Time to ‘rethink school’?

[johnny6]

Another parent who wants school to be a child minding service...

Good point would read again.

However if you read my initial post I pay for wrap around care as it is (I would also be happy to pay towards a changed schooling structure and I never suggested it should be free) these are all discussion points. However what I am suggesting is additional hours in addition to a fundamental change in how we teach children.

Also kids are getting fat, whilst parents need to take a long hard look at themselves, extra physical education is got to be a good thing surely.

 

[Minstadave]

Excercise doesn’t need to happen at school, getting the parents and kids out together would be just as acceptable, probably better.

 

[kindai]

Schools need a drastic re-design in education to be more practical in life.

English, Maths being the core 2, the 3 sciences are good to have basic knowledge.

But when have I ever needed to know about the battle of Hastings or Henry 8ths wives outside of 1 test? Never.

We had 6 lessons a day at my school. So 30 a week.

3x Maths, 3x English, 3x French, 3x Geography, 3x History, 2x PE, 1x RE, 3x Physics, 3x Chem, 3x Biology, 1x IT 2x DT.

Everything in bold has been a waste of time in "learning". Everything in italic was too much for practical day to day application.

 

[Dis86]

Good point would read again.

However if you read my initial post I pay for wrap around care as it is (I would also be happy to pay towards a changed schooling structure and I never suggested it should be free) these are all discussion points. However what I am suggesting is additional hours in addition to a fundamental change in how we teach children.

Also kids are getting fat, whilst parents need to take a long hard look at themselves, extra physical education is got to be a good thing surely.

What you are suggesting is a fundamental change to the way the education system is run and managed to make it more convenient for some parents who made a choice to have kids and continue to work full time.

 

[Dis86]

Schools need a drastic re-design in education to be more practical in life.

English, Maths being the core 2, the 3 sciences are good to have basic knowledge.

But when have I ever needed to know about the battle of Hastings or Henry 8ths wives outside of 1 test? Never.

We had 6 lessons a day at my school. So 30 a week.

3x Maths, 3x English, 3x French, 3x Geography, 3x History, 2x PE, 1x RE, 3x Physics, 3x Chem, 3x Biology, 1x IT 2x DT.

Everything in bold has been a waste of time in "learning". Everything in italic was too much for practical day to day application.

I use physics and chemistry every day. I used to use French daily too.

School isn't just about learning facts it's also about the other skills attained through those subjects. History was great for research skills. R.E. for critical thinking.
Some people will go on to careers where those subjects are useful and there's no way to know thats where their interest lies if they don't study it at a young age.

 

[Haggisman]

3x Maths, 3x English, 3x French, 3x Geography, 3x History, 2x PE, 1x RE, 3x Physics, 3x Chem, 3x Biology, 1x IT 2x DT.

Everything in bold has been a waste of time in "learning". Everything in italic was too much for practical day to day application.

What a load of nonsense.

A) how are kids supposed to know what they are interested in/what career path they want to follow if they don't get exposed to it in the first place.

B) learning for the sake of learning helps to make you a more rounded individual, regardless of whether it's directly applicable to your chosen career path.

You may not have found those subjects useful/interesting, but that doesn't mean nobody else did

 

[johnny6]

Anecdotal "evidence", but our 6 year old is knackered when I pick him up at 4.30 and I doubt he'd be able to concentrate on much by that point, contrary to the above poster's beliefs, he isn't "up at all hours", but is in bed by 7-7.30pm.

Perhaps for older children (e.g. secondary school) a longer school day would be appropriate, but I think it would be counterproductive for primary age kids

Out of interest, when are these kids supposed to eat dinner, wind down, and spend time with mum & dad when they get home at ~5.30-6pm and are supposed to be in by 7 to get enough sleep?

Picking up my point about rethinking breaks and feeding children. My son is at after school club (normally until 17:15-17:30 but can be as late as 18:00). The after school club is run by the school and staffed by the teachers and teaching assistants. He gets extensive food options at lunch time as his main meal of the day, and a lunch sized meal which includes fruit and the occasional treat at after school club. He therefore doesn’t have to eat when he comes home.

His school diet is leagues ahead of mine when I was at school.

We get home between 17:30 and just past 18:00 and he is in bed at 19:00-19:30 every evening during the week. Giving us 1-2 hours to do that days homework, bath as necessary and have fun. Like I said in previous comments I would like to see homework removed as part of the changes. Allowing for more parent kid fun time.

We do benefit from being a 3 minute walk away from the school so we can leave the house at 08:30 and be at school on time, meaning he can sleep until 07:15-07:45 in the mornings, giving him his 12-13 hours sleep.

It is like a military operation in the mornings and we are lucky enough that both my wife and I work for companies which are flexible enough to adjust our start and finish times slightly when needed. Both of which are also a 10-15 minute commute away (subject to traffic)

We have been doing this for almost 3 years now and we receive nothing but positive comments about our sons development from his teachers at parents evenings.

 

[kindai]

Some people will go on to careers where those subjects are useful and there's no way to know thats where their interest lies if they don't study it at a young age.

You may not have found those subjects useful/interesting, but that doesn't mean nobody else did

Theres a stark difference between exposing the concepts and cramming **** in for the sake of ticking boxes with exam boards.

 

[Lakeland]

I’ve worked in a school that had a no homework policy (apart from gcse revision) and it made little difference. If anything it can put kids off education so I’d be in favour of getting rid unless there are individual cases where it’s appropriate.

Long days (5pm finish) also made little difference apart from the kids and staff being more tired and having less time for hobbies and jobs. If anything I think the day should be shorter and sharper but I realise that’s not going to happen due to logistics.

I agree with the idea the op suggested re what could happen aftet hours to embed learning but I think it would be more apropriate to lessen the content that’s required to be delivered so it can be delivered during normal lesson time.

Kids engagement with their learning is absolutely pivotal to their success and so the more that can be done to engage them the better; giving them more lessons doesn’t necessarily mean more learning is going to take place.

 

[DampDog]

Schools need a drastic re-design in education to be more practical in life.

English, Maths being the core 2, the 3 sciences are good to have basic knowledge.

But when have I ever needed to know about the battle of Hastings or Henry 8ths wives outside of 1 test? Never.

We had 6 lessons a day at my school. So 30 a week.

3x Maths, 3x English, 3x French, 3x Geography, 3x History, 2x PE, 1x RE, 3x Physics, 3x Chem, 3x Biology, 1x IT 2x DT.

Everything in bold has been a waste of time in "learning". Everything in italic was too much for practical day to day application.

I agree in that we do appear to waist a lot of time during education on things that are irrelevant in adult life, but how do you sort the wheat from the chaff? Looking at your list I'd tag PE as being an essential. We are about to be buried under a tsunami of diabetes and diseases related to obesity. You could argue that keeping yourself fit and healthy and gaining an interest in sport or fitness would have a bigger impact on your life than missing the odd English or math's lesson. I sort of agree that parents have their part to play in promoting a healthy lifestyle, but getting access to some the activities that schools offer can be expensive and prohibitive because of the costs involved.

I think the focus should be shifted to subject that can have a huge impact on your life. How pensions, mortgages and loans work. I worked with a chap who honestly thought that if his car was stolen he would not need to keep paying for it.

 

[dowie]

Currently my son’s school hours are 08:45 to 15:00 (which we then supplement at our own cost with after school club from 15:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday) I’d like to see standard school hours extended to 08:45 to 17:15.

I doubt most kids would concentrate for that long (at least not in primary school) - they'd be knackered... surely the after school club already addresses the issue of not being able to pick them up at 15:00?

The teachers also put in additional hours marking etc.. I guess the after school clubs don't require anywhere near the same staffing levels and so are feasible to be run with a small contribution from parents who want to make use of them (that seems fair to me tbh.. as not all parents will want to make use of them). But if you want to extend the school day then that means new lessons/lesson plans etc.. and quite a lot more work for staff who are probably already stretched - not to mention you seem to be basing the idea partly on it being beneficial to you as a parent to not have to pay for an after school club - the actual education value of longer school days isn't necessarily clear?

My view on homework (with the exception of reading and art) is that you are asking parents to help educate their children without knowing the skill or academic level of those parents. I’ve lost count of the number of parents (low and highly educated alike) who have said to me in conversation that they didn’t know the answers because it has changed since they went to school so they googled/YouTubed it. The academic level of the parents is simply not factored in with homework.

It shouldn't need to be, the homework is there for the kid to complete, if they get stuck then they can ask the teacher the next day.

 

[Dis86]

I agree in that we do appear to waist a lot of time during education on things that are irrelevant in adult life, but how do you sort the wheat from the chaff? Looking at your list I'd tag PE as being an essential. We are about to be buried under a tsunami of diabetes and diseases related to obesity. You could argue that keeping yourself fit and healthy and gaining an interest in sport or fitness would have a bigger impact on your life than missing the odd English or math's lesson. I sort of agree that parents have their part to play in promoting a healthy lifestyle, but getting access to some the activities that schools offer can be expensive and prohibitive because of the costs involved.

I think the focus should be shifted to subject that can have a huge impact on your life. How a pensions and mortgages. How loans work. I worked with a chap who honestly thought that if his car was stolen he would not need to keep paying for it.

