Is hothousing necesserily a bad thing?

[columngollum]

Interesting point coming out of a nearby discussion, (but requires a separate thread.)

Hothousing is a word invariably used as an insult. But is it one? It has been said, I don't know if it's true, that starting tennis at five is too old. Presumably most three or four year olds don't show great tennis genius, so presumably all three year old tennis players are being hothoused!

But, I guess if they're playing tiddlywinks and not tennis then they're not being hothoused (but I can't see the difference.)

tag

not 'tage'

Isn't that the problem? If we don't know what it means then how can we know whether it's bad or not?

I am not sure I necessarily agree with children knowing their levels but then they do need to know their targets in order to progress. I can't see how it is NOT weird to tell other parents your child's NC level in the context of explaining how far ahead your child is compared to theirs. If someone asked then fair enough but TBH I would never ask someone what level their child was working at.

I must say, I thought hothousing was Elibean's second description, supporting your child's learning is the 1st.

A child needs to know what their next steps are in learning, but I don't think that small child benefits from knowing their target.

My years ago ds' reception wrote in his home contact book. "Reallytired ds' were explained to and and realllytired's ds signed that he understood." As ds was only five year old I asked him what his targets were. I got the sensible reply "Dr Who lives in a target!"

I think even at age 7 or 8 basic next steps or targets are sufficient, I am not sure that they actually need to know their levels, although some children are motivated by that sort of thing at an early age but it doesn't work for all of them.

DS (Y3) has been given his writing targets in a list and although he has been told his level you wouldn't actually know what level they relate to by reading them (unless you are a teacher of course).

"hothousing" is originally a gardening term meaning to artificially stimulate growth and development "forcing" plants to grow and mature out of season in hot house enviroments.

Clover I don't think dc need to know targets and in fact think it can be detrimental to progression, it was with my 2 older dc.
My dd doesn't have levels or targets, you don't need them to progress.

I agree Reallytired it's even more insane when Mr or Mrs Ofsted ask a 4 or 5 year old what their target is and grades the lesson /school in need of improvement if they can't answer
I've heard of schools getting children to learn their targets by rote!

I'm not sure how helpful reading targets are for children, but in learning to swim it's useful to say swim to this point or that point. Aren't academic targets abstract things?

My daughter, at home, was writing some diary type entry the other day and I suggested that she copy it out at school in her school diary, whereupon she refused saying that she'd get in trouble because Miss "Pogue" makes us put in more details. I didn't press the matter. But I thought the sentence was fairly long already. Is that not a target of some kind? Keep making the sentences longer and more detailed?

You are probably right, as long as the teacher knows them and is teacher them properly the DCs probably don't actually need to know specifically, unfortunately I think Ofsted dictate this as Mrz has said.

DS1 just has a list of things he needs to start introducing into his writing, DS2 is only 5 but I think he would panic if given something like this, he is the sort of child who needs to go at his own pace whereas DS1 loves a challenge.

It has struck me that throughout infant school I always found the school reports quite negative as they always included next steps, the way they were written makes it sound as if the child was never quite good enough even though the levels looked good.

Yes I guess that would be, not sure sentences ever have to be 'long' to reach a particular level though but for instance last year some of the targets in the Y2 class were to use connectives and dropped clauses within sentences.

Nobody's going to go up to a 5yo and ask him what his targets are for maths! That's insane. I bet he doesn't even know what he's having for tea, let alone what his target is. Surely it's the teacher who needs that info!

I don't think the length of the sentences was to do with levels, more probably to stop the children writing things like

at the week end i playd

Mind you, it does have a ring of truth about it.

I'm afraid they do ask 5 year olds what their targets are and they also expect them to know

Both my DC seem to know what their "next steps targets" are. DS (yr4) is told his NC Levels but not DD as she is just in yr1.

11 plus exams are definitely marked partly on sentence length and sentence complexity. Well ds2's essay paper was.

Ds2 does an activity to a high level that has a reputation for pushy parents. I can honestly say that everything he has done has come from him. Nothing to do with us. I only signed him up for the activity because I wanted him to have some time away from his severely autistic brother. Before I signed him up I had a word with the teacher about not wanting him pushed & he was only doing it for fun. Actually I needn't have bothers because the classes are not pushy at all. But anyway it turned out he had some talent in the area & has progressed. We facilitate it in that we make ourselves available as a taxi service & pay for lessons. I also will tell him if I see something that I think he might enjoy, but he decides whether to go for it or not.

I have met some barking parents, but vast majority are sane & like us a bit surprised to find themselves with a child doing what they're doing.

DS1 can't remember what he did at school each day or what he had for dinner but he does seem to know his NC levels and targets

At level 2 upwards children will be expected to consciously vary sentence length to create effect. Long sentences aren't always needed. Less can be more!

The 11 plus mark scheme awarded marks for using conjunctions etc. It basically boiled down to using longer, more complex sentences. This was a school set component of the 11 plus though. SATS were slightly different - but didn't have an essay component iirc.

As an exercise I can see the point in long and complex sentences. But once the children have got used to the idea of clauses, sub clauses, phrases, conjunctions and the like, you don't want then using dreadfully long sentences any more, surely! The Germans are great and both monster words and monster sentences. I'm not sure how far we want to go down that road.

Well no, but for a ten year old faced with the 11 plus it was a useful way to grab some extra marks. But also highlights the problem of testing I guess.

SATs do have an writing component (although it may be journalistic writing, non chronological repoerts, letters, diary entries etc and not just an essay) there is also a writing element in the level 6 SPAG NC test

When we say journal, do we observe the broadsheet/tabloid distinction

or are we talking about the journal entry form of commentary, which begins with: what I did at the weekend?

Presumably "style" is something we worry about long after we've mastered the mechanics of putting pen to paper.

When we say journalistic writing the child may be expected to write the same "news" in the style of the Times and in the style of the Sun (or similar). Children are expected to develop awareness of audience and genre from Y1.