Keep failing pupils back

Less · 03-09-2007, 09:28

Keep failing pupils back - Tories

So, the Conservatives propose that to improve literacy in secondary schools children found in their last year at Junior school to be struggling will be kept back for a year in a bid to ensure these children catch up.

Excuse me? But I thought our children started school at the age of 5 and moved on to secondary school at 11 this surely gives the teachers at the junior school 6 years, (age 11 minus age 5=6 for anyone that should have been kept back), during which time they (teachers), should have the chance to notice that little Sarah is struggling with her reading etc. Therefore shouldn't more emphasis be placed on bringing her up to speed before the final year?

Also, keeping a reluctant 12 year old back could cause disruption of the classroom for the struggling 11 year old that might have been passed as fit for progress to the secondary school if only their lessons hadn't been disturbed by the actions of some older children.

WillowTheWhisp · 03-09-2007, 09:30

It would be a darned site easier if Primary schools could concentrate on teaching the basics first instead of all the additional curriculum which they can't possibly be any good at until they've learned to read and write.

lancsdave · 03-09-2007, 09:34

A clear example of politicians not having a clue, talk about handing the next election to Labour on a plate !!

BERNADETTE · 03-09-2007, 09:41

If a child is struggling the problem should be picked up very quickly and extra help arranged. It is a big thing moving up to secondary school without the added stigma of having been held back at junior school for an extra year. Do these people live in the real world? It would just give the bullies another excuse to havs a go!!!

cashman · 03-09-2007, 09:43

another glaring example of polititions being completely out of touch with reality.

WillowTheWhisp · 03-09-2007, 10:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

If a child is struggling the problem should be picked up very quickly and extra help arranged.

It would be great if it was that simple but even if a teacher knows a child needs help there may not be anyone available to give the extra help. They can't just ask for extra staff and get them. It's incredibly difficult. Then there is the problem of class sizes and in some schools a large percentage of pupils start without being able to understand a word of English let alone read and write it!

cashman · 03-09-2007, 10:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It would be great if it was that simple but even if a teacher knows a child needs help there may not be anyone available to give the extra help. They can't just ask for extra staff and get them. It's incredibly difficult. Then there is the problem of class sizes and in some schools a large percentage of pupils start without being able to understand a word of English let alone read and write it!

then that to me puts an un-necessary strain on education, surely if a child cannot understand a word that child should NOT be admitted.sorry if this comes across racist,its not meant that way, its just common sense.

BERNADETTE · 03-09-2007, 10:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It would be great if it was that simple but even if a teacher knows a child needs help there may not be anyone available to give the extra help. They can't just ask for extra staff and get them. It's incredibly difficult. Then there is the problem of class sizes and in some schools a large percentage of pupils start without being able to understand a word of English let alone read and write it!

I know there are many problems, but aren't we going to add to them if this ridiculous idea takes off?

Less · 03-09-2007, 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It would be great if it was that simple but even if a teacher knows a child needs help there may not be anyone available to give the extra help. They can't just ask for extra staff and get them. It's incredibly difficult. Then there is the problem of class sizes and in some schools a large percentage of pupils start without being able to understand a word of English let alone read and write it!

How much would keeping children back cost? Instead of stigmatising these children by forcing them to stay an extra year at junior school wouldn't the money be better invested if it was used when and where the problem arises, after all if the child can't read at 11 then as sure as eggs is eggs, they couldn't read at 10 or 9 either, unless some children forget how to read in their final year at junior school? Rather than leave it until the last minute when this practice could cause greater damage let's attack the problem earlier.

WillowTheWhisp · 03-09-2007, 11:00

It would help in the first place if there were extra-curricular classes for the non-English speakers in Reception classes to get them up to the required level by Year One and I fully agree that the problem should be tackled early on before it gets out of hand.

BERNADETTE · 03-09-2007, 11:28

At the end of the day any parent should know that their child is not progressing and should have got things moving before the child is ready to go to senior school. After all lots of kids have dyslexia and it doesn't hold them back. The key to the problem IMO is parents spotting any problems and getting them sorted!

beechy · 03-09-2007, 11:39

we already have problems with classes at
school being to large it would seem impractical to create
a system whereby education of primary childer has to be extended
we are already seeing teachers being told to extend school to include
more sports and to cut the time of other subjects
bottom lie is only so many hours in a day weeks years
once again pie in the sky politics

cashman · 03-09-2007, 12:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It would be a darned site easier if Primary schools could concentrate on teaching the basics first instead of all the additional curriculum which they can't possibly be any good at until they've learned to read and write.

while thats all well and good,and i agree on attacking the matter early is a must, my question is WHO pays for teaching the basics to these childeren? to me the responsibility lies with parents,they after all have brought/ brought up, the childeren here.

Less · 03-09-2007, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by beechy

we already have problems with classes at
school being to large it would seem impractical to create
a system whereby education of primary childer has to be extended
we are already seeing teachers being told to extend school to include
more sports and to cut the time of other subjects
bottom lie is only so many hours in a day weeks years
once again pie in the sky politics

Not really pie in the sky politics, if we, (all of us parents and other so called adults), really cared these kids wouldn't be in this position, it's because we are selfish that such children get left behind. Although I don't agree with the idea of keeping children back a class, I do believe we all have a responsibility that each child should have a chance to learn even if their parents don't care. Which means education needs more investment.

By the way, so far as large classes, I was part of the post war 'baby boomer's' and we had classes between 30 and 40 but we all knew we had to pay attention when a teacher spoke, perhaps something similar needs to be introduced?

beechy · 03-09-2007, 16:12

i to was in the classrooms of the early 50s and we did
indeed pay attention to our teacher
this was called respect both earned and taught
no such thing exists now
i myself as a parent sat down with my childer
and we educated each other through the school years