Am I right or do I not really care about 'the kids'?

[Feebeela]

I was speaking to an executive head this evening of a local primary academy and I would appreciate your thoughts on our conversation.

We were talking about how there is so much pressure on schools and UKS2 chn because of the SATS. Her school is in a deprived area with a transient community, lots of EAL etc. From Y5 they run a Saturday school and boosters starting from 8am during the week. I must have looked horrified because she said that we need to make sure that these kids leave school able to read and write according to government targets and if it means more time in school then so be it. I replied that surely the demands of the curriculum are such that chn are having to learn at a much younger age than 10-20 years ago and it's detrimental to measure against such stretch goals. After all, the demands are higher but chn aren't getting any cleverer. This head shrugged and disagreed.

Her argument is that if we want children to succeed, we need to push them otherwise, they end up in the bottom set of secondary school in our (deprived) area and get mixed up in gangs, knives, drugs etc and have lesser life chances than chn from 'middle class' homes where they are supported in every way. Saturday schools, 8am boosters are all for the kids and by disagreeing I was in the wrong.

When did education get so narrow that it's only about English and Maths tests? Am I missing something? Am I a bad teacher because I disagree? I feel that we are turning these very chn off of school by pushing them so hard, so young. If we cram like this, do they grow to love learning or are they just wrung out by Y7 or 8?

I totally agree with you.

I can see her point really. If you get to secondary without at least half decent reading and literacy your card is marked. You need to be able to read to access anything else including all the wider stuff.

And for some kids school does provide a rather helpful structure. Going to do extra isn’t the horrifying prospect you’d think for all kids.

I think it is true that schools in areas of high deprivation need to do what they can to ensure that the children make greater than average progress because they are more likely to start from a low baseline and probably don't get the support and encouragement at home that other children might so space for the children to sit and do homework or extra curricular activities is important where these aren't provided in the family home.

I would agree with you that education should be more than learning for tests and exams and that children should find interest and enjoyment, otherwise they are more likely to opt out. I heard the other day that apparently the new ofsted framework is going to be focusing on broad and balanced curriculum rather than data - don't know how true this is!

But it is still the case that employers and further education providers want to see 5 GCSE passes including English and Maths and that children need what ever help a school can give to get them there - particularly the children who are getting no step up in other areas.

Saturday school seems a bit much. But our school runs 8am booster groups for the kids who are struggling, and I don't think they are viewed as negatively as you think. The kids get extra attention in smaller group sizes, get help in areas they're struggling with, and seem to quite enjoy them.

Of course education is about more than maths and English but if you can't read and write particularly then you can't access the wealth of other experiences that life (and education) has to offer. You are also unlikely to be accepted on any further training or education schemes to get you out of the path of the gangs etc. I think she's absolutely right.

Similarly in a school of high deprivation, but at the risk of stereotyping (although I think there are stats somewhere which show this), it's generally not EAL children who don't achieve their potential.

99% of the immigrant families have worked so hard with their children and really valued education. They would have been at those Saturday morning classes and appreciated them.

It's white working class families who seem the hardest to target. These are the children who are behind in our school, for a huge variety of reasons. You can often simplify the EAL children's attainment down to 'hasn't got the English, when they get it, they'll fly,' but these white working class children have got a myriad of issues that a Saturday morning class won't even begin to scratch the surface of (especially as attendance would be dire in our place).

I'm a Primary school teacher in a very deprived catchment.

My DS goes to a Prep. His school day starts at 8am and ends at 5/6pm and he has Saturday school. Nobody paying the 20k p/a for that is head tilting and saying 'poor children' about the hours.

So, no, I don't agree that morning and weekend classes are detrimental in themselves, actually maybe it's levelling the playing field a little.

However, what is detrimental is every other subject and activity being squeezed into tiny gaps to make way for endless test practice. My DS has no f*cking clue how to tell whether 'after' is being used as a subordinating conjunction or a preposition in any given sentence, and I sure as hell do not want him removed from art or sport or French or ICT so he can find out. Some of the things we've decided are 'important' for our primary school children are ridiculous.

