Studying Romans in state school primary

[BeccaBean]

Can anyone tell me which year your child learnt about the Romans? Thanks!

Mary Seacole was also around doing very similar things at the same time .

1. Mary Seacole is all over the curriculum. Seriously. Have you checked recently?
2. She was, as far as we can tell, an interesting woman who travelled very widely and ran her own businesses internationally (unusual in those days for a woman) and did genuinely try to help soldiers. However, she was not a nurse in any sense of the word; she was mostly a business owner who also did what she could for the poorer soldiers (mostly food and drink, but also some herbal remedies, which were not evidence-based). She appears to have been a nice enough person and was certainly a fascinating character, but she did not create any innovations in the world of medicine. If you want proof for this, read her very readable autobiography; she says it all herself in her own words!
3. Nightingale pioneered the idea of using data in healthcare to spot trends and improve practices and also pretty much created proper modern nursing as a profession. She wasn't always evidence-based either (she never accepted germ theory!) but she revolutionized healthcare and brought it into the modern world.

I mean, I'd probably enjoy having a beer with Seacole more than with Nightingale. But the weird spin of "Seacole was basically doing what Nightingale was doing but has been written out of history BECAUSE RACISM" (or something) is just utterly tiresome and not true.

DCs school has mixed year groups so DD has done Romans this year (Yr3) & DS has done Florence Nightingale this year in YrR.

I would hope this was the case, unfortunately I know a lot of schools still don’t look at revising their curriculum and resources from the point of view of being inclusive. I worked in London boroughs who made huge efforts to look at what they were teaching from a representative point of view and made sure materials, books etc reflected their cohorts, but even in supportive boroughs it was sometimes an uphill struggle to make change.

Unfortunately the fact that until a concerted effort was made to acknowledge Seacole’s contribution she had been largely erased from history - the poor woman suffered the indignity of being forgotten twice, the first time within her own lifetime - and yes I do think it was largely down to an attitude that as a woman of colour her story had little value.

I'd go all the way and say history absolutely should be taught in chronological order. It is after all a chronological progression (for want of a better word).

Year 1 and 2 for DS. We also live in an area where there's lots of roman remains, as we're just outside Bath. Our local library has a roman mosaic beneath a glass floor and there's remains of 2 villas.

Year 4. We had to build a life size Roman shield. Needless to say we kept it in the garage to give to DC2 when their Roman shield project was due 😂

Yep, was going to suggest this. Should be on the school website somewhere. Not that ours update theirs very often!

I'd go all the way and say history absolutely should be taught in chronological order. It is after all a chronological progression (for want of a better word).

I still disagree as history is not just about facts and events. It also depends what you mean by "progression."

There are conceptual difficulties with earlier periods and also some stages such as the dark ages.

There are other aspects of history that are of extreme importance to start discussing at key stages of cognitive ability - mainly around evidence, facts, bias / pov, archaeological evidence, technological ideas, geography. Some are easier to comprehend than others. Some history ties in with geography and may be better placed next to a geographical unit for geographical context.

However it's important that timelines are used and indeed are very important in order to be able to understand chronology.

For example, you can't start with early man in reception; their understanding of past and present and how time passes is still being developed.

Year 4 for us

I'm surprised that there are schools teaching it I'm KS1 when it is part of the KS2 curriculum.

Unless they're an academy that has actually embraced the suggestion that the national curriculum isn't compulsory in academies.

*in not I'm

Bloody fat fingers

Year 4 / 5

But not possible in mixed year primary schools, of which there are many

Ancient History at 6 and 7 which covered the Romans and the Greeks. There commenced a lifelong love. Started Latin aged 8.

Unfortunately the fact that until a concerted effort was made to acknowledge Seacole’s contribution she had been largely erased from history - the poor woman suffered the indignity of being forgotten twice, the first time within her own lifetime - and yes I do think it was largely down to an attitude that as a woman of colour her story had little value.

I don't think she was of no value but her achievements were minimal and really had nothing to do with medicine. If schools want to teach about Seacole, it would better to introduce her as an unusual example of a well-traveled female entrepreneur in a century when not many women did that. She didn't actually achieve anything in the medical sphere, so teaching her alongside Nightingale is pretty silly and makes no sense. I'm not being mean, I'm being honest.

If you don't agree with me, please quote sections from her autobiography that state otherwise (spoiler: you won't find any).

Why on earth are we teaching kids about the Romans? I mean what did they ever do for us?

@Nightlystroll oh you know, Christianity, built straight roads, introduced counting in 10s and 100s, baths, Latin

@RosesAndHellebores well I mean, yes obviously there’s Christianity. And straight roads, counting in 10s and 100s and Latin, you can’t deny them that. But APART from that, what did the Romans ever do for us?!

@Dolphinnoises

I'm not sure what the problem would be wrt mixed year groups.

The past was a continuum. Treating it as a jumble of non-sequential eras, events, or developments disrupts children's understanding of it and therefore contradicts what should be the aim of history teaching.

Because if you teach, say, Y3/4 you can only teach things once every 2 years, otherwise children do the same topic twice. Some children will do the Stone Age in Y3 and Ancient Egyptians in Y4, some will do it the other way round, depending on which year they enter the class. How do you suggest getting round that?

DD is doing the Romans in Y3. They have also done the Stone Age this year. And can confirm they did indeed do both Florence Nightingale and Mary Seacole in Y2.

Content differentiation?

I can't see the point at all of Egypt before the Stone Age/ Victorians before Romans. It completely defeats the main concept of history, namely that it is a continuum. It's as counterproductive as teaching algebra before students can multiply.

@mathanxiety

I think you're just not understanding what mixed year groups means and how it relates to a long term curriculum. Mixed year group classes are usually with the same teacher for two years (although not always if its a 1.5 year intake or the teacher leaves or moves year groups). They are often in small schools that take on 15 children or fewer per year (although can happen if you take in 45 children, for example).

Imagine you have your child, A, start in their mixed year 1&2 class in 2023 with Mrs Smith, and they start off in September learning about the Stone Age... Great... All good they can carry on teaching in chronological ordered.

But then your child, B, 11 months younger, joins that same year 1&2 class in 2024. What do they teach now? If Mrs Smith teaches the Stone Age again, all of the now year 2s (child A) have already been through that curriculum and have got further along chronologically... and are now back at the Stone Age. So if you move up the time line, all of the 2024 year 1 intake have missed the Stone Age.

Most mixed year group schools have to work on a two-year rolling programme, and that does not work chronologically when you are with the same teacher for two years, but not the same 30 children (15 leave to move up, and 15 new children join)

There are A LOT of small schools across England (if that's the curriculum we're talking about) and many many more across the UK, particularly in very rural areas. I just used mixed year groups across two years as the easiest example, but it gets even harder where a primary school might only have 2 classes and pupils stay in that class for 3 or 4 years with the same teacher (whilst older children move on).

There just isn't a possible way to teach history chronologically in these schools. (Unless you completely separate history out and ask half the class to not listen while the older/ younger half have their history lesson.