English isn’t a Real Subject

Another thing many kids don't know (can't be arsed to know) these days is centuries! They seem permanently confused that the 17th century is 1600s...

It doesn’t seem fair, but it’s unavoidable. If you are asked to write an article (which is a core skill in English Language) and your article uses knowledge gleaned from history, philosophy, economics, theology etc. to make your writing more plausible and persuasive, then that’s the nature of the beast - it’s better than an article that is uninformed and basic.

Not sure who is meant to teach that.

Primary teachers. Within the Maths curriculum.

'Language related to dates' mostly in Year 1. 'Knowing' mostly comes into Year 3. 'Being able to convert', mostly into Year 4.

I would say that this is the type of thing where the maths equivalent of cultural capital comes in - children from chaotic, language-poor homes may not necessarily experience e.g. the same amount of repetitive conversation about 'What happens on a Tuesday? oh, that is Rainbows' or 'We will go on holiday in August' as others - and others will not have the literacy skills to decode the quite complex vocabulary involved at the point it is 'supposed' to be covered in the curriculum....as well as the perennial problem that 'Number' has tended to have much more time and practice than 'Measurement' or 'Geometry' within a child's primary Maths experience.

OK!

The famous Rosabel one was about a hat. Think it was my DS's year so 2017 AQA.

Not sure which one it is about a hat. piggy

The standard required to get an 8 or 9 now is an odd, archaic, erudite style, especially in the essay questions.

It is not a style which is recognisable or achievable to most normal, clever, working class kids.

Old syllabuses tried to blend practically and even vocationally (!) relevant style and skills with a range of cultural reference points. And critically; media analysis, which would have been useful in the last few years.

Can't help with the hypotenuse, although I do remember initiatives, (about 10 years ago?) to improve the quality of English across the curriculum.

Wish I could. I'd like to learn more maths now.

Thanks Piggywaspushed unfortunately I left mainstream teaching after 6 years - deeply frustrated by the fact that genuinely teaching, the way the teachers who inspired me taught, generally got me into trouble! I'm not a very good "yes (wo)man".

I no longer live in an English speaking country, but our grammar school warned us at open evening that children with an A (equivalent) in maths and a C (equivalent) in the native language leaving primary school tend to struggle significantly with the entire curriculum, whereas children with an A (equivalent) in the native language and s C (equivalent) in maths tend almost universally to catch up in maths within a couple of years and do very well indeed overall. Entrance requirement is A-/ B+ average across the key subjects.

Take it back : Katherine Mansfield - from NZ.

I tell a lie. The original sample exam papers for OCR English language were speeches by Obama and Mandela: different times...........

I think you are right there woman. I assume it has to be British : but that one about the hat, who was that by? Her name escapes me, but isn't she Canadian?

edna, that's a great post! Nice to meet another rebel!

And , yes, noble , that part most certainly is bollocks.

I did read somewhere recently that literacy is massively overlooked in maths. (most people think it's an English teacher's job!) and that the demands of language are so domain specific in maths (such as our hypotenuse chat the other day noble) that it needs very specific teaching.

the whole of anglocentric knowledge
Gove banned all non British born English writers from the examined English Literature syllabus.

I've not seen any non British born writers' source texts on exam materials for English Language across AQA, OCR, or iGCSE, but maybe I've missed them.......

I used to teach GCSE English. I taught my year 9-11s nursery rhymes and Bible stories and fairy tales and history and politics, in order to teach them literary analysis.

Yes, English Literature is an exam partly in cultural capital, partly in language use and the ability to actually think (if you cannot think coherently and express your thoughts in writing, you can't pass) and only partly a test on whether your teacher covered the syllabus.

Yes, it's harder than GCSE maths which AI could pass.

It's unfair, but can be rebalanced by a teacher prepared to go off piste and piss off the department head if they notice...

English, RE and history are pretty much the only subjects which give children a chance to top up their cultural capital, if they aren't getting the input at home...

Mind you I once spent a triple lesson with a year 8 class who were 80% special needs and 20% with almost no English at all, teaching them to tell the time on an analogue clock. It had become transparently obvious in the preceding 3 months that none of them could. I think it was the most they'd learnt in one day since infant school... I used to tell them the stories of the set texts, bedtime story style. I read the whole of mice and men aloud to a year ten bottom set - head of English had told me just to show the video as they'd never read it, then teach the lower paper exam topics. I had complete, rapt silence in the lessons whole I read to them - nobody had read to them since infant school, and then only teachers. Head of English found out and was angry I wasn't following the scheme of work

English should be about cultural capital - not about assessing it, but about imparting it - IMO.

I can't speak for GCSE, as I don't teach it, but primary Maths draws on a range of skills and knowledge 'not on the maths curriculum directly'.

For example, although being able to read isn't precisely NECESSARY - a reader can be provided - it is definitely beneficial. Those with English as a foreign language, especially earlier stage learners, definitely suffer from their lack of skills that have nothing to do with Maths.

Equally, problem solving at primary level often relies on context. Coins and money; word problems about swimming or buying tickets to the cinema or fair; bus and train timetables; measurements of ingredients for a cake ... in all cases, children who have directly experienced all of these will do better. OK, it's not as high level as biblical allusions, but there are still factors of culture and experience that affect a child's ability to understand and solve each problem.

It is possible that Maths at GCSE is culture and language-free, because it IS more abstract at that higher level?

To be fair that Glastonbury article compares with a Victorian description of some kind of fair (which they definitely won't have been to!) and it's really, really clear what Glastonbury is in the article. That's a sample paper and the source material has become MUCH harder since then.

A little general knowledge goes a long way, and teaching every subject to the syllabus (and only the syllabus) means that millions of young people leave school knowing fuck all about anything else.

Friend teaches English to young people resitting. Her example of this was a question which involved a newspaper (I think Guardian) article on Glastonbury. She said at age 16 they hadn't heard of it & wouldn't have the money to even be thinking about festivals.

Oh babdoc this a form of social media where it's perfectly acceptable to use acronyms and abbreviations like FWIW, BTW, DH AND even ones that are more forum specific ones like AIBU and in a wider context even words that don't even exist like "woded' (means rich apparently) not an Oxbridge disatation in middle English.

Also being autistic isn't an excuse to be a sick and humiliate and bully someone. Maybe being a grammar school kid with a superiority complex is. But I wouldn't know about that. What I do know is being an autistic dyslexic what it's like to put with bullying undermining remarks like yours so do one will ya! Oh sorry in proper English "please decrease from your bigotry will you" is that better

4 is very low but it's the uni benchmark. Most comps say 5.

@DaydreamInBlue at our school we would be reluctant to let someone do A level without a 7. It’s a huge leap up and I just don’t see how you would cope with a four.