Sign in / up

back to article 'No, I CAN'T write code myself,' admits woman in charge of teaching our kids to code

The government's "Year Of Code" scheme to bring computer programming into schools for children as young as five has degenerated into a political bunfight. "The word 'coding' has been hijacked and abused by politicians and media who don't understand stuff,” the Raspberry Pi foundation’s director of educational development and a …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Suspect that this might be a Scotland only thing, I did GCSEs in England and highers in Scotland in 98/99 and the computing higher that I did was the first programming that I had done in an educational setting.

          0 0
      2. h4rm0ny
        Reply Icon

        >>"If you look at any of the media reporting it seems the whole concept is being diverted into things like basic HTML markup"

        That's inevitable. Real programming is hard. Or at least takes a lot of knowledge and development of skills. It's not possible to cram all that in amongst everything else at a school environment. And yet at the same time, it is intolerable that whole years of kids might fail a subject. Therefore they must change the subject to something much easier (and less useful as a subject) and keep calling it programming. This has been doomed from the outset and I doubt the lady in this article could have changed that.

        4 0
        1. Moosh
          Reply Icon
          IT Angle

          @ h4rm0ny

          One thing I regret the most is the direction my education took. I personally ended up studying history at university. Don't get me wrong, it was enjoyable and I loved it, but had I been exposed to something more than simply making flowcharts and dodgy looking "websites" using clip art and Microsoft publisher while at school I'm pretty sure I would have realized my interest and passion for IT a lot sooner (when I might have actually been able to tailor my education around it).

          I was exposed to electronics for a single year at secondary school, which looking back on it, I absolutely loved. But after that year it just dropped off the map and was forgotten by everyone; I believe I was one of the last year groups to actually have the mandatory electronics part of Design & Technology (after which the only things the school taught that was related in any way to Technology was the use of video editing software in media studies, a basic 3D modelling program in Design and the aforementioned dodgy IT lessons).

          It pains me that things like this seem to require specialist schools in the UK; I feel as though I was cheated out of potential futures just because schools like to boast about how many of their students get into University and end up neglecting anything more specific than mathematics, physics, chemistry and biology - and indeed even neglecting to inform students of the many different applications and career opportunities these areas offer them. My school actually entered into a partnership with a business and started promoting Business and Media studies above all else.

          2 0
          1. h4rm0ny
            Reply Icon

            Re: @ h4rm0ny

            Oh, I fully agree with introducing subjects to pupils in sufficient detail that they get a chance to see what it's about and pique their interest. But I would far rather you get a week of programming, then a week of something else, in order to introduce higher level subjects properly to children so they can make informed choices about higher education and find out that they enjoy something. But if there's a whole two years of watered down programming... that's just going to ill-serve most children and pump out bad programmers and force universities to spend more time trying to (a) undo damage, (b) repeat material for kids to get everyone to the same level.

            2 0
        2. the spectacularly refined chap
          Reply Icon

          That's inevitable. Real programming is hard. Or at least takes a lot of knowledge and development of skills. It's not possible to cram all that in amongst everything else at a school environment.

          That's precisely my point. It needn't be. For a start remember we are talking about a foundational level here - no one is suggesting high schools should be turning out CS graduates. Secondly, with an intelligent choice of tools and proper integration it could actually reinforce existing material. This is why I suggested functional programming: it's obviously not got so much commercial relevance but allows pupils to focus on what is essential rather than peripheral.

          I mentioned SML in my previous post so we'll stick with that for the time being. "3 + 7;" is a complete and useful SML program - key it in at an interpreter and it gives you the result. No need for compilation or a containing program to get parameters or communicate the result. In that sense it's a basic calculator.

