So is the idea now that the state just provides for skills in reading, writing and arithmetic for free?

The trouble with a “rich” curriculum is that it makes you sit through a lot of lessons that you don’t have any interest in. And some that you positively detest. ?

Everyone who enjoys Art or Music or whatever thinks it would be sooo beneficial for everyone ?

Some of us liked the academic fact stuff. My marks n Embroidery all came from the written dissertation on Jacobean Bkackwork. And no it wasn’t enough to get me a pass?

GrannyGravy13

I thought education was devolved so it’s all down to your First Ministers in Wales, N.Ireland and Scotland.

Yes, it is.

However, if Westminster only provide enough cash to fund The Three Rs who will make up the shortfall?

It isn't going to happen. The country needs an educated workforce.

Germanshepherdsmum

Anyone got a crystal ball?

You don't need one. This government told you what they intended to do. Whether you voted for or against them you were told how they see the world and how they would achieve it.

Callistemon21

GrannyGravy13

I thought education was devolved so it’s all down to your First Ministers in Wales, N.Ireland and Scotland.

Yes, it is.

However, if Westminster only provide enough cash to fund The Three Rs who will make up the shortfall?

It isn't going to happen. The country needs an educated workforce.

Parents will have to Callistemon. Please don't tell me you haven't seen it already happening. It won't affect us but it will become more and more of the way of life for our children and their children.

It isn't going to happen. The country needs an educated workforce.
Actually that''s questionable. Education encourages questioning challenging and developing thinking skills. Not something a governent really wants
And modern technology requires a small proportion of very clever highly qualified and able people. The rest of the population just needs to consume and use things. Educating them might encourage them to start questioning what they are consuming and who is selling it to them.

trisher

^It isn't going to happen. The country needs an educated workforce.^
Actually that''s questionable. Education encourages questioning challenging and developing thinking skills. Not something a governent really wants
And modern technology requires a small proportion of very clever highly qualified and able people. The rest of the population just needs to consume and use things. Educating them might encourage them to start questioning what they are consuming and who is selling it to them.

"NOW, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!"

Mr. Gradgrind is a school superintendent who promotes an education based on facts alone (no talk of imagination or emotions, please)...

Hard Times by Charles Dickens

Please don't tell me you haven't seen it already happening.

I'm afraid I have to tell you that no, I havent seen it happening.
However, I am not as closely involved in my DGC's education as their parents are and I was with my DC.

With some teachers in the family, too, I have not heard of this.

Hard Times by Charles Dickens
Don't remind me Dickens! That was on the GCE syllabus, I hated it until I saw it televised many years later.

Callistemon21

Hard Times by Charles Dickens

Don't remind me Dickens! That was on the GCE syllabus, I hated it until I saw it televised many years later.

... me too!

trisher

^It isn't going to happen. The country needs an educated workforce.^
Actually that''s questionable. Education encourages questioning challenging and developing thinking skills. Not something a governent really wants
And modern technology requires a small proportion of very clever highly qualified and able people. The rest of the population just needs to consume and use things. Educating them might encourage them to start questioning what they are consuming and who is selling it to them.

I agree with you. That is exactly what's already happening.

Lathyrus

The trouble with a “rich” curriculum is that it makes you sit through a lot of lessons that you don’t have any interest in. And some that you positively detest. ?

Everyone who enjoys Art or Music or whatever thinks it would be sooo beneficial for everyone ?

Some of us liked the academic fact stuff. My marks n Embroidery all came from the written dissertation on Jacobean Bkackwork. And no it wasn’t enough to get me a pass?

No, pupils still have options, although they have no choice about sitting through maths, English and science.

The trouble is that some pupils won't have so many options, so we'll end up with a PM who (mis)quotes Ancient Greek and everybody thinks he's oh so clever and they doff their caps accordingly. (Oh hang on ...)

It will consolidate the line between the "educated" and the "trained", which is why we have people sneering at the "elites".

I didn't do anything "practical" at school - nor did my son, who only left school six years ago. There will still be choices. He had the option to study practical subjects, but chose not to, just as others had the option to learn languages or humanities or performing arts. The point is that some pupils won't have those options.

M0nica

Trisher it is not a question of either or and I would include wordplay, and puzzles as well as singing games and a lot of the things you mention as part of teaching literacy, as do most teachers.

But when many children today are still leaving school functionally illiterate. Cut off from society, work and any chance of improving thir circumstances. I know where my priorities out.

Hanger down on their literacy etc so that they catch up with their contemporaries as soon as possible then they can benefit from everything else that school has to offer.

It might sound good in theory, but increasing the number of hours of literacy to the exclusion of other subjects doesn't improve literacy and makes pupils feel they are missing out.

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

In that case our GC must be the exception trisher because in the space of one week (Wednesday to Wednesday) our 7yr old GC will have participated in an inter-schools football tournament (in school time) a music festival along with four other schools at local large church (in school time) and the schools science fair (after school)

This is a small state primary school in a commuter belt village

Unfortunately, music festivals and science fairs don't guarantee quality.

We shall have to disagree on that.

Catching a child’s imagination and allowing them to broaden their horizons is in my option a good thing.

Do you have anything to back that up other than your opinion?

trisher

M0nica

Trisher it is not a question of either or and I would include wordplay, and puzzles as well as singing games and a lot of the things you mention as part of teaching literacy, as do most teachers.

But when many children today are still leaving school functionally illiterate. Cut off from society, work and any chance of improving thir circumstances. I know where my priorities out.

Hanger down on their literacy etc so that they catch up with their contemporaries as soon as possible then they can benefit from everything else that school has to offer.

My DS left school a functional illiterate as you so thoughtfully term it. He dropped out at 14 because he couldn't stand the pressure or the lack of understanding. Literacy is no measure of intelligence. Nor is it a measure of ability or talent. It's a skill which is hard for some to master. Schools should be about educating the whole person because there are children for whom literacy is a real problem and trying to stuff it down their throat instead of offering them the opportunity to expand and develop skills in the arts or practical skills is actually counter-productive. It's the reason we have so many children dropping out or being excluded.

I find it surprising that the intelligent child of a Head Teacher was functionally illiterate at age 14 due to^lack of understanding and pressure^

Perhaps liaison and collaboration with the school could have helped him as the school obviously lacked understanding of his needs.

If that is the case, there is no hope for thousands of children who did not have the advantage of a trained teacher for a parent.

Perhaps the teaching of the three Rs does need a fresh approach so that every child who is capable has a good grounding at primary level to enable them to expand into learning other subjects.

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

GrannyGravy13

In that case our GC must be the exception trisher because in the space of one week (Wednesday to Wednesday) our 7yr old GC will have participated in an inter-schools football tournament (in school time) a music festival along with four other schools at local large church (in school time) and the schools science fair (after school)

This is a small state primary school in a commuter belt village

Unfortunately, music festivals and science fairs don't guarantee quality.

We shall have to disagree on that.

Catching a child’s imagination and allowing them to broaden their horizons is in my option a good thing.

Do you have anything to back that up other than your opinion?

Have you any evidence to the contrary?

So, if giving children, whose literacy fell behind during Lockdown, extra lessons will not work, nor will concentrating on improving their skills, possible at the price of other subjects _for a short period_what do people suggest?

We are not talking here, as I understand it, of generaal problems of literacy, but the specific problems caused by COVID.

Are you suggesting that they just continue as they are struggling in mainstream classes with no extra help?

I am curious about people's suggestions for how to help this cohort over this specific problem.

Monica I am still struggling with the OP, I think they are suggesting that under a Conservative Government only basics are going to be taught in schools and any other subjects will have to be paid for.

As for the children who have suffered due to Covid, I can totally understand bare bones teaching in order for them to catch up.

It seems all those posting on this thread have been very lucky with the schools they are aware of. I have watched the growth of a contribution for this or fundraising for that. Such contributions once paid for extras, they have now moved to pay for necessities.

However, my intention is far from wanting to knock those who give a truly "free" education at the moment. It is to highlight what the "small government" of the new right would look like. We know they believe that the private sector can provide all our needs and that "markets" move with those needs. We know, that although they said they would not privatise the NHS, that is exactly what they are doing.

Why would this not be true of schools? It has happened in tertiary education, why not in all education. After all the New Right tell us that "businesses are the heart of a good economy" [source: conservatives.com]. This is not about the individual, the New Right see only see profit as success. So they have, as fast as they are able, been turning schools into businesses. They are running the NHS using private businesses. They even use private businesses in the benefits system to disastrous ends for individuals.

We grew up with all the advantages of post-war economic growth. We are about to leave a society that knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. We are reverting to the England Oscar Wilde knew (1854 - 1900).

Conservatives, particularly the New Right currently holding power, never take us forwards, only backwards. They persuade the "just about managing" and "those with some savings" that they will be part of the "winning" side and that the losers deserve to lose. Every time, the JAMs and TWSS want to believe that. It has never proved to be true. But it is what such people have aided and fought for and will leave as their legacy.

GrannyGravy13

Monica I am still struggling with the OP, I think they are suggesting that under a Conservative Government only basics are going to be taught in schools and any other subjects will have to be paid for.

As for the children who have suffered due to Covid, I can totally understand bare bones teaching in order for them to catch up.

I am sorry I confused you. Perhaps I should have just headed it "Return of the Ragged Schools". I wonder if that would have been more obvious?

No, because that to is to my mind a complete misinterpretation of what is intended. If I had children who had fallen behind badly during COVID, I would want the school to concentrate on getting the basic skills up to the level they would have been expected to reach had COVID not happened as soon as possible, so that they could then fully aprreciate and benefit from the wide range of subjects and skills that schools now offer.

My DGC's state schools offer opportunities and skills in so many things compared with what was on offer to me or my children in our school years. I am envious of them.

GrannyGravy13

Monica I am still struggling with the OP, I think they are suggesting that under a Conservative Government only basics are going to be taught in schools and any other subjects will have to be paid for.

As for the children who have suffered due to Covid, I can totally understand bare bones teaching in order for them to catch up.

I don't understand it either.

For example, learning an instrument in school to any level beyond basic always had to be paid for.

Are we to assume that the teaching of science, history, geography, foreign languages, sport will have to be paid for by parents and only the three Rs will be funded by Government?
Will poorer children who have learnt the basics by age 11 be allowed to leave school, and go out to work?

I think it's a scare story.

Science won't be ignored. It's one of the "trinity" of maths, English and science.

M0nica

No, because that to is to my mind a complete misinterpretation of what is intended. If I had children who had fallen behind badly during COVID, I would want the school to concentrate on getting the basic skills up to the level they would have been expected to reach had COVID not happened as soon as possible, so that they could then fully aprreciate and benefit from the wide range of subjects and skills that schools now offer.

My DGC's state schools offer opportunities and skills in so many things compared with what was on offer to me or my children in our school years. I am envious of them.

But I expect your DGCs go to a school in a relatively "good" catchment area. You don't seem to appreciate the huge difference in provision between different schools. I can see it even in my area. The schools are all allegedly comprehensive, but they're not. Savvy parents know what's going on, but I'm not sure all do.

M0nica

So, if giving children, whose literacy fell behind during Lockdown, extra lessons will not work, nor will concentrating on improving their skills, possible at the price of other subjects _for a short period_what do people suggest?

We are not talking here, as I understand it, of generaal problems of literacy, but the specific problems caused by COVID.

Are you suggesting that they just continue as they are struggling in mainstream classes with no extra help?

I am curious about people's suggestions for how to help this cohort over this specific problem.

It's by no means the whole cohort. As I've mentioned before, I'm currently working in a school and I can see it first hand. Some pupils don't seem to have suffered at all and I know from my private tutees that some private school pupils hardly lost any lessons. The issue is the ones who are hard to reach anyway and won't sign up for voluntary help. Taking them away from the subjects which most other pupils are doing, so that they can "catch up", just disadvantages them even more.

So what do you suggest growstuff ?

The sad truth is that a lot of 16 year olds leave school, barely able to read properly.

This means that they have not benefited from other subjects on the school syllabus, as you basically have to be able to read to even do maths these days, when what we called "problems" at school - the kind of excercise where you had to read a certain amount of information to tackle the sum in question is exceedingly prevelant.

A pupil with poor reading skills is handicapped in practically every subject, as to study them you need to be able to read the relevant information.

This may be the background for the goverment "telling teachers to concentrate on reading, writing, and arithmetic". I don't know, not having followed the debate.

If my guess is correct, this does not mean that children will in future not be taught anything else, but ought to mean that by the end of Primary 1 or 2 every child, whether dyslexic, or unable to get help at home, because parents are semi-illiterate will be able to read and do basic arithmetic, as well as be beginning to express themselves in writing, thus having a base to build all future education on.