School curriculum is it out of date?
Discussion
Having read this
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15916677
And thinking about the other lessons that are being taught to youngsters, how many do you think maybe are out of date and others that are not enough.
Always thought PE was a waste of time in my youth as i spent hours everyday playing out but most kids today are parked in front of a computer and rarley do any exercise.
Thoughts anyone.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15916677
And thinking about the other lessons that are being taught to youngsters, how many do you think maybe are out of date and others that are not enough.
Always thought PE was a waste of time in my youth as i spent hours everyday playing out but most kids today are parked in front of a computer and rarley do any exercise.
Thoughts anyone.
Having seen the "product" of the school system deteriorate over a period of years (in my former role as a lecturer in Comp. Sci. at several universities) I'd say the biggest problem is that pupils are no longer taught to solve problems through original thought. Far too much emphasis is placed on researching and regurgitating someone else's ideas alongside passing the assessments. As a result, when confronted with something new and no direction about where to find the answer, panic seems to set in and the problem is declared "too hard" or "boring" very quickly.
I'd agree with the above, without clear instructions young employees are very difficult to get any reasonable productivity out of, they also have no idea when it is and isn't appropriate to wear headphones, text their mates, or sit and chat about things that they did at the weekend. We desperately need as a nation higher standards of literacy and numeracy, especially the understanding of practical numeracy that all of should understand like the way APR is applied to borrowing. We also need to find ways to make young people creative in solving problems and in generating their own future, not just relying on the internet for answers as for most this is the sole source of their 'research' for any assignment.
Those that have been to FE colleges on vocational courses are slightly less useful as they don't appear to understand that the term deadline refers to a fixed point in time rather than some fluid date that will simply bend around their motivational level and social life.
Those that have been to FE colleges on vocational courses are slightly less useful as they don't appear to understand that the term deadline refers to a fixed point in time rather than some fluid date that will simply bend around their motivational level and social life.
"Coding is the new Latin"
I don't think it is. Latin gives an immense understanding to all sorts of human communication. Coding lets you communicate with a computer, and is likely to change every few years.
Apple and Microsoft have done an amazing job of improving the interface with computers over the years, and as long as that continues, I don't see a need for everyone to be computer literate at a core level.
He might have a need for more programmers, but comparing it to Latin is stretching it a bit.
I don't think it is. Latin gives an immense understanding to all sorts of human communication. Coding lets you communicate with a computer, and is likely to change every few years.
Apple and Microsoft have done an amazing job of improving the interface with computers over the years, and as long as that continues, I don't see a need for everyone to be computer literate at a core level.
He might have a need for more programmers, but comparing it to Latin is stretching it a bit.
Ozzie Osmond said:
I'd like to see schools focus on stuff that's fundamental to everyday life, including ethics etc alongside the reading, writing and arithmetic.
The national curriculum prevents that from taking place. Many children and teenagers at home are suffering from mental health problems or anxiety caused by poor parenting, the inability of parents to care about the welfare of their children over their own, and because of the pressure to perform in exams. The struggle with this while nobody in the school has the time to get to know them, what makes them unique individuals and to help them make what they learn at school relevant to their lives now and in the future. I think people need to know about their past, and other things about the world, but they don't necessarily need to prove that in a test. On the other hand there are many vital skills for life that could be focussed on by schools in a much more detailed way if teachers weren't wondering how to fit the required number of hours for each subject in and then trying to force information down the throats of people who don't have the self awareness to function in a group situation.
MX7 said:
"Coding is the new Latin"
I don't think it is. Latin gives an immense understanding to all sorts of human communication. Coding lets you communicate with a computer, and is likely to change every few years.
Apple and Microsoft have done an amazing job of improving the interface with computers over the years, and as long as that continues, I don't see a need for everyone to be computer literate at a core level.
He might have a need for more programmers, but comparing it to Latin is stretching it a bit.
Actually at a basic level coding stays pretty much the same, just small little changes, and once you learn to program then you should be able to learn a new coding reasonably quickly. For instance we use Matlab in engineering and I think that would be very useful for schools to teach the basics, as it is widely used and very ueful, not just used by the people who write Google or Microsoft, and almost infinetly more useful in a real world application than Latin is.I don't think it is. Latin gives an immense understanding to all sorts of human communication. Coding lets you communicate with a computer, and is likely to change every few years.
Apple and Microsoft have done an amazing job of improving the interface with computers over the years, and as long as that continues, I don't see a need for everyone to be computer literate at a core level.
He might have a need for more programmers, but comparing it to Latin is stretching it a bit.
intrepid44 said:
For instance we use Matlab in engineering and I think that would be very useful for schools to teach the basics, as it is widely used and very ueful, not just used by the people who write Google or Microsoft, and almost infinetly more useful in a real world application than Latin is.
Most people who use computers are nothing more than 'computer users', whereas everyone in the country communicates with others.I'm not saying that there's no place for learning coding, I'm saying that it's a bit of a fallacy to pretend that it's benefit would be as widespread as Latin.
The problem with teaching kids something as low level as coding in school is that it has no context. I found it very difficult when I was at university to get my head around things like object oriented concepts because they didn't make any sense in an acedemic situation. Now I work as a developer I can put those concepts within the context of the project I am working on and they make far more sense.
I think the school curriculum should aim to nuture kid's interest in computers so that as they get older and their knowledge develops they choose to study it further, all the way up to university level.
I think the school curriculum should aim to nuture kid's interest in computers so that as they get older and their knowledge develops they choose to study it further, all the way up to university level.
marshalla said:
Having seen the "product" of the school system deteriorate over a period of years (in my former role as a lecturer in Comp. Sci. at several universities) I'd say the biggest problem is that pupils are no longer taught to solve problems through original thought. Far too much emphasis is placed on researching and regurgitating someone else's ideas alongside passing the assessments. As a result, when confronted with something new and no direction about where to find the answer, panic seems to set in and the problem is declared "too hard" or "boring" very quickly.
I heard this complaint when I met up with an old CompSci lecturer in 2000ish. I graduated in 1995 (Bristol), and apparently the quality of the intake went down after that.I don't really understand it. Hasn't the NC increased focus on problem solving and coursework, rather than the opposite?
The student interns I take in now are a bit of a mixed bag. There is quality there, but only the top 20%. It is rare to find someone who has sufficient passion to study anything outside of the curriculum, but I guess I spent most of my time at university binge drinking and avoiding expulsion so I'm not in a position to criticise.
HundredthIdiot said:
I don't really understand it. Hasn't the NC increased focus on problem solving and coursework, rather than the opposite?
The critical phrase in my original post was "through original thought" - it seems that a lot of "problem solving" consists of using Google or Bing to find someone else's solution to the stock problem. Funnily enough, it's an issue which I first became aware of with students from certain parts of the world where the culture dictates that the way to get on as a student, is to give the teacher exactly what they gave you. No less and definitely no more.
As a parent with no work experience in teaching etc my view is this;
The curriculum is too broad. They are taught a little bit about too much. I would prefer they ensured kids could read, write, do basic mental maths and understand how to use basic maths, history, English grammar etc.
2. The school year is too short. I think state school teachers are only contracted for 185 days a year - so out of a 52 week year, kids are schooling for 37 or so. I think that is pretty ridiculous.
I think (and some studies have shown) that the more kids spend learning, the better they get.
I would like to see another 4 or 5 weeks on the school year. Improved outcomes would be significant.
The curriculum is too broad. They are taught a little bit about too much. I would prefer they ensured kids could read, write, do basic mental maths and understand how to use basic maths, history, English grammar etc.
2. The school year is too short. I think state school teachers are only contracted for 185 days a year - so out of a 52 week year, kids are schooling for 37 or so. I think that is pretty ridiculous.
I think (and some studies have shown) that the more kids spend learning, the better they get.
I would like to see another 4 or 5 weeks on the school year. Improved outcomes would be significant.
johnfm said:
I would like to see another 4 or 5 weeks on the school year. Improved outcomes would be significant.
That would only work if the extra 4 or 5 weeks were used to space out the current amount of things that schools need to teach. Putting in even more would lead to teachers that were a bit more burnt out than was needed. A lot of teachers I know (and I live with one and work with schools so I know quite a few) would gladly forgo their long summer break in favour of more regular shorter breaks and less pressure to cram work into such short time slots.
MX7 said:
intrepid44 said:
For instance we use Matlab in engineering and I think that would be very useful for schools to teach the basics, as it is widely used and very ueful, not just used by the people who write Google or Microsoft, and almost infinetly more useful in a real world application than Latin is.
Most people who use computers are nothing more than 'computer users', whereas everyone in the country communicates with others.I'm not saying that there's no place for learning coding, I'm saying that it's a bit of a fallacy to pretend that it's benefit would be as widespread as Latin.
