AIBU in being shocked that pupils aren't marked down in exams

[Hammy02]

for having poor spelling and grammar? Apparently the coalition are reintroducing marking down exam papers by 10% if spelling & grammar is not up to scratch. How on earth did the previous government get away with this? No wonder employers are having trouble when people can't write a decent application for a job?

AQA mark down for poor spelling and grammer

WriterofDreams "Children aren't actively taught spelling and grammar any more, so testing it isn't fair. If they're going to reintroduce penalties for poor spelling and grammar, they'll have to reintroduce the old-fashioned rote teaching of these things. I would be hugely hugely in favour of this BTW (I'm a primary teacher)."

You win the prize for the biggest load of bollocks I have ever read on MN. I don't know any primary teachers who don't teach spelling and grammar - if you seriously don't, then it's a very strange peculiarity of your school only, and I would be moving ASAP!

Take spelling - current documents used are Letters and Sounds in KS1, and then Support for Spelling in KS2 which only came out last year!

Both documents replace previous spelling guidance, which has not ever, ever stopped.

Grammar is taught via the Primary Framework for Literacy, or the guidance is clear - you must have a scheme of work in place which Ofsted deem equally worthy.

Why are there statutory assessments then in spelling in both key stages, if we aren't expected to teach spelling?

Why are children marked on their grammar in the tests at both key stages, if we aren't expected to teach it?

Sorry, but you are not teaching what you are supposed to - and your school sound nuts!

As a bookworm pedant with an English degree, I heartily agree with the proposals.

As the mother of a dyslexic DS, I cannot see it as right that he would be 10% down before he'd even started the exam. He's been well taught, with old-fashioned grammar and spelling, and remedial spelling, and he still doesn't get it. I can see that this inability should "count" in English exams (as his English will always be comparatively weak), but it does not strike me as fair that he would miss out in his strong subjects (like science).

Have there been any proposals on how dyslexic children would be assessed under the proposed new mark scheme?

WriterofDreams Wed 24-Nov-10 10:04:26 Children aren't actively taught spelling and grammar any more, so testing it isn't fair. If they're going to reintroduce penalties for poor spelling and grammar, they'll have to reintroduce the old-fashioned rote teaching of these things. I would be hugely hugely in favour of this BTW (I'm a primary teacher).
not a very good one if you don't teach spelling and grammar Writerofdreams. Can I ask why you don't?

she does teach it. I thought she said way down the thread that she specifically teaches pupils with lower than average understanding of grammar and poor spelling. She basically does remedial work in a more old fashioned manner and finds it successful with these pupils who are now making progress.

I always really liked learning spelling and grammar at school... maybe that's why I did four modern foreign languages and one ancient one!

we were taught grammar via Latin and Greek tbh not in English lessons IIRC. I certainly remember the foreign language lessons at school but tbh I cannot remember when I was at school learning that much about English grammar in English lessons.

I had to learn it properly (or more thoroughly at least) when I taught English as a foreign language because foreign students really quiz you on it IME.

did they really teach you much English grammar though Bonsoir? Maybe I've blacked it out, really cannot remember doing much of it, lots of creative writing etc.

ZZZen - a bit, though nothing like as thoroughly as my French DCs have been taught their grammar (and continue to be taught it at secondary). Of course, French DCs don't get taught creative writing or essay construction in anything like the same depth as English DCs.

Zzenagain, she clearly implies that the rest of us don't have to teach grammar and spelling, and that the only way to do so is to use repetitive remedial lessons like she does. It's irresponsible to post such bollocks about teaching on a public board.

Haven't read whole thread, but it occurs to me that I mostly learnt my spelling and grammar through reading LOADS as a child, rather than through anything I was taught at school.

Do schools encourage reading enough?

Spell checkers not picking up homophones is still a problem - if someone doesn't know the difference between there, their & they're, or your & you're, it's not going to help.

A cafe near us was having refurbishments done & had a notice up saying "Please bare with us." I'm pretty sure that's not what they had in mind but spell checking would have been useless.

I think that reading is a highly effective tool for acquiring accurate spelling and verbal fluency/complex construction, but it doesn't teach the rules of language.

My French DSSs are always asking me about grammar rules in English. I cannot answer their questions (though I can always tell them what is right and wrong).

I recommend David Chrystal's Rediscover Grammar

Oh thanks mrz!

I also think the good old First Aid in English is useful for primary aged children

That was what was used in my primary mrz - an excellent book (wonder if they did an updated version)

yes there is a revised addition published in 2004

This was NOT snuck in by the labour government.

I took my GCSEs in 1996, and did not get marked down for spelling and grammar (as we were never taught any english spelling or grammar!). This was normal for the time. And I spent my entire school time under a conservative government.

I am sick to death of Labour being blamed for things that last conservative government did!

Grammar, spelling and punctuation have always been part of the mark scheme for GCSE English but for other subjects children were marked on subject knowledge rather than on ability to write grammatically correct answers.
This change happened in 2003?

bruffin sorry for delay-the answer is yes spelling etc can make a grade difference.

I think (not my KS) that grammar, spelling, punctuation make up 13% of the English exam marks.

I think Colditz is perhaps making an inaccurate assumption: that lack of formal teaching of something means it's not included in the exam. My mother wrung her hands at the lack of grammar when I was at school in 60s and 70s - but grammar and spelling (and neatness) were certainly marked in O levels.

The writing test of KS2 English SATs have the grammer marked as part of the judgement. There is a separate spelling test. So a bit to be told I haven't been teaching grammar and spellings for the past 10 years. Another coalition lie.