Our Children's Education

My daughter is a Primary School teacher and after 35 yrs. she is convinced the parents need just as much education as the children, and they treat the teachers like glorified baby sitters. It is such a shame that a great majority of the parents can't spend at least 10 minutes of their day listening to them read let alone helping them to tie shoelace and in some cases send them to school without any lunch.

I couldn't agree more Dreamtime. I was going to type a long post about that very topic this morning, but held back, maybe I'll retype it now I know I'm not on my own!

Hi Tony, You would have had more than a few thousands behind you here after the Budget Cut Rally last week here in Perth. The Premier didn't even show his face and explain himself. I call that cowardice.

Blimey, I wondered who would be first to use that "smiley" - but I didn't expect FIVE of them!!

I share much of her opinion Dreamtime. Aspiration, I believe needs to be deep-seated inside the child's mind, which then inspires the child to learn. If the parenting is lacking, or education is treated as one of life's nasty's, without the concept of it being the child's future security, the child will have no Aspiration. When I started this thread a young friend of mine, still at UNI, is having teacher experience in a Warwickshire school reception class. Two terms on since these children started school, over half come into the dismal category described in the newspaper article. One child in the class (a bright child too) actually said that he just wanted to stay at home & smoke like his dad. He might be fortunate in having a dad at home, as fourteen out of the twenty six children do not. The area where the school is, has not a huge community from overseas, so there is not a huge language issue, more the remnants of our one time mining industry.

I don't know about sending a child to school at the age of two (as the first link suggests) what a child needs at that age is a parents love, support and guidance - not some government sponsored child-minder. Pre-school should be about mixing with other children and experiencing interaction through play. This is simply the forerunner to structured learning. However, I think that a lot of a child's education also depends on having the right sort of encouragement and support at home. You can have the best, most enthusiastic and proficient teachers at school (ok, not all teachers are the best, most enthusiastic or proficient) - but without any support at home then the child's chances of succeeding are reduced significantly. Parents must take responsibility, not just pass it back and leave it to the school. Learning is not simply a nine to three (or whatever) - five day a week experience - it is a lifelong task and without a parents involvement a child is bound to struggle. Parents who ignore their kids when they get in from school and accept that sitting in front of a TV - often with a game-controller in their hands for hours on end - is acceptable need to open their eyes at what is happening to their children. It might make their child's reaction times faster but does nothing for their ability to retain information. Admittedly a child has to want to learn, but without that critical support at home even any self-generated desire can be easily suppressed by a disinterested parent or household. I think parents should stop blaming everyone else for their child's education, switch off the telly, pick up a book and actually SIT with their children and read it. Show an interest in what they have done during the day. Ask them questions, and wait for their answers and listen to what they are saying. In fact, they may even teach you something - it's never too late to learn. At the opposite end of the scale, I read a report today about a mother who never says "no" to her children, even to the point of allowing them to cut through live electric cables! What sort of adults are those children going to become? What will happen in later life when someone actually does say NO to them? It beggars belief! Please bear in mind that I not saying all parents ignore their children and their children's education. But then, those who are the type of parent who don't care probably wouldn't be reading this in the first place! Sorry for the rant - I'm off for a lie down!

Dreamtime I use to help out in school listening and helping children to read to assist the teacher with these difficulties , then government change polices eg if your a one parent or claiming benefit , this will be stopped or affected if your doing voluntary work. When you are bringing your own children up on low income sorry to say this comes first, so to me government again can't have it all ways. At this time government wanted people on benefits as Philip mentioned the miners for eg, they put them on the sick to keep them quiet when closing the pits, all this has been on tv Panorama how they wanted people on benefits. As for no lunch terrible that is, or not the nutritious lunch over here I can tell you from some of my own family working their guts off to the extend they have been told by the doctor they can drop down dead any minute, working too hard with her illness, and not eating to feed her children, off on a low basic wage, they can't afford lunch s as expected (nutritious) as well as high rise council tax, water and fuel bills, and food for the table paying for stuff in our schools eg none uniform day, photos, outings, etc and nutritious lunch, paying off loan s or fines for not having tv licence or for loans they can't pay off which the government encouraged people to have finance. I like probably others here don't get loans or finance hence how I was bought up, nor had a tv for years in past, when I got a home if I could nt afford the licence but we now live in a different era where tv and net is vital for a childs home work, my grand daughter of 8 has to do her home work off my pc. Every oap I chat to , I hear say thank God they won't live to see it how this country is going, yet feel sorry for the young. Yes I have even been homeless living in a car, shed, out side toilet, with 18 month baby and 2 and half year old child so yes I know what poverty is like. For any parent or grand parent here I got my children to learn to read by reading Puddle Lane books at bed time leaving half the story for the next night so they looked forward to knowing the end. When the sounds of words are sent from the schools like sh, ch fr, etc I woud cut them into their squares and play a game first by going through them with the sounds then turning them all over and asking them where they thought ch or sh was etc like playing pairs in a game of cards.