The only reason I can understand any Latin at all is because I compare it to one of the other languages I speak (English, French, Spanish, Italian), which is exactly what I also do when looking at other Romance languages such as Portuguese (very easy due to its proximity to Spanish) and Romanian (bloody difficult, as there's just a remote resemblance to French).
I wouldn't be able to program a computer without learning to code (something I cannot do), but I can learn to speak multiple languages fluently without having to learn Latin.
Latin is very useful if you want to study the structure of language, but somewhat overrated if you just want to communicate in them.
marshalla said:
The critical phrase in my original post was "through original thought" - it seems that a lot of "problem solving" consists of using Google or Bing to find someone else's solution to the stock problem.
Funnily enough, it's an issue which I first became aware of with students from certain parts of the world where the culture dictates that the way to get on as a student, is to give the teacher exactly what they gave you. No less and definitely no more.
Do you really mean "through original thought" or "from first principles"?Funnily enough, it's an issue which I first became aware of with students from certain parts of the world where the culture dictates that the way to get on as a student, is to give the teacher exactly what they gave you. No less and definitely no more.
Undergrad studies tend not to require any original thought, from what I recall.
HundredthIdiot said:
Do you really mean "through original thought" or "from first principles"?
Undergrad studies tend not to require any original thought, from what I recall.
What I'm really getting at is, perhaps, a bit more nebulous - creativity, inspiration, analysis, generally being able to think about a problem and formulate a possible solution rather than relying on finding out how someone else did it.Undergrad studies tend not to require any original thought, from what I recall.
OK, it leads to a lot of wheel reinvention, but sometimes the modern school system seems to be dedicated to training it out of pupils as quickly as possible.
Chrisw666 said:
johnfm said:
I would like to see another 4 or 5 weeks on the school year. Improved outcomes would be significant.
That would only work if the extra 4 or 5 weeks were used to space out the current amount of things that schools need to teach. Putting in even more would lead to teachers that were a bit more burnt out than was needed. A lot of teachers I know (and I live with one and work with schools so I know quite a few) would gladly forgo their long summer break in favour of more regular shorter breaks and less pressure to cram work into such short time slots.
No more curriculum - if anything, a bit less.
More time to learn it. More time for teachers to allow the kids who need it more time to grasp and reinforce concepts.
Parents would be pretty pleased too.
marshalla said:
What I'm really getting at is, perhaps, a bit more nebulous - creativity, inspiration, analysis, generally being able to think about a problem and formulate a possible solution rather than relying on finding out how someone else did it.
OK, it leads to a lot of wheel reinvention, but sometimes the modern school system seems to be dedicated to training it out of pupils as quickly as possible.
It's the best way to learn something I've always found. Until you can think around it & find a way to solve it you probably don't really understand what your attempting to do.OK, it leads to a lot of wheel reinvention, but sometimes the modern school system seems to be dedicated to training it out of pupils as quickly as possible.
From my personal experience, having worked in a uni and having close connections with a few schools, the problem is one of staffing and their roots.
Engineering (and possibly some other) degrees are typically rubbish because lecturers generally go from school to college, then uni, do a PhD and then go into teaching. I guess a lot of school teachers just miss out the PhD bit but in essence, they are the same and have not actually lived in the real world. As such they have not solved any of the problems that the rest of us face on a daily basis.
For engineers this is fatal as they are simply regurgitating what they were taught.
So how are these people supposed to teach our children how to solve problems and develop an inquiring mind? They can't.
My local school is judged as good-outstanding by Ofsted and yet I think their maths is terrible. My kids are rarely told how the maths they learn relates to the real world and how maths is an integral part of our daily lives. But then maths isn't a major subject anymore as there's loads of other fluff that gets taught instead.
Engineering (and possibly some other) degrees are typically rubbish because lecturers generally go from school to college, then uni, do a PhD and then go into teaching. I guess a lot of school teachers just miss out the PhD bit but in essence, they are the same and have not actually lived in the real world. As such they have not solved any of the problems that the rest of us face on a daily basis.
For engineers this is fatal as they are simply regurgitating what they were taught.
So how are these people supposed to teach our children how to solve problems and develop an inquiring mind? They can't.
My local school is judged as good-outstanding by Ofsted and yet I think their maths is terrible. My kids are rarely told how the maths they learn relates to the real world and how maths is an integral part of our daily lives. But then maths isn't a major subject anymore as there's loads of other fluff that gets taught instead.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff