To hate the grammar lessons children are having to do?

[Clawdy]

Trying to help DGS with his work sent from school yesterday. It was co-ordinated conjunctions and subordinate conjunctions, and so confusing. He struggled with fronted adverbials last week, but eventually managed them. I was a primary school teacher years ago, but I found the whole concept difficult. When we finally completed the work, I wondered what on earth was the purpose behind it. How could analysing the difference help with his story- writing? He's eight years old.

@TheBuffster

Year 2 have to use fronted adverbials to get greater depth in the sats so schools have to teach them then if they don't want Ofsted to rip them a new one.

1) KS1 children are not assessed from the tests. The papers are used to inform teacher assessment for which there has to be a much greater bank of evidence than just a test paper.

2. There is no writing 'SAT'. English writing is assessed using the work produced by the child in their lessons.

3. Fronted adverbials do not feature on the criteria for greater depth. It's not even hinted at.

Grammar is important though. I learned it through extensive reading (but would still have benefited from a few more specifics). But what about the many children who don't like reading, aren't encouraged to read by their parents, or are simply not very good at it? Are they destined to not be able to produce basic sentences in their own language? Probably half of our adult population are unable to produce e.g. a cover letter for a job application without several glaring errors. It's nice to encourage creative writing, but it's got to be a lower priority than clear, correct writing for communication purposes. Let's face it those who can't use correct grammar are not going to have a career in creative writing either.
In my average state school around half the year group could not read fluently by age 14. These people were never going to absorb correct grammar by reading widely. But it would certainly have been possible to teach them a few rules and have them practise.

I managed to learn 6 foreign languages without ever even hearing of a fronted adverbial. 🤷🏻‍♀️
Yes, grammar is important, but if you hit children with the complex stuff too early they’ll mostly just end up hating it. Words are like little bits of magic, formulating sentences and reading/writing stories should be like weaving a spell.

With the greatest respect to Michael Rosen, his abilities as a writer do not mean that he understands what it takes to teach someone how to write. In fact, they may well do the opposite. When I first started teaching, I found it more difficult to understand the misconceptions children had in Maths because it had always been my strongest subject. I'd never experienced their struggles so couldn't comprehend them without significant effort and imagination on my part.

Children don't just magically gain skills when they reach certain ages: they were embedded years earlier through careful and precise teaching from parents and staff.

I wholeheartedly agree that there are issues in the way in which grammar is taught. We need to help teachers (and schools as a whole) improve their integration of these concepts into a well-rounded and language-rich curriculum. The biggest battle right now is actually teaching the adults in school the concepts that weren't taught to them in the first place.

I have a degree in English literature and write reports and letters constantly. My grammar is excellent for the things which matter (using an apostrophe anyone?). I have found my 6yo and 10yo English lessons dry and pointless. It's a real wasted opportunity to instil some real knowledge and love of learning about anything else more meaningful and interesting.

On the plus side, the ability to absorb and understand technical nonsense should be good preparation for many jobs in the future!

@Sunbird24

I managed to learn 6 foreign languages without ever even hearing of a fronted adverbial. 🤷🏻‍♀️ Yes, grammar is important, but if you hit children with the complex stuff too early they’ll mostly just end up hating it. Words are like little bits of magic, formulating sentences and reading/writing stories should be like weaving a spell.

The only reason it is being held up as an example of something complex is because parents (and adults in general) weren't taught it and so don't recognise it.

It's simple. It's using an adverb or adverbial phrase at the start of the sentence instead of next to the verb.
Quickly, Amy bolted towards the doors.
In silence, Jack thought about what he had done.

Actually for greater depth they have to reach skills on the year 3 level like adverbials. I would know, I marked and submitted our year 2 writing last year when we were audited.

@TheBuffster

Actually for greater depth they have to reach skills on the year 3 level like adverbials. I would know, I marked and submitted our year 2 writing last year when we were audited.

Not according to the actual published assessment criteria nor the moderators in our authority. It's also not featured in any of the assessment meetings or moderation prep I've done with our KS1 team for the entire time I've been assessment lead, including several moderations.

Such a statement would also fly in the face of a 'depth-based' curriculum.

Imagine a child with a September birthday, he/she may have just turned 5 in Year One and may or may not be able to have the dexterity to manipulate a pencil. He/she then has to master the concentration needed to sit and write and then to top it off has to learn Grammar.
They don't learn much in the way of grammar in year one. Hopefully they have learned to hold a pencil in reception, if not in nursery or preschool or at home.
Look to other countries where children do not start formal education until much , much later.
What countries? Most countries in Europe have compulsory education from 3 or 4. It may be part of a preschool setting but they have a curriculum. They learn how to hold pencils etc.
There is so much evidence to show their little digits aren't even ready to bloody well write at 5/6.
Eh?
Now factor in "disadvantage" in all its forms.
So disadvantaged children shouldn't have a rigorous education? How are their lives ever going to improve? Education is of the utmost importance for those from disadvantaged backgrounds as they do not have parental money or connections to fall back on. It is literally the only thing they have.
Why should "disadvantaged" children be written off at age 5 to a lifetime of underachievement, low paid and menial work, just because a middle class person with the benefit of a good education thinks it may be too hard for them?

