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

Drivers Ed.

I know someone who seems to have got a mortgage without understanding how interest rates work and is now amazed and outraged to discover her payments have gone up.

But this info would have been all over the terms and conditions and made pretty clear during the process when selecting an offer. I can see someone being clueless before getting one, but to not be aware after would genuinely require someone to purposefully not pay attention.

People who seemed to think they'd "somehow" be OK in old age without paying into a pension.

Your employer has to offer you a pension now so someone would have to actively opt out of paying into a workplace pension.

A woman who can't sort out anything legally or financially or make medical decisions for her husband after he had a stroke because she has no POA

So a school should teach a lot of unmarried under 16 year olds about this? Same with the one on wills and house ownership. Teaching them to read, to be able to use the Internet and interpret information is useful though.

The "parents should do it" view comes from a very middle-class, affluent, conscientious-parent, educated (Mumsnet, dare I say) perspective. And what happens with the kids who aren't born into that sort of family? This is how the disadvantaged stay that way.

No it isn't, there are many reasons people stay in the poverty cycle, not learning at school about the stuff you've listed isn't one of them.

But the parents don't always know it. I know someone who seems to have got a mortgage without understanding how interest rates work and is now amazed and outraged to discover her payments have gone up. (And obviously parents who have always been renters may know nothing about mortgages). People who seemed to think they'd "somehow" be OK in old age without paying into a pension. A woman who can't sort out anything legally or financially or make medical decisions for her husband after he had a stroke because she has no POA (thought she could just "sort that out", if necessary, AFTER he was incapacitated; also thought you don't need any of that anyway for a spouse). A woman who thought she would automatically inherit everything from her husband, because she's his wife, and is now raging that this isn't the case and refusing to accept that what he chose to do with his will was perfectly legal and she has no grounds for contesting it. There was a woman on MN the other day who doesn't know whether her name is on the deeds to her house (abusive DP isn't telling her). And so on.

The "parents should do it" view comes from a very middle-class, affluent, conscientious-parent, educated (Mumsnet, dare I say) perspective. And what happens with the kids who aren't born into that sort of family? This is how the disadvantaged stay that way.

So yes, in theory, to finance classes in school - the only problem being that it's just very hard to get teens to actually believe that they will one day be concerned with pensions and mortgages, let alone wills and inheritance. Unlikely they'll remember everything they were told in a year, let alone decades down the line. And a lot of stuff might have changed by then anyway. I think a big public-information campaign aimed at adults might be more the way to go.

I think that is the job of parents.

A lot of these things are learnt by lived experience. Plus kids nowadays have information at their fingertips. Not everything has to be actively taught in a classroom setting.

Schools do teach life skills in PSHE (Personal, social, health education I think), but not many of the practical things you list, those are for parents to teach. Are schools supposed to have utility meters available so pupils can practice taking readings? Schools cannot put everything into their curriculum, they expect to operate in partnership with parents, who have the majority role in life skills. How long would it take you to show each of your children how to change a bulb, how to read a meter, how to change smoke alarm batteries etc.

They are taught some of those things, such as formal letter writing they usually do in year 4 in UK, and abusive relationships and peer pressure stuff they do in PSHE.

OKAY OKAY. Bloody hell.

I went to school in the 1970's. So it's changed. Whoopie doo.

I do not agree that schools/society should just pick up everything that parents cannot do/be bothered to do. This is why people are looking to the state more and more and absolving themselves of any responsibility. The children are then learning that they don’t have to worry either as the state/someone else will always pick it up. This is why many can’t ‘cope’ in the workplace.

I would prefer children to be taught that they need to use the resources they have to solve problems. I’ll say it again, never before has there been so much information available. I also simply do not understand why there is a constant need to be taught everything. I was never taught to clean, I just worked it out! If we persist with saying children need to be taught everything by someone else then it’s always someone else’s fault when they can’t do it.

Perhaps we should tell the children that their parents should be teaching them xyz and when they say they can’t as they don’t know then tell them to find out. Most of this is laziness and we can change it.

This. Parents do need to consider teaching their children "basic life skills".

I disagree.

Many parents don't know how to navigate a good number of items on that list, because they were never taught themselves. These topics are important, just like sex-ed, and education has to start somewhere.

I think it should be a joint effort from the school and the parents ideally, but if the parents can't or won't do it, schools should prepare children for life as much as possible.

It is a useless idea as most is already on the curriculum so what idea is it if most is already being taught?

Thing is while people say they were never taught it at school the reality is that yes they were but they had to be there and listen. If those two things were not in place then they cannot say it wasn't taught.

Plus the fact that the OP has focussed on Bunsen burners rather than a scientific principle or even the outcome learnt in an experiment using one is quite illustrative. It shows she's missed the point. Some children learnt a huge amount at school and took away from it a keenness to learn more.

Science was never about Bunsen burners, just like mathematics was never about set squares or art isn't just about the pencils.

Alright, but the OP's point isn't that children with disadvantaged or neglectful upbringings should get more support. I agree they should. And the parents.