          Go one step further to an early example of a useful algebraic equation: ⁰F = 9/5 ⁰C + 32. That translates more or less directly to an SML function, again with no need for a surrounding program:

          fun CtoF c = 9.0/5.0 * c + 32.0;

          A factorial is defined as

          - The factorial of 0 is 1

          - The factorial of n is n multiplied by the factorial of (n-1)

          Again it translates directly:

          fun factorial 0 = 1

          | factorial n = n * factorial (n-1);

          We've only scratched the surface yet, but we've already established the idea in the pupil's mind of programming as solving computations rather than making text scroll across the screen or something equally pointless. It's also strongly reinforced the maths syllabus by showing real world relevance. You can go on to discuss sorting algorithms or basic data structures as time permits.

          0 0
    2. h4rm0ny
      Reply Icon

      Oh, I agree. She might be a consummate organizer and manager and that's okay by me. My big issue is that programming shouldn't be taught to kids. Introduced to them - absolutely. A couple of lessons to show the basics of programming, part of a General Studies component if they still have that. But at that age, the focus should be on foundational skills - maths, language, history. You learn these first because skills like programming are about the application of your foundational skills. It's the reason I loathe ICT as a subject. Teach maths and someone can work with any spreadsheet with a little familiarization. Teach spreadsheets and you just have a pile of rapidly out of date program specific knowledge that you can't use very effectively.

      Maths and English and History skills in this country are on average pretty poor, imo. Focus on those.

      35 0
      1. Tim Soldiers
        Reply Icon

        Why History ?

        0 0
        1. Rich 11
          Reply Icon

          Just to rub Gove's nose in it.

          1 1
      2. Tim99 Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Unhappy

        @h4rm0ny

        Good comment.

        I got into computing via a back door, writing programmes for use by myself and colleagues in one of the fundamental sciences in the 1970s. I am retired now but I still mentor people and assess them for technical competence for a national accreditation body.

        My (generally middle aged or older) colleagues and I have noted over the last fifteen years or so that the education system has failed our younger colleagues in one important respect - The (usually highly intelligent) people that we see are unable to put the subjects that they have learnt to practical use. In many cases, younger professionals are unable to function without direct supervision or instruction, and that any initiative that they might show is discouraged by their management (who generally have little practical experience themselves). I believe that this is because schools, colleges, and universities now train people to pass exams and not to think . Someone who has been taught to think can solve problems, someone who was trained to pass an exam may well be lost when they have to go outside their syllabus.

        Even if we thought that this style of "education" was the best option, I have personal experience of students who were unable to pass the exam being "helped" because they had spent a lot of money to be on the course. The powers-that-be do not want their course to be thought difficult because few students will want to apply. Fewer students means that there is less money available to the department, and its power and importance in the institution is therefore reduced.

        This might be the ravings of an old fart, but I am seriously worried about the competency of many of the people in the professions who will be running everything as I continue the gentle decline into senility.

        9 0
        1. Vanir
          Reply Icon
          Joke

          Re: @h4rm0ny

          @Tim99

          Don't worry old fart, you are being replaced by much younger, fresher farts! And, more significantly, much cheaper farts!

          0 0
        2. Moosh
          Reply Icon

          Re: @Tim99

          You've reminded me of a story my old mathematics tutor told me:

          He had a kid in who seemed to be really intelligent, was getting every question right, etc., but when he sat the maths exam he didn't do quite as well as usual. When the tutor asked him about it, he said that there was a question that involved thawing a turkey, but that he had never encountered the term "thaw" before, and so he left it out. My tutor had to explain to him that thaw was not a mathematical term.

          0 0
    3. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      @Davie Dee

      "Firstly, you don't need to know anything about a subject to manage it at a very top levelFirstly, you don't need to know anything about a subject to manage it at a very top level..."

      Don't you believe it. This item of faith is probably the number one reason for the terrible state of British management and business, not to mention the chronic failure of governments to get results.

      It's true there is room for some people who are, above all, "people specialists" - I don't mean HR people, they are the diametric opposite of people specialists. In their classic book "Peopleware" (which all managers should read) De Marco and Lister describe a person who mysteriously caused every team of which she was a member to excel - although she had no obviously relevant or outstanding skills. Those teams just, somehow, jelled and worked far more effectively than others.

