Forums

Posted: 02-09-2013 17:23 Post subject:

Colleges already try to steer GCSE re-sit candidates with E grades towards the Literacy Level II examinations. This can be a multiple-choice type examination, which is based on a selection of comprehension questions on an assortment of unseen texts.

There is a single Pass level.

There are advantages to the college, which can make claims about the percentage of candidates gaining a qualification. Like any sub-GCSE examination, the Literacy papers struggle to gain much credibility with employers and are not in themselves much value for college entrance.

For some pupils, they may boost confidence at a crucial stage, though many candidates in these re-sit classes have crazy ideas about how easy it is to pass multiple-choice papers by luck alone. The lottery is probably a better bet! Sad

Posted: 03-09-2013 09:34 Post subject:

Children 'should be taught about porn on the net'
Children should be taught about the “negative impact of online pornography” in the classroom, one of David Cameron’s main advisers has said as leading charities call for an overhaul of sex education.
By Louisa Peacock and Emma Barnett
10:00PM BST 02 Sep 2012

Claire Perry, the Conservative MP, said that sex education in secondary schools should be updated to reflect the digital age.

She made her comments in a blog post for Telegraph Wonder Women, which has launched a campaign for better sex education, as the NSPCC called on the Government to update its “woefully inadequate” sex education guidance, which is 13 years old and contains no reference to the internet. Shocked

The charity said that the Prime Minister should urgently convene a group of experts, young people and teachers to rewrite the guidance, which is the only official teaching material available, to bring it into the 21st century.
Since the document was published in 2000, the rise of online pornography and social media means children are being exposed to sex more often and earlier than before, experts said.

Research by the NSPCC, commissioned by The Telegraph, has shown that in the absence of meaningful sex education in schools, the internet is warping young people’s views about relationships.
Many girls feel they have to “look and perform like porn stars” in order to be liked by boys, the NSPCC said.

Almost a third of pupils believe pornography dictates how they should behave in a relationship, the survey of 601 secondary school pupils aged 11 to 18 showed. Seventy-two per cent said pornography should be talked about in sex education, suggesting that lessons are too focused on the mechanics of reproduction and lack meaningful discussion about the issues young people face online.

Other findings showed that schoolchildren are three times more likely to go online for advice or information on sex and relationships than they are to consult their parents or helplines.

Claire Lilley, a policy adviser at the NSPCC, said: “It’s natural for children to become curious about puberty and sex. If they are not learning what they need to at school or at home they will turn elsewhere, including to online porn. What pornography teaches boys is that girls are for sexual gratification, while girls feel they have to look and perform like porn stars to be liked and valued by boys. This makes children vulnerable to being forced or pressured into behaving sexually.”

Ms Lilley said it was vital that teachers were equipped to help pupils interpret what they face online.
“The current sex and relationships education guidance which predates social media is woefully inadequate.
“Many children will have already been exposed to a vast amount of inappropriate, unrealistic and sometimes downright harmful pornography through the internet. This can warp their view of what is normal and acceptable sexual behaviour.
“To protect children from these damaging messages they must be taught about sex in the context of healthy, caring relationships and how to protect and respect themselves and others.”

Writing in response to the Telegraph’s online campaign, Mrs Perry, the Prime Minister’s adviser on children, said: “The rise of sexting, online bullying, porn and young people documenting their entire lives on the web needs to be a core tenet of how we teach sex and relationships.”

She added that the guidance should be redrawn by sex education experts. “Rather than putting one more set of responsibilities on the shoulders of hard-working teachers, it should be possible to encourage schools to develop relationships with the many excellent charities and organisations that use trained experts to deliver the right messages to young people in appropriate and high-impact ways.”

Several reports have suggested that the Government should act to improve sex education. The current curriculum focuses on the mechanics of sex and pregnancy. However, information about contraception and safe sex is discretionary and discussion about relationships is often neglected.

In March, the Department for Education concluded in its review of personal, social, heath and economic [PSHE] education that it would refresh drugs and alcohol teaching, but it failed to commit to updating sex and relationships. The Department for Education said: “Our recent PSHE review found that the existing guidance offers a sound framework for sex and relationship education in school.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/10282171/Better-sex-education-Children-should-be-taught-about-porn-on-the-net.html

There was no internet when I was at school. About the only extra-curricular information we got about sex came from Health and Beauty magazine, and other naturist mags! Luckily my school had a very good headmaster, who took it upon himself to give sex education lessons to all the first years. He would have been a good advisor on a suitable curriculum, but sadly he died some years ago. He was probably ahead of his time.

Posted: 03-09-2013 10:10 Post subject:

(Notice this in the womens section)

When I was young, girls were not at all interested in what boys wanted, but only in each others opinions.

I suspect this is why so many young men are gay, these days.

(And wanting to get married; What is wrong with a life of batchelorhood?)

But hey, Im 40 and a frigid old maid.