Thank you for your responses. You've all definitely given me food for thought. I agree with the white working class/EAL kids as it chimes with my experience but it does make me wonder why we can't teach our children effectively during the week. Are we pushing our children too far to young? I have been an observer in a primary school where Reception children are using rulers in their maths books. Fine for those children that have those fine motor skills, processing skills etc but for those children who need time to play in the sand pit to develop those skills we are doing them a massive disservice, surely?

It's a combination of too much academia too young, not enough really early intervention, and a ridiculously full curriculum.

There is something going seriously wrong with education, though. I was at a Christmas Market last night. I went to a stall and was served by a 15 year old. I paid £7.50 for something and handed her a £20 note. She handed me £13 change. I said "Oh, you need to take 50p back, X" and handed her one of the £1 coins she'd given me in change. She looked at it blankly, then clicked, and rummaged for 50p.

I went to another part of the market and needed to pay for entry to a grotto. 3 tickets, £2 each. I again paid with £20. I was served by a person of approximately 18. The person serving me said that they were terrible with maths, so how much change did I need? I had to tell them to give me £14 in change.

These were not difficult sums, but whether it was the actual maths or the pressure of recall and time that caused difficulty, it was a problem.

I think if you still can't read by year 5, you can't have the most helpful background, whether that be parents who don't care, eal, parents with a SN etc and actually Saturday school is necessary to help the kids with the basics.

@Feebeela were the children using rulers to measure or to draw straight lines because the teacher wanted their books to look tidy? I would think that measuring objects could be a fun activity, not so much the second one.

My DS was one of those children who struggled with fine motor skills, holding a pen, crayon, writing, drawing and I certainly wouldn't have thanked any school who wanted him in on Saturday to do formal education. However we spent lots of time at home doing things in a fun way, using puzzles in magazines, crafts using old cereal boxes etc.

I understand that in many countries in Europe children don't start formal schooling until they are around 6 years old.

I don't know what the answer is though about the children who need a bigger push in school because of what they miss out on in their family home.

She’s right that if the kids can’t read and write when they get to secondary school that they are less likely to succeed in secondary education and the path they are likely to follow is not very rosy.

She is also right that as a primary head she has a moral duty to attempt to address the inequality in society, and that these pupils need extra help.

If they don’t catch up, they will not make it up later, they will simply fall further and further behind.

You can’t change the system, you have to work within it. So what’s your solution?

They key question is who is delivering these sessions? Is it the Year 5 and 6 teachers? Or is she bringing in other staff, or delivering them herself? Burning out staff won't be the answer either.

But some of these problems are bigger than individual teachers or schools can solve and they are entrenched by the time children even arrive at school. I remember teaching Year 1 in a deprived area and a boy (white working class, poor concentration and significantly behind in his learning) told me that he had watched Shrek earlier that morning, before school. I did wonder how on earth he was supposed to be interested in me teaching him phonics using a whiteboard and a pen (this was pre IWB days) if he had already spent 90 minutes that day sitting glazed-eyed in front of the best that Pixar and Disney could put together.

But if you suggested on MN that children shouldn't watch TV before school there would be an almighty uproar...

I think that schools are increasingly picking up the slack for what would once have been taught at home. I'm in a 3/4 class in an 'interesting' school, and I honestly can't believe how poor some of the basic skills are. Cutting along lines, or colouring within lines is beyond quite a lot of these students. When we were kids we'd be off outside after school, or helping with chores, or helping cook dinner. Now it's TV and iPads, so children just aren't developing those basic skills. I learnt about volume and converting measurements by cooking with my mother. Most of these students have never cooked anything, and one even has his mother peel his banana for him everyday.

I actually think we need to get back to basics in education. One of the subjects I have been required to teach this year is coding. Complete waste of classroom time for children who don't know basic number facts. I have probably three students out of thirty who regularly read at home. Those that do their homework at home are all online - mathletics and Reading Eggs. What happened to making dioramas, or putting together a project?

We're not allowed to tell children their results on assessments because it might upset them. So none of the challenge of trying to be top of the class, or move up reading levels (in fact, we don't even have reading levels at our school). They are going through the motions of school, but not learning how to push themselves to be better. We can't make them do oral presentations, because they might get embarrassed with public speaking.

