the boy in the striped pyjamas

[workshy]

my yr5 DD watched this in school the other day

school sent home a permission slip explaining that it was a 12 but was related to a topic they had been covering in school

I know about the film and chatted to DD about it and was confident she would be ok so I gave my permission -obviously lots of parents had absolutely no idea what the film was like and many DCs were upset by it

is it really a film they should be showing to 9&10 year olds?

Any bloody age appropriate books can be used in a literacy lesson. They could read Charlie and the Chocolate Factory instead. Alternative book choices do not even have to be historical! There is no government requirement to study historical novels.

temper!

They meet completely with my approval. The Silver Sword leaves a lot unsaid about the Uprising but there's not the same moral imperative there to tell the whole truth or none at all.

The reason historians read contemporary literature and watch contemporary films is for light these shed on the period. It's not possible or at least certainly not educational to read a book about a serious subject in a vacuum. And I'm surprised that as a teacher you think it acceptable to regard books like this in that way.

Rather temper than petulance.

I did think I detected an element of both now you come to mention it ... but back to literacy lessons ... I'm planning on studying the Hobbit if that's ok

I'm just glad somebody is cook

Blasted child pressed send!

I'm just glad somebody is worrying whether something is appropriate for their child to watch....I'm still traumatised by the fact that people let their 9 year olds watch Family Guy!

I've had 4 year olds tell me about watching Blade and mum say it's ok he watched it with his dad

Have been following this thread with interest, not so much because of the Holocaust debate, but more because of the comments made regarding children reading books with a content aimed beyond their years.

As a children's bookseller, I have noticed a real rush amongst parents to move their 9, 10 and 11 year old children into the teen section because 'they're a really good reader.' Often, the books in the teen section are no more difficult to read than some of those in the 9-12 section; it's just that their content is aimed at older readers and, therefore, may contain reference to topics unsuited to younger children.

I run a series of inschool reading groups aimed at able readers. I have noticed two interesting facts arising from these groups. Firstly, a lot of children do not like Michael Morpurgo and, secondly, yes, a lot of Year 5's and 6's are reading books written by authors such as Charlie Higson (The Enemy) and Robert Muchamore, which are definitely aimed at older readers. I think this is because the books are written to appeal to a more reluctant older reader, which makes them ideal for a fluent younger reader 'reading wise' but not so content wise IYSWIM.

However, I would not give my Year 5/6 reading groups 'The Enemy' or Robert Muchamore. I would not expect to find these books in a primary school library, nor would I expect a primary school teacher to read them as a class book. It is ultimately for the parents to decide whether they are happy for their younger child to read books aimed at an older readership.

In my shop, TBITSP is classified as a teen book. The publisher of the book states that it is not a book for younger children, even though the book is about a 9 year old boy.

There are so many really good books with a content appropriate to a Year 5/Year 6 child. Save the teen books for when they're ready

Ditto everything you have said, madame. Without wishing to make sweeping generalisations, it is sometimes also true that the most academically able children can, on occasion, be less emotionally developed than their less able peers (certainly true of the G&T yr 5/6s and yr 7s I have worked with) which is even more reason for parents (and teachers) to follow this advice about reading recommendations.

Not read any of this thread, am too lazy. My year 5 boy was so distressed at this movie I had to switch it off. It was distressing for me to see my ds so upset. Firmly believe all children are different and maybe a good discussion about feelings in advance might help including what to do if feelings become too uncomfortable.

And alongside KitKatGirl1: it's entirely possible that the more able a child the more sensitive and perceptive and imaginative he or she will be, therefore the more disturbed by the almost incomprehensible facts of the Holocaust.

There is a dichotomy mmehooch. Our house is full of the sorts of books and films which are really too old for younger readers (I've eight children so that's bound to be the case). Sometimes something too graphic appears on the television and I'll shoo the smaller ones to bed. But even in an ultra liberal house (euphemism), there's a line drawn at the Holocaust which is qualitatively different, hence my strong stand.

maples it was apparently KatandKit who was cross because she said bloody. I think I'm just supposed to be thick :)

Well I've spent all day saying I'm sick of cooking all these bloody meals, so don't be, it's an absolute pain (the meals, especially when they decide to go out at different times) :)

Yellowtip do you always tell people what someone else thinks or is it a special service just for me?

No I don't want to use the book for any purpose but I don't have a problem with others making the decision to use it based on their professional knowledge rather than impose a blanket ban based on my own view on a subject. But then I'm probably not as ultra liberal as your household.

mrz you said 'temper!' to Kat.

My knowledge, professional and otherwise, would lead me to avoid all discussion of the Holocaust at primary school age. I suspect you know less about the subject than you care to let on.

By 'ultra liberal (euphemism)' I clearly implied that I'm generally slack.

what is your knowledge, professional and otherwise of teaching literacy in a primary school Yellowtip?

Considerable.

It extends to knowing that teachers are fallible.

It's not about teaching literacy! It is about the content of the book not being age appropriate. Wouldn't matter how you taught it. You'd have a choice of either not doing it proper justice, or going into more detail than would be suitable for the age group. No matter how good a literacy teacher you are, this problem would remain. Whatever the literacy objectives are when studying this book, they could be achieved by reading any number of more appropriate books instead. Can you explain why you think this is an appropriate text for 9 year olds? Are you teaching it yourself and have some reason for defending it, or are you just arguing for the heck of it?

Using this book for KS2 literacy is about as appropriate as deciding Lady Chatterley's lover would make a fine Year 9 text. Even if some publishers decided to make a workbook about it, the content would still not be age appropriate.

Basically what I think has happened is this. The class are studying ww2 (as confirmed by the OP up thread). Some teachers have thought "ooh look the main character is a 9 year old boy, this book must be great for nine year olds".

So you are or were a primary teacher Yellowtip ...interesting

I'm not easily caught out mrz.

I expect you're exactly right Kat. Because the poorest teachers can lack both intelligence and depth.

once again you are second guessing very badly Yellowtip