To expect school teachers to actually educate my child?

[ICancelledTheCheque]

Maybe I'm being a bit PFB but this has really irked me.

DD is Y7 in a big academy secondary school. She showed me some work she had done - in three paragraphs there were six spelling errors and five grammatical errors. The teacher didn't mark up a single thing and just put big green ticks and irritating smiley faces on her work and wrote "excellent work" at the end.

But it wasn't excellent work. How is she going to learn if they don't flag this stuff up? Is this the norm these days? Doesn't bode well for GCSEs if so!!

Anybody working in a primary school will soon tell you that spelling and grammar are being pushed a lot by the current government.

Yes it is being pushed but that doesn't mean teachers are allowed to teach it effectively. You might find that the need for a seven year old to identify modifiers is given equal weighting to their need to learn how to change a y to an I and add es....

As with everything in education, teachers will be teaching to criteria set by a lunatic. Most won't agree with half of what they are teaching and half of what they are teaching will won't be useful to the kids.

Won't be useful...

That half will come at the expense of spelling, punctuation, reading for pleasure etc etc

I am teaching several French and Italian students at the moment. They think and analyse in a very similar way to English students. Their issues are more related to how to answer a particular type of question, more exam technique than thinking skills. I am massively impressed by their ability to not only think but to do this in a second, often third language.

The huge cultural issues are with Chinese students or students from Arabic cultures which tend to be (massive oversimplification) more instructive and students are not encouraged to argue or be creative.

Bobochic rereading your post has someone actually said that? I would be very, very concerned if they have.

The differences really are mainly exam techniques and obviously knowledge. Interestingly a lot of the academic language is very similar. French and Italian students studying science and maths have very few issues and tell me they have found the move quiet easy.

Of course people say it, and tbh there are differences in analysis because the cultural hinterland is not the same. All cultures contain widespread unconscious underlying assumptions.

"When English teachers ask French students to think, they quickly conclude that French students aren't taught to think properly."

Well a teacher who says that must be really, really bad at their job. If someone said that about one of my students I would be massively offended on their behalf and on the behalf of their previous teachers who have done an excellent job.

I have just entered several French and Italian students who came to the UK in August for English GCSE. In terms of cultural hinterland, casting a valid and well argued European slant on a text would be welcomed. I am predicting 6s, 7s and 8s for these students.

Apparently they are also doing well in sociology and history as well as science and maths.

"French students are taught to think very well indeed but in a quite different way to English students"

What do you mean?

Oh come on, Moomin. You talk about focusing on teaching people to be able to spell only well enough to use a spell checker. You make a list of professions that use IT-based systems as a reason for not giving more importance to learning spelling. You set up a false dichotomy between 'executives who can think' and 'secretaries who can spell' (though how you think the secretaries are going to learn that 'low-level' skill is not explained). You're asked several times if there is an evidence base for your assertion that there is no link between learning spelling through writing and applying them in typed forms. You ask a question about whether I've ever noticed something about good typists and I answer honestly from my own experience which in the absence of an objective evidence base (which you decline to share) is a pretty valid way of responding.

So let's not be disingenuous about what you've said and not said, eh? It doesn't even take particularly high levels of reading comprehension to take your words at face value.

I know it's easier to accuse people of 'assuming' than either owning your statements or having a discussion on the merits of the issue. It isn't a particularly good example of effective critical thinking, though.

I'm still keen to read more about some of the theories you are putting forward, if you are willing to share the evidence behind them?

I'm still keen to read more about some of the theories you are putting forward, if you are willing to share the evidence behind them?

See

A - my comments about reading for detail.

B - the quote and link I have provided.

C - the book I have referenced.

Haven't read through the whole thread but this reminds me of the time my OH went for an interview at University to do his PGCE. He was given an A4 piece of paper describing a written task he had to do. The task said to make sure he marked clearly on his work any errors or corrections. When he went into the interview he handed in his piece of work, then gave them back the sheet describing the task - where he had marked in their spelling and grammatical mistakes. He genuinely didn't know if that was part of the task. It wasn't so that was an uncomfortable start to the interview! 😄

Yes, you were right in your assumption that I was hoping for something slightly more academically rigorous than a blog on a website that is promoting touch typing.

There are two issues here really - first, we may have different views on what constitutes 'evidence', and second, you need to do a little more 'reading for detail' to see if your blog post addresses what I actually asked. (Hint: it does not.)

