Add a subject, bin a subject

[noblegiraffe]

Lots of cries of 'why aren't they taught X at school, it's really important' with the response 'what would you like to see binned to make the time for that?'
I would like to add all aspects of managing finances - mortgages, credit, car finance, gambling, loans, costs associated with owning/renting a home, savings, investments, interest rates, the general economy. I know it's supposedly done a bit in PSHE, but I'd want it done properly. With homework and tests.

In order to make space for this I would bin: KS3 Drama.

You don't have to bin a whole subject, so for example you could bin the study of poetry in English, or anything involving circuits from science, but you can't bin the study of oxbow lakes from Geography and replace it with learning Latin - they should take about the same time.

Why would they be taught at school by someone who didn't understand them? Obviously the assumption with any of these subjects to be added is that they would be taught by appropriate professionals!

When I was at school we had 'electives' in (the equivalent of) year 8 and maybe year 9 (can't quite remember). Six months of each subject that you could then elect to do in following years.
Stuff like: economics, typing, metal work, wood work, art, home ec, technical drawing.
I would have that set up - and include RE in there - no need to do it every week for the whole year.
Flat pack furniture building and first aid would make great after school club activities.

So sad that so many people are saying drama and art are not important! Children can gain so many skills from drama such as confidence, public speaking etc.

Learning the rules of random sports eg rugby, cricket, netball etc seems pointless to me. If you're sporty you probably play outside of school and know more than you are being taught. And if you aren't it would be much better to be give back the chance to choose physical activity you enjoy. My daughter happily works up a sweat dancing for two hours but will be miserable playing ball sports and will do the minimum required.

I would get rid of RE and instead teach in a very focused way about the importance of tolerance, kindness, equality etc. Being able to get on with your fellow man is more important than knowing the parts of a church or mosque.

Oh yes and I would greatly reduce the emphasis in primary on handwriting and teach all to TouchType from reception. In almost every job you are more likely to type than handwrite.

It seems to me that the real risk with dropping any subject like music, art, drama or sport is that the only children with any chance of pursuing them will be those from families who can pay for private extracurricular classes.

It would be fantastic if schools could teach everything that young people need to know, but that would mean a wholesale reform of education. And how would we balance 'need to know' with 'increasing your general understanding of the world'? Would we get breadth and no depth?

I often wonder if the way we teach a lot of the traditional academic subjects is just because 'it's always been this way'. A previous poster pointed out that most of GCSE Biology isn't useful to most people and that's true. It's interesting for many people to learn about the glomerulus and the loop of Henlé but of little practical application to almost everyone. The same is true of most GCSE Chemistry and the vast majority of GCSE Maths. Many people go on to have successful lives never thinking again, or needing to know, about how attrition, erosion and abrasion carve out a river valley. We could apply the same argument to literature and languages and certainly classics and music and art.

It seems a bit harsh to pick drama out of all the things we learn that are genuinely useful for a minority of their students.

Also I think a lot of maths taught is pointless. I struggle to defend it when my daughter asks me when she will need to use it in life. Maths like budgeting, and things you will actually use would be much better. If an adult needs to divide a large number by a smaller but still large one they use a calculator so why waste so much time teaching kids how to do maths manually.

To anyone who said get rid of music, have you not read about the thing where a school massively increased music in the curriculum and their maths levelz increased hugely.

I wish I'd been able to drop-out of art and music and drama... I'm not artistic like that and think it was pretty pointless and time wasted for me. I don't think they should drop the subjects completely though.

I wish I'd been able to drop-out of art and music and drama... I'm not artistic like that and think it was pretty pointless and time wasted for me. I don't think they should drop the subjects completely though.

Likewise, total waste of time for me. I got absolutely zilch out of 2 years compulsory music, 3 years compulsory drama and 3 years compulsory art. My son says the same, although he suffered 3 full years of music and art - he did luckily only have 1 year of drama.

I'm all for it being offered as an option, and all for "taster" sessions or carousel where maybe you do a term of each for the first year, but to have it compulsory for so long for those not interested is a massive waste.

At my son's school, the numbers choosing these subjects to GCSE are less than 20, and to A level is around just 5, so it's not as if they're even popular.

Just to add, why enforce 3 full years of music and art, and then only do a single term of electronics/systems tech? Just makes no sense.

Academies can employ anyone to teach.....the cheaper the better in a lot of cases.

