To think literacy standards are not falling in way reports state? Did anyone see Sky TV interview earlier?

[Cortina]

Saw a report earlier that literacy standards in the UK are too low. We are continuing to fall behind in terms of the international league table.

Will come back and link to the report. I was struck by the TV row between the presenter and a teacher spokesperson. Did anyone see the interview? There was also a head of a UK based Chinese school who said she believed that part of the problem lay with parents who were not spending sufficient time helping children learn at home. She said good study habits needed to be laid down by the age of seven.

My thoughts are not that we are doing increasingly badly but other countries are doing better. More countries are involved in the international league table than previously too.

Well I think literacy standards are appalling actually. it's no good thinking other countries are setting standards too high or that the benchmark has been raised or anything like that.

You only have to sift through a raft of application forms or letters from school leavers and even graduates to see that the art of the business letter, the art of good grammar, and the art of spelling, are all sadly dying on their arses.

Just wanted to congratulate you on the rare achievement of getting through an entire post on literacy standards without cocking up on the old grammar and spelling. :)

As literacy affects so many other areas of life I think that, no matter where we are on the league table, we should always strive to do better for British children. Most prisoners, for example, have low literacy levels and it's far harder to get a job if your literacy skills are substandard. I agree with the head that the responsibility lies partly with us as parents and partly with schools but we certainly have a shared duty to make sure that the highest possible percentage of children finish formal schooling fully literate.

Report

Whilst I agree with previous posters I think things are changing. Our culture is perhaps beginning to view grammar/spelling rules etc as being of limited value? We can check spelling, we can google facts. These things belong to the outmoded world of rote learning. Other cultures/countries will continue to value what we begin to leave behind? Asia has begun to lay off some of the testing & rote learning and introduce creativity into the curriculum. At the same time they've redoubled the emphasis on spelling, grammar and accuracy etc. Interesting times ahead.

Having said all of that I think we've made great progress in teaching literacy in schools and I am not sure the picture is quite so dire as the report indicates as I said in OP.

Our culture is not viewing grammar and spelling as of limited value. We are clearly still making some very serious judgements about people's abilities and attitudes based on their command of written English. It is not an outmoded world of rote learning it is a very current and pressing matter of clear communication. Creativity is something that can flow after the basics have been mastered.

If standards really have slipped surely over time we'll become increasingly blind to grammatical errors etc? Gradually spelling and grammar will cease to matter in the way in once did? We read far less than we did 20 or 30 years ago, we have far less exposure to the written word and so perhaps skills we once took for granted will inevitably weaken? TV dominates many lives. Which skills will employers value most in the future?

I agree with you Cognito about mastering the basics first. I read somewhere that in order to think outside the box we need to understand it first.

I think this must be the story I heard referred to very briefly on the news on the Today programme this morning.

What amused me was that the minister sounding off about this (didn't catch his name) said that "23% of children are leaving primary school with below average literacy"

Erm - maybe he would like to comment on numeracy while he is at it.

DS is doing his SATs this year. Have just been to a meeting about it where we were told the words he needs to earn to spell for the spelling test.

Because they have a spelling test, they are not marked down on any spelling mistakes within any of the other writing papers, which just seems bonkers to me.

"surely over time we'll become increasingly blind to grammatical errors etc?"

I don't think what's being spoken about in the reports is necessarily grammatical errors, I think it's more fundamental. If children can't read or write to an average standard they are at a serious disadvantae. And I'd agree that numeracy needs work as well.

I don't think we will have less exposure to the written word in 20 or 30 years. Paper publications may be on the wane but they're being replaced by digital media, blogs, websites, e-readers. Students will still be required to submit their work in writing and employers will still need employees that can communicate clearly. Even TV is more interactive than in the past and that also requires literacy skills. I'm pretty confident about the future of the written word.

I thought the teacher spokeswoman came across really badly, she was on the defensive immediately which is always a sign you are not going to debate properly.