However the blog itself references an interplay between typing and handwriting, when you have been downplaying the idea that skills learned through one transfer to the other. It's that proposition I'm particularly interested in.

You come across as having real problems with people challenging your assertions and assumptions with their own experience.

Homework is under no obligation to be marked, it is frequently marked by Teaching Assistants not teachers, it is usual not to correct errors although spellings might be, excellent work would relate to how much the content answered the objective rather than grammar or spelling. TAs are often only allowed to tick mark and write excellent or good try etc in some schools due to parents complaining. Classwork usually has a much higher level of scrutiny and would involve correction. It can only be marked by a teacher but could include verbal feedback (VF) on work. Hope that helps!

dyslexia.yale.edu/EDU_keyboarding.html

Jassy this article references dyslexia however most educationalists agree methods that suit dyslexics often work very well for other sectors of the population.

I have in no way downplayed transferrable skills. Spelling needs to be taught. Spelling needs to be taught in a variety of ways. Very few schools teach spelling using keyboards this is a wasted opportunity in the computer age.

Please read the book I mentioned it is very interesting.

To everyone else - apologies........

Jassy Is is difficult to find studies that separate spelling and writing. Most find teaching basics is important, indeed essential, but using IT to support the basics benefits students. Which I belive is my point.

by people.ucalgary.ca/~hunter/writ.html

How writing needs to be taught but is supported by IT.

"teaching the elements of the writing process in conjunction with teaching the capabilities of word processors , by helping students to understand the demands of style and audience, by teaching strategies for evaluating compositions and making revisions, and by encouraging students to seek and use feedback on drafts. In short, we ought not expect word processors to relieve us of the responsibility of teaching students how to write; rather, we should be seeking ways in which the availability of word processors can help students to set higher personal and help us to assure that they develop the competencies necessary to achieve them."

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=doc.renlearn.com/kmnet/r004215628gh546b.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiVpICXjOjRAhXhYJoKHTbnChg4ChAWCCkwBg&usg=AFQjCNE41sdJP-737ALpuINoDXbdHtZG2Q&sig2=HEYO3axFHsaLCvvFXcL8Vw" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=doc.renlearn.com/kmnet/r004215628gh546b.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwiVpICXjOjRAhXhYJoKHTbnChg4ChAWCCkwBg&usg=AFQjCNE41sdJP-737ALpuINoDXbdHtZG2Q&sig2=HEYO3axFHsaLCvvFXcL8Vw

Apologies as the link is about writing rather than spelling specifically.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.pdsttechnologyineducation.ie/en/Training/ICT-in-Classroom-PDFs/ICT-in-the-Classroom-PDFs/Word-processing-focus-on-literacy-numeracy-Primary-13-18.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjcwfuOjejRAhUsEpoKHZStC4o4HhAWCBwwAQ&usg=AFQjCNEPLKT5pQT_3jcwhW8MxHnHezcvlg&sig2=P_-28c9VzQY1N0sa--PNCw" rel="nofollow" target="blank">www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.pdsttechnologyineducation.ie/en/Training/ICT-in-Classroom-PDFs/ICT-in-the-Classroom-PDFs/Word-processing-focus-on-literacy-numeracy-Primary-13-18.pdf&ved=0ahUKEwjcwfuOjejRAhUsEpoKHZStC4o4HhAWCBwwAQ&usg=AFQjCNEPLKT5pQT_3jcwhW8MxHnHezcvlg&sig2=P-28c9VzQY1N0sa--PNCw

Again a writing article with links to spelling.

www.google.co.uk/patents/US5649222

This study finds that it is teaching rather than word processing that helps, but well taught word processing is valuable.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D2434%26context%3Dreading_horizons&ved=0ahUKEwjT6vH9lejRAhWH6xoKHaklDUgQFgghMAM&usg=AFQjCNEEtTdu8JuEWrjXYW9wXjJkBu9dkw&sig2=m2KkKDH2HNyhbQPx2CYDTQ" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D2434%26context%3Dreading_horizons&ved=0ahUKEwjT6vH9lejRAhWH6xoKHaklDUgQFgghMAM&usg=AFQjCNEEtTdu8JuEWrjXYW9wXjJkBu9dkw&sig2=m2KkKDH2HNyhbQPx2CYDTQ

This is a general piece about spelling but mentions muscle memory, although not specifically related to typing.

Most spelling studies are related to dyslexia the majority support the use of IT. Some studies suggest handwriting is key for neurotypicals but not all.