It's a completely watered down generation, and we're raising a whole lot of wet blankets that can't cope when things don't go their way.

4point2fleet - I'm in the same position as you and have actually been stressing that my son's school isn't teaching him all the SPaG stuff and showing him how to use his inference & deduction reading skills!
Thank you for making a valid point that he doesn't really need all that stuff. He can read well and write a few paragraphs and can do pretty good maths. But he also gets tons of sports/ games etc which he needs more than subordinating conjunction booster groups. When did it all get so pressured for children? I say that as a Year 5 teacher in a deprived area. I wish we could just be allowed to teach what the children needed to know and at each child's level. No wonder children are being turned off learning by secondary school.

@Applepudding2018 the children in Reception were using them to rule lines in their maths books for neat presentation by underlining the title not measuring.

I understand that we teach in a system where we value grammar and reading strategies such as inference, prediction, evaluation etc but we risk losing the idea of reading for pleasure and writing for fun. I find that teaching is becoming formulaic and those children that need more time to embed these skills or can't focus as they aren't academically ready or are bored (like me) by the skill and drill are being turned off at a younger age. Even teaching art there is a formula of research, explore, design, create, evaluate. What is wrong with just painting a picture and enjoying it?

Anecdotally, I believe that we are pushing the curriculum down the years so we are teaching more complicated concepts to younger children. Maybe this is why we have to teach our children from 8am or on a Saturday, we are teaching too much, too young and those children that don't have support are failing to catch up. If we valued other (more practical) skills or allowed children the time to build stronger foundations, then surely these children could thrive?

We are also at risk of children enjoying sport, music and art only if their families can afford these activities after school but that's another thread.

"Everyone is a genius but, if we judge a fish by how well they can climb a tree, it will always believing it is stupid"

(I help out listening to Year 2 5-6 yo at our local primary school). Surprised to find the year 1s have tests due! They can't even read yet! What use is that apart from stressing the 4-5 yos and worrying their parents. The littlies should be allowed to enjoy these early years, like we did!

I live in a deprived area and my DS secondary school does Saturday school - 3 girls who live in my street who fall into the white working class remit have gone and 2 of them have now done well and are now at 6th form . I have no issue if they are not compulsory- my DS would struggle with an extra day of school.

Anecdotally, I believe that we are pushing the curriculum down the years so we are teaching more complicated concepts to younger children. Maybe this is why we have to teach our children from 8am or on a Saturday

Do you think that disadvantaged transient communities were doing well at school before the curriculum changes in primary?

They key question is who is delivering these sessions? Is it the Year 5 and 6 teachers? Or is she bringing in other staff, or delivering them herself? Burning out staff won't be the answer either.

Indeed. Staff who have their own families/interests outside of the already long working week.

For many in disadvantaged communities, school on Saturday is a better environment than their homes. And if that's what it takes then yes, it's fair game. I would not be happy about teachers having to work on weekends in school though.

I'm a bit shocked about the poster who said that her Y1 cohort in her school can't read - the vast majority of ours are reading quite strongly - certainly well enough to understand some basic written instructions.

Home environments for many children don't give a damn about education. I think the exec head is absolutely right. And it doesn't mean that somehow our kids are doing the educational equivalent of being sent down the mines.

Sport, drama and art are complete luxuries in the face of illiteracy and crap numeracy. The idea that children shouldn't be pushed or stretched is a middle class luxury, for families who are safe in the knowledge that they can support their children for a second go at education, or when their children finally knuckle down at secondary. There are no such second chances for these children - if their primary school doesn't get it right first time then they don't stand a chance.

Thus doesn't mean I want a Korean style hot house for young children - just an acknowledgement that primary education is absolutely crucial for social mobility.

i did saturday school, and 830-530 from age 9, the HT is right, it might even lift a few of those children into a different strata if their home-life is lacking. I do think it's too much to ask of the same set of teachers though...

NotAnotherJaffaCake, nursery and primary education are crucial if children are to realise their full potential. However, I disagree with your view that disadvantaged children should have a Gradgrind offer. If we want sport, drama and art for our children - and I certainly do - we should want that for all our children. Of course, social mobility is about making good progress and achieving good results, but it is about so much more.