Posted: 12-09-2013 08:53 Post subject:

Start schooling later than age five, say experts
Formal schooling should be delayed until the age of six or seven because early education is causing “profound damage” to children, an influential lobby of almost 130 experts warns.
By Graeme Paton, Education Editor
10:00PM BST 11 Sep 2013

Traditional lessons should be put on hold for up to two years amid fears that successive governments have promoted a “too much, too soon” culture in schools and nurseries, it is claimed.
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, the group of academics, teachers, authors and charity leaders call for a fundamental reassessment of national policies on early education.

It is claimed that the current system robs infants of the ability to play and puts too much emphasis on formal learning in areas such as the three Rs at a young age. The letter warns that the Coalition is now ratcheting up the requirements with policies that prioritise “school readiness” over free play.
This includes the possible introduction of a new baseline test for five-year-olds in England and qualifications for child care staff that make little reference to learning through play, they say.

The letter – signed by 127 senior figures including Sir Al Aynsley-Green, the former Children’s Commissioner for England, Lord Layard, director of the Well-Being Programme at the London School of Economics, Dr David Whitebread, senior lecturer in psychology of education at Cambridge University, and Catherine Prisk, director of Play England – suggests that children should actually be allowed to start formal education later to give them more time to develop.

A spokesman for Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, said the signatories were “misguided”, suggesting they advocated dumbing down.
“These people represent the powerful and badly misguided lobby who are responsible for the devaluation of exams and the culture of low expectations in state schools,” the spokesman said.
“We need a system that aims to prepare pupils to solve hard problems in calculus or be a poet or engineer — a system freed from the grip of those who bleat bogus pop-psychology about 'self image’, which is an excuse for not teaching poor children how to add up.”

By law, children must be in school by the age of five, although the vast majority are enrolled in reception classes aged four.

Today’s letter says that children who “enter school at six or seven” – in line with Scandinavian education systems – “consistently achieve better educational results as well as higher levels of wellbeing”. It would mean putting off the start of formal schooling for up to two years for most children, with experts suggesting that they should instead undertake play-based activities with no formal literacy and numeracy requirements.
“The continued focus on an early start to formal learning is likely to cause profound damage to the self-image and learning dispositions of a generation of children,” the letter says.

The letter is circulated by the Save Childhood Movement, which is launching the “Too Much, Too Soon” campaign tomorrow.
It will push for a series of reforms, including a new “developmentally appropriate”, play-based early years framework for nurseries and schools, covering children between the age of three and seven.

Wendy Ellyatt, the founding director of the movement, said: “Despite the fact that 90 per cent of countries in the world prioritise social and emotional learning and start formal schooling at six or seven, in England we seem grimly determined to cling on to the erroneous belief that starting sooner means better results later.

“There is nothing wrong with seeking high educational standards and accountability, but there is surely something very wrong indeed if this comes at the cost of natural development.”

etc...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10302249/Start-schooling-later-than-age-five-say-experts.html

Posted: 12-09-2013 12:07 Post subject:

I recall there was a wave of interest, some ten years ago, in the strong evidence that countries which delayed formal education produced children who were better prepared to learn when they were ready.

It seemed sensible to me at the time. Now, I fear, whatever the motives of those proposing it, it could appeal to the authorities as an economy measure or opportunity to deskill the personnel working in the field.

Infants who are well cared-for and allowed to develop through play in a safe home environment might well thrive. Those in "shut-your-face" homes would just have their faces shut for longer. Sad

That said, Gove's statements are more and more like something dreamed up by The Onion or Daily Mash! Rolling Eyes

Posted: 12-09-2013 13:28 Post subject:

Posted: 14-09-2013 12:22 Post subject:

Posted: 14-09-2013 16:29 Post subject:

Teaching phonemes.
*Shudder*

Teach words slowly and carefully - in context. We use language in context and to decontextualise words is unhelpful at an early stage. Phonemes are assimilated by natural induction; the 'rules' are created by multiple encounters in differing contexts. Homo Sapiens is a master of pattern recognition - not rule application.

Human children have evolved to naturally acquire their native language, they don't need to learn it. Leave that torture to the EFL students.

(comment in general, not aimed at you, liveinabin - I'm sure you're just doing your job)

Posted: 14-09-2013 17:07 Post subject:

Posted: 14-09-2013 17:27 Post subject:

When I was at junior school, slow learners in (or of) English were taken aside to be taught ITA (Initial Teaching Alphabet). While it was interesting to see a sheepdog used to separate them from the the rest of the flock, even as a 9 year old I could see that the big problem was if they were teaching kids at an early age to spell incorrectly, how were they then going to unlearn all that and catch up with the rest of us?

I've just looked at a couple of pages on ITA and to my adult mind, it looks like Elvish.

Take a look...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1523708.stm

and get this quote from one person's experience...

Posted: 14-09-2013 17:39 Post subject:

Posted: 14-09-2013 17:59 Post subject:

Posted: 15-09-2013 02:40 Post subject:

I am losing count of the Superheads who fall. Here is another:

Raids on Coursework Finagling Rolling Eyes

Posted: 15-09-2013 07:26 Post subject:

Isn't it funny how people like that always get busted just in time to retire. Mad