To think schools should have a class to teach basic life skills

Most of the things I learned in life that have been useful long term, I learned in Girl Guides.
Sure, my parents taught me loads growing up in the 80s, but Guides taught me map reading, basic survival skills, how to light a fire etc.
My kids are growing up on a tiny island in the Caribbean, they’ve no idea how to get on a bus, get a train or navigate a subway system, so when we’re back in UK over summer, this is what I’ll be teaching them - and like a Boy Scout badge, if they can get us to our destination a few times, they’ll get $10.
As parents we should be looking out for the things they need to understand, and looking to give them opportunities to learn.

I genuinely think getting into debt is very much down to parenting. If your parents were the type who didn't have much money, didn't waste money and who were always about only buying stuff if you had the money ie credit is evil and paying interest is stupid. You also learn this, it's almost like part of your values. Never in my life have I ever had any debt apart from a mortgage because it was instilled in me that if you can't afford something, you can't have it. I knew paying anything on interest was stupid because I would be paying more for it than I I saved up and got it myself. I was also fascinated to watch something on TV where they asked people if they would rather pay 120 for something and have it now or wait for 2 weeks and get it for 100. I was shocked and disturbed at how many would rather pay more. That's when I thought some people must just be thick.

You don't have to be taught the details of mortgages, because yes, what is available can change. But you can be taught there are various forms of debt and that they earn interest so you end up paying back more than the initial loan. Some people don't understand that, even intelligent people, and get into big trouble with debt. It's possible mentioning it in school would have made no difference but it might with some, who knows?

I know this is bitchy but I was thinking exactly the same thing - OP you presumably had at least 11 years of education in English grammar as well as 28 years of hearing, reading, writing and speaking the language and you still came out thinking this sentence was correct - but you think if you'd had one PSE lesson age 14 on mortgages or relationships you'd have understood and retained that information for life?

Most people don't buy their first houses until their mid 30s these days - you really think you'll remember everything you were taught about mortgages 20 years later (and that's assuming nothing has changed - LISAs/Help to buy/stamp duty etc have all changed over the last 20 years?) How much French or science or history do you remember? If not much, why would practical 'life' skills stick in your mind any more? How many people live in the same country they grew up in for their entire lives - they could be taught how taxes work in England and then move to Scotland/France/USA/Ireland....

If someone can't work out how to change a lightbulb or cook pasta safely they probably shouldn't be living alone tbh...

Bloody hell. This is what parents are for.

Parents don’t have science degrees and can’t generally teach science, but they can teach kids to b cool, do meter readings, and a million other life skills.

Stop expecting teachers to parent for you 🙄

• Showing how to do basic meals, cooking pasta safety, use of kitchen appliances correctly - Parents
• paying bills - parents
• what a mortgage is, how to deal with contracts and paperwork parents
• how to meter readingsparents
• change a lightbulb, basic tool use in the home parents
• how to check fire alarms parents
• credit card education parents
• managing money, spreadsheets to manage them parents
• insurances like life insurance and what ones you need parents
• education on abusive relationship signs parents backed up by school
• things like peer pressure parents - backed up by school
• how to write formal letters/emails school

From your list I have seen most of them taught in school regularly over the past 16 years.

• Showing how to do basic meals, cooking pasta safety, use of kitchen appliances correctly - taught in food tech

• paying bills - taught in PSHE

• what a mortgage is, how to deal with contracts and paperwork - mortgages I discuss in my maths lessons in Year 8, 10 and 12

• how to meter readings - discussed in PSHE, maths as part of exam questions

• change a lightbulb, basic tool use in the home - I have done as part of a Guide meeting but not at school

• how to check fire alarms

• credit card education PSHE / Core Maths lessons

• managing money, spreadsheets to manage them - PSHE / IT lessons

• insurances like life insurance and what ones you need - Core Maths niche subject but it is in the curriculum

• education on abusive relationship signs - PSHE in Year 12 at my school

• things like peer pressure - PSHE every year from 7-13

• how to write formal letters/emails - my daughter has just done this in Year 5.

Part of the issue is having had to teach multiple PSHE lessons - students don't listen and don't care. It's taught when it is irrelevant to them.

I always recall spending a day teaching my Year 7 form about politics and governments and it was hard work, 6 months later we had the 2010 election and I spent a maths lesson discussing hung parliaments, voting etc to the same group of students who could see the relevance.

Lots of the above I was taught by family but I do get lots don't have that support network.

we need to give a good rounded education for those who are less able and will never achieve a good suite of GCSEs, let alone A levels or a degree, who currently seem to

But how on earth would you determine who are the 'inquisitive' children who get the chance to learn the solid principles if they're written off learning organisation and planning before 16? Beyond the bits they do already. And why would they, if they don't get that exposure and teaching until they've already gone through school? What are you hoping to teach them when you say planning and organisation? It's like Brave New World!

My point is really time wasted in the classrooms learning things that don't need to be learned (lots of facts etc), then time wasted in lessons doing tests, reviewing answers to tests, etc. We're in a new World where "core" knowledge is at our fingertips and we really shouldn't be wasting limited "quality lesson" teaching time on unnecessary rote learning. I fully accept some rote learning remains necessary.

We should be spending more time on skills, whether academic skills, or life skills, i.e. research, logic, planning, organisation, bias, comparisons. And yes, I know that subjects like History are more about "cause and consequence", "balanced arguments" etc rather than rote learning of dates, but that's not much help if the pupil isn't studying History to GCSE level, so actually misses out on some pretty important "skills" that aren't "taught" in other subjects.

Nothing wrong with an academic education that we need for higher education, professions, and for people who are inquisitive and searching for knowledge, but at the same time, we need to give a good rounded education for those who are less able and will never achieve a good suite of GCSEs, let alone A levels or a degree, who currently seem to be abandoned by the wayside and often lose interest in school before they "find" their niche if it's in more practical pursuits.

What's your broader point re education, what changes do you think should be made and what do you think children actually need teaching and to get out of education? Do you not think any children benefit from learning academic subjects as far as they can, guided by trained teachers rather than paring this down?

It's not really about memorising equations,. All need applying to pass. Some better known ones, fine to make it a test of knowledge too. Not really sure what point that makes. The learning is always about being able to apply the principles.

Yes, indeed, so much readily available online, so why do schools still spend/waste a lot of time on rote learning stuff and tests of knowledge in lessons, when most of the stuff being tested is available online? We don't really seem to have moved away from decades ago when people really had to learn facts because they couldn't carry around an encyclopedia with them. Fair enough in foreign languages where learning vocab is pretty essential, but not so much in other subjects where other skills such as evaluating evidence or logic are more important.

Why, for example in Maths, are some formulae given to the pupils in the exam paper (or formula sheet), and some aren't? That's a classic example of expecting a pupil to spend time learning something that's simply unnecessary as it becomes a test of memory in a Maths paper rather than a test of logic nor Maths ability. (Same in Physics with some formulae provided and some not).

You mean losing more of what the OP and other posters propose (eg maths and sciences etc) in favour of mortgages and changing lightbulbs?

I think massive harm. How to kids knows what they don't know, so to speak and build upon the very basics to aim for the higher exams (A levels) that get them into further studies and careers?

In my opinion, in England anyway, studies specialise far too soon. This is a different thread but I absolutely do not agree children should be losing any 'less specialist' material any sooner. What they do learn is the bare foundations. Its age appropriate for GCSE but they need to know the solid academic basics. There are life skills already. That's valuable. But the balance cannot be tipped further. There's so much information available online now. That wasn't the case in the 70s. Much harder to replace a good teacher's role.

Can a pupil who struggles already in Maths really take on board the compound interest equation that you're trying to teach them? Is it not better to start earlier/simpler just to give examples of how much extra interest is paid over several years if someone doesn't pay off their credit card bill in full every month compared with those who do, i.e. buy a TV for £500 - pay it off within the month, total cost £500, but only pay a tenner per month for years and the total cost is £5,000! (pure guesses) rather than give them an equation they don't understand? Just to get the "message" across.

You're making quite a leap from a clear demand to teach a few life skills to whole concepts in Maths not being taught! Why go so extreme? What's the harm in "tweaking" the curriculae a little bit to put in a little more "real life" stuff and a little less specialist stuff, the latter which could easily be taught at higher levels or in "career specific" professional exams.

"More generally, instead of woodwork I’d have liked a session on household items and systems such as boilers, electrical systems and gas safety!!"

Secondary age children have almost no interest in this. What 16 year old cares about this?

If you did as a teenager you made have realised that electrical systems is covered in science lessons and household and gas safety in pshe.

Surely The point of education is to empower you to research and apply information on these things when you need them, not make sure you posses every bit of knowledge you'll ever need as an adult.

The real trouble is that issues like that can’t be fixed by or in schools. Not when SS are underfunded, early start centres shut down , early help support and interventions are minimal if at all and so on.

I'm an ex maths teacher. All the financial stuff you mentioned - credit cards, mortgages, budgeting etc - I embedded into my maths lessons.
The more practical stuff can be learned at home - light bulbs, washing, cooking etc. Parents have a responsibility to prepare their children for adult life.

So called state ‘cared for’ children (they’re anything but) would certainly benefit from this.

More generally, instead of woodwork I’d have liked a session on household items and systems such as boilers, electrical systems and gas safety!!

I remember that one!!

Jesus. H. Christ.

@TagyoureitI'm also sure they do teach you about mortgages, because I remember learning about compounding interest. I also remember learning about gambling in maths! I actually think we did learn alot of those things in school, but many of us didn't care and weren't paying much attention (me!), or remembered the details when it became relevant

I hear what you're saying, but unless you take it further you're only learning the very basics of algebra, chemistry, physics etc. If you weren't exposed to it you wouldn't even know about it. And while I rarely use these things, there have been times I need to figure out what "x" is or maybe some very basic chemistry. There was a thread last week where the OP had found sulphuric acid (I think) and one poster told her to mix it with something, even with my very tiny remaining knowledge I knew that sounded like a bad idea. Ironically everyone will need a mortgage, so you could argue that's the thing that you shouldn't be taught in school because that should be easy to learn about anyway.

Couldn't agree with you more and these kids needs to be supported from a young age, it's not that difficult to know which ones will end up where. That doesn't equate to removing things from the curriculum to accommodate this, and making everyone mediocre. Remember too, we live in a global economy now.

I understand that people are saying that some children just won’t get these things and it could/will lead to problems later on however schools doing it because if lazy and crap parents is not the answer. I don’t want academic stuff removed/or cut down so that schools can make up for stuff parents should be doing. I want my children to have a full curriculum, dumbing down abd making students all do the same thing because otherwise it stigmatises others also has to stop.

If this is needed then something needs to be setup after school, but not delivered by teachers, to cover this stuff. I would be interested to see how many children took it up. I’m willing to bet not many because many just don’t want to take responsibility for themselves and it’s easier to blame someone else.

Yes, someone here even thought teachers are responsible for children trying new types of water and monitoring consumption. FFS.