*** NEW POST *** The curriculum should be there to serve pupils, not teachers, argues @greeborunner.bsky.social wp.me/p7mhqT-O4 - ThreadSky

ensermark.bsky.social • 61 days ago

*** NEW POST ***

The curriculum should be there to serve pupils, not teachers, argues @greeborunner.bsky.social

https://wp.me/p7mhqT-O4

Comments

philg42.bsky.social•61 days ago

The curriculum is nothing to do with teachers. It is imposed on teachers too. It is there to serve politicians.

greeborunner.bsky.social•61 days ago

The English curriculum is so slight we have a huge number of choices we can make. It is only more limited at GCSE but that's not the curriculum.

philg42.bsky.social•60 days ago

Fair enough. I think that you are lucky to have so many choices available.

prestonscience.bsky.social•59 days ago

Which headlines were you referring to in this post? I can’t find any curriculum news stories from the last few days!

prestonscience.bsky.social•59 days ago

(*was Zoe referring to)

greeborunner.bsky.social•59 days ago

There was a headline story yesterday (telegraph i think but then picked up by others) about the new curriculum

greeborunner.bsky.social•59 days ago

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/12/29/labour-national-curriculum-diversity-bridget-phillipson/

chrishillidge.bsky.social•59 days ago

The Telegraph is becoming increasingly screechy about anything the government does lately.
The truth will be in the article somewhere, but I doubt the headline accurately reflects it.

greeborunner.bsky.social•59 days ago

I agree and my response in the blog was less à response to them and more a response to the resurgence of the argument in the sector.

ensermark.bsky.social•59 days ago

@greeborunner.bsky.social

poppywat.bsky.social•58 days ago

If you look,there are plenty of maths teachers who do have the same arguments about what we teach and its purpose. Not fractions/equations because these are the foundations like spelling and grammar. But the context within which we teach statistics is a big one.

historylecturer.bsky.social•60 days ago

When I started, my Head of Department at meetings used to wait till enthusiasts had propounded new schemes and then ask "Can you explain to me how any pupil will be better educated by this?"

chrishillidge.bsky.social•59 days ago

We don't see this argument with the science curriculum because they put everything in and its pretty prescriptive! Not much room for debate except for sequence possibly.
Plenty of discussion about what should be taken out though!

aberflyarf.bsky.social•59 days ago

📌

helenupnorth.bsky.social•61 days ago

So that’s what Shakespeare was for? To teach us what great writing is? And Chaucer and Milton the same? Sorry but I thought the last 2 were incomprehensible and I’ve never understood the Shakespeare obsession. English teaching of the 1980s clearly failed its mission too.

greeborunner.bsky.social•61 days ago

I'm sorry it failed you. It failed many others in different ways, but at least you know some Shakespeare to decide if you want to go back to explore it further.

helenupnorth.bsky.social•60 days ago

I’ve tried. I’ve seen a few plays in the west end and a couple on film. Still don’t see the huge attraction. Yet I love to read, I can chat about plenty of literature. I do however think that some of the stuff we throw at kids is terrible. Reading widely will help your expression and use 1/x

greeborunner.bsky.social•60 days ago

And that's why it can't be about our preferences. We need to open doors for pupils to things we may not like. I don't like Hardy's poems, but if I could see how they would enrich the curriculum foe the pupils I would use them.

helenupnorth.bsky.social•60 days ago

… of language but does it have to be English that was written hundreds of years ago? There are some wonderful books written in the last 20 or 30 years

greeborunner.bsky.social•60 days ago

Yes, but do we want them to be the main texts studied? Wouldn't we be missing out a lot of what predated them? Do we ignore Michaelangelo in art as he's old? Or do we learn from him? There's a lot of space in English for new without losing literature that's endured

helenupnorth.bsky.social•60 days ago

How is there possibly space when literature is constantly added to? My point is not the age per se it’s the accessibility due to the language. How many texts are studied for GCSE? Is it 2 or 4? That doesn’t leave many options.

busybusinesshod.bsky.social•60 days ago

I’ve always thought (and taught) that English Lit has one purpose - to challenge our thinking. Shakespeare does that and allows us to explore changes/stasis in perspective/issues/society throughout the centuries by introducing other texts and events that are linked to the text being studied.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply