Does it matter whether the pizza guy has GCSE Latin?

[PooshTun]

By the time your DC gets to 14 it should be obvious whether he is academic or not. If he isn't then why should he be expected to sit through 2 years of Latin, German, English literature etc only to get a D or E?

Wouldn't you rather he spent the next two years doing something that will help him get a job? And if the kid is struggling with English then shouldn't this be the school's focus as opposed to getting the kid to study German or French?

The education authorities (and some MNetters) seem to be of the opinion that ALL school leavers should leave school with a well rounded education. That is a great thought if you have a kid who can't decide whether to study geography or Latin or Egyptology at university.

But with some kids they are not academic and they won't be going to Uni. They would benefit greatly from a two year course that would prepare them for the work place as opposed to studying subjects which somebody somewhere has decided that is necessary in order for a person to be a 'well rounded' person. Some people's main concern is first get a job THEN work towards to being what someone else regards as being a well rounded person.

And my point is that kids ARE offered more vocational options so it's a non-argument!

You can't get away from the fact that most children will need a reasonable level of skill in core subjects such as English and Maths. I agree that for non-Academic children the focus should be on vocational work where appropriate.

Vocational jobs still require skills such as maths, if you are a caterer and you have a recipe that serves 8 but you are catering for 12 you need to be able to scale up the recipe etc.

"Why limit their options at 14? Until they leave school they should be able to access all of the syllabus, with particular choices made based on preference and aptitude"

I'm suggesting that non academic kids should have more vocational options to choose from instead of having to select from a list of traditional subjects like Latin geography or physics for example.

So I don't understand why you are asking me why I think that 14 year olds should have their options limited.

Chaz - I am not suggesting that core subjects like maths or English gets dropped. I've even made the point that someone struggling with English should benefit from the school focusing on literacy skills as opposed to learning about 18th century poets.

Thing is, real kids don't always fall into 'academic' or 'non-academic' (ie vocational) categories. And furthermore, I don't agree that its always obvious at 14 who will flourish in which camp - often yes, but not always.

I'm all for choices and options earlier than 16 though, as long as its the kids that choose and not someone labelling them one thing or t'other.

I was labelled academic, but would have loved some vocational courses in there!

"And my point is that kids ARE offered more vocational options so it's a non-argument!"

You are assuming that every one is at some leafy suburban comp with lots of options and an extensive external relations outreach program.

All schools do! If my leafy comp with very few non-academic kids can do it certainly the rest of the comps in the country can and do do it!

It's a non-argument - it already happens! It's like starting a thread with 'I think primary schools shoud teach children to read'

THIS ALREADY HAPPENS!!!!

You just want a bun fight don't you? [ggrin]

i wasn't academic but still enjoyed studying biology and chemistry from two years even though i failed the exams.

though at my ds's comp there are tons of vocational courses to pick from

Tons to pick from in our local secondaries too, just checked

And good thing, as long as no one tells a child 'you can't do the academic subjects' if they want to. My db is an interior designer, and very successful at it - he's always been a creative type, not interested in academia per se, but his secondary school years of maths, English, languages etc have all served a purpose in his life, and relationships, today. He's definitely more 'rounded' than he would have been with nothing but art and design courses (nor did he know he wanted to follow that path, until he was in his 30s!)

Because the vocational skills, by definition can be learned as they start work. Few jobs accessible to school leavers will improve their literature or foreign languages, or chemistry. Even fewer will do all.

That's the good thing about comprehensive education- everything is potentially available to everyone. Unlike the selective system, which makes decisions about children at the age of 10, and closes down their futures from Yeqr 7.

Yes, ifeel it would be burning bridges at too early an agr

Yes, for the love of CHRIST let's stop this endless mindless ramming of LATIN down the throats of less academic children after year 9! When will this madness end?

Oh right.

Secondary schools do this already.

I have a 14 year old.

It already happens.

Still, nice idea, PooshTun.

Now, I've got a really new idea, It's a children's book, about a boy who doesn't know he's a wizard until he goes to a wizard boarding school....

merrylegs

Poosh - I think you're essentially correct. Horses for courses. One of DDs best friends is just choosing her 'option blocks' - In addition to the core stuff plus French, she's doing catering and business studies blocks, this is excellent for her as her ambition is to open a restaurant. DDs school wouldn't suit her at all (but does suit DD perfectly).

Selection at 11 may be too early, but I reckon there's a case for differentiation at 13 or 14 - the point at which children have to choose academic versus vocational anyway, in reality- the trick is to ensure that the latter is not seen as second best.

This can be done within comps but wouldn't have to be.

As to the EBacc - its not a bad notion, for academic kids. But, if you've got a comprehensive school racking up more than say 25-30% Ebacs then either there is some form of covert selectivity or they are probably forcing too many children inta academic subject choices.

I think we need to stop dividing children into academic/non academic, TBH. 'Vocational' courses are often full of disengaged children who may well excel in some academic areas- languages, for example- but never get the chance to try as they are siphoned onto a hair and beauty course, and effectively written off.

By the same token, some high achieving academic students may excel in some vocational areas- yet because they are divided at KS4 they never get the opportunity to try.

Tethers - so how do you square the circle of there only being so many hours in the day?

In any case, the differentiation shouldn't be 'A has an IQ of >120, she must do all GCSEs'; B has an IQ of 100 so should do vocational. If A wanted do do more vocational courses it should be (at 14) to a great extent her choice.

You don't actually have to be massively academic
to get the EBacc.

"Moving pass Her Pedantic-ness's unhelpful comments"

Did you mean past?

[helpful]

Sorry- posted too soon. I would expect a good comprehensive school to get at least 30% EBacc once it's properly bedded in- why wouldn't you?

Soup - I'd take it as a compliment

merrylegs

But how many children leave school unable to become a hairdresser because they didn't have the option to do it? Why can't that stuff wait until theybe left, and make way for subjects they may never use in thir jobs - but it keeps the options open.
I have no problem with children opting for less academic or vocational subjects, but within the same school system rather than effectively leaving school at 14 .

How much of your education do you actually use though?
I certainly don;t use about 98% of it in any practical sense, chemistry? Physics? Algebra?

But Seeker is right , its all about civilising a nation isn't it? I loved latin because it was fascinating and logical and we had a wonderfully eccentric and brilliant latin teach who took us to Pompeii and made us read Plini's diaries at the top of vesuvius. THAT is what education is about in my mind, developing young brains to question, analyse and understand the world, otherwise what is the point of any of any subject other than english and maths at the most basic level?

I have a personal bugbear about the dropping of Latin as I think its such an important subject for understanding the English language.