Schooling - will it/should it ever change?

[nameymcnamechangeagain]

I’m not not on education, don’t get me wrong it’s important to an extent etc but I’ve got GCSEs and 5 a levels and don’t have a job while my partner left school at 14 straight into work and earns great money....but my point is will schooling ever change? Kids will never ever need to know how to do long division (at least not most) or benefit from using a Bunsen burner. Why don’t they teach life skills? Organising money, how to do taxes, how to do how real every day things that you kinda need in life but go into absolutely clueless?!

Maybe because in most cases parents would and should be teaching their children life skills? Maybe because my mum taught me how to manage my money but didn’t have the first clue about chemistry.

Maybe because if we dont teach academic skills, children will grow into adults who think academic skill is irrelevant? Maybe because some children will grow to become scientists and mathematicians who use the skills involved in long division or use a Bunsen burner every day - possibly even teaching the next generation to do the same? It’s no wonder STEM subjects struggle so much.

Those things are taught in PSCHE. Unfortunately it’s such a long way of in terms of students experiences that they are often not very interested.

What jelly said!

It won’t change whilst there is a focus on results, Ofsted, narrowing the curriculum, ticking boxes.

Years ago, I had a student teacher in my class. Her tutor came to observe her and stayed after her lesson. One of the children asked me a question and that took the lesson in a completely different direction. The tutor said that he thought the mark of a good teacher was one who could respond to the children and change the lesson if necessary. That wouldn’t happen these days.

Jelly is right.

But you don't know if you'll end up in a career that needs hearing things up with a Bunsen burner until you're an adult.

There's more than academic qualification needed for jobs- you also need some luck (right place right time etc) as well as soft skills so you can do well in interviews.

I'm not self employed so never done a tax return and there's a wealth of financial information on the Internet like if I earn X, how much can I borrow for a mortgage and what would my repayments be?

I think a lot of parents would prefer their DC to learn about long division and how to use a bunsen burner safely.
I would, because I can explain finances/cooking/voting at home (and long division too tbh). Schools can teach life skills in addition, but hopefully in addition to or alongside the academic stuff.

At home though I don't have to access to things that explode safely (science), steel drums or a variety of maracas (music). I also can't speak German, or have fancy DT equipment at home. That's the stuff I'd send a DC to school for.

I really want all schools to give DC the opportunity to be anything they want (I know not all will have the ability or be able to due to circumstances). My DS is 3, atm there's nothing to say he couldn't be a physicist or an astronaut if he wanted. I'd hate it if my local secondary focused more on life skills than academic stuff.

OP a little task for you. Imagine schools didn't bother teaching kids how to use a Bunsen burner, do trigonometry, what cell mitosis is, instead, as you suggest, they concentrated on budgeting, what tax it, how to get a mortgage.

Now imagine it's 40 years into the future. The power stations have all fallen into disrepair because no one had the academic skills to become an engineer, so you forage for wood to burn to keep you warm. Your grandchild's desperately sick, but there are no doctors because no one has the academic skills to become a doctor, so she dies. You have a fever but there are no drugs to treat you because no one has the academic skills to become a pharmacist. Luckily you survive, but not before you've passed your virus onto your elderly neighbour because no one taught you about infection control.

But hey, your tax returns are perfect!

I agree with you to a certain point - there are some children who are not academic at all and would do better being taught practical skills like plumber etc along side "Maths for real life" for example. However, you can't just teach everyone life skills or there would be no doctors etc.

I think there needs to be some changes, but I cannot stand the utilitarian approach to education where people bleat on about how they didn't need Pythagoras or Shakespeare but needed to be told about taxes.

The way I see it is there's a broad KS3 to expose students to a range of areas, they then use that as a foundation for their chosen areas at KS4 and then specialise further at KS5/FE. How are they meant to learn what their interests are if they aren't exposed to a range of subjects, especially if their home culture on education is "I don't know X and it hasn't done me any harm".

The best private schools offer a fabulous broad education. Taking the lowest common denominator approach to state education would limit life chances of students in my opinion.

there are some children who are not academic at all and would do better being taught practical skills like plumber etc along side "Maths for real life" for example.

I completely agree that some children would flourish with the opportunity to learn a trade, however building, joinery, plumbing, electricians all draw on maths, science, technology etc in a very practical way so the kids still need a strong base from which to work.

I agree jelly. It's also worth considering at what point people want to decide the haves and the have nots in terms of academic potential. It's worth further considering whether there's a risk of vocational pathways being viewed as something for people who aren't capable of academic routes, rather than a comparable pathway of technical education.