I think there can be a huge gap between 'wears pyjamas to school' and is a drug addict ' however.

The OP's point was 'what did Bunsen burners ever do for me?' when they've had 18 years to Google how to change a lightbulb. That is to say, let's jettison a lot of academic content in favour of extra 'life skills'. I've heard a lot.of this argument and am fiercely opposed to it.

I think as I say, kids in difficulty need extra support. They don't need opportunities taking away. They don't need awareness of opportunities and possible careers out there, possible talents or interests, reduced further. That's even if they're not able to take full advantage of those learning opportunities at that time. That's how to widen gaps between them and hugely advantaged children. How would they know anything about the sciences, mathematical principles, languages, music, art etc etc etc even sport beyond a local kick about their world is being shrunk further by the OP's idiotic policy? And what about the children without those issues? Don't they need stretching rather than having their wings clipped?

Scouts do all of that, OP.

My mum told me what it was like when she was at school and it was so sexist. The girls did home ec, the boys woodwork. The girls would cook an entire dinner, set the table nicely, then the boys would troop in, sit down, and the girls served them dinner!

When do you want these things taught? When kids are 7? When kids are 16?
Life moves on and skills quickly become obsolete.

Those talking about learning to balance cheques, not a skill that's used at all today. Many people have smart meters and don't read them (I don't think this means you shouldn't know how to but hardly a priority for schools)

Lightbulbs come in all shapes and sizes. Time consuming to learn how to change them all. We don't have any bayonets in our house.

Much better for parents and children to react to the change around them and learn to use the internet or books to look up what they need to know.

And dumbing down the curriculum so it only teaches what "everyone" needs to know is crazy.
If no one uses Bunsen burners then no one will ever need to change a lightbulb again as technology will grind to a halt.

And also, as many people above have said, pretty much all of these things are already taught in schools.

What we need is parenting classes and more expectations on parents.
👏

Just no. Do people not understand that having children comes with responsibilities - to feed them, look after them, teach them. What we need is parenting classes and more expectations on parents.

i would also add this, you don’t just learn individual facts, you learn also how to apply those facts eg percentages when understanding credit card interest. Children also learn by watching and participating at home. Helping parents with cooking, laundry, gardening. Doing this you learn lots of skills not just how to prepare one meal for example but how to boil water, chop veg etc that can be applied to many meals.

Lastly people need to stop bringing do lazy. Never before has there been so much information, help, support, so many how to videos, so many cookery she’s, finance shows, websites etc. All the info is there if you can be bothered to go and look for it and then spend time learning/applying it.

I wish we could stop this culture of blaming someone else, take some responsibility for yourself! If anything I’d like to see schools doing less of this stuff, I feel sorry for the teachers.

Yep! And then when they're 18 they're old enough to move out! 😄

Effective education happens at school and at home. It teaches a child to communicate well, listening as well as talking. It teaches us to work together, develop empathy, share ideas. It teaches self worth and resilience. It teaches us to become resilient and independent, but caring and thoughtful of others. If a child/adult has those skills and attitudes, the rest follows.

The point is some parents aren't financially literate themselves so this paves the way for poorer families staying poorer, and as I said previously tends to affect women more. I personally know some women who grew up with no financial knowledge who made huge financial errors in their early 20s which affected their whole family's outlook.

In school my maths teacher anecdotally told us about how credit cards work and I NEVER forgot and I keep to his advice to this day 20 years later (I put everything on credit card but automatically clear it every month to avoid interest but gain a great credit rating + points + consumer protection). Out of everything I was taught in Maths it's the only class I outright remember as it was directly applicable to my life and therefore I found it interesting.

Saying finance isn't interesting - many young people are very interested in making money and how to manage it. I think around 15/16 would be a great time to do it. I mean why else are we even at school? 🤷🏻‍♀️

I really do think some financial classes should take place in schools such as how interest works on savings and debt, credit ratings, how to keep a rolling financial plan and forecast. Types of debt etc. These things don't change that much from year to year. Yes some security too such as paying attention to cybersecurity warnings carefully from your bank.

Haha it seems to be what some want isn't it! The funny thing is in real life the people i know that say school should do this and teach that are the same people who moan about state intervention into their lives (i don't mean social services or similar but a general comment that theyre their children they know whats best and the gov should have no say in their lives) - make it make sense!

Why don't we (teachers) just give birth to them for you, bring them up and then present you with a fully formed adult when they turn 18?

Schools here have a 'Learning for Life' weekly class. There's 'General Studies' and earlier in senior school compulsory 'Home Economics' - cooking, food safety etc. Maths covers compound interest etc. And RE is important even if you are not religious to understand and respect those different from ourselves.

A lot of what you mention IS covered, but these classes are seen as a bit of a break/light relief/'not that important' (they are important, but that is how how they are perceived as no grade awarded) so kids mess about a bit. Same in Careers.

So I think it comes down to - did you pay attention? And/or did you develop critical thinking skills (to google or work out yourself) as undoubtedly time moves on and life is complex.

Also learning is reinforced a great deal better through action than can be taught sitting in a classroom.