to think the pace of change in schools has speeded up in last 30 years

[morningtoncrescent62]

I'm interested in what people from different age groups think about this.

I finished school in the early 1980s. If a teenage time-traveller from a 1950 grammar school had arrived in my school around the time I left I think they'd have felt pretty much at home. We did the same subjects (perhaps not as much Latin, it was optional and taken mainly by the higher streams, but the grammar to comprehensive change probably accounts for that), we spent most lessons listening to teachers droning on and writing down/memorising what they said for eventual regurgitation in an exam, there was the occasional 'experiment' in science where you knew the result you were supposed to get and pretended you'd got it even if you didn't but that was the only practical activity going on, independent research was limited and severely constrained by what books you could access, and corporal punishment was still around, though probably more of a last resort than in 1950.

Fast forward 30 years, and if a time traveller from an early 1980s school were to find themselves in a school now, they'd be completely lost. Several new subjects are on the timetable. There's a lot more emphasis on activity, and the remaining whole-class teaching looks and feels different with whiteboards and powerpoint presentations rather than chalk and talk. Technology makes unlimited information available inside and outside the classroom in a way that would bewilder a 1980s visitor and pupils seem to be increasingly treated like consumers, with schools having policies on 'student voice', pupils involved in interviewing for new teachers and the like.

My actual experience is limited - my only evidence is the school I went to as a pupil in the 1970s/early 80s, my DDs' schools (DD2 left four years ago), and what I read in the press and on t'internet. So what do others think? NB I'm not commenting on what kinds of curriculum and teaching are better, or more fit for purpose, or whether we should get back to basics. For better or worse, by the time my DDs left school it was beginning to feel like a completely different universe to the one I'd been in, and I want views on whether that's an unreasonable conclusion.

I think the new maths curriculum is dire. It's too much too soon. I believe that standards in maths will fall in 10 years time. There is too much memorisation in key stage 1 and not enough time to create real understanding.

I was at secondary in the 90s and trained in 2003. There was a jump in what I experienced at school to what I was expected to deliver. I went to a good school and did well, and lessons were a mix of improving technology (CD ROM to the introduction of the internet in the library) and traditional methods like dictation and copying of the board.

I used a blackboard on teaching practice. OHPs were gradually being replaced by digital projectors. There were set expectations of lesson structure and curriculum content to define the quality of lessons. In the last year I've returned to teaching after a break while having children, and the expectations of teachers have, jumped, swung around and looped the loop. I feel like there is more to process than there was when I was training. I can see the benefits of some of these practices, but the pace and scale of the change is hard to adjust to. The stakes feel higher too.

Yes, I think the rate of change has accelerated significantly.

"how many people now need to know calculus, etc as they can use a computer to do it. "

Actually, the needs for expertise in STEM subjects (maths, science, engineering) is higher than ever due to the demands of the modern economy. It's not a question of "getting a computer to do it"--you have to actually understand how calculus works in order to do a STEM subject at a higher level.

The dumbing down of the maths curriculum in the UK is and will be our greatest mistake in education. We will continue to rely too heavily on overseas graduates in every sphere of our economy

What proportion of mumsnetters have ever used calculus at work? I used calculus when I worked in research, but I don't know anyone else who has used calculus at work. Most people need a basic level of maths for the workplace and GCSE maths should show that someone can cope every day maths.

Infact I think if you asked a typical maths teacher what "differentiation" was they would think that you were refering to lesson planning rather than d(y)/dx (Even though I hope that every secondary teacher who teach maths does understand calculus even if they don't have a maths degree.)

In maths differentiation is finding the rate of change or the gradient of line on a graph. In teaching differnetiation is recongising that children can cope with a steeper learning curve than others. In the past an attempt was made to teach calculus to every child who did o-level maths with the result that a huge proportion failed. Employers had no way of telling apart someone who just could not do calculus from someone who just could not do maths.

I think our biggest mistake has been not to ensure that our mathematical high fliers are sufficently stretched. I believe that the present govement wants children to have the option to sit two maths GCSEs to rectify this problem.

I don't agree that the curriculum has been dumbed down. The year 6 curriculum covers aspects of maths which I didn't study until GCSE level, and as for English, well our year 3 class are being taught Grammar that I was NEVER explicitly taught and I have a degree.

I left school in 1996 and am an English teacher. I wish I'd had the kind of education and teachers the kids at my school have now; it's diverse, engaging and taught with a great deal of passion by really dedicated staff.

The curriuclum is different, rather than dumbed down. Expectations of primary school children are higher than ever. At secondary there is more spoonfeeding than the past. In the past children were blamed for failing exams. Nowdays teachers get the blame.

