To think the British educational system is all wrong?

[CookiePlough]

It seems like the aim is to make adults out of children as soon as possible rather than allowing them enough time to just be kids.

My main issues are that 1. kids start school way too early and 2. spend way too much time in school.

What is the purpose of a 4 year old child learning to read and write and do addition and subtraction? How does this help the child either in the present or in the future when they are an adult? I can see that 4 year olds are clearly capable of learning these things and of course being able to read or do simple arithmetic is not a problem. The problem is what are they missing out on in order to learn these skills? In my opinion they are missing out on playing. Unstructured, self determined playing. You can learn academics at a later age but you can't really make up for not getting enough playtime as a child. However, this wouldn't be a problem if the school day wasn't so ridiculously long. There just isn't enough time to play after school. There is no time to go anywhere after school (eg the park), for playdates, for any play that takes longer than an hour, to do extra curricular activities (without missing out on Unstructured play time) or anything else. Everything has to be done on the weekend but then when do you have time to do things as a family?

I understand most kids have 2 parents working full time so kids need to be in some sort of childcare setting but even nursery is preferable at thst age to school as there is more unstructured play and more adult supervision. School requires much more in terms of social skills, resilience etc. Which kids,should learn but not by suddenly being dropped in it.

I'm just ranting because I'm tired and upset rather than explaining my points properly. And it's not like I can change the system. I just feel so sad that kids are missing out on being kids. It's not the worst childhood obviously but it's also not as good as it could be.

For 2022 Poland is 15th in Maths, 17th in Science and 16th in Reading.

Ireland is the top European country for Reading, Estonia is top for Maths and Science.

I forgot to say earlier that the Netherlands is also strong.

@poetryandwine "The country is not rich and teacher pay is a problem, but the teaching profession is considered prestigious. "

I actually think this is one of the key issues the UK has and I don't know how we can address it. Teacher pay is an issue here yes but I actually think a bigger issue is that the teaching profession is no longer considered prestigious in the way that it once was (and probably looking back 50 years at least for that). I am not saying I consider teachers overpaid or am something who thinks they have an easy life and work 9-3, but the reality is the salaries are comparable to similar professional roles, particularly outside London. They're comparable to lawyers for example, and probably work out as more on average if you consider it a pro-rata salary given the extended holiday. (Yes teachers need to work some of holidays but so do lawyers). Pretty sure it's more than nurses get which no one would say is a less stressful job and has similar academic requirements for entry. The real issue is that teaching isn't a well respected profession and which is really demoralizing when you're facing a high work load, government targets, stress (and a lot of bad managers who don't manage that well) and not getting pay rises. So people don't become teachers or leave if they have other options. We're then reliant on people who have a genuine passion for teaching and making a difference and will put up with the shit because teaching is their vocation (and you might start out with that but it's hard to maintain) or people who just don't really have many other options. And then the government feels that it can't give teachers more freedom to decide what they can teach, and parents/students have bad experiences with teachers, and then the profession is less respected and the job is even less enjoyable/more stressful and the race to the bottom continues.

Me too. I was a bookish child, but it wasn't that unusual then (I'm 69). I was reading simple story books before I started school and could write my name and do simple sums. The weekly trip to the library was the highlight of my week.

If I hadn't started school at 5, my poor mother would have been driven demented by my constant chattering.

Not at all. But the exposure to the arts, languages, sciences etc would be at a more basic level that they could understand and access, rather than the memory/essay obsessed teaching that they currently suffer and because of their low literacy/numeracy, they really can't cope with. All about "teaching" at an appropriate level, and not the one size fits all that is actually aimed to fail over half the kids.

I think it did for a while, but I believe it was rather an effect of comparatively more difficult curriculum that stretches a lot of pupils (e.g. A-levels in maths are easier than Polish equivalent, the required list of compulsory reading in Polish is much more extensive and more international than the one in the UK), so those that are gifted can benefit rather than good overall educational system.

The tests themselves were not an issue, but the teaching assumes a lot of memorising and definitely does not leave enough space for critical thinking.

A few younger teachers I know are quite a mixed bunch. I would say two have little get up and go. Quite restrained personalities and probably would not fare well in business. One has a maths degree from Warwick and has a very rich family. They like teaching though. Maths teacher teaches in a state 6th form and other private primary. So both avoiding behaviour issues.

Several others are born teachers. They never thought about doing anything else and their parents are teachers. Again all working in lovely state schools with limited behaviour issues.

I also think a unionized profession loses status. It’s also a profession young people know inside out having received teaching for many years. I’m not sure many like what they see. Nursing has the same problem. Both can lead to very decent salaries, and quite quickly for ambitious teachers, but young people don’t want to join the ranks. Plus all SLT in schools are teachers! They don’t have sufficient management training or MBAs. They tend to get by on the hoof. So it’s partly unprofessional!

I don’t recognise DC playing all day in YR. There are more formal reading and writing sessions. Not all DC would get a decent start at home. My DDs thrived in Y1. Depends on the child but plenty of dc are perfectly ok and enjoy school.

I interview programmers (graduate and experienced hire) and couldn’t care less what they are wearing - most so indeed wear t-shirts to interviews (except the Indians). I care about what they can do, not their dress sense.

I’ve been out of teaching for several years, but I am surprised to read teaching salaries are on a level with lawyers. I certainly wasn’t paid anything like that as a class teacher.

It's not about their dress sense, it's about effort and respect and being able to adapt to different circumstances
They don't need to turn up to an interview in a suit and tie, but I would expect trousers and a shirt/smart top with tidy hair, despite our job being one done in trainers and polo shirts (physio).

I don’t think the education system is all wrong. It not great though. I think teachers could do with longer and better training, better pay, more respect and more autonomy. GCSEs should be scrapped as they are depressingly formulaic and take up valuable years of learning. School culture needs to be excellent as regards expectations of behaviour and love of learning. Parents need also be expected to support the system. SEN and pastoral care should be properly funded. In primary there should be plenty of music, drama and science as well as forest school. These are mainly societal changes.
I’ve observed both private and state education and much of the success of private education has as much to do with the school culture and parental and teacher expectations as with wealth or smaller classes.

I don’t really agree with this, I got A’s in English Language and English Lit in GCSE and then again in A-level a million years ago. I remember some of the poems we read and specifically discussing Joyce with my teacher. Yes when it came to the exam I focused on that, however I was able to do it because I had just spent 2 years appreciating literature. Discussing the structure and content deepened my understanding and my appreciation.

Children who are taught well do well because they understand the content and absorb it. The coursework and exam at the end are just the culmination of learning how to read and comprehend. There are no real shortcuts here. Teaching to a test only works of you can make sure you have covered every permutation of questions.

Same, I was fluent by the time I got to school. Reading has been one of the great joys of my life. My DD is the same, fluent before school. I don’t think any child has been harmed by being taught to read.

It’s completely possible to teach to the test for GCSE English literature without the students understanding the texts or even reading the full version and come out with a good grade. A level English Literature does require understanding.

I don't want to absolve myself of this responsibility. I don't get enough time with my kids because they spend most of their waking hours at school.

Yet many on here dislike the concept of boarding school at the same time as expecting to be able to pass their children to someone else.

They finish at 3.30 and we are usually home by about 4.15pm. They have about 3h before they have to go up to go to bed. Dd takes an hour to eat but she is severely underweight so we cannot cut down on that. She is also exhausted after school so needs quite a bit of down time. The school expects them to do 15min of an app based math game, 15min of a spelling game and 15min of reading. Dd loves to read so that's not a problem but she rarely has the time or energy to do the math and spelling games and is now severely lagging behind.

She is also summer born, end of August. I regret we didn't defer by a year (I mean start reception one year later) but at that time everyone (nursery teachers of two childcare settings she went to) advised us heavily against it. They said she is very bright and would get bored if she had to stay another year in preschool. Really, a 4 year old would get bored of playing?

I was never worried about academics (till now) but I could see that there was a marked difference bw dd in terms of social skills, gross motor skills, etc compared to her friends some of whom were almost a year older.

@CookiePlough It sounds like you live further from the school than we do so that must make a difference. We are only a 10 minute walk away. If we're going to the park we just go straight from school (I bring snacks!) and then home afterwards. We also do bedtime later but my two have always been night owls.

Is that 45 minutes of homework every day?! That seems excessive. My kids get set weekly homework but we rarely do it (and teachers never chase it up). We do read with them regularly though. There's no evidence that homework is beneficial at primary age. They should be able to cover the required learning in school hours. If your daughter is falling behind I'd speak to the school about how they can support her. I really doubt it's due to lack of homework.

I grew up in Germany (which is probably why I am so biased against the English system).

I actually don't agree with the 3 tiered secondary school system. Your marks in the last year of Primary (age 10 or 11) decide what type of school you go to and therefore whether you can attend university or not. I think, this is way too early. Your ability to learn, aptitude and interest mjght form much later. Your chance of attending university should not be decided at age 10. Yes, there is a possibility to change in year 7 but practically very few kids change from a lower tier to gymnasium. I know a few who left gymnasium. My best friend was one and while she had struggled at the gymnasium she absolutely excelled at the lower tier school as according to her the standard was so much lower. It's almost impossible to change to a gymnasium in year 7 abd I don't know a single person who has done it. What is more common is that people do a subject specific abitur (school leaving certificate) after finishing school that allows them to study particular subjects at university.

Also, I arbitrarily call them lower tier schools, which sounds derogatory though they in theory they are meant to be for kids who might be better with practical rather than abstract learning. In reality though kids are judged based on the type of school they go to, ie they were considered less intelligent and surprisingly lower class. Surprising because in general German society is not as class based as the UK ( but equally judgmental). The experience of my friends who went to these schools is that they were much rougher and Had more challenging behaviour.

This is how it was in the city i grew up in when i was growing up. Maybe now things have changed.

The thing that was absolutely fantastic though is that you started school in the year you turned 7. There was pre school before that and we did do a bit of numbers and shapes, etc but with no pressure to learn whatsoever. Also in year 1 school was from 8am -12pm and then from year 2 to year 10 it was 8am to 1pm. Year 11 is 8am - 2.45pm and then Abitur ( a levels) depended on your subjects. So we had the whole afternoon to play, visit or go out with friends, di extra curricular activities or just do nothing. Of course back then some families had one parent at home otherwise it would have been wrap around care but now I think that is still better than formal and structured learning in the afternoon. (And I guess my generation was famous for being the latch key generation. By about age 10 if both parents worked we just stayed at home on our own)

Again maybe things have changed but I don't think there was ever a lot of academic pressure, not even later in secondary. It was all very play based in primary and then in secondary the load wasn't massive either. I have spoken to a few kids in secondary here and they told me they get an hour of homework in early secondary but then as they are getting closer go their gsce s they are expected to do 3-4h of schoolwork every day after school. Is this true? How is that even possible? How can kids put in 3h of school work if they only get home so late? When do they do other stuff? What kind of childhood (or teenagehood) is this?

Yes. We live unfortunately quite far (and traffic is horrendous) and I know that is a major factor that makes everything more hectic and stressful. In summer we often go to the park after school on the way home.

So, it's not exactly homework. It's basically educational apps (e.g. ttrs) that the kids are encouraged to do every day for 15min each and then reading. They also get maths and English homework on Friday for which they get a week. Rhe maths homework usually takes not more than 15min but the English homework is too often more like a project, eg design a poster. That can take half a day or longer.

Most kids finish wrap around care before 5.30 and it's only Mon to Friday. It's not ideal but still very different to boarding school.

YANBU. I’m deferring my son starting school for a year so he will begin a little before his sixth birthday. I think 4/5 is so young to start school and that virtually all children would benefit from a later start.

My DDs never ever did 3-4 hours homework a night in GCSE years. Simply didn’t need to. Likewise they wanted to go to school and learn at 4. Which is what they did. One had next to no homework at state junior school and the other had more at a private prep. It was manageable though. Both did loads of extra activities. They never went to bed at 7. They didn’t get that tired! There’s far too many assertions being made about schools and dc that don’t recognise schools and dc are different.

But the post that @SuzieNine was replying to said that someone who turned up in a t-shirt wouldn't ever be taken seriously. That's just not correct at all - it completely depends on the industry and employer. There are some employers where a standard suit would go against you (thinking some creative industries). You're in a client facing role so yes of course being presentable is important, but not all roles are client facing.

Not all schools are like this. In primary my kids didn't have any mandatory homework, except reading with them each night (and even then the school didn't actually do anything if you didn't). They did provide optional homework though - some parents want it and complain if they don't have it.

It might be worth looking at changing schools to one that's closer to you and has a less academic approach. In the meantime explain the situation to the school and say that you're not going to be doing the apps.

Two people came to my workplace for interviews the other day, one was wearing hiking trousers and a flannel shirt, the other wore jeans and a big coat that he didn't take off. Not an issue at all. I wore jeans, comical t-shirt and a hoody for mine.