General Chat

Skool is wildly overrated. For the most part in modern Britain its functions are (a) child minding (b) social training which is the responsibility of the parents (c) providing employment for the NUT most of whose members would not have a hope of earning the same money somewhere else.

It should not take 13 years to learn to read and write and carry out basic maths. As it is most of the adult population is innumerate and has a poor level of literacy. Hence the employers screaming like mad about the cutback on visas for highly skilled immigrants.

"When I think back
On all the crap I learned in high school
It's a wonder
I can think at all
And though my lack of education
Hasn't hurt me none
I can read the writing on the wall

Kodachrome
They give us those nice bright colors
They give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So mama don't take my Kodachrome away"

Paul Simon

Ann, I think you may have hit the nail the head, when you say you had your children 24/7.
With so many mothers being forced back to work after 9 months, mainly due to economic reasons, when do they get the chance to toilet train etc?
Many only see their children in the evenings and at weekends, or for 2 days during the week if they're lucky enough to be able to work part time.

As a slight aside. It is strange that I often wonder if it is because parents are young themselves these days so don't seem to have the ability to teach life skills to their children. then I think back to when I had my daughter, I was just 21, OH was 23. I remember my parents friends saying I looked too young to have a child. We had no playgroups or nurseries to send toddlers to so I had my daughter and subsequently my son 24/7. Daughter was toilet trained by 17 months and could read and write her name by the time she went to school at five years old. Son was not so inclined to learn to read early but recognised lettters and was toilet trained about the same age. Teaching them these things was the thing to do. (incidentally by the age of 7 they were both at the same reading age).

Maybe we have come to accept that children won't be toilet trained early, taught to dress themselves, read etc. so parents now don't feel the need. I have seen no attempt so far to toilet train our Great Grandson who is two now. His mother works in the nursery of the local hospital.

Good point, Detective.

Putting aside SN, there could be a number of reasons a child can't use a knife and fork.
One which seems to repeat itself is the lack of space in modern homes. There just isn't room for a table to eat at - the occupants end up balancing their plates on their laps. Finger food, or other meals pre-cut at the kitchen work-top are easier to manage.

Not being able to write, or even attempt to write, their name must surely be the laziness of the parents. The vast majority of pre-schoolers attend nursery/playgroup who normally try to instil the basics in the last term. However, it does need the parents to encourage and reinforce the skill at home.

Donkey's years ago, I helped out at the local playgroup (learning through play) ever single one of the children were able to have a good stab at writing their name before they started school.
At that time, there weren't the free places there are now. Perhaps that's the difference - the parents had a vested interest in their children.

I wonder if it's because a lot of families just don't eat at the table at home, Ann. My left hander uses a knife and fork the right way because he didn't like to be different when he was little.

A lot of adults seem to eat with their fingers these days.

I am amazed, when eating out, at the number of teenagers, young and old, who are unable to hold a knife and fork properly. I watched one young lady the other day trying to cut up her food. She had no chance the way she was holding her cutlery. I actually wondered if she was left handed and didn't realise that she should have the knife and fork in different hands to her friends.

I'm afraid so, Ann. So much time is spent in schools doing "crowd control" that should be spent teaching. I'm not sure it's just young parents though. Some parents really can't be bothered to make the effort to teach their children the things that our parents taught us before we got to school.

I'm disgusted by the number of children who start school in nappies these days. At one time Head Teachers used to insist that children were toilet trained and could refuse to admit them, they can't any more. That's just one example. Detective is right that too many parents and a few children know their rights without accepting their responsibilities.

It's only a small minority but that minority can take up a lot of time and distract schools from doing their proper job, which is teaching. Some LEAs have done away with "special schools" and allow all children into mainstream without putting the resources in to support the children or the teachers.

Teachers only have a limited time with each child and some quiet children get overlooked because of the children who demand attention.

Having said all that, most children are motivated and have supportive parents and they get through school just fine.

...being able to hold a pencil and use a knife and fork.....
My 7 year old grandson could do these things before he started school. Now he has started holding his knife like a pencil - he gets away with it at school - but it annoyed my daughter, and caused food to be pinged across the table, so she taped the knife to his hand in the 'proper' position!!
It only took one go - he realised the error of his ways, found it much easier, and holds it properly again!! :-D

A neighbour of mine moaned about the poor standards of teaching where her 5-year old attends.

Apparently, after 3 months at the school, the pupil could not yet spell/write his own name.

I'm still not sure if the mum was 'pulling my leg'!

"Children used to come into schools able to dress themselves, use a toilet, sit and listen and use a knife and fork. They usually knew their colours and their numbers and knew how to hold a pencil. Nowadays many can't."

In your opinion Gwynne, is this what we are reaping by now having young parents who, themselves, failed to get anywhere in the educational system, and whose parents failed to teach them simple things like how to use a knife and fork? And is this only going to get worse as the problem is perpetuated?

Maggie, I was a victim of grammar school education and I made sure my son went to a good comp. Where he did exceedingly well.

The problems within primary schools come when "experts" introduce new ways of learning against the advice of teachers. ITA was a total failure. The powers that be also decreed that we should teach all manner of other things in school so the basics suffered. They still do.

Children used to come into schools able to dress themselves, use a toilet, sit and listen and use a knife and fork. They usually knew their colours and their numbers and knew how to hold a pencil. Nowadays many can't.

Only an idiot would attempt some of the changes Gove wanted, so he is an idiot, in my opinion. His own PM reined him in so he must agree to a certain extent.

