For fans of Michael Gove

[mystery]

The science syllabus makes more sense to me as does the chronological history. I like the increased emphasis on learning to read in ks1 and the reduced emphasis on writing in loads of different genres in ks1.

These things are like marmite.

I also think that for some children covering more formal methods in arithmetic sooner will be good - not for others though.

[Guest55]

Well you are very much in the minority - many Primary schools do the victorians and WWII - they won't be able to in future.

According to our science department the science in unteachable ...

[mystery]

I'm sure there is a big split amongst primary teachers - there are certainly ones who like the history for example, as well as many who hate it. Marmite!

What is it that your science department does not like - and for which key stage?

The trouble is there's stuff in the current curriculum that people could disagree on until the cows came home, and the same with the proposed national curriculum. I haven't looked at in great detail but as I say there are a few bits which I quite like, and I'm sure lots which if I had to teach I would grow to detest.

I just don't think that my children who are currently at primary school are getting much out of any subject most of the time; I'm kind of hoping that a change will make the whole school work together and plan something that is coherent and more interesting. Again I'm aware that there are other schools that will be doing a fantastic job with the current curriculum. Maybe that's part of the job of poor old teachers - making the most of some weird curriculum that is put in front of them. I certainly remember a dreadful GCSE modular science syllabus I once had to teach. It was possible to make it good and prepare them for the silly module tests too.

[Guest55]

I'm sure there is a big split amongst primary teachers

I've yet to find one that agrees with the history.

I've not got time to list all the problems in science .... just talk to local teachers!

[Amber]

There are those of us who feel that it is not in any way the business of the Government to prescribe what is taught in schools.

I have no idea why as a nation we accept this - it doesn't happen elsewhere. Except maybe China.

If they didn't decide it, they couldn't keep changing it. What the h ell do they know about it anyway?

[mystery]

I don't know. Hopefully they employ advisers. Thing is, everyone complains loads about the current draft curriculum but they've forgotten everything that is bad about the previous one. I first taught prior to any national curriculum. There were some pretty bad gcse syllabi. Who wrote them?

[Amber]

I think what 'people' (usually teachers) complain of most of all is the constant change. It is an accepted fact of life in this country that the Government tells teachers what to teach. There is another way, of course.

[moved]

Not only what to teach, but how to teach it! This is a step too far in anyone's book!

[mystery]

Where does it tell you how to teach it? I've not read it in detail yet.

The thing that always surprises me is how many teachers round here use the old frameworks from the national numeracy and literacy strategies, and use the year by year, and term by term, and block by block, and unit by unit stuff that has been archived and that really does try to tell you how to teach it. I don't find it much help as a parent and I certainly would not have wanted to use it as a teacher. However, without that kind of detail, one was a bit stumped as to what was meant by the level criteria set out in the old National Curriculum.

It's interesting because when I left teaching there was no NC, and when I came back to it I thought there would be some helpful documents on the internet setting out what was expected for maths. It looked like an incomprehensible mess to me for something so simple and cut and dried even as a maths curriculum from KS1 to KS3. Maybe if one has been part of it for decades it makes sense, but for someone landing from Mars it's a mess. I saw a maths teacher from another country try to get grips with it - she was mighty puzzled that this was a national curriculum but it was still hard to work out what was wanted.

[Amber]

Not only what to teach, but how to teach it! This is a step too far in anyone's book!

I was discussing with a (journalist) friend why it is that the media does not challenge this but instead engages with the content of the curriculum and canvasses opinion upon it. If you think about it, having a government lay down what is taught in schools, and how it is taught, is not only nonsensical but also potentially dangerous, especially when we know that once there is a change of government, something else will come and replace it. Think about how various regimes have used education to mould citizens in history and then ask how it is that in almost all of these places now, there is no prescribed national curriculum, only loose guidelines. How have we come to this, where even those working with babies are given 'learning goals' - something which happens nowhere else in the world?

I do wish the media would take this up instead of giving credence to the whole sorry mess by debating whether this history is better than that history, or whether children should be taught algebra at 5 or 7.