throw an actual news story into this Education News thread):

    Primary schools stop pupils reading above their level

    (Schoolsweek.co.uk, 18th April 2016.)

    While the article makes it plain that this is not known to be a widespread issue it would seem that some Primary teachers, for whatever reason, aren't clear on when they have accomplished even this least thing in English. From everything I've seen, this is also a feature of Primary mathematics teaching. As I said quite earlier, I'm not calling this a personal moral failing in Primary teachers, so no defence is required, but it shouldn't be a controversial observation that Primary teachers, along with Secondary teachers, aren't as well prepared or filtered by ITT than they could be otherwise. We only need look so far as the increasing popularity of awful social media pro forma gurus, subject policy documents and how-to-teach books to get supporting evidence for this.
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2016
  7. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    This should read: It is the statutory responsibility of Primary to teach these tables.
     
  8. Jesmond12

    Jesmond12 Star commenter

    I had to do a double take there Vince. :eek:
     
  9. hhhh

    hhhh Lead commenter

    Not many teachers (or others) bothered to fight against the removal of 1:1. Or at least, it certainly didn't seem to be publicized-apologies if anyone reading did do so. Some schools still do it, but now it's an option. As it made such a difference, why wasn't there a move to secure more of it, by qualified teachers? Pupil Premium doesn't have to be spent on this- was is really an improvement to allow heads to get rid of it and choose to spend it on what they wanted? As a poster above says, this could have made a hug difference in many cases.
     
    palmtree100 likes this.
  10. Lukeydoo

    Lukeydoo New commenter

    Vince, if you think "the basics" are to be secured at primary level then I would direct you to look at the KS2 end of year exams as well as the ones in KS1. By the time they leave in year 6 - and achieving the expected level - they are often more knowledgable than their own parents in mathematics and their use use of the written word. They are fully equipped - in my experience - with everything they need to be a functioning adult and are far from just having the mere "basics".

    It is my belief the complexity of primary level work has been raised due to the failings of secondary to continue students' intellectual trajectory to the full summation of their potential. But I would never be bigoted enough to post that on an Internet forum about teaching...oops. I guess I am part of the club now Vince - where do we get the membership cards from?
     
    Last edited: Apr 19, 2016
    guinnesspuss likes this.
  11. Vince_Ulam

    Vince_Ulam Star commenter

    Basic literacy is a good thing, it enables you to read what people write. Here is what I said:

    Did you see 'at least'. Nobody would deny that Primary can and frequently does more than this. However, to assert that Primary produces 'functioning adults' is hilarious and suggests that you have a very low expectation of what it is to function as an adult. This goes to support my position on the need for a stronger filtering role in ITT and accounts for some of the low levels of knowledge, skill and behaviour we see in Year 7 each September.
     
  12. Lukeydoo

    Lukeydoo New commenter

  13. spanboy

    spanboy Occasional commenter

    Having only just glanced through some of the posts here, I don't see anyone mentioning the importance of parental support with reading at home etc (apologies if I'm wrong). I remember, as a child, spending time with my mum and dad, reading to them and showing them my construction of letters and words on paper, and getting encouragement for doing this. I certainly without any doubt owed my improvement at this age equally to my parents as my teachers.

    I now work in Spain in an International school - the Spanish kids (who have come up through state Spanish primaries) tend to learn by rote. While this might stifle creativity and self-thinking skills, the Spanish kids are, in general, ahead of the others when it comes to knowing the basics, because of the repetitiveness of their learning earlier down the line. They also reinforce their learning further by attending extra lessons and summer schools etc.

    Teachers do not have enough time to do it all - especially nowadays with all the ridiculous, meaningless pen-pushing they have to do. Sometimes the parents and kids themselves have to take some responsibility for making it 'sink in.'
     
  14. HelenREMfan

    HelenREMfan Star commenter

    I did the Tempest for A level ***. I did read Lamb's Tales as it was my end of first year secondary prize......I did "get" the Tales.
    Why are we shoving a one size "fits all" curriculum down the throats of our children? What is wrong with saying that some children will never "get" Dick and Dora?
    Can we appeal for a horses for courses curriculum please?
     
    Jane Austen likes this.
  15. HelenREMfan

    HelenREMfan Star commenter

    Puts me in mind of the University student (Bath if I recall correctly) who could not form a sentence - a simple sentence - in either of the languages she was studying!
     
    palmtree100 likes this.
  16. ValentinoRossi

    ValentinoRossi Star commenter

    Okaaaay! Here we go, then ;)

    I am an English teacher. Contrary to what many assume, independent schools do 'shadow' National Curriculum. That is because, by the time we get to Year 10, our pupils sit exactly the same GCSEs as state school pupils.

    The introduction of (allegedly) more "rigorous" aims of the new specifications, we need to ensure that our pupils have been prepared for this challenge. So we place a firm emphasis on SPaG from Year 7. We teach a Shakespeare text in each Year 7 - 13.

    Intellectually, Shakespeare is completely accessible to all age groups - in my opinion and experience in both state and independent sectors. Presently, I teach 'The Tempest' in Year 7, 'MND' in Year 8, 'Macbeth' in Year 9 and 'Romeo and Juliet' in Year 10 & 11. I take an entirely different approach to each play, dependent on the Year Group.

    ALL English Literature is about life, death, humanity and sex (not necessarily in that order!) It is ENTIRELY relevant!
     
    Lara mfl 05 likes this.

Share This Page