Pensions and taxation are complex areas (I know I've drafted legislation for both). Can't see schools employing an IFA or ex-tax inspector.

In primary I would bin y6 grammar (the over the top unnecessary stuff, not the basic parts of speech) and replace it with touch typing.

In secondary I would bin pulling texts to death in core English language GCSE. I wouldn't replace it with anything new, just allow more time for more useful core English skills.

I would also reform Maths & English GCSEs so that a pass meant you were workplace/life competent. Then I'd let there be harder more academic GCSEs in them too. (ie I'd probably rebrand the functional skills to GCSE as that is what people understand).

I'd keep KS3 drama as my DD enjoys it.

why this love for touch typing?

I don’t think it needs a financial analyst to teach teenagers ‘what is a pension, why do you need one?’

Because they won't listen to their teachers......tbf, they probably won't listen to any adult "preaching" to them. Sometimes life lessons have to be learnt the hard way.

This thread has been a really good read, goes to show that whatever happens next in education will still be a poor fit for many.

Man on TV right now talking about creative subjects being just as important as STEM. He talks a lot of sense.

I agree with bellbook about kids not necessarily listening to stuff they are “preached” to about. It’s only as an adult that you understand how important some of the life skills stuff is, and kids turn off if they think things aren’t relevant.

Maths teachers are masters of getting kids to engage with things they think aren't relevant

Maths teachers are masters of getting kids to engage with things they think aren't relevant I wholeheartedly agree with that! I think most teachers are tbf, as there's an awful lot of stuff we teach them in a lot of subjects that doesn't seem relevent to teenagers.

Yes but that’s because it’s stuff we’re passionate about.

I'd scrap the whole of year 9 as it is.

Continue with maths, English, science and an MFL all year but then until Xmas have blocks of different subjects, all the life skills such as finance, basic cooking how to use cutlery etc. I would also include 2 weeks of each subject they can take for GCSE / BTEC so they actually have a taste of the subject and you wouldn't have people taking childcare because they think it is playing with dolls or PE because they like sports.

Also subjects they might want to do at college. Catch up sessions and reading lessons could be incorporated to boost those falling behind. Extension classes for those who are ahead.

Visits and experiences if possible as well.

Options are taken just before Xmas and subjects start proper in the January.

Yes I know it would be a nightmare to time table and ideally it would be an individual time table per child.

I don’t think it needs a financial analyst to teach teenagers ‘what is a pension, why do you need one?’

And you don't need an ex tax inspector to say "Tax is deducted from your wage if you're an employee. The more you earn, the more tax is deducted. The first £11.5k is tax free, the next x at 20% the next x at 40% etc. And you also pay National insurance on your wages".

In fact, it would be brilliant exercise for maths skills if kids were given a weekly wage figure and the tax/nic rates/allowances and for them to work out the tax and NIC deductions and resultant take home net pay. The figures and calculations are incredibly simple for a basic wage with no "extras" such as pension deductions, benefits in kind etc., yet even well educated people struggle once they enter the workplace.

Further to the last, it would be even better to challenge the high achievers in Maths by giving them the "net" take home wage figure and getting them to work backwards to the gross pre-tax wage using simple algebra!

Because they won't listen to their teachers

More often than not because they don't understand the relevance of what they're being taught so "zone out" as they just can't see the point.

Teach them things they can relate to. In Maths, rather than circle theorums and solving quadratic equations, teach them how to check their payslip and tax/nic deductions.

In Geography, get back to teaching practical skills like reading a map rather than analysing the deforestation of outer mongolia.

In English, teach them how to fill in forms rather than analysing the shit out of a Shakespeare play.

I would also include 2 weeks of each subject they can take for GCSE

This is so important. How can a kid "choose" to take a subject for GCSE or later for A level that they have absolutely zero knowledge/experience of?

My son's school has only just started to offer Computer Science at both GCSE and A level (courses started last September). They are now whinging at lack of uptake and threatening to stop the courses. What planet are they on? My son would have loved to do it, but refused to take the risk as there was ZERO information from the school as to what lessons would be like, what would be taught etc. They didn't even choose which exam board to use so researching the internet was pointless as different boards have different sylabii. This, from the school that used to offer a 2.5 year course to take the ECDL in years 7-9 but decided to drop it without notice, leaving kids 1 or 2 years into a course that they couldn't finish!