"Given the hack down the tall poppy attitude of the LEAs, the NUT and those dire esta lishments teaching colleges (unis now ?) it is hardly surprising."

Just not true. Making things up is daft.

You are wrong in almost everything you said, Rollo. Well, for schools around here you are. I can't speak for where you live.

I agree with both Guinevere and Det, especially about the 'one size not fitting all'.
Many 'problem' children just aren't academic, so effectively spend 5 years wasting their lives, and very frustrated. These children were why technical schools were introduced in the past, then closed with the demise of the Grammar School and introduction of the comprehensive, which was meant to cater for all abilities, but, with the introduction of league tables was soon 'rated' on exam results, rather than general education.
I was horrified at the number of children I found at secondary school who essentially should have received extra help in primary school - but didn't.
Their grasp of reading was not adequate for what they had to learn in secondary school - and by then it was too late.

Saying that anybody who has been educated at a public school is idiotic.
Michael Gove is not an idiot far from it.
State schools vary a lot in quality from the horrendous to top notch. Overall though some sort of boring mediocrity appears to be the target.
Given the hack down the tall poppy attitude of the LEAs, the NUT and those dire esta lishments teaching colleges (unis now ?) it is hardly surprising. Trouble is our education system is poor, boring and out of touch. It fails to support children witb social and learning problems, preferring exclusion, while the brightest are not stretched or encouraged.
The only person in the present govt who cares a button is M Gove.
Arguing a point by generalising from the particular is very poor logic though popular with the press, ch5 and BBCTV.

Guinevere does have a point.

In addition, It's the minority students with a poor attitude which taint opinion about the majority. However, a teacher with poor management skills does not gain their respect. No respect equals disruptive behaviour.
Added - it doesn't matter if the students are average to low ability, or in the top 25%.


A small number of students are well aware of their 'rights'. Unfortunately they have not been informed of their 'responsibilities'. If their behaviour results in others not learning, they have removed the 'rights' of their classmates to be educated.

Children/students have different learning styles. A one size fits all approach doesn't work.

...so your opinions and thoughts aren't from experience then, Errol?
....and the programme wasn't at all biased?

I run a group for very ordinary teenagers in a very ordinary town.

This week the four 18 years olds in my youth drama group will be getting their A level results. All 4 of them have university places waiting if their results are good enough. The two sixteen year olds expect to go on to sixth form college. The 17 years olds are already at sixth form college.

This year three former members of the group graduated from university and 2 of them will begin teacher training in September. One will be going on to do a MSc degree and the other has found employment. Others are at university. Some are working. Several of them are now teachers.

3 of the group spent last summer in Africa teaching English to and working alongside teenagers in Africa and have been raising money to build a school in the village. The younger ones are on GCSE courses and expect to do ok. These are the young people you don't see on TV they just get their heads down and get on with it. What they have that some of their classmates don't are supportive parents and stable family backgrounds.

I don't work in schools any more but I know a lot of people who do and they are proud of the work they do.

Children learn their attitudes from their parents. They are in school for far less hours than they are at home. I spent the latter part of my teaching career working with children with challenging behaviour. Yes, they can be very intimidating and they can, occasionally, be violent but there are reasons for why they are as they are, in most cases.

Schools are not failing our children, society is failing our children and parents are failing their children. If parents and the wider population don't value education then their children are not likely to either. If parents don't accept some responsibility for the bad behaviour of their children then there isn't a lot that schools can do, but they will keep trying.

Of course there are bad teachers and sometimes good teachers get it wrong. Bad teachers tend to not last long, teaching isn't well paid enough for them to persevere in a job that gives them no satisfaction. Good teachers learn from their mistakes. Teaching is still a vocation for many and they deserve our support.

I'm very, very old but I can remember what my schooldays were like and we had a lot of "attitude" in school then. But, usually, if we were in trouble at school then our parents backed up the school and didn't go storming in defending their offspring and saying they were being picked on.

If parents see no hope for their own future and are struggling in poverty it is hard for them to feel hope for their children. Teachers try to pick up the pieces.

Putting public school educated idiots like Gove, with no idea of what real schools are like, in charge is not the way to solve the problem. Most teenagers are lovely under the skin.

Your family aside, because as I am sure you will agree, it is very easy to bring in personal opinions and personalise debates, the point of this thread is the programme and the fact that it highlights how a "normal" classroom is today.

I'm not a qualified teacher, but I do have a BA in Educatin Studies, and many years as a LSA
I am aware of intimidating circumstances in the classroom, but that's more reason not to become prey to the lowest common denominator.
There are tactics that can be deployed.
I have to admit, whilst doing my degree, I wasn't too impressed with the BEd students (I was doing a BA(Hons) ). They seemed to take it as the 'easy' option.
Class sizes in state schools are too big - usually30+.
Private schools have an average of 12, maximum of 16 - much more manageable.
And there are some cr*p teachers and 'professionals' out there.
My grandsons are both 'tongue tied', The elder has a lisp, the younger had trouble with a lot of letters.
He went to a speech therapist, who said he had a 'concentration' problem, and suggested my daughter played with him more.
He had no 'concentration' problem - he was 3 and was bored with her 'lessons'.
I had him for 3 weekends on the trot and made him use sentences starting with the letters he had a problem with - we all had to do it.
It was a game, and a laugh.
Within 3 months, as he grew, he could talk properly. No-one in the family had any doubt he would be able to talk 'properly' - he was aware of his problem - by the time he started school, but 'professionals' decided he should be able to do it in X number of months, so the family 'fast forwarded' his ability. Did him no favours at the time, though.