trudie wrote:
Or an exam with Maths, English, Comprehension, Spelling, SPAG, VR (21 types and rising) and NVR ... With NVR everything is allowable.
This is not learning. This is not education. This is not reflected, in any way, in GCSEs or beyond.
I agree that VR and NVR practice, which serves only to develop the child's logic, may not have a direct correlation with academic subjects, but it hopefully assist them in other indirect ways throughout their lives. However, I would argue that the work/tutoring done in Maths, Comprehension, Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar has been invaluable for building a foundation for future learning in these areas, especially for the SATs at the end of Y6. My child is now a whizz at word problems, which they struggled with before we started DIY tutoring, their spelling ability has improved, and I know that they will cope well with the Reading section of the SATs (and of course comprehending and interpreting texts is vital for education). Since punctuation and grammar are also vital to writing a decent sentence/essay/creative writing/email/letter, I think that was also worth spending time learning properly (and will be needed for the SATs). I've DIY'd for the CEM (eldest child), and also for the GL (youngest), and while I agree there is more 'technique' to learn for the GL, I still think both build a good foundation for Y6 and beyond.
The idea that the GL exam is tutor-proof is laughable - I totally agree with Deb70 which they say:
Deb70 wrote:
With CEM, I think bright children with no tuition would pass, but not so with GL.