Why is there so much intensive learning around English grammar at primary school now?

[dottyspotmonster]

Just helping my dc through their independent and dependent clauses Easter homework.
My dc seems to have a heavy load of grammatical terms and their meanings to learn, when really as long as you speak the language you know them anyway surely.
Seems a waste of time when it could be spent learning more useful things.

Many adults think alot and abit are words and should of, could of etc is correct.

If children now can learn these aren’t right, it can only be a good thing.

Fair enough @JingsMahBucket I'm an ignorant masters holding 3 language speaking person.

I'm not saying all grammar, I'm saying all this 'specific' stuff in primary school because what I do know I've never needed this level of grammar myself either.

@JingsMahBucket

Because British people are terrible at grammar and spelling. As a non British person, I’m constantly appalled at the poor level of written and spoken English in the UK.

Fully agree here.

And better teaching of grammar is not specific to other European languages.
It happens in the US too.

@IchBinAnnaOfCleves I agree with things like that. It's more things like my dd has homework for the holidays and the sheet says 'complete the sentence using a dependent clause'.

And in an ideal world with enough time to learn everything, there's no reason to not shove it on the pile of things to learn but it seems a shame other things get left out of primary school learning to accommodate this. Imo.
Which has clearly been disagreed with!

Why out of interest, if you do understand what someone has written, does it constantly appall you?! I find this a bit strange too.

It's taught to the ridiculous level it is at the moment because you can test it easily. Something is right or wrong. Given all primary school seems to be about is testing then grammar taken to this extreme allows for that. I'm not saying basic grammar shouldn't be taught, I wish I had been taught the basics in the 80's. However the heavy reliance on it now is just depressing and can really put children off learning to use the language and enjoying writing.

@IchBinAnnaOfCleves

Many adults think alot and abit are words and should of, could of etc is correct.

If children now can learn these aren’t right, it can only be a good thing.

YES. And something in particular I’ve seen in the UK, writing “incase” as one word instead “in case” as as two correctly. Other English speakers don’t do this.

And in an ideal world with enough time to learn everything

Even in a non-ideal world, literacy and skills in language are prioritised

It was Gove's idea and recent research shows it hasn't led to the gains he hoped it would.

I agree with things like that. It's more things like my dd has homework for the holidays and the sheet says 'complete the sentence using a dependent clause'.

Knowing that sentence structure will strengthen writing skills later when she has to write essays and papers. Why so much resistance to learning about your own language? And then (some) Brits get angry about immigrants’ children doing so much better than their children academically. Pick a frigging lane. SMH.

I write perfectly grammatically correct sentences, most of the time, but we didn't do it in such depth as is taught today.

@JingsMahBucket

Having shit spelling and grammar could immediately disqualify you from a lot of job applications though.

I was about to say exactly this.

@Pashazade

It's taught to the ridiculous level it is at the moment because you can test it easily. Something is right or wrong. Given all primary school seems to be about is testing then grammar taken to this extreme allows for that. I'm not saying basic grammar shouldn't be taught, I wish I had been taught the basics in the 80's. However the heavy reliance on it now is just depressing and can really put children off learning to use the language and enjoying writing.

Exactly this. It is much harder to evaluate a piece of complex writing in terms of grammar, style, use of vocabulary and so on than it is to say 'write a sentence using [x technical term].

Subjunctives, onomatopoeia and subject pronouns are key essentials. Knowing dependent and independent clauses is also useful - it will be needed at GCSE and A level when writing quality essays. I'd much prefer all of the above to be assessed as part of creative and persuasive writing though, not in the mechanistic way it is in SATs.

Because it is useful for kids to know what a verb is. When you learn German at secondary school, it's important to know where the verb goes. If you look at the sentence "he is a tall man" and think the verb is tall (true story, top set year 9s) then we have an issue. (They think verb = "doing word" arrrgh so jumping, dancing, running. Not only are there less active verbs about which are used more often, but those are actually nouns anyway - I like cake, I like dancing.)

I am no longer a teacher and I now work in copy editing; if you could see some of the sentences people apparently think are English you would understand.

I do think fronted adverbials may be a step too far tho.

ah I see @pointythings has said the same (but a bit more concisely :)

But what about all the availability of computers that correct everything for you? They don't tho @dottyspotmonster. Thank goodness actually, as I don't wish a computer to write for me, thanks.

You would perhaps (apparently) be surprised how often I read something in my job (so not a SM post, an actual piece of writing by someone who was paid to write it) and the syntax and orthography is so poor I actually cannot tell what they want to say.

@clary I did laugh at the idea that computers will check everything (and get it right). At the very best, word processors will give you something that is clunky and/or ambiguous if you let them have their way. And they will tell you that what you have written is wrong because they have a Govean rigid adherence to the rules.

At worst the grammar check facility will land you with gibberish if you choose to obey it.

@clary see my earlier point, I did two languages at school and didn't learn what a verb was until secondary school.
I say two languages at a level then moved to France.

And in German they love switching the verbs around in all sorts of places in comparison to English so it's a whole new ball game anyway!

@clary reading the last bit of your post, perhaps the circles I move in just know their grammar then. Hence my ignorance that someone called out.

I don't come across this issue except on here really and I'm definitely of the generation that didn't learn what a fronted adverbial is.

We didn't learn about verbs, nouns or adjectives til I started Secondary School.

I think it's a good idea to learn about it a lot earlier but they do go into too much detail. I don't know half of what is taught to my 7 year old.

Because to use language well know need to know how it works, sure they can muddle along just with what the learn passively but they won't be able to communicate with nuance or interperet advanced language.

You made a comment about the usefulness of programming, consider this: being able to speak english at the level of whatever they pick up just by being in an English speaking society is like being able to use apps, for many people that will be all they need on a daily basis but they are limited to what is already set up for them; having proper knowledge of grammar is like programming, you can grasp the underpinnings of how it works and how to use those rules to do whatever you want/need.

I can't speak as to what was being taught in the English system when I was in primary or secondary because I went through the Dutch system - where we most certainly were taught these things in both. I'm 54.

When grammar teaching was brought back I was pleased because I felt it was important for my DDs to understand their own language. What we have now does need to be redrawn to be more practical and sensible.

@Pashazade

It's taught to the ridiculous level it is at the moment because you can test it easily. Something is right or wrong. Given all primary school seems to be about is testing then grammar taken to this extreme allows for that. I'm not saying basic grammar shouldn't be taught, I wish I had been taught the basics in the 80's. However the heavy reliance on it now is just depressing and can really put children off learning to use the language and enjoying writing.

This 100%.

And because it's very difficult to test Writing as the very nature of it has a largely creative component.

Therefore, you boil it down to a tickbox exercise where children can name the terminology to pass a test. Applying it in their writing is quite another thing that many children cannot do. And by the time they get to secondary, they've forgotten most of the grammar stuff anyway as it was surface-level learning to pass a test. Utterly pointless.

I include my own DC in this!! Amazing at SPAG & spelling tests, atrocious at using it in writing.

But then you also have a system that tells you that a Y6 child can only be working at a greater depth if they've bunged in a few colons or semi-colons.
Don't get me started!!

Years ago people learnt Latin grammar which would then be applied to writing syntactically and grammatically elegant English. Few people can read Latin anymore.

[quote dottyspotmonster]@clary see my earlier point, I did two languages at school and didn't learn what a verb was until secondary school.
I say two languages at a level then moved to France.

And in German they love switching the verbs around in all sorts of places in comparison to English so it's a whole new ball game anyway! [/quote]
Surely it would have been easier to learn about verb placement in MFL if you already knew what a verb was though? I mean, not knowing can't have made it easier?

I am talking about people who don't use commas, or use them instead of full stops, or interchange practice and practise...maybe you don't work with anyone under 30 as I think it's a big issue there.

@theluckiest my dd school does this. They tell the class to remember how to form a sentence using all their grammatical terms in one writing piece to ensure maximum marks in tests. The dc then tend to learn set sentences instead of actually applying the grammar to a situation that needs it.

But @nosyupnorth if you want to specialise in anything you can. You can learn it in as great a depth as you choose. Learning what a fronted adverbial is (as an example) is not exactly difficult when you're older, so it seems madness to apply so much time to the learning of such things when other (more interesting subjects) things are not being learnt.

It could well be that my knowledge of things like who wrote what piece of music in what era (all things taught in school) has stood me well in life. What artist painted what painting and why.

Things like this show education as well. Indeed, even subjects like Latin, a fantastic foundation in a great many languages, is ignored in favour of every dc knowing what a relative clause is. Dull education imo. But obviously a number of people believe this is a good use of teaching time so it's been interesting to read through the various opinions.

@clary I didn't know what a verb was and in about two minutes of French class, I knew what a verb was. It's not difficult. But it wasn't necessary until I learned the new language. Therefore imo, teaching a class of 7 yo what a verb is seems such a waste of time. I bet it doesn't take a few minutes in year 3!!

I don't work with anyone under 30, I am clearly ancient in grammatical learning terms.

I think learning parts of speech is one thing.

Being tested at age 10/11 on fronted adverbials or coordinating conjunctions is quite another. There are far more important things that could be learned at primary school, for example typing.