Obama school speech

Barack Obama has been accused of attempting to indoctrinate America's children with "socialist ideology". His plan for a televised address to be shown in classrooms when children return to school next week provoked sparked complaints from parents and fuelled the growing conservative backlash against his leadership. Critics alleged that the address planned for Tuesday was another example of state interference and so-called "big government" by the Democrat president following his record financial stimulus spending and plans for health care reforms. Officials across the country fielded irate calls from parents after it was revealed that the federal education department had encouraged schools to make children watch the 15-minute address. Districts in states including Texas, Minnesota, Missouri, Virginia and Illinois have declined to show the speech, which the White House said would be about no more than the need to work hard and finish education. (link via telegraph.co.uk) It sounds like parents are afraid to let their children listen to a speech by the president. Why?? Am I missing something? What is wrong with listening to President Obama extoll the virtues of education? Why is this controversial?

Nursery and primary schooling in England: "nappy curriculum" too stressful for children

Primary teachers call for homework to be scrapped Three and four-year-old throwing tantrums because they cannot cope, association says Teachers will tomorrow call for homework for primary school children to be scrapped as a waste of time for children and teachers. Homework, frequent testing and the introduction of the government's "nappy curriculum" for early years classes have provoked criticism that nursery and primary schooling in England has become too formal and produces stressed children. This is leading to three and four-year-olds throwing tantrums in class because they are being forced to learn to read and write too early, say teachers. (link via guardian.co.uk) I was very impressed with the nursery school and primary school my sons attended but the curriculum has obviously changed since my sons were that age. I think the Government’s new curriculum is putting far too much pressure on young children which starts with the The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) (all children under five are required to meet 69 targets covering areas such as numeracy and problem-solving). It's sad that young children have so much pressure put on them. What has happened to childhood? Do you have young children and live in England? What are your thoughts about the Early Years Foundation Stage? Do your children get stressed over homework?

Should Twitter be taught in primary schools?

The British government is proposing that Twitter, blogging, podcasts and Wikipedia be taught in primary schools (ages 4 to 11)in England: Pupils to study Twitter and blogs in primary schools shake-up Children will no longer have to study the Victorians or the second world war under proposals to overhaul the primary school curriculum, the Guardian has learned. However, the draft plans will require children to master Twitter and Wikipedia and give teachers far more freedom to decide what youngsters should be concentrating on in classes. The proposed curriculum, which would mark the biggest change to primary schooling in a decade, strips away hundreds of specifications about the scientific, geographical and historical knowledge pupils must accumulate before they are 11 to allow schools greater flexibility in what they teach. (link via guardian.co.uk) I'm all for keeping up with technology but not at the expense of learning about history! I hope these proposals will be rejected by the National Union of Teachers. I think a greater flexibility in the curriculum sounds good but I don't understand why it's necessary for young children - ages 4 to 11 - to learn about blogging and Twitter. What do you think about the idea? If you are a teacher, what are your thoughts about the proposals?

Free cookbooks for all 11-year-olds in England

All 11-year-olds in England will be able to receive a free cookbook under a programme aimed at tackling obesity. Head teachers will be able to order the booklet, which has recipes for favourites such as spaghetti bolognese, roast chicken and jacket potatoes. Ministers are also announcing that £151m will be spent building food technology areas in schools. The initiatives are designed to pave the way for compulsory cooking lessons for all 11- to 14-year olds by 2011. (link via BBC News) The Real Meals cookbook, which contains 32 classic recipes and sauces and is endorsed by top chef Phil Vickery, was chosen after the public was asked to nominate the basic dishes every child should learn how to cook. Here is a list of the individual recipes contained in Real Meals. I think it's a good idea to encourage children to learn how to cook and providing free cookbooks is certainly a great way to start them on the path to learning! Hopefully, the cookery lessons will also help tackle the obesity problem in children. What do you think of the list of recipes in the cookbook? Which recipes would you recommend as the basic dishes that every child should know how to cook?

