primary education

[SJKenyon]

This is first time I have been on Mumsnet. My children are older than primary age but I am a primary teacher. I wanted to post this to make as many parents aware as possible of the draft primary curriculum which came out for consultation on Thursday. It is available at directgov.uk. It is 221 pages long but parents need to see it asap, not just teachers. Take a good look at the history and geography sections and then the lack of interest in Art in particular. If you want your very young children to be subjected to this kind of statutory curriculum from next year, then look no further. But if having your 6 year old learning about the importance of nation, and Isambard Kingdom Brunel along with Isaac Newton and Christina Rosetti (all KS1), is of concern to you, or the inclusion of the Crusades in KS2 worries you as a Muslim parent, then perhaps you should take a very close look at this. If parents and teachers unite to say no to this, we have until April 16th to prevent it. As a teacher, I am deeply concerned by it. So should all of you be as parents.

I agree with mrz - I think longer school day will be next suggestion. Also agree with Clay Davis on including Ancient China and Indus Valley (which I already cover as it is in old curriculum).

This looks too much to fit into a normal school day. Realistically, most teachers, through no fault of their own, will have to rush through the topics and look at nothing in depth. How can we complain about this though?

This is one of my points - children enjoy looking at a topic in depth and learning to think comes from having the time to make links between areas of learning. Not rushing from one thing to the next. I already cover quite a few of the topics included in the list. I try to change my history topics each year to avoid re-teaching same topic to children in mixed year group classes. Also to keep me fresh - I re-research and re-build my planning each time, to make it fit together with other areas of the curriculum and to ensure curriculum coverage across KS2 (which is my responsibility). If the topics are to be taught sequentially as listed, then some of the more gory subjects (which year 5 and 6 love!) will be 'wasted' on year 3, such as Roman invasions. My year 6 last year loved it. I don't see them loving "Chaucer and the revival of learning".

The mixed year groups thing is a problem that I don't think anyone designing the history curriculum has though of. The history curriculum I taught in the US was sequential but I only taught in single age classes, so I'm not sure how they deal with that there.

The computer curriculum is awful. As much as I'm in favour of programming being taught it looks like its been shoved in without much thought to it.

Also they haven't thought much about the ability of many teachers to actually tecah programming. Or whether schools have the appropriate software or hardware to manage it.

I think that's a problem across this curriculum. In some areas it is very content specific (history, geography) and in others e.g. computing, art, history he's tried to leave it open-ended about what to teach. Those areas look a bit vague and wish-washy and could be problematic for teachers who aren't strong in those particular areas.

Having looked at it a bit (particularly in regard to Newton) I think you are scaremongering a bit. It looks like only older children would be expected to have some idea of what Newton was actually talking about. Younger children would only be introduced to simple ideas relating to what Newton thought about and his life. I seriously cannot see a problem with this. In fact, I am slightly disappointed as I think earlier and better science opportunities would benefit us greatly as a society. I bloody hate Michael Gove and the rest of them, btw, so am totally not here to tell you how they're wonderful people etc.

I take your point about primary teachers not necessarily being able to teach the things required eg programming, but it is really very easy stuff. The KS1 requirements sound like things that many schools are already doing to me. The KS2 requirements sound like things I taught myself as a child by playing with a very basic computer in the days when computers were few and far between. Surely they can't really be beyond the grasp of primary teachers?

I don't think its beyond the grasp of primary teachers. However, if you are going to add something completely new to the curriculum then IMO you need to be a bit more prescriptive about exactly what skills, knowledge and progression you are looking for. Especially if its an area that the majority of teachers don't have any experience in.

The computing curriculum will be logo, beebot, scratch type programming in KS1, extending this in KS2 and onto other programming as they get older I guess.

We have done some control work in KS1 for years and have introduced Scratch programming for Y2 from this year.

We are still doing some application work in KS1 though - use of PowerPoint and Word for example. Plans for database type searching is including work on geneaology/ancestry databases - also links well to privacy of data, etc too (why we can't get up to date census records, etc) - as well as internet based searches.

Already do a lot of internet safety from foundation up as it is.

Science curriculum looks good.

Still wading through it, but the mentions of learning poetry by heart jumped out at me.

All seems based on children acquiring knowledge rather than skills. Feel rather depressed now!

Actually as a parent I quite like this. It looks like it will build a broad foundation of general knowledge which seems sadly lacking in this country these days. I guess it's all about level isn't it? I read the history bit and it talked about covering chronologically over KS2 &3, perhaps some things could be focused on in more detail. I have no problem with DS's learning any of these things. Do we really need to whitewash over bits of history we are less proud of- you mentioned the crusades- surely this is about presentation of the subject matter. My children are of mixed race with ancestors on their father's side who in all likelihood were victims of this country's involvement in the slave trade- I certainly hope colonialism and slavery will be covered. This country is built on a rich tapestry of events some good and some bad. I see no reason to omit bits. As for gravity- DS1 (5 years) and DS2 (3 years) both know a bit about what it is. Modern languages in KS2 will be fabulous- children learn languages better at a younger age.
Children are like little sponges, naturally interested in discovering the world around them and how it works. I think all too often we underestimate them.
In a similar discussion about poetry in schools not long ago (not on mums net) someone said poetry "wasn't relevant to the lives of many children" as an argument for why it shouldn't be part of the curriculum. What on earth sort of country do we live in if we say to the children of those parents who can't be bothered to offer their children poetry at home "this isn't for you" by not offering it at school. Children of middle class parents like me will learn about this stuff regardless of what the national curriculum says because we read to our children, visit museums, find out about places we are visiting on holiday and generally provide opportunities. Schools should be levelling up the playing field a bit by providing opportunity for ALL children to develop this knowledge.
We seem to have a self destructive hate of academia in this country. I say self destructive because none of the currently developing world powers like India or China seem to have such a negative view of academic learning.

Re learning poetry by heart. This doesn't take up much time and doesn't require forcing children to recite poems parrot fashion. dS2 (3 years) quite often picks up the poem book and pretends to read "From a railway carriage" or "on the Ning nang Ning." He knows them because we occasionally have a poem at bedtime and those seem to be favourite so he's heard them a few times.
Most children start school able to recite some "poetry" by heart- Twinkle Twinkle Little Star and Baa Baa Black sheep to start with. Poetry is good for children- it helps them play with rhyme and language plus they love it :-)

Learning poetry by heart is brilliant.

I just want whatever history is taught to be taught well. DD (Year 1) learnt all about the Gunpowder Plot in November - she can recount the whole story. It wasn't until last week that I realised they maybe should have checked her understanding of the phrase 'blow up' - turns out she was under the impression that Guy Fawkes was trying to inflate King James .

OK, that's funny, but still...

Sounds pretty good to me and much like what I covered at Prep School. A good grounding in British history is ideal.

What is the problem with having a longer school day? Finishing at 3.15 is very inconvenient for a lot of people. Far better to finish at 5pm and have sport, art and music given more time as well as the core subjects.

Given that I always had school on Saturdays as well as a 5.45pm finish plus homework and we all coped with fine I don't see a big issue.

Lots of parents - myself included - send their child to after-school clubs and would be just as happy with them spending a couple more hours at school proper.

AbbyR - Agree with everything you say.

SJKenyon:

Thank you for bringing this to the attention of all of us on Mumsnet & thanks to mrz for providing the link to the document.

I have read comments with interest but as someone with children surrounded by remains of Victorian Industrial revolution and not too far from Ironbridge I am personally horrified that my children have absolutely no idea who Isambard Kingdom Brunel is or England's great engineering history and lead in the industrial revolution.

I seriously doubt KS2 are expected to appreciate the maths of gravity (info here if interested: motivate.maths.org/content/why-do-objects-fall-same-rate - but they can observe the effect and the basic principle that regardless of mass items fall at the same rate (unless they have some form of parachute effect - e.g. a sycamore seed ('helicopter seeds') or feather). That observation will open the door to quite a few interesting observatons and make understanding tides (earth/ moon gravitational pull) and planetary orbit a bit more understandable.

My DDs (Y3 & Y5) love art - but it amounts to close to 2 full school days a week right now if you include D&T work in that as well (and no I'm not joking) - so a reduction from our perspective (or better integration with other elements of the curriculum) would be very welcome. I do recognise that planning, calculation and design are also part of this process - but I'd personally love to see the children challenged with designing a cradle to protect a raw egg if dropped from the roof of the school (1 storey building - lovely integration of gravity, D&T and hopefully a bit of maths or set the children to building a rocket, the one that goes highest wins a prize or something?).

My DD1 has made pencil cases 3 out of 4 years running now. I've posted elsewhere about my woes with out school - but from my perspective some high standards and a bit of a shake up would be very welcome.

I'll go away and read this document with interest.

Past sell by date - thanks for that and interesting comments on science in particular. We do teach about parachute effect, seeds, gravitational pull on tides and planetary orbits. These are all part of the upper KS2 curriculum already. It does sound like your children do a lot of art and DT. Unfortunately, as I am teaching year 6 at present, we have very little time for either. One of my concerns is that if the curriculum becomes even more overcrowded with statutory programmes of learning, then these subjects will be squeezed out even further.
If your children are constantly making pencil cases, then that suggests the school is following the same QCA scheme year after year. Mine puts together a creative curriculum each year drawing on core topics and brainstorming new ways to teach the requirements of the current National Curriculum within the topic. Children complete projects which cover science, history, geography, literacy, art, DT and Music and they love it. They are always keen to find out what the next topic is going to be. This is also why I am worried about an overly prescriptive history curriculum in KS2.

AbbyR - "a self-destructive hatred of academia" ??

Very far from the truth for me. I come from a highly academic background and I won't bore anyone with my own qualifications.

Pyrrah - had you considered that teachers are allowed a life outside of school? If we finished at 5pm, I would be at school from 7.45am to about 6pm. Then I travel home and make dinner for my own family. Then most evenings I spend about two hours, sometimes more depending on marking load, working and preparing for next day. Saturday school? Are you even considering that teachers would have to be paid for that? Again, I already spend around ten hours of my weekends working. I currently work around 60 hours a week and have two children of my own. Please don't suggest that teachers should work longer hours to cover childcare for others. I find that very insulting.

If you really think the suggested history curriculum is so wonderful, take a look at what the Historical Association has to say:
www.history.org.uk/news/news_1714.html

I quote:
Most primary school teachers are not trained historians and are not equipped to teach such a vast sweep of British history in any meaningful way
7-11 year olds are being asked to understand the complexities of the War of the Roses, religious schisms, and how to define a constitution and nation. Quite frankly how many well educated adults can do that?
Three years of Historical Association surveys have revealed the limited time secondary schools give to teaching history. To try and teach the content listed in any meaningful way would require a vast expansion of history teaching time. This is a high speed superficial tour rather than the old fashioned grand tour.

Thanks for starting the thread SJKenyon, especially as the 'consultation' seems to have been issued in a good week to bury bad news... I teach upper KS2 and they understand gravity, no problem. We have even had a bit of a look at thermodynamics. The world around us is absolutely what interests children.

However, with history, unless you happen to live close to a historically significant site, it is not around us - the teacher has to bring it to life somehow. (And I know that parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy is still with us (just), but it is not concrete to children of this age.) We use artefacts, role plays, contemporary accounts, all kinds of questioning and self-directed work to help children understand what happened and why it was significant.

Horrible Histories has indeed shown that focusing on the yucky bits, putting stories to songs etc can make any era vaguely interesting, but I still look at the list of things to cover in KS2 and wilt. If I, as a mature, graduate professional with an interest in politics find it unappealing, how likely is it that 7-11 years olds will have a passion ignited? My very bright, historically switched on son has just covered the Glorious Revolution in Y8 and hated it. He looked at the KS1 and 2 lists and commented that everything he had really enjoyed at primary was gone .

Absolutely agree with you partystress. We have similar background - mature graduate with secondary aged children. My 15 year old son thinks what is suggested is appalling and he is also extremely bright and absorbs history like a sponge.

Looks pretty interesting. But will probably detract from the three rs. There's a difference between what you can learn in primary school and what you should learn there.

I think it is absolutely excellent and well overdue.