There's a "culture of low expectation" in secondary schools. Do you agree?

but Hullly, surely the kids who don't give a toss - still won't give a toss.

We did some of that kind of stuff at the scary, hard as nails comp I had the pleasure of 5 character forming years at & the kids who did fuck all in all the other lessons, did fuck all in the "how to write a cheque" lesson, the "components of a basic meal" and "how to vote in an election" lesson too!

They didn't want to be there, didn't care about what exam results they got & couldn't wait to leave. That whole attitude pervaded up through the school, so it was a constant struggle for those of us who might have the vaguest interest in learning not to be seen as total outcasts. You almost had to stealth learn all the while feigning complete disinterest.

I know this still goes on today - this is the bloody problem - not the subject matter, not the teachers but the disinterest in any form of education.

Healthy diet and how your body works? Bloody hell, they do enough on that already, quite frankly: I'd like to see some PSHCE that's more focussed on calming the hell down and not giving your parents the catsbum mouth when they have a glass of wine, to be honest!

Yy those too

And computers

A history of scientific development and thought. String theory. V keen on string theory.

What about understanding how your body works, a healthy diet etc Hully? Your list is a bit light on science.

Even better, Gove's plans will probably fail more of them since he seems to pluck them from his arse on a whim rather than anything else.

So in short thousands of children are being failed, but not for the stupid reasons Gove gives.

I think schools should teach literacy and numeracy to a level necessary to be a fully functioning member of society.

A chronological history of the world so we understand our past and can give proper thought to the future (and not a drab recitation of kings and queens, but movements and ideas and revolutions, to include political and religious and social areas).

Economic theories and the application of.

How finance works

How government works

How to function in the world: how to have a bank account/ use an airport etc etc etc

And alongside those that want to specialise academically do so, and those that want to take practical subjects do so.

But then you might get literate, politically engaged, financially aware voters and that would never do.

Talkinpeeace, my post was in response to Hullygully's Thu 13-Jun-13 22:10:54

Who died and made you moderator?

My 2 ds both achieved a level 5 in primary. One of them managed a B in something, the rest were all c's for both of them.
They both went to rubbish schools, weren't challenged and neither reached their full academic potential. Ds2 was particularly bright, and i feel he was failed more than ds2.

DD 9 doesn't go to school and unless she really wants to won't go to secondary.

Actually I exaggerated a bit - one lunchtime a week is a club.

Also I'm not there all other lunchtimes as I'm part time, but when I am "in" my lunchtime always gets used for something. Often helping A level students who want more personal help - and then the run up to the Jan exams was revision, and the run up to GCSEs was revision and target groups etc.

pickled
apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/PrintReport.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=327805&ReportType=COLOUR
looks like a large tad irrelevant to me

lets stick to getting Gove to be emprical and statistically valid shall we

The chap who is spearheading this is drawing up a curriculum aligned to human rights, it's refreshing and at least an attempt to move away from the anachronous gumpf that we have at the moment.

Absolutely not! It's to boost results and actually I find mostly to reassure (girls mainly) that actually, yes, they do know the stuff.

Mainly it's a change in culture - towards spoonfeeding. When we did exams we would go home and revise at home, yes? Not so much nowadays - a lot of pupils do all revision in school in guided revision sessions. Parents are informed of these sessions as well etc. It's becoming more and more expected. :(

"all the extra revision/booster/help/retake classes"

Why are these classes even necessary Rainbow? Is it because poor discipline gets in the way of efficient delivery of the curriculum first time round?

HullyGully - exactly

(And incidentally in response to posts earlier I have a 2:1 from a RG uni in my subject, and 3As and 1B in Maths, F Maths, Chem and Phys at A level. Plus a handful of S-levels, professional quals and NVQs in various stuff from my previous career)

Bugsy - the vast majority of pupils actually do enjoy at least some, if not most, of their subjects - however much they like to posture and say otherwise as teenagers do See them in a lesson and you will see they do love it (apart from moles, agreed on that one!). But you just need a few disaffected ones who "should" be getting A/A* as they got 5 at KS2 SAT to produce the data they are quoting!

And that's nuts as well.

So how come teens in other countries don't see school as a massive PITA? There is something about our culture that under values education.

I accept that not everyone wants to learn about moles but there should be something that a young person wants to learn!

Schools, let us remember, were always meant to be holding pens so the adults could work, hence the long summer hols for harvest help etc etc

They are a hopelessly unrealistic creation now. Bizarre subjects taught by the fed-up to the hopelessly bored, great big strong humans who should be busy and working and doing, not sitting at a small desk "learning " something in which they have no interest...

oh well

Yes, Rainbows. And that is why it is ALL SO MAD

teacherwith2kids has it in one. Compensation drives behaviour - as does fear. If government want to change teachers' focus and behaviour then they need to change the way those teachers are foaled and measured. No different to any other industry.

What you can expect them to do is to teach and expect to a* where appropriate, which is what they do.

(I also agree with an earlier post that the newer focus on progress should result - because of a different balance of what is expected / rewarded - on more focus on the top end.

However, it does seem to me that this was implemented as a policy with no 'downside' - the most able are now expected to make more progress but there is still severe punishment for those schools where not enough children get A to C EVEN IF that represents absolutely astonishing progress for a very low ability cohort. So those schools with low ability cohorts have to put in superhuman efforts on the A to C measure AND move their small number of high achievers on further than before...all in the same 24 hour day. The schools with over 50% low attainers still have to reach the magic benchmark of 40% 5 good A* to C GCSEs to avoid being branded 'failing'. The fact that is a much more difficult feat than for schools with a more balanced intake is ignored...)

I cometely agree too. Teachers can only do so much.

Also it's not necessarily down to the teachers, but down to the targets given to the children.

Yes I do agree. The people I know who came out with the best GCSE results were best at regurgitating facts but didn't necessarily understand the content.