official letter from dd's school telling me they are going to lower standards:and they are proud of this!

[hk78]

thank god there's a place to get this crap off my chest!

i've had a letter from school, telling me all about the 'new marking policy' (i wasn't aware of the old one )

basically, the main theme of the new policy is that "not all spellings are corrected. We feel that it is demoralising to a child if there work is covered in red pen - I can remember that feeling well from my own school days!"

1. they are proudly sending a letter to say they are going to let things get even more slack

1. 'there work is covered in red pen' ????

i don't think there's any point in even complaining - no-one is bothered any more are they?!?!?

Am listening to Ken's speech, I had forgotten how funny it is.

Please listen to it, it is facinating and hilarious.

SSSandy2 - it's the reason why for so long bilingual upbringings were frowned upon by many so-called language professionals - they identified the "mix" of languages in the very early years and labelled it "confusion". Actually, mixing languages at the early stage is only a sign of a child, pragmatically, using all the words at his/her disposal to express him/herself.

Also, many speech therapists don't know about this and so when they assess bilingual children they use the framework of their own language and wrongly assume that all children in all languages acquire the same basic vocabulary in the same order. Which leads to lots of wrong assessments about language development.

Ooh, that's so true Anna, I'd never thought of that. DD says most of her verbs in Italian and nouns in English (unless it's too Daddy then it's all in Italian). She's only just started saying a few verbs like "eat" in English and is gradually switching over, but it's definitely taken her longer than with the nouns. Hmmm, food for thought.

Interesting, Anna. I did not know that.

Am now sitting here trying to remember what my DCs first words in each language were.

dd's first words in English were "more" and then "more meat"
German it was "manu" and "nein"

I think Fio has a good point about the origins of the letter.
nd we do rant on about schools, don't we? they are damned if they do, damned if they don't, and we're all experts.

I feel encouraged and informed by the posts by teachers on this thread.

Will listen to KR when I have access to a computer with speakers!

Well, I feel encouraged by the multilingual posters, who I think have far better insights into language development than the average poster .

And as for the Ken Robinson speech... what a statement of the b**y obvious. Sorry. No insights there.

Anna
Unfortunately, the Ken Robinson speech is not for all of us "a statement of the bloody obvious."

For many involved in children's development it is a completely different approach, otherwise we would not be having discussions like this one.

I know of no school in this area of Germany that puts the same emphasis on creativity as they do on the more traditional lessons. I know very few people who, if their DC said they would like to be an artist, would jump up and down in joy.

KS - it wouldn't be such a statement of the obvious in France, either - though Sarkozy's lettre aux éducateurs at the beginning of September addressed the role of promoting creativity very well indeed. Things are changing here.

But in thinking Anglo-Saxon circles - yes, I think it's stating the obvious. Creativity and personal insight is the absolute goal of education.

Anna,
Then maybe we should move back to UK as this kind of thinking is almost unknown here in Germany.
I have heard so many horrible things about the school system here that I am dreading DD starting school next year.

"thinking Anglo-Saxon circles " - unfortunately, since the introduction of the National Curriculum and SATS, this has not included gvt ministers responsible for education - though with 7% of our GNP in the creative economy, they should take more notice.

I agree with ssandy that music can be badly taught in schools - I thnk that is because it is not taken seriously, and rarely has specialist teachers. Children have to seek private tuition to aquire the technical skills to be a good musician. And I fully agree with the 'building a house' analogy...BUT...and no-one has answered my question here....do you really think that when children are very very first beginning to write independently, with no hope of getting the spelling right by themselves, that that is the time to correct spelling? I am not talking about later. I agree that good spelling and grammar is important later on and needs rigorous support. Bt at the earliest stages?

And if you do, when your 4 year old presents you with a birthday card (the first they have ever written off their own bat, by themselves) that says
'I lv yo mmy'

because the 'l' in 'love' is pronounced 'luh', ditto the first ''m' / 'muh' in 'mummy', are you really going to politely tell them they have spelled it wrong? Even though they were aplying the phonetic information they are beginning to learn?

And will you have applied this to everything? When your gummy toddler first said 'ulk' did you say 'not 'ulk', it's milk...and do this about every word?

And for every 1 dimensional drawing of a house Ds has done since he was 3 should I have corrected it because he has not yet learned to draw with perspective?

Good artistry is underpinned by good technique - but they can be developed hand in hand, at the right developmental stage for the child.

I have asked hk78 (who has disappeared) whether this is a KS1 policy - as it is in DS's school.

if it is a policy that includes yr6, then i despair alongside her.

Blu - personally, I think it is the role of schools not parents to teach early reading and writing, so in the example you gave of a tiny child's first attempts at writing, no, I wouldn't correct the child - except that I won't be confronted with it. My daughter in her bilingual school will learn to read and write much later than 4 - at 6 in French and at 7 in English - using different techniques.

