This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comment

← Three Developments in British Education

alphcat's Avatar Jump to comment 10 by alphcat

Until recenty what is being suggested for KS2 wasn't properly touched upon until KS4. The very basics didn't really have to be taught until children were 15 though most good schools did introduce them far earlier. That meant greater depth of understanding was left to A level which is optional, Hopefully this breakthrough shift to teaching the basics at an earlier age will now follow through into KS3 and 4 and children will have to have a greater understanding of evolution and be exposed to far more of the evidence for it then they are at present to get their compulsory science/biology gcse. If it doesn't it will be less effective.

And where the national curriculum leads the exam boards have no choice but to follow. Academies may be able to teach what they want in theory. In practice at the moment they are still schools and still judged by exam results. That may keep them on the straight and narrow in the still unlikely event they become infiltrated by the odd creationist teacher. I was also under the impression that when it came to maths, English and science even academies were required in some way to stick to the national curriculum. After all, nobody really believes Goves new academies legislation was give freedom to schools. Everyone really knows it was an attempt to get rid of LEAs, save cash and I wouldn't be surprised if it were also to introduce limited privatisation by the back door.

The other issue is that the KS2 SATs tests for science was removed. And when that happened a lot of primary schools who were struggling to get science specialists on board simply avoided teaching too much science. We notice at our high school that whilst the children have fairly standard levels of maths and english the amount and quality of science they've picked up varies wildly according to the primary school attended. Science is starting to have a much lower profile in primary schools than it did, and without SATs to measure progress there are no checks. That needs adressing.

At the moment the real threat is from unregulated free schools run by nutters. New academies are still just schools trying to get more cash. In the future however, creationists may realise the greater powers afforded to governors of academies will be useful. But Gove is far too stupid to have thought ahead. So this change is only good if the state manages to retain some control over what is taugh. And that is counter to idiot Goves ideological mindset. In short Gove is taking a lot of time on what seems to be a very good curriculum review at the same time as he is trying to get rid of having to check or control whether schools actually have to teach it. How stupid is that?

Tue, 12 Jun 2012 08:47:03 UTC | #947016