You mean maths and English then with a dash of logic and critical thinking! Of course not being a thicko helps.

 

[johnny6]

What you are suggesting is a fundamental change to the way the education system is run and managed to make it more convenient for some parents who made a choice to have kids and continue to work full time.

Equally I know of multiple people who would love to work more but the current system does not support it. Why spend more time at work (potentially paying more into the tax pot) if Childcare costs more than they can earn.

If people can work more and pay more tax into the pot and children get a better education and teachers are supported more than they currently are what are the down sides?

You can’t do one without the others, so a ground up rethink would be required.

Also how many households now need 2 full time working parents to live and pay the bills compared to say the 1970-1990s?

 

[Buffman]

Education should not be built around convenience of the parent. Your sister is right, 08:45 - 17:15 is a ridiculously long day for a child.

Pretty much this. Concentration would be thru the pan

 

[lunar]

Don't really know where you will find the teachers to extend the school day to 15.45 and the cost will be astronomical. Also, little planning time for teachers.
Beside kids will not be able to concentrate for such long periods.
I feel a better idea would be to make sports mandatory after school.

As regards homework, it is usually given to review the work the students have done, or research based. It allows students to work independently.

 

[kindai]

Kids engagement with their learning is absolutely pivotal to their success and so the more that can be done to engage them the better; giving them more lessons doesn’t necessarily mean more learning is going to take place.

This, I did best in the subjects where it was actually interesting and exciting, usually by teachers who gave no homework and lessons were full of energy and cool stuff going on. On the flip side, the subjects I did worst on were those who lessons were reading and copying information from a 50 year old workbook and given homework on the most boring things. It switches you off, kids love engagement and the critical thinking comes form giving them practical problems to solve.

Looking at your list I'd tag PE as being an essential

If they expanded it to include diet/nutrition, weightlifting, injury care etc, then yes I agree.

 

[sneakysnail]

I would think a trimming of a syllabus would be more beneficial than extra hours. I think after a point it's just to much. Better to use the time efficiently than just bombard them with information. You can't force someone to learn and if someone's to overwhelmed with volume of information they are just going to zone out and not absorb it.

I remember so many wasted classes because I just wasn't interested. Who wants to be forced to do one hour of French then one hour of German back to back before going home for the day? I might as well been sent home two hours early. At year nine I could drop one but not both...how many hours wasted that could have been used on a subject I actually wanted to learn?

After year 9 there should definitely be a wider range of subjects that can be dropped. I didn't mind geography or history but given the choice I would have gladly dropped both for more science classes but had to stick with one. Art, drama, Re, french/German were definitely subjects that I think had way to much time designated towards them and maybe year 9 was a little late to start dropping them.

On the flip side I know it's tricky to offer every child a bespoke education and not the most practical. I'm also very out of touch with current secondary education.

 

[DampDog]

You mean maths and English then with a dash of logic and critical thinking! Of course not being a thicko helps.

No not really. More math's, English the Sciences, health. Certainly things like RE, Geography, History should be left until later, as an add-on to the core subjects. Not everyone is suited to a life in academia. That said the last time I was inside the school gates we were still doing 'O-Levels' I think we still had the cane and the slipper (it was actually a flip-flop at my school) Can't remember when corporal was abolished? Early-mid 80's?

 

[Puzzled]

In an ideal world it would be better if parents (well all of us really) didn't need to work as long hours and could actually spend a decent amount of time with their kids each day.

Sad really how both parents have to work full time just to get by and then get what a couple of hours before bed to actually see their children, in some cases not even that.

Anyway from what I remember of primary school I was pretty tired / losing interest by the end of the day so adding extra hours wouldn't get much more out of the kids lesson wise. Essentially you'd just be making after school clubs mandatory, perhaps you could break up lessons a bit more but you still have the tiredness issue.

 

[johnny6]

Don't really know where you will find the teachers to extend the school day to 15.45 and the cost will be astronomical. Also, little planning time for teachers.
Beside kids will not be able to concentrate for such long periods.
I feel a better idea would be to make sports mandatory after school.

As regards homework, it is usually given to review the work the students have done, or research based. It allows students to work independently.

Whilst I agree costs need to be considered couldn’t a fundamental change in how/what we educate include a requirement to reduce the planning/administration burden teachers have currently? Couldn’t a fundamental rethink also result in better value for money with regards to education costs and future tax revenues?

If we could start again would we be working towards exams and spending more time on planning and marking than reading with the children (for example)?

Put it another way there is another thread somewhere on this forum which talks about automation removing a lot of low skilled jobs in the future. If we assume this is fact for now does the current educational system allow the UK to produce a very high proportion of highly skills individuals that can do the highly skilled jobs that are left in this future?