General Resources for 11+

[magwich2]

I think many mistakes made in written english go back to the fact that half the population cannot speak properly.
"Should of, would of, could of" spring to mind along with many of the other common mistakes mentioned here.
Perhaps schools should teach children to speak proper(ly!) before getting on to the writing.

[Amber]

Perhaps schools should teach children to speak proper(ly!) before getting on to the writing.

There is so much truth in that. Oracy is not at all valued in schools - 'English' has been renamed 'Literacy' at primary level, which reflects this. There is a parlous lack of informed pedagogy here - children who cannot speak will not learn to write effectively as they can't make the connection between spoken and written language. This is one side-effect of sending children barely out of nappies into formal education and a fabulous illustration of misguided government policies which force children to start formal learning so young. In France, for example, there is a huge emphasis on discourse, the ability to speak and listen in an informed way, leading to useful debating and interpersonal skills as well as a link to later literacy. Here we are so keen to get something down on paper that talking is considered a waste of classroom time. And the least skilled speakers are also the least likely to speak up in the types of discussion which go on in our schools, which perpetuates the cycle.

http://www.robinalexander.org.uk/wp-con ... -FINAL.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[scary mum]

Perhaps schools should teach children to speak proper(ly!) before getting on to the writing.

There is so much truth in that. Oracy is not at all valued in schools - 'English' has been renamed 'Literacy' at primary level, which reflects this. There is a parlous lack of informed pedagogy here - children who cannot speak will not learn to write effectively as they can't make the connection between spoken and written language. This is one side-effect of sending children barely out of nappies into formal education and a fabulous illustration of misguided government policies which force children to start formal learning so young. In France, for example, there is a huge emphasis on discourse, the ability to speak and listen in an informed way, leading to useful debating and interpersonal skills as well as a link to later literacy. Here we are so keen to get something down on paper that talking is considered a waste of classroom time. And the least skilled speakers are also the least likely to speak up in the types of discussion which go on in our schools, which perpetuates the cycle.

http://www.robinalexander.org.uk/wp-con ... -FINAL.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Amber, I thought of you when I read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24818439" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Amber]

I am going to live on the moon.

[leanmeamum]

I agree a lot of it is to do with the way youngsters speak these days - very soon we'll have 'texting' language giving us headaches.

Another drawback is lack to grammar being taught in schools. Our local primary has not started teaching grammar as a regular part of English yet. Even the year 6 children have not started working on grammar with few months to go till the next Sats! Last year it was a new test but this year they know what to expect.

[southbucks3]

I am going to live on the moon.

It is well known in alien watching circles, that moon babies have pencil and paper introduced to them in the womb, this is why they have as such success on an intergalactic scale.

I would try time travel Amber, and I will happily meet you there!

[mystery]

They should all be taught - speaking, listening, reading, writing including grammar, spelling, punctuation etc etc.

I personally don't think that waiting to have perfected one thing before starting another is a good idea at all. Soon 7 years of primary have gone by and you haven't made much difference if you're not careful. They all will reinforce one another.

I feel very sorry for children who come from backgrounds which do not contribute to or have a negative effect on all these skills. It's hard enough in my very lucky family. Part of the battle here is against errors picked up with a vengeance at school both from other children and teachers, and battling against the tide of spellings, grammar and punctuation barely being taught at my children's school - or if it is taught, it's not taught to my children but to some others who are considered stronger in this area (where's the logic in that?). My children are not the type who read a word in a book once and then always spell it correctly. It is impossible to have a two way conversation with school about things that would help to support their spelling, grammar and punctuation. So I watch perfectly capable children's spelling, punctuation and grammar not develop in the way that it could, and at times deteriorate quite markedly.

The new literacy curriculum is more helpful in some respects for parents than you might think. I look at the spelling appendices, for example, and wish that my children were covering this at school. They are more than capable of it. Instead many hours seems to go into them learning to write in various genres that they don't really want to write in from 5 upwards. Yes, they need to develop this sense of style and employ it in their writing too but they need some balance with a bit of attention to detail and accuracy - these things are much easier to set up as good habits in the primary school years rather than deal with as problems in the secondary school years after 7 years of developing poor habits at primary.

There seems to be an unwritten rule amongst the teachers at our school that they only correct a certain percentage of spellings. It doesn't help my children one bit. I noticed at parents' evening, for example, that one of mine had spelled bed as bead in her latest story. She has spelled bed correctly for years but recently has decided that it follows the pattern of bread, head, read etc instead. It was not corrected, and she was not required to re-write it correctly. This is just one example amongst very many. Since then she always spells it as bead rather than bed. I suspect that if it had been corrected the very first time and she had been required to put some effort into relearning the correct version at that point in time this particular misspelling habit would have been cracked very quickly. Now it is just one more casualty to add to the pile of frequently misspelled words.

After 9 years of correcting every "you was" that my older child has uttered (a very common utterance round here from children, parents, nursery school teachers and some primary school teachers) I have finally succeeded as she now gets it right most of the time. Some teachers do correct grammar like this frequently in their classrooms, others do not. Personally I would rather they did.

[leanmeamum]

I'm guilty of correcting children's grammar as they speak! But I'd rather point out their mistake straight away so they don't repeat it again

[mystery]

The report by Robin Alexander linked to above was interesting. Even as a secondary science trainee long before the national curriculum it was very clear to us that "talk" both between pupils and teacher, between pupils, and just from the teacher, was one of the most important parts of good teaching. It was clear while we were at school as pupils too. Has this really been lost from teacher skills to the point that it needs specifying in a national curriculum for people to feel that it is important?

At my children's school some teachers have this skill and others don't. How does Robin Alexander propose that those that don't do get some of this? Half of them I can't have a straightforward, well-reasoned two way conversation with about even the simplest issue concerning my children. So what's the hope of constructive talk in the classroom with over 30 little terrors?

In the past, if a school had a good free advisory service paid for by the Local Authority and provided free of charge to the school, and used by the school, there was a chance that good practice would spread. What are the chances now? A lot of these services have to self-fund or not exist at all, and most schools have the choice whether to pay for these services or not. Some of these services are great and others are terrible.

I don't know how Finland does it.

[mystery]

I'm guilty of correcting children's grammar as they speak! But I'd rather point out their mistake straight away so they don't repeat it again

I kind of ask mine to say it again - if they say "you was a pain Mummy" for example, I repeat it with a question mark in my voice and they say the right thing back. Peculiar, but I started it terribly young so they don't resent it ... unlike other things I try to do!

I don't think it's a "guilty" thing. How else does one prevent or crack habits? It's the same with spelling. I think too many teachers think too hard about how a child will feel about corrections - and this leads to so many more corrections than a thorough and non-judgemental stance from the start would.