      But the top boss does need to understand the work that is being done - and in a deep, comprehensive way. Otherwise you get heaps of trouble.

      19 0
      1. Davie Dee
        Reply Icon

        Re: @Davie Dee

        I agree that there are jobs that do need to know specific detailed knowledge of what there "product" is but I don't believe it is compulsory. What I believe has happened, as you point out that's ruined the country, are people with no technical knowledge as well has having zero managerial skills and an inability to learn there product / teams.

        You don't need to know the workings of a product to successfully manage the people that do know it, sadly the people in charge of these things often get their jobs based on political / personal ties with people that have influence in filling these roles.

        The best ones are those decision making managers with huge shares in the company. Can anyone say conflict of interest!

        4 1
      2. itzman
        Reply Icon

        you don't need to know anything about a subject to manage it at a very top level

        In a perfect world with perfect employees, that is true. You may take their 100% accurate information, and use it to make only those decisions appropriate to our level of management.

        However, in a world of human beings, how if you know nothing about their jobs, will you know if they are simply lying to you?

        Years ago when Britain still had a manufacturing industry one of my PCB's was going into production and the production manager said 'the girls can't stuff that board in less than 45 minutes. I said 'rubbish, I bet you I could stuff it in under 15 minutes.

        I did it in 12 minutes sitting down at the carousel..

        we set the rate at 20.

        0 0
    4. Brewster's Angle Grinder Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Coat

      @David Dee

      "Firstly, you don't need to know anything about a subject to manage it at a very top level"

      I think we tried that with Paul Flowers and the Co-operative bank. He knew nothing about banking and ran it outstandingly.

      We need a "QED" icon. I'll grab my coat and go see if I can make one.

      1 0
  2. Mike Wilson

    Teaching kids to code?

    So the money set aside to teach kids to code will be gobbled up by consultants, PR types and other useless people who won't be teaching kids to code. Is anyone surprised by this?

    45 1
  3. Purlieu

    Oh

    They are going to teach them HTML, I see now the difference between "coding" and "programming"

    31 0
    1. Cave Dweller
      Reply Icon

      Re: Oh

      Exactly. Even the term "year of code" doesn't bode well with me. I'd much rather more emphasis was put on programming and problem solving. Jumping around languages such as C++, Java, Javascript, Pascal, and VB, the "coding" isn't too bad to learn, but learning the patterns, best practices, and elegant solutions are the skills that I'd consider important.

      13 0
  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Idiocracy

    It's a government initiative so:

    - it won't work.

    - the only jobs it'll create are for a few of 'call me' Dave's latest cronies.

    - it'll be forgotten about in 6 months whilst simultaneously being a great success. Someone, maybe the blond PR drone, will get a CBE.

    - not a single person will learn to code from this.

    I applaud the whole programme and all those who are involved, for services to the UK IT industry: making our jobs even more vital in the future than they are now.

    39 1
    1. dogged
      Reply Icon

      Re: Idiocracy

      > - the only jobs it'll create are for a few of 'call me' Dave's latest cronies.

      And madam here only finished a Politics degree three and a half years ago, and her CV shows some propaganda for Irritable Duncan Syndrome and some different propaganda for another bigwig. Oh, and expensive hair and makeup.

      Accurate job title? Grandee cock-holster.

      7 1

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. dogged
          Reply Icon

          Re: Idiocracy

          @ " 's water music" - nice one, loses something in the forum display, btw.

          I don't think it's misogyny apart from the deliberate crudity of the phrasing. Somehow, this politics graduate has taken her worthless degree and got several highly paid and extremely visible jobs out of it without producing anything at all in under four years. Most people with a similarly useless degree would be asking whether you want fries with that.

          It's either nepotism or she's fucking somebody. Or a cynical attempt to get publicity in the Daily Telegraph when it's not publishing pictures of all the fit girls who got their A level results but none of the fat ones.