I feel that responsiblity needs to be shifted back to children.

I left school in 1979. My older DC were at school in the 1990s/2000s, and I was a secondary school TA; and I have one dc at primary in 2015.

I was taught to read with phonics. My DC were taught look-and-say. Their spelling wasn't corrected, and they were never taught grammar. DC5 learned phonics and is currently learning parts of a sentence that I didn't do until secondary. They are also expected to know their times tables in Y2. We didn't even start tt until Y3 when I was at school.

DC3 went to a private Junior school where they sat in rows facing the teacher. As he has ADHD and dyspraxia he found it a much more effective learning environment than the infants he moved from where everyone was doing their own thing and lots of movement.

There is much more disruption in the classroom than we would have got away with, and that isn't a good thing for the rest of the class.

If the maths nc in schools have not been dumbed down why do most universities put on remedial maths courses for students taking science sources also MNetters continually moan on about the jump between gcse maths and A level maths and the difficulty dcs have coping with the jump despite getting A* GCSE in maths

School maths is inappriopiate for science and maths degrees. There is a mismatch between what a STEM specialist needs and what someone in a non STEM job needs. The govement is proposing to address this by having an additional maths GCSE as an option for children who have the mathematical ablity to become a STEM specialists.

Our education system has to meet the needs of children who will go on to do skilled, semi skilled and professional jobs. A hairdresser needs does not need to know calculus, but does need proof that they have decent everyday Maths skills. An aspiring hair dresser might not want to spend timetable time learning calculus even if she/he is capable of learning calculus.

In the 2008 I went through my cousins GCSE coursework and was stunned how simple it was. This is bearing in mind, I have not done any maths work since the 90s (GCSE). My friend who is a primary school teacher and is the science teacher at the school, says that kids are much dumber, compared to first started her job. Which proves Charlotte Iserbyt is right when she said that there is an agenda of dumbing down America (ie the west). And Charlotte Iserbyt is no conspiracy theorist as she was the Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI), U.S. Department of Education, during the first term of U.S. President Ronald Reagan. Im glad I am going to send my child abroad to get ger education.

well I doy have a choice

I read recently that if you transplant a surgeon or healthcare professional from the 1950's into an equivalent setting today, they would be completely at a loss due to the extent of change.

Do the same to a teacher or educational professional and they would hardly notice the difference.

IMO, from what I understand, the pace of change in education is lagging behind and the slowest of most other professions. We can thank government policy for that.

Governments tinker round the edges too much, mess around with metrics, which creates a massive amount of 'noise', but not much across-the-board innovation. Educational psychology has contributed towards improved understanding about how we learn, but 20 years worth of academic research on technology usage in the classroom and the majority of which has remained in the theory and not found its way into the classroom. Insufficient investment in technology skills for learning is one root cause ...

[my source of knowledge, albeit I don't claim to be "the font of all knowledge", is my current PhD thesis around Connectivist learning theory, which recognises the influence of technology networking - it is taking many years to even get people engaged with transformational approaches to how people learn in 21st century]

Do the same to a teacher or educational professional and they would hardly notice the difference.

The basic structure of the day like registers, assembly, playtime might not have changed much but the actual lessons and the workload are totally different.

I think that at y9 children who want to take an extended Maths paper/ class because the subject is important for their future should have the option.
Those who struggle, don't want to do more than what life will require should have the option to do more life meaningful maths.
Surely, this is the way to go, equally the same with English.
A basic education unless you particularly want to specialise/ take it further.

I would hope that the majority of chilldren would have the option of doing a further maths GCSE. I think we need to be really careful that we do not cut off children's options at a really early age.

daisychain01 schools have changed beyond recongition since the 1950s or even the 1990s. The problem with academic research is that it tends to be done by people who don't teach. Its well known that a lot of what is taught on a PGCE course is useless and does not translate to real life experience.

I feel its time that research came out of its ivory tower and was done by people who actually work at the coal face of education. Certainly there are currently moves in that direction.

Its well known that a lot of what is taught on a PGCE course is useless and does not translate to real life experience not just PGCE, the same could be said for most Degree courses full-stop. Modules are based on theoretical data gathered by researchers and put into module curricula. Looking back at my degree and masters materials, none of it bore any resemblance to what I have since learned working in the real world, but it's better than nothing.

It's a bit of a generalisation to say researchers are in their Ivory towers if they work closely with practitioners. I agree that there needs to be a closer partnership between theory and practice but saying we need to get people at the coal face doing research sounds like you are blaming the wrong people. IF there aren't enough practitioners doing research that isn't the fault of researchers. They still try to contribute to the body of knowledge which is hard slog!