The teachers at my dts' school and I'm sure many others do a fantastic job in a tough environment but they are behind what my own P6 work was like - particularly in math. This isn't down to them however I thought the spokeswoman wasn't very adept at getting her point across without aggression. Maybe there is a history between her and Boulton (previous interview gone wrong?) She gave a very poor impression and if I were a teacher I'd be embarrassed she was representing me.

Voidka, I had this argument over and again with my DCs' primary school. They said spelling was done in spelling lessons, grammar was done in grammar sessions, and essays, stories, poems, and the like were not marked for grammar and spelling, because it would take too long and that this was sanctioned by the LEA. This always sounded like bollocks to me, because I can proof read pretty much as quickly as I can read.

The result of this compartmentalisation is that I have three teenagers who still struggle with spelling and grammar, and don't see that it has any importance in literacy. This will probably never change now.

Cortina. What evidence do you have to challenge this report?

I think literacy standards are awful. Grammar is cringeworthy a lot of the time.

Voidka Thu 15-Mar-12 17:13:29
DS is doing his SATs this year. Have just been to a meeting about it where we were told the words he needs to earn to spell for the spelling test.

Sorry, how on earth can you have been told what words your son needs to learn for his SATs? The words they are required to know, are not known bu=y the school until the test papers are opened and since they should not be opened more than an hour before the test, it simply is not possible for anyone at the school to know what words are included. Schools are not given a long list of words for the children to learn.

*by

English spelling, punctuation and grammar have now been put in a box labeled: "They only matter when they're part of a mark scheme".

No wonder a lot of people think you are being weird and unreasonable when you point out any written error .

5foot5 - why is his comment innumerate? (Genuine question btw).

Onehand - having been through Primary Teacher Training within the last 5 years, I can tell you that it is widely agreed that routinely correcting all spellings in a child's work can be demoralising and is of little value. It is not because it takes too long, but because ink all over a page can discourage a child from writing and, often, content and composition are the actual learning objective of the lesson.

Yes, spelling and grammar are important, but so are ideas and creativity. Some of the children I teach would spend so much time worrying about getting the spelling spot on that they would barely write at all if I pulled them up on every mistake.

My dd was told that of and off mean the same thing. She was told this by her teacher. Her homework diary has a page per week for writing in what has been done in class. One week it said 'we done model making'. It makes me want to cry.

Lifeissweet - that's just nuts. Surely if spelling is corrected and the child sees that, then they will learn just as much? Demoralising? What a load of effing rot.

Absolute rubbish lifeissweet.
If a teacher cannot correct a child in a way that doesn't lead to that child feeling demoralised then they are in the worng job.

Well the argument is (and I'm not saying I agree) that correcting spellings in children's work does not make their spelling more accurate. I am not sure what that is based on, but it is what we were told.

It's called a shit sandwich. "Your essay was wonderfully thoughtful, the spelling was substandard, you used some great quotes". Bingo, no demoralising there.

A theory I heard was that teaching has been suffering because of women having more freedom. It used to be that an intelligent woman would aspire to be a teacher or a nurse. That was it, really. Now they can be an astronaut, deep sea diver or CEO. Ergo, less brains in teaching. I know a teacher who is dedicated, hard-working and wonderful. She can't punctuate, spell or formulate an email. I don't know if I would want her teaching my DD even though she is great in so many ways.

So all those children who left school a couple of generations ago, pretty much knowing the difference between their, there, they're, theirs, there's etc
were left feeling creatively crushed and "demoralised".

They did destroy the world's economy, lashings so you never know...

If you don't provide a builder with the bricks, he cannot build the house. If you don't provide the child with the tools to be creative, said child is less able to be so. Ergo, teach the sodding spelling and grammar. It isn't hard. I find it desperately sad that we haven't grown out of seventies schooling yet, how many generations have to get it wrong before somebody gets off their arse and sorts it out.