          7 0
    2. Chad H.
      Reply Icon

      Re: Idiocracy

      It seems you've learned political code, so someone learned to code...

      1 0
    3. Shoot Them Later
      Reply Icon
      Facepalm

      Re: Idiocracy

      You can tell it's ridiculous simply from the fact that the 'director' of this initiative has the temerity to go on Newsnight to tell Paxman that "you can create a web site in an hour", but has not personally invested that hour to try it herself [and shame on Paxo for not picking her up on this].

      It's bad enough that an obvious inexperienced political crony gets appointed to this sort of position, but I would have been prepared to cut her an awful lot more slack if she'd come on and said "I'm a non-technical person with no experience of coding, but I tried some of this stuff and I learned something - and I am enthusiastic about helping other people go through the same learning journey" [or something along those lines].

      The problem isn't really just having people with no domain experience in charge of projects, it's also with having people in charge who won't eat their own dog food. But that's the political class for you.

      9 0
  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Go for it?

    Billions of people can write in one or more of hundreds of languages, but only a small fraction can write worthwhile novels, poetry, lyrics etc. We recognise that and those that are particularly skilled can generally make a decent living out it.

    If everyone was taught to code, then maybe people would finally appreciate that the ability to write decent code is a skill well worth paying properly for.

    42 0
    1. Michael H.F. Wilkinson Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Up

      Re: Go for it?

      Very good point. When teaching "Introduction to Computing Science" which runs in parallel to "Imperative Programming" in the first term of our CS programme, I always point our students to Peter Norvig's excellent page Teach yourself programming in ten years. Really top-notch programming is a skill that requires years of dedication to master. This is thoroughly underestimated by many.

      This is also illustrated by our some of staff members regularly stunning students with our ability to find bugs near instantly in code that has been baffling them for hours or even days. This even happens to MSc students who have four or five years of course work under their belt. I then remind them that I have been making that kind of programming mistake (we all do) for 25 years at a professional level, so of course I can find them more easily.

      10 0
      1. HollyHopDrive
        Reply Icon

        Re: Go for it?

        Oh my god.... I haven't laughed that much in ages. That is the best interview I've seen. I'm still wiping the tears of laughter from my eyes........

        I've ranted before about teaching kids to code, but apparently you can build a website in an hour. Does make you question if its that jeffin' easy how come the government have had to get big consultancies in to build all this IT stuff. We've spend billions when apparently a days training and a couple of hours work would have sorted everything.

        Mind you, IMHO Michael Gove seems to know bugger all about education (having gone to school doesn't make you an expert in education in the same way using the tesco website to do your shopping doesn't make you a web developer) so this level of apparent incompetence should come as no great shock.

        eCards....brilliant......economic and job crisis over.....

        "What is code" and then that look from the woman....hahahhaha......I'm going to be smiling about this all week.

        6 1
    2. Dr Stephen Jones
      Reply Icon

      Re: Go for it?

      "If everyone was taught to code, then maybe people would finally appreciate that the ability to write decent code is a skill well worth paying properly for."

      People can appreciate that writing decent code is a skill every time they see a BSOD at their cash machine. Teaching every child to code is therefore completely unnecessary.

      0 3
      1. DropBear
        Reply Icon
        Unhappy

        Re: Go for it?

        Some other people look at that same BSOD at the cash machine (or ATM(!) or giant billboard) and instead of what you and I see they see it's working perfectly adequately the rest of 99.99% of the time as it is, therefore improving anything or upholding higher quality is entirely uncalled for and definitely wasteful of oh-so-precious resources. Sadly...

        0 0
    3. MrXavia
      Reply Icon
      Thumb Up

      Re: Go for it?

      Good Point!

      Just 'knowing how to code' does not make you a programmer.

      It is a skill, a talent, and 'teachers' teaching it when they don't know anything about it is a bad thing...

      Can you imagine BSc Comp Sci classes filled with kids who think they can code because they were taught it at school by someone following a book....

      I shudder to imagine..