There is no academic article that answers your specific points. Most suggest teaching the basics is vital but skills can be well supported by the appropriate use of IT.

I've read as much of this thread as I can bear. It is so, so maddening that so many non-teachers think they know so much more than teachers about how to teach.

Spelling matters. Of course it does. I went into teaching all proud of my status as stickler for accuracy. Was APPALLED by the first pieces of work I marked; I had no idea that year 10 pupils could be that bad at spelling. Red-penned the fuckers like a MN old-schooler. For a while. Until I realised it MADE VIRTUALLY NO DIFFERENCE!

I've been amused by some of the comments along the lines of 'And if you notice a pattern of poor spelling or grammar, surely you can make a point of doing a grammar session that week.' Hahahahaha!! Yes, that will solve it all. I have stood beside GCSE pupils and read one of their gibberish sentences aloud, in an attempt to get them to re-phrase it, only to have them look up at me and ask, "Well, what's wrong with that?"

I may sound jaded. I am a bit, but actually, I love my job. It's just that I realise a few things (yes, I am actually going to stick my neck out and say that I know more about this than a non-teacher).

Firstly, a lot of kids find grammar really hard. They cannot understand the difference between a comma and a full stop, no matter how many emergency grammar sessions you run. At some point, you have to cut your losses.

Secondly, spelling is really, really easy to learn, but very difficult to teach. You want to spell well? Look up words you don't know. EVERY TIME. I've seen kids spell the same word three different ways in one piece of work. That is basically taking the piss; they are saying to the teacher - 'You tell me which is right, because I clearly DON'T KNOW, but I'm damned if I'm going to be arsed to look it up.' When I was a kid, I'd be mortified to get a simple spelling wrong. Most kids don't care. It's hard to make them really, actually care. If they do care, they will be on it already. So - easy to learn; nigh on impossible to teach. Sure, you can do all those spelling rules in primary (which will help), but English is, as we know, not good at sticking to rules.

I'd love it if marking every spelling in red DID have an effect - and, to be honest, as a reflex, I still circle almost all errors. But I have marked errors on COUNTLESS coursework drafts (back when you were allowed to do such things), only to have the final version handed in with the SAME ERRORS STILL PRESENT. Even when it is GCSE COURSEWORK!

I'm sorry, but this issue has really got me going. All this bullshit from people who have no clue.

Yes, you are allowed to mark in red; there isn't some special snowflake rule.

Yes, many teachers DID receive proper grammar education. I left school in 1998, and learned Latin as well as English grammar, thanks.

No, you do not know everything about teaching just because you used to watch Grange Hill.

And it takes a special kind of numpty to think that education = spelling.

Thanks, I'll have a read. I was particularly interested in some of the arguments you were making - from what you say these might not be immediately relevant, but interesting nonetheless -but then we have deviated somewhat from the original points you raised anyway! I don't think I've suggested there isn't a role for the appropriate use of IT in teaching spelling. I apologise if anything I have said has come across in that way.

I'm outcome-focused - as someone who does a lot of recruitment and has a need for team members who perform well at producing accurately spelled and grammatical work of a high quality under pressure, I've a personal interest in the skills of the school leavers and university graduates we are producing. So I'm interested in the evidence base on what mix of techniques is the most effective - not least because I find myself picking up the pieces in the workplace sometimes!

My main point is that spelling really, really matters in a lot of workplaces, and while IT can help, too many people rely on it to their own and their employers' detriments because their own spelling skills are insufficiently strong.

I think I love you a little bit, Merchant

Wow Merchant I have been pissing about on this thread all day and you just nailed it in a oner. Gutted

Ask to see the school marking policy. In my school we mark in 4 colours very thoroughly but the abgle of marking depends on the learning intention. The minimum marking is to tick the success criteria and acknowledge the work with initials but we are expected and monitored on working in depth regularly.

Haha brilliant post merchant

Thanks, guys!

Slight disclaimer:

I realise it might have come across as if I'm saying it's too hard to teach spelling. To clarify, what I'm trying to say is that there are various things you can do, but ultimately, once in secondary anyway, the child just has to take responsibility. Kids know if they don't know how to spell a word. They have a choice: they can look it up, or they can take a guess and rely on the teacher to write in the correct spelling (which they will then ignore).

The OP seemed to moaning that the teacher wasn't prepared to play this soul-destroying game.

MerchantofVenice, please read some David Crystal and get off that high horse.