FURIOUS with Gove's maths comments

[BusterGut]

The man is a total twat.
He is so out of touch, he must be living on Mars.

Bloody 'pre-algebra' - that's missing no. sums in Y2.
Bloody 'maths every day' - who doesn't?
Bloody teaching maths till 18 ????????? (Pity the sec sch maths teachers)

GGrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
(I've written to the slimy little toad. Anyone else going to join me?

Science and maths and rainforests and history projects and spelling and drawing are all seen as equally important all at the same time

No, they're not. Science, Maths and spelling are core-subjects, with lots of dedicated time - an hour every day for Literacy and Maths, and around 2 hours for Science. History projects, rainforests and drawing are foundation subjects, not as important and receive less teaching time. Plus core skills are still taught through them as well, on top of the repeated basics.

Two hours for science everyday and only an hour for maths.

One hour a day for maths. An hour.

well if thats how he feels it's rather a pity that the tories scrapped the EMA which was keeping many 16 - 18 year olds in college, studying maths and english alongside their courses. Many of the year 11 students that I teach were only prepared to go to college with the incentive of EMA.

And what are the govt doing about the massive shortage of primary school places in London?

Maybe Gove could persuade Dave that education is important after all and investing in the public sector might be a good idea.

By the way, Radiohelen, if a teacher is no good at their job then I can honestly say it would be the worst job in the world and you wouldn't want to do it in a million years!

2 hours a week, you plank.

It's more than an hour if you count history dates, results tables and graphs in Science. Co-ordinates in Geography, measurements in DT/Art/P.E., etc, etc. Good schools reinforce core skills most of the time.

"Many of the year 11 students that I teach were only prepared to go to college with the incentive of EMA."

That is so depressing. Bribing to go to school.

Oh get lost Feenie - you have no idea why children are failing at maths if everything is so marvellous. You insist everything in the garden is fabulous and children are leaving school without basic skills. It's complacency like yours that's landed us here. Total denial. There's no problem to solve.

Yeah, sure. When you've seen three children through NC primary and had to fill in the very large gaps left by teachers while they were dressing up as chimney sweeps or whatever the fuck, you do actually understand why children with unsupportive parents crash and burn.

Charming post, Gooseberrybushes - as always, you don't seem debate rationally without resorting to rudeness.

I have worked in primary schools for over twenty years - I doubt I have no idea, do you? I will obviously have some insight into the numbers of children who are perceived to be 'failing'. The impact of inclusion on school test results plays a huge part in the percentages - and and this article sheds light on some of the rest.

Do try and be polite if you reply. It's not difficult to just have a discussion.

You know, I absolutely hate this attitude. I have seen it so much on mn, people think they're so damned progressive for warning against didactism and the squeezing into the mediocre middle. It just condemns and has been shown to condemn thousands and thousands of children into a failure of social mobility. If schools have abandoned the practice of leaving things to the parents - Good. But I bet they haven't.

gooseberrybushes, yes it is depressing but these are very damaged kids and just keeping them engaged in education for longer and giving them better life chances works out far cheaper than the money spent controlling youth crime, where many will now end up

Try "to".

Simply responding to your own name calling. If you don't like it, don't start it. I rarely resort to rudeness - as you know - I am simply reciprocating.

I actually think you have no idea. I think you are complacent beyond belief.

No idea what you're ranting about. But at least you were polite, well done.

Show me where I have called you names, please.

I rarely resort to rudeness, as you know

Pmsl!

Apart from 'plank', and I was joking - you were being a bit daft.

Blaming it on social circumstances is complacent. The school is the one door of opportunity the child has. The only possible opportunity.

For years that opportunity has been wasted and the results are obvious, the utter failure of social mobility and a lost generation. The same twenty years approximately that you've been in the system. Sometimes when you're too close to a problem you simply don't see it. You grew up with these methods and philosphies, professionally - you learned them, practised them, theorised about them and you can't bear to admit the results have been less than perfect.

Yes, I rarely do. I disagree with people: I am not rude and abusive. And I certainly never start it as you have.

You are often bloshy, rude and abusive.

I wasn't trying to start anything - I was joking when I said you were a plank. But 2 hours of Science a day was quite funny.

What don't you start - I thought you weren't ever rude and abusive?

Yes, it is very, very obvious you have no idea. The only thing that was hard to understand about my post was this sentence: "You insist everything in the garden is fabulous and children are leaving school without basic skills."

Which should have read : "You insist everything in the garden is fabulous while children are leaving school without basic skills."

You have no idea - you simply don't see any problem. You can insist everything is fine if you like. Some people may chose to disbelieve you.

I am closer to the picture and see exactly why children don't get level 4 - that is what you perceive as failing, isn't it?

Children need to know all their tables at level 3, you know. And I would still like to know how many schools we are talking about.

No I am not bolshy, rude and abusive. Not at all. I certainly haven't called you any names.

I really don't think it's funny that you, a teacher over the last twenty years during which so many children have been so miserably failed, doesn't see any problem at all.

Now that's depressing.

Why is the number of schools relevant? Surely the number of failing pupils tells the story. Why are you fixating on this detail?

Depends what you call miserably failed - and I will inevitably know the nitty gritty of that subject more thoroughly than you, because of my profession.

LilyBolero, my dd did most, if not all of those things in her state primary. I can't believe that her pretty below average primary (went into special measures when the only good teacher they had left moved on in despair) is the only state primary in the country which covered that stuff, at least in basic form.

Because I'm pointing out that you don't have much experience to make sweeping statements about the state of the maths curriculum in the vast majority of schools in England.

'However an entire primary generation was let down by let's-all-hold-hands-and-save-the-world-airy-fairy-don't-want-to-bore-the-children-now-do-we type education and the results show it.'
Absolutely Gooseberry.
The peopel who purorted to 'support and understand and reflect' and peddle liberal crap have condemend many to lives on the scrapheap.

Do you know of Thadore Dalrymple a social commentator (and prison doctor) who writes extensively on such matters and who is, quite simply, brilliant?

Highly recommended reading.

The equivalent of being woken up with a clashing of s cymbals by the ears, a kick in the kidneys and a dousing with a pail of cold water.

What we all need to some extent-noone as much as Feenie however.

"Depends what you call miserably failed".

You really don't see a problem at all do you.

It may be a requirement of the NC that children know their tables by level 3 but it doesn't mean they do, as everybody knows.

Jux, they are all things which the population as a whole show an alarming lack of understanding of, that's why they need more teaching.