      0 0
  6. Lusty

    I hate to say it...

    Coders are the new factory workers and this is setting up that exact scenario. The country needs a large number of people who can write code to fulfil a design done by someone else. They don't need to know about web design, they don't need to know how to write an algorithm, they just need to be able to write and debug code having followed what someone higher up has produced.

    Unfortunately for these education people, they will need to read and write. Judging by the school output I've seen this would appear to also need some work.

    4 0
    1. Pete 2 Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: I hate to say it...

      > Coders are the new factory workers

      I have mixed feelings about this initiative.

      On the one hand I welcome anything that adds to the technical content of the school curriculum (i.e. has a relevance to the modern, technical, world). On the other I can see this programme as a transparent ploy to grab some headlines without having any sort of measurable benefit.

      As far as "factory workers" are concerned, I am not so sure. These children won't have any tangible skill at the end of this, but they will have gained a minuscule amount of familiarity with a small subset of buzzwords used today. While that knowledge will almost certainly be obsolete by the time they leave school, that amount of jargon will set them up nicely to fill management roles - but not to do anything meaningful or creative. If it also conveys the view that "coding" is a difficult process and that the real talent is the analytical process required before any "code" is written, then it might, just, have some worth.

      But that's all we should expect or hope for from any educational scheme like this.

      2 0
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I hate to say it...

      "Coders are the new factory workers and this is setting up that exact scenario. The country needs a large number of people who can write code to fulfil a design done by someone else".

      Another perfect example of what happens when the partially sighted are led by the blind. Managers (and politicians in this country at least) know so little about computing that they imagine "coding" to be a simple, low-skilled job that any fool can do if they are not talented or ambitious to go into finance, law or politics where the money is.

      Of course, the whole paradigm is entirely, disastrously wrong. You get the best results when analysts are expert programmers already, and the programmers understand the skills and difficulties of analysis. On small enough projects, the ideal is to have one person do both.

      Suffice it to point out that the view of coders as "factory workers... who can write code to fulfil a design done by someone else" is about as far away from agile development methods (such as XP) as it's possible to get.

      6 0
    3. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I hate to say it...

      That was a company I worked for ten years ago started to think - they thought "developers" should be low-end, barely skilled workers "assembling" components written elsewhere following design blueprints made by "analysts" who had no clue about IT. That company went bust two years after management "let go" skilled, expensive developers and relied only on the "new factory workers".

      2 0
      1. Lusty
        Reply Icon

        Re: I hate to say it...

        developers are not low end but coders certainly are. It takes very little skill to write code when someone else has given you the design and algorithms. The skill is in the upper layers. Just like with infrastructure, I may design a SAN but I certainly don't need to be the guy unboxing it and screwing it into a rack and the web designer who did a page layout shouldn't have to sit down and write lines of HTML or Javascript. Code writing is extremely low end work for the most part and unless you're the guy designing the application/database/layout etc then you're the factory worker

        0 3
        1. amanfromarse
          Reply Icon

          Re: I hate to say it...

          Let me guess, you're in the 'upper layers'.

          2 0
          1. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: I hate to say it...

            "Let me guess, you're in the 'upper layers'."

            Well then let me guess too, you just left uni and think you're as good as all the guys who've been doing it for years?

            1 1
  7. John H Woods Silver badge

    Kids who can think ...

    ... can code if they want to.

    Teaching children to think more effectively, however, has always appeared very low on the list of priorities of all governments - the conspiracy view might be that perhaps they prefer a more docile popuation; but I tend to subscribe to the cockup view: politicians just cannot leave education alone, so it continues to suffer the consequences of decades of misuse for partisan point scoring and electoral gambits, whilst those with any clue as to its improvement are sidelined and ridiculed.