Interestingly, when it comes to speech, yes, I do tend to repeat most of what our daughter says in English to ensure she's learning correct pronunciation. But I am very aware that (a) I am her only source of English on a daily basis (b) my stepsons are learning English from listening to the conversation between me and my daughter and they always seem to pick up on the really weird things she comes out with. So I spend quite a lot of time discussing with them what they ought to be saying.

As for drawing - no, I no more expect my three year old to draw with perspective than I expect her to make her own supper.

kindersurprise - do you read French? If so, I'll give you a link to what Sarkozy wrote this autumn.

That makes sense, Anna.

Because when I have been discussing the importance of encouragement and morale over accurate spelling it has been within the context of the very early exposure children get here in England (I say England because in Scotland children start school a little later).

I would have preferred Ds to start reading and writing at 6 or 7, as you describe. I cannot understand why the government here persist in wanting to start even earlier.

Blu - so, if I understand you accurately, you believe that children's spelling should not be systematically corrected when they are learning to write at an age that you believe is too young? A form of semi-compensation for a misguided system?

If that's what you believe, I can go along with that.

I don't really know, however, what I believe is the right age to learn to read and write. Here in France children are prepared for reading and writing in école maternelle (pen control, letter formation etc), in particular the third year (the year in which they have their fifth birthday) and most children I come across (from affluent and well-educated homes) seem to have been reading pretty well by the Christmas of their first term in primary school. So my daughter, born in November, should be able to read French just after her sixth birthday by that reckoning.

However, I learnt to read at just over four and have never had any problems whatsoever with spelling, grammar, language learning or self-expression. And there is a definite part of me that thinks my daughter would enjoy learning to read early too. Hmm. I shall go along with the system she is in, but I have my doubts.

Anna
Thanks, for the offer. I have only just started learning French in September and we are just at the je m'appelle, j'habite stage. I think that Monsieur Sarkozy might be a bit too much for me yet.

kindersurprise - OK

Grist to the mill of those suggesting that children learn to read and write too soon in the UK...
here

I agree it's too young. I am desperately trying to do what DS#2's teacher tells me and encourage DS to learn his phonic letters. He loves the little cards with the pictures, he loves doing the actions...but can he associate the graphemes with the poxy phonemes ??? Can he hell! Or at least not consistently. And does he want to? No. Of course not. Is he stupid? No...most definitely not. He is simply too young.

The best thing that has happened recently is when he started recognising letters in the books I've been reading to him. But it's slow progress. Left to mine own devices I'd be happy for him to be like that until he wants to move on. But I know he's going to be 'left behind' - I can only assume the other parents are training their kids with a whip and a chair . And the Tories want all kids to be able to read by 6. Ha!

Anna - partly - but also I believe that in the very earliest stages of learning to do anything, mistakes are inevitable and obvious and encouragement built on things got right is good whereas correction of mistakes diverts the child's attention in the wrong direction, at the worng moment.

I have numerous copies of my writing from the ages of 4-6, enthusiastic attepmts to use the knowledge I was gaining, no spelling corrected.

My schoolbooks from 7 onwards, when absorbtion of the rules - and many broken rules - of the English language have been absorbed show much more accurate spelling and sophisticated grammar and corrections of all mistakes by my teacher.

I grew up to love reading and writing, and despite the evidence on MN (of my terrible typing, and inability to type and think in coherency which means I often use dodgy English) I have a good degree in language and Literature.

I would not correct the spelling of a very young child because what they are learning at that ppint is not focussed on correct spelling...and if it was they would be being set up to fail.

I wouldn't cncentrate on 'mistakes' in anything a child of that age was doing - as in the drawing with perspective exam,ple.

But I think 'making mnistakes with pride' is a process of learning which is vallid (and temporary) in many larning proceses throughout our lives. I work with actors. There is a stage of learning lines when they make mistakes. All the time. It is absolutely obstructive to interrupt with a prompt of the correct lines every single time they go wrong. Although that stage follows - when they are making less mistakes anyway.

I would in no way support a process that settled for 'lower standards' (in the OP) as the finishing point.

Why do they have to mark it with a red pen? I would personally gently underline the mistake and write the word correctly in the top right corner - perhaps the child could leave a box especially for that purpose - maybe even setting themselves a challenge in anticipating 6 spelling mistakes or whatever. The child could then learn the spellings on the list or if there are a lot - learn 10 of them. I would personally prefer my child's work to be corrected properly and completely.

Blu - I know where you are coming from, and I am sure that the approach you describe is appropriate for many children.

But not all. There really are a lot of children who want to get it right, and want the teacher to correct their mistakes, from a young age.

As a child, I know I suffered from an ambiance of "doing your best" and lots of so-called encouragement and unclear messages about mistakes. It didn't suit me, it made me feel very insecure.