Tonys TV - often with a game-controller in their hands for hours on end - is acceptable need to open their eyes at what is happening to their children. It might make their child's reaction times faster but does nothing for their ability to retain information. Even though I agree with you fully on all what you say they have now proven that playing games for younger children advances their knowledge for reading as they have to read the commands of the game in order to play it. As for shoving their child in front of the tv or dvd/videos I recall a very good teacher saying exactly the same in a school, yet she then admitted when she has her grand children at the week ends it s the first thing she does is put one on or them as they sit and watch leaving her alone, so she can have peace and get on with what she is doing. Hence this is the case where a lot of parents now a days are too tired or have nt the time with working hours. Just like the people walking about not communicating with others listening to their music, the government knew this prior what it would do, but allowed it into this country, then in the house of Lords were complaining about it and trying to find a way of stopping it. why I said earlier they contradict. By the way your not ranting, your expressing your opinion, this is where we are brain washed to think our opinions are rants, yet well educated mps do the same but theirs are classed as discussions or question time.

I believe part of the problem is that we move our children through the system by age, I think it would be far better if they moved by ability. This would also highlight when children were not progressing.

Would it really help a 10 or 11 year old to be sat in a group of 6 years olds? I know thats at the extreme end - but you get my meaning.

They only do that Tonys if a child is continuing to miss behave at present. More apt to study the child s way of thinking first for slower children,, eg what spurs them in things they are good at, are they good with their hands, money etc more so than other subjects, which I know we don't have the resources for.

This use to be so when I attended Copthorne A1 was for the very bright children, A2 for the next bright down A3 and A4 for first years and carried on with B1 B2 etc for second year then C1 C2 etc thrid year. This was never done in the infants though. I believe we should push children on what they are good at, it would nt be good if we had all our children pen pushers, for who would wash the toilets in offices or who would drive our lorries for our goods etc. The government state that eating proper foods helps a childs learning, yet children are now going with out less decent food now a days, which will get worse as they have recently announced food is going to triple in price. Also if a child does nt get on with a teacher this alters their level of learning. The worse thing the schools do is tell a child its very clever as then the child get bored eventually and stops learning normally these children become a problem as like another member said earlier, and so with one of my grandsons who is classed by the shcool as a golden child. In America a specialist has said it is best to say their work is good and try a bit harder next time to these kind of children rather than say they are brilliant or very clever.

Did you know that at any one time roughly 20% of children are now 'home-educated'? When I found that fact out I too was astonished. My grandson - now 17 and training to become a professional footballer - was home-educated for 18 months. It was his last years at junior school. It was soon realised that he needed to study only for an hour a day with one-to-one teaching. He went back to school at the start of secondary education. In most areas he was ahead of those who took the traditional route and he became bored. One of the subjects he hated was Religious Education (it was a Roman Catholic School). We got over that by explaining that all his friends would know the stories and that he would feel uncomfortable if they began to discuss it amongst themselves. Being a bright lad he knuckled down. He left school last year with 6 GCSEs of 'C' and above though none of them was in RE. But, he has turned out a well-rounded happy lad AND able to do things for himself. As well as reasonable academically he can also cook and do the family shop for himself and his mum. He has even been known to use the vacuum cleaner. Though schools teach academic subjects they don't teach survival skills.

Morning Pixrobin, A very good point, AKA - Home economics. A couple of years National Service would set up quite a few of the younger generation these days. It would also teach them a lot about self respect and for other's too, as it appears that doesn't come under the school curriculum these days. A lot of stress is put on students and it shows when having to compete with others. I am glad to hear your grandson was able to cope with the short term way of teaching and I wish him well for his future. On a lighter note, from all accounts he will make an ideal husband too !