    Although I am very much in favour of teaching British kids to code, that is a view about eductation itself and applies equally to teaching them, say, history. I'm in two minds, however, about whether coding should be automatically considered an economically valuable skill. On the one hand it is probably the most offshorable skill set in the world; on the other hand much of the offshore code I have personally seen is suboptimal, and significant amounts of it comedically bad. Perhaps there really will be a market for British coders once the long-term impact of the current craze of cost-control-above-everything-else hoves into sharper focus.

    14 0
    1. clod computing is big
      Reply Icon

      Re: Kids who can think ...

      Sure. But if any of the poohbahs knew their asses from holes in the ground, you could "teach them to code" simple games and interactive web thingys for the olds to feel proud of with http://scratch.mit.edu/ - the technology is free and very limited but in a way that should allow teachers to focus on what they do best - helping the kids learn some subject matter creatively. In making things, kids that get it learn that writing code is sometimes like putting lego bricks together which is probably a fairly good primary school lesson - plus they (apparently) can have fun. Checkout the simple game video and http://scratch.mit.edu/educators/

      No, I'm not affiliated in any way.

      6 0
      1. keithpeter Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Childcatcher

        Re: Kids who can think ...

        @ clod computing is big

        "...you could "teach them to code" simple games and interactive web thingys for the olds to feel proud of with http://scratch.mit.edu/"

        Environments like Scratch can also be used to teach Maths through fun things as well as the activity of making a computer do things. I sometimes think we've forgotten the fun bit amid the target driven content driven machine we have in education in the UK right now.

        Please remember this is all about children in school. Any attempt to 'make it real' by analysing some idiotically simplified business scenario and using a simplified system to program a solution will get us back to the ICT disaster.

        Much better I think to develop problem solving skills, debugging skills and checking skills ('does this really do what I think it does?'). The minority who want to do more work with computers when they leave school will have some skills and will find out about the messy and political reality in most businesses when they get there.

        4 0
      2. Chris G
        Reply Icon

        Re: Kids who can think ...

        Just had a quick look at your link, it is clear that every government IT department and definitely all of the Teach Kids Coding Crowd should complete all the sections and projects in it before being allowed to call themselves IT people or recommend what and how kids should learn coding..

        0 0
      3. John H Woods Silver badge
        Reply Icon

        Re: Kids who can think ...

        :-) you don't need to sell Scratch to me - I've been in love with Smalltalk, Squeak, Seaside and Scratch for years and years and years !

        0 0
  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Schol Reform

    Schools don't need to teach computer science. Is it a big industry? Yes, yes it is. Is it a skill as important as the three Rs? Heck no.

    More to the point, this is among many subjects they're trying to get added to the curriculum, without having anything removed. I'd much rather see them teach life skills in schools, things like how to write a cheque / pay bills. How to re-write a plug, take meter readings or even some basic electronics like fitting a light switch etc. This is something I feel is as important as the 3 Rs. I haven't been taught any electronics while at school, I'm currently moving into my first property which has a bit of work needing to be done. I find myself calling my dad every 5 minutes asking how to do the most simple of household tasks.

    Aside from a 'life skills' class, the only other reform I'd like to see is a change in school hours, change it from 9-3:15 (or whatever it is right now) to 8 - 5. Why? How many parents out there want to work, or rather need to wrok to support their families, but can't because they need to pick up and drop off the kids from school. Not only that it'd give more time to teach all these extra subjects schools want taught.

    ---

    following are random wishes, but not important so far as school reform goes, therefore less babble

    1: Daily PE rather than weekly, with no BS excuses to get out of it.

    2: Bringing options selection forward to year 9 or even 8 in senior school to allow a better focus earlier for those who know what they want to do.

    3: Larger array of 'after school activities' and 'breakfast clubs' (not advocating these should be free mind you)

    PE would help with the obesity problem, as well as concentration at schools. Almost every kid I went to school with who had ADHD was almost perfectly behaved after PE, at least for a few hours anyway.