However you may find that many children are using them anyway. After all, there are loads of examples in class storytelling language:
Once upon a time
The next day
Early in the morning
After lunch

With the greatest respect to Michael Rosen, his abilities as a writer do not mean that he understands what it takes to teach someone how to write. In fact, they may well do the opposite.

Exactly. Evidently, most on this thread arguing grammar is unnecessary can write perfectly well for every day purposes at least. It isn't representative of the typical British person at all. Those who most needed to learn that grammar are not able to express themselves in writing in the way that seems so easy to most of us here. There are a lot of very sheltered people on Mumsnet!

I studied three modern languages at secondary school plus Latin. I have an Honours degree in interpreting and translating which involving studying two modern languages plus electives in linguistics. My work involves writing texts for publication. I had never heard of a fronted adverbial until I saw it mentioned on social media this week.

I agree that a basic knowledge of grammar is good both for English and for learning foreign languages but I cannot understand why this rubbish is being inflicted on young children (and their homeschooling parents). Talk about sucking the joy out of learning.

Thankfully, it doesn’t seem to have made its way into Scotland and long may that continue.

@randomer

Now factor in "disadvantage" in all its forms.

I am not sure why you think this isn’t being recognised. The research on Early Years looks at developmental stages and there is much greater awareness now of the need to get some knowledge in before a window of opportunity closes. Real disadvantage can be entrenched otherwise.

And I agree that the most disadvantaged communities/individuals are the ones who need to have their needs identified quickly and accurately. Their disadvantage may come from parents who didn’t have successful learning outcomes or their own needs met and our system can help them.

One family I worked with had a pupil in my class who had poor speech and articulation. There was poor literacy with the parents in their own language and minimal in English. There were older siblings all statements with severe needs but this child was intelligent - she just hadn’t been exposed to the material that would help her. We can do so much to help children like that. And she needed it.

@blueberryporridge

I studied three modern languages at secondary school plus Latin. I have an Honours degree in interpreting and translating which involving studying two modern languages plus electives in linguistics. My work involves writing texts for publication. I had never heard of a fronted adverbial until I saw it mentioned on social media this week.

I agree that a basic knowledge of grammar is good both for English and for learning foreign languages but I cannot understand why this rubbish is being inflicted on young children (and their homeschooling parents). Talk about sucking the joy out of learning.

Thankfully, it doesn’t seem to have made its way into Scotland and long may that continue.

Scottish education is in a decline and you think its a good thing that grammar isn't properly taught? No wonder standards are so low.

I had an appalling education in Scotland, fortunately went to school abroad due to parents' work in the midst of this and was taught the missing grammar that my awful Scottish education had failed to teach me. Even so, and despite a degree and Masters (outwith Scotland), I still have minor problems with my grammar that will never be at the same level as a Dutch or German native speaker writing in their second language.

My job also involves writing texts for publication and I would write better if I had had a complete education prior to another education system instilling in me the rules of correct grammar and the reasons behind them that the Scottish education system failed to. Its about more than being able to express yourself reasonably correctly, its about having the depth of knowledge to explore the entire freedom of the world of the written word without being constrained by unnecessary limitations.

I'm actually going to give myself an online session on grammar to try and improve a bit more. It would have been much easier if my Scottish primary and secondary school up to third year had actually bothered to teach me it.

I struggle to think of any other Northern European population where a failure to teach the rules of grammar correctly would be supported.

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that as my experience is valid as yours. Our school is outstanding so I doubt our ks1 leader got it wrong.

I have an English degree (Russell Group) and an MA in journalism (also Russell Group). I had to look up fronted adverbial...

@WeeWelshWoman

I have an English degree (Russell Group) and an MA in journalism (also Russell Group). I had to look up fronted adverbial...

Same - MA in literature though - a fronted adverbial means nothing to me.

It's all bollocks.Gove loves this stuff,blazers,the house system, grammar for little kids,back to basics,Brexit means Brexit,on and on it churns out.

This emphasis on grammar is depressing. It’s mainly made up. I coped very nicely at Oxbridge without knowing what a fronted adverbial is. I want my children to be enthused by books and learning. Sadly the curriculum has done the opposite. It’s reprehensible as far as I’m concerned.

It's all bollocks. Gove loves this stuff, blazers, the house system, grammar for little kids, back to basics, Brexit means Brexit, on and on it churns out.

Well, quite.

And who amongst us aspires to have our children turn out like the emotionally and socially bankrupt individual Gove is?

What terrifies me is that as minister for education he had the power to micromanage the curriculum, bypassing the real professionals in the sphere - the teachers.