Don't stay in school

pollypenny

skattykatty wrote: »

School? Just read, digest, explore, challenge and discuss Shakespeare:

Money? 'Have more than thou showest, speak less than thou knowest, lend less than thou owest'

Mental health? 'There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so'....'To mourn a mischief that is past and gone is the next way to draw new mischief on'...'This above all: to thine own self be true'

Human rights? 'If you !!!!! us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?'

Work? 'All the world 's a stage, and all the men and women merely players. They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts'

Politics? 'The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool'

What's it all about? 'Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more: it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'

Love it! :T:T:T

I've said that we can cover the whole curriculum in English many time!

theoretica

Flyonthewall wrote: »

There needs to be a system in place to make sure all schools are teaching the important things, not just random schools teaching random ones. They're all things everyone needs to know so everyone needs to be taught them all.

I disagree with the logic of your last sentence. Personally, I think that our modern school system has gone very wrong along the lines of everyone should be taught the same things when people are so very different. As you yourself say, some people learn many things out of school, some won't. Surely some better way could be found of sorting out the people who will benefit from classes in X,Y or Z than having them sit through the lessons? My school occasionally managed it, sorting classes and streams not just on results, but on learning style and interests, and offering optional classes (and strongly encouraging certain students to attend some of them) from self defence to technology shop skills, but it could have been done much more and better.

Flyonthewall

pollypenny wrote: »

You cannot pass English Literature A-level on memory alone, either.

Student have to analyse previously unseen texts.

I did English Lit AS level, we