Should creationism be taught in science lessons?

The theory of creationism should be taught alongside evolution in school science lessons, a leading biologist and education expert has said. At present, Government policy is that discussions about creationism belong in religious education lessons, from which parents are entitled to withdraw their pupils. However, a Department for Children, Schools and Families spokesman said that science teachers should answer questions about creationism if asked. (link via telegraph.co.uk) The controversial views of this expert - the Rev Professor Michael Reiss, director of education at the Royal Society - have provoked some heated debates in the media and in the blogosphere. Personally, I think that creationism has absolutely nothing to do with science and should only be taught in religious studies (as it presently is). It's okay if students ask about creationism in science lessons and a debate about it should be allowed but I don't think creationism should be taught in science lessons. Creationism is a religious belief based on faith and evolution is a science based on evidence. Creationism should not be taught as if it is equal to scientific fact! What do you think? Do you think creationism should be taught in science lessons?

Petition for review of the compulsory Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS)

Thanks to an informative post - Want a happy, healthy child? Then sign this petition - on Little Green Blog, I've been reminded about legislation for Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) that is due to take effect soon that involves a set of Learning and Development Requirements which must be followed by providers of care for children below 5 years old. You read that right - learning and development requirements for children under five years old! I support the campaign (Open EYE, the campaign for an open Early Years Education) that is opposing this new law and agree with their views that it's: overly prescriptive; potentially harmful to the development of children; and a breach of the human right of parents to have their children educated in accordance with their own philosophies. The petition states that: We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to commission an urgent independent review of the compulsory Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) policy framework, and to reduce the status of its learning and development requirements to ‘professional guidelines’. More details from petition creator We recognise the government’s good intentions in its early-years policy-making, but are concerned about the EYFS legislation, which comes into force in England next September. Our concerns focus on the learning and development requirements, as follows: 1. They may harm children’s development 2. They will restrict parents’ freedom of choice in childcare and education 3. Their assessment profile requirements may place an unnecessary bureaucratic burden on those who care for young children 4. Recent evidence suggests that government interventions in education generally may not be driving standards up and may be putting too much pressure on children Read more on the blog, Open EYE, the campaign for an open Early Years Education. And please sign the petition via this link: http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/OpenEYE/

Taking a year out (or 'Gap Year')

Is your son or daughter considering taking a year out (or 'Gap Year') from his/her education? Or perhaps you are considering time off for a volunteer placement in some far off land. If so, The Telegraph's complete guide to gap years, Gap year travel advice provides just about all the information and practical tips that you may need.

100 Best YouTube Videos for Teachers (and non-teachers too!)

SmartTeaching.org provides a cool list of 100 Best YouTube Videos for Teachers. I don't think you necessarily have to be a teacher to appreciate the list though! I'm not a teacher and I think the videos are fascinating and educational. I'm sure that most everyone can enjoy watching the videos and learn from them.

Should we give up on spelling correctly?

Time to give up on spelling, says academic For those who have always struggled to remember the exceptions to the “i” before “e” spelling rule: don’t bother. One university lecturer has become so fed up with correcting his students’ atrocious spelling that he has launched a crusade for the most common “variant spellings” - otherwise known as spelling mistakes - to be fully accepted into common usage. Instead of complaining about the state of education as he corrects the same spelling mistakes in undergraduate essays year after year, Ken Smith, a criminologist at Bucks New University, has a much simpler solution. “Either we go on beating ourselves and our students up over this problem, or we simply give everyone a break and accept these variant spellings as such,” he suggests today in an article in The Times Higher Education Supplement. (link via timesonline.co.uk) I think it's a dreadful idea! If we start accepting "variant spellings" on some words, where would we stop? The article also makes reference to the chairman of the Spelling Society: Dr Smith’s suggestion was warmly welcomed yesterday by Jack Bovill, chairman of the Spelling Society, which has advocated a simplified, more phonetic, approach to spelling since 1908. I have to say that I never knew there was a Spelling Society but I'm certainly not impressed with the society if this is their view! What do you think of the idea?

Parents of fat children to get official letters - Government campaign on childhood obesity

Government bans the word 'obese' to describe overweight children Parents of primary school children will start getting letters in September telling them how fat their children are. But however much they weigh, no child will ever be described as obese. The Department of Health has found in surveys that the term obese is a turn-off, so instead will use the term “very overweight” for those children whose body mass index exceeds 30, in an attempt to enlist parents’ support. (link via timesonline.co.uk) The National Child Measurement Programme (NCMP)- operated jointly by the Department of Health (DH) and the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF). What do you think of this campaign? Do you think it will help the fight against childhood obesity? Sadly, I have my doubts that the programme will work since the parents of the children with the most serious weight issues are likely to ignore the letter, especially if the letters won't be using the word, obese.

Should secondary pupils under the age of 16 be locked in school grounds?

Minister calls for lunchtime lock-in at schools to stop rush for chippie (link via guardian.co.uk) The proposal comes as damning new research reveals the extent to which children pass through school gates to buy large quantities of food that is high in fat and sugar. Some pupils left school to buy junk food more than 11 times a week. With soaring numbers of children now dangerously overweight, Brennan said one answer was to keep millions of pupils inside the gates. 'Some schools have a stay-on-site policy for 11- to 16-year-olds but lets the sixth form go off-site. I'm very strongly supportive of that approach. I would like to see more schools operating some sort of stay-on-site policy because its advantages are shown not just in improved uptake [of healthy school lunches], but also improved behaviour and community relationships.' But any plans to lock children in were attacked as Orwellian by parents yesterday, while headteachers argued that it was not possible to police pupil movement Personally, I agree with keeping pupils inside the gates during the school day. That was the rule when I went to (an American) High school and that's the rule at the secondary school my eldest son attended and my youngest son is still a pupil at. The sixth-formers are allowed to go off-site and that makes sense to me - they are treated as adults and deserve the right to leave the school grounds when they want to. I'm not sure about literally locking the school gates though. It should simply be a rule and enforced. If kids sneak away, they should be punished. It's not just about their diet, but their safety. They are children (11- to 16-year-olds) so they need to be obeying the school rules and certainly not roaming around away from the school during the lunch hour. What do you think? Do you think kids in secondary schools should be allowed to go off the school grounds during their lunch time? Or is it too much of a nanny-state idea?

Student earns marks for swear word on GCSE exam

Markers award students for writing obscenities on GCSE papers. Write ‘f*** off’ on a GCSE paper and you’ll get 7.5%. Add an exclamation mark and it’ll go up to 11% (link via timesonline.co.uk)

One pupil who wrote “f*** off” was given marks for accurate spelling and conveying a meaning successfully. His paper was marked by Peter Buckroyd, a chief examiner who has instructed fellow examiners to mark in the same way. He told trainee examiners recently to adhere strictly to the mark scheme, to the extent that pupils who wrote only expletives on their papers should be awarded points. Mr Buckroyd, chief examiner of English for the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA), an examination board, said that he had given the pupil two marks, out of a possible 27, for the expletive.

And you may now have questions about the AQA, "the UK's leading Awarding Body for General Qualifications" (seriously?). According to their website, this is what the AQA do: The Assessment and Qualifications Alliance (AQA) is the largest of the three English exam boards. AQA has a leading reputation for promoting education for the public benefit and draws on long experience of setting and marking public exams such as GCSEs, A-levels and other qualifications. We also offer first class support for teachers and learners. and their "values": AQA strives to be the provider of choice by offering qualifications that have high educational value, are valid, reliable and fair and are affordable and manageable for schools and colleges. We also aim to set and maintain appropriate standards which carry credibility. I am not impressed. I find this news absolutely outrageous! It's disgraceful for the AQA to admit this is how they set their standards for exams in English. What kind of message is this sending to the students? What are your thoughts about this?