    Bringing options forwards would help those who have a clear direction sooner, most kids I went to school with had an idea what options they wanted to take before they even got to high school. Would also mean we can offer a better quality education at college since the kids will have had better focus on their target subject already. (bringing options forward could also be a good way to introduce comp sci. First two years on basic IT, with the last two years looking at HTML and javascript, as well as basic object oriented design)

    After school and before school activities would again help out parents who have to work odd hours, these however would not be free activities, but it would be better to pay a few quid to an after school club, than a lot of cash to a carer to pick them up from school. In some situations you could possibly have student managed clubs for senior school etc, where the teacher just needs to be nearby in case of emergancy.

    Sorry this has turned out so ramblish. School reform is one of the few political things I'm somewhat passionate about, then again based on statistics I went to the worst infant and junior school and colleges in the region, senior school wasn't that bad, but the rest of my education has kinda tainted my opinion.

    8 6
    1. the spectacularly refined chap
      Reply Icon

      Re: Schol Reform

      1: Daily PE rather than weekly, with no BS excuses to get out of it.

      That's a quarter of the school day gone already then. Forget adding anything else to the syllabus - are you going to get rid of maths, English or science to make way for it?

      I don't see why kids can't stay on till four or half four instead of three or half three, especially in secondary school, but that is the world we live in.

      6 2
      1. Patrick Moody
        Reply Icon

        Re: Schol Reform

        He also said:

        "change it from 9-3:15 (or whatever it is right now) to 8 - 5."

        I'd estimate that you get 5 hours lessons from a 9-3:15 day and at least 7 hours from an 8-5 day, which would more than make up for the difference. I think the anonymous coward actually made some pretty good suggestions.

        8 0
        1. P_0
          Reply Icon

          Re: Schol Reform

          He also said:

          "change it from 9-3:15 (or whatever it is right now) to 8 - 5."

          I'd estimate that you get 5 hours lessons from a 9-3:15 day and at least 7 hours from an 8-5 day, which would more than make up for the difference. I think the anonymous coward actually made some pretty good suggestions.

          One small problem with that idea. The NUT(ters).

          3 1
          1. David Barrett
            Reply Icon

            Re: Schol Reform

            One actual problem with that... You talking about kids doing 8am-5pm days?

            So a 9 hour day... For kids, how much do you think they will take in in that last hour or so?

            That's more than I work full time and I cant concentrate at the end of the day!

            1 1
      2. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Schol Reform

        @Spectacularly Refined Chap

        If I were going to suggest any subjects be removed, it would be religious studies or history. Although I'd rather suggest that the amount of effort put into both be reduced and focused rather than removed completely. As an example, I don't know what we gain from learning that old king hal was full of beans, and married half a dozen queens. But I do understand the importance of being taught more recent history such as the great war and WW2 (as well as other wars we've been involved in which aren't really taught at all like the faulklands)

        And clearly maths shouldn't be removed. After all, if daily lessons take 1 hour and kids currently spend 4.5 hours in school, ( removing an hour for lunch, and half an hour for a morning break) and 1 hour is taken up for PE, that's closer to 2/9 than 1/4. Of course, with the extension of school to 8-5. Take an hour for lunch, and half hour in the morning, and afternoon, they'd be attending 7 hours of curricular activities, P.E woudl only take up 1/7 of the day, leaving 6 hours in the day for other activities, which is still more time spent on education than they would have had with the original 9-3:15 schedule.

        0 3
      3. Sooty
        Reply Icon

        Re: Schol Reform

        1: Daily PE rather than weekly, with no BS excuses to get out of it.

        If that were to happen, they would also need to make sure it was real PE, and not just an hour of running around a field kicking a football, which is what mine were. Actually include some education bits, although maybe that was just my school.

        1 0
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Schol Reform

          Nope, wasn't just your school. Although I was advocating Daily PE more as a get kids active than a get them learning about PE thing. Whether it be kicking about a football, playing hockey, or doing athletics (dependant on the weather)

          It's only those in senior school who chose P.E. as an option who were taught about anatomy and other bits like that (I didn't take it, so not entirely sure what was covered on the booksmart part)

          0 1

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Other stories you might like