What would you add to National Curriculum ?

I'm not sure how options are chosen now but the choices used to be structured so that Maths, English Lang, English Lit, Double Science and a language were compulsory then a compulsory choice of a humanity plus three other subjects which would fit into that timetable, which could be academic or vocational.

No-one directed poorer children away from the core academic subjects. How would they decide who was poor or not? By their address? Enquiring about family circumstances?

Iam64 thank you, I began to think I was imagining the Parenting classes run by Sure Start and I don't think they were patronising.

Schools in the Midlands are running courses to teach pupils how to deal with a stabbing

Growstuff - Poorer children are assumed to be lower achievers and are directed towards so-called vocational courses.

When pupils choose GCSE options in Y9, if a kid is keen on history, the history teacher will ask if they've thought about History GCSE. No-one directs them away from something. The only steering might be if a student struggles with writing, an essay-based GCSE might mean it's daunting for them - but the subject teacher will tell the Y9 class the demands and structure of their GCSE.

I think there are things that I would like to see REMOVED from the curriculum.

The last 2 years at primary school are spent learning things that they then do all over again in the first years of secondary school. It is fine for those who are academic and quick learners, but puts unnecessary pressure on those who find it a struggle. I would rather see the time spent on broadening their life experiences. There are some children who finish up being labelled as special needs because they cannot keep up, when in fact they are simply average children being forced to swallow learning that is inappropriate.

Every child is precious, academic or not, and there needs to be time and space for this special time as young children to be focused on age-appropriate activities.

Having seen all the work my GD has in year 10, I reckon she works harder than I did for my O levels. Her science knowledge leaves me breathless and she can do maths, unlike her granny at 14.
School is different from when we went. I wish I had had such positive teachers. I didn't have the encouragement and guidance, they were quick to criticise in my experience.

The domestic science however was wonderfully taught and set me up for life. ( says it all. )

I would add older people who know nothing about the current system but criticise it at length. It would be interesting to see how they would do.

Good family centres, including those run by Sure Start did run parenting classes. One of the reasons the conservatives started to close Sure Start centres was David Cameron's (false) claim that they were only used by middle-class families like his own, which didn't 'need them'. The whole aim of SureStart was to offer support to all new parents, whatever their background/financial situation. Cameron should have visited the ones here in the north west, serving areas of high deprivation where support for parents is essential.

There is so much snobbery around about vocational versus academic courses and that helps no-one to achieve.

We need all kinds of skilled and qualified people for society to function.

Most parents can't help their children with academic subjects at secondary school. A secondary school pupil is quite capable of being an independent learner and that's what schools should be promoting.

Callistemon That is exactly what is being implied - and it already happens. Poorer children are assumed to be lower achievers and are directed towards so-called vocational courses.

I'm afraid I disagree with you about parenting courses. I find the whole idea extremely patronising.

When my children were going through schools I was active in the PTAs and was a governor. It was quite striking how most parents of little children did seem interested in what was going on at school, but the interest waned as the children got older so that by the time they got to secondary school there were many parents who seemed to have no interest at all in their child's school.

Admittedly this was a long time ago but has that changed?

By the way, if you are seeing a lot of children around towards the beginning or ends of terms, they're most likely from private schools who tend to have longer holidays than state schools.

There are some parenting classes and Surestart run or ran them too. I don't see why they are patronising if they are offered in the right way.

I don't understand the rest of your post growstuff

Who said only poor children should be steered towards vocational subjects and children of wealthy parents singled out for high flying academic careers?

No-one.

However, concentrating on life skill subjects suggested in many posts leaves far less time for the core academic subjects, that is why helping parents to help their children is a good idea.

It is more of a struggle for a pupil to achieve if the parents are not interested in any aspect of their lives.

Between 16-17 children can be involved in the National Citizen Service. They learn many of the things posted on here, budgeting, independence, cooperation. It involves a short residential course where they live independently and learn basic living skills. My DGS did it.

School holidays are actually three days longer for pupils and two days shorter for teachers at state schools.

By law, schools have to provide education for 190 days a year with five non pupil days. They used to be open for 193 days a year (one of which was usually a Christmas shopping day).

Parenting classes seem very patronising to me. Some schools do actually run evening groups for parents on various issues, such as behaviour in the teenage years and mental issues, etc.

I really hate the idea that poor children should somehow be singled out for special classes. My son received free school meals at one stage in secondary school. However, he did 12 academic GCSEs (no practical or arty subjects at all) and achieved A/A*s in all of them.

We do poor pupils a bigger favour be enabling them to go to the best unis and to achieve the academic subjects which are needed for professions, rather than forcing them to do so-called vocational subjects at an early age and consigning them to the pathway we consider best.

I would prefer all pupils to have a common curriculum of academic subjects until 16 and then let them choose more practical subjects. They have to stay in education until 18, so they should then have the opportunity for quality vocational training and access to more vocational higher education courses.

Jillybird I did qualify my views by saying that more resources should be made available for parenting classes. That would be an attempt to break the cycle of poor parenting.

However, perhaps it could be better tackled in school at an earlier age, but then, not all pupils need such classes. How would you discriminate and how to teach everything else on the curriculum in the time available?

Regarding food technology, my late son Zachary adored that subject and was a very keen cook, at the age of 12 singlehandedly producing Christmas dinner (very tasty too) for six people using two kitchens! From him I learned that you use eggs to make a cake not because they make it taste good, but because they cause a chemical reaction among the ingredients that results in a cake! Heaven is lucky to have him xx

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

My grandson’s school (11-18) runs courses for pupils on resilience. An excellent idea.

I was just thinking that when I was teaching the holidays seemed really short. Now I'm not they seem really long.

Fiachna50. School hols are exactly the same as they were 50 years ago when I was at school. 6 weeks in summer. 2 weeks at Easter and Christmas and half terms in Feb, May and Oct.

* evie* and * anxiousgran* how to be polite:, yes, this is taught and exemplified as I noted above, how to handle money also, and creative writing: all taught in school. Here’s a link to the National Curriculum for England: www.gov.uk/government/collections/national-curriculum
Scotland, Wales and N Ireland all have their own versions.

Having read through this thread, half the subjects suggested are already being taught. I have 2 GC, on en primary and one in secondary school.

They have variously done cooking nutrition, sewing. courtesy and concern for other people.

Like others, I think soft skills are the respnsibility of parents; table manners, basic housekeeping, what next schools will be expected to handle potty training.

Although secondary school days seem shorter these days because of the limited breaks, most schools have numerous extra-curricular activities running both before and after school as well as in lunch breaks. DGD belongs to the school choir, drama group, is learning German and doing several other things I cannot remember and seems to be in school either by 7.30am or staying until 5.00pm every day of the week.

Less school holidays, the children never seem to be in school these days. How to budget/handle money, UK history as in learning about how our country works, no matter which country you live in. How politics work and how it affects your everyday life, also cookery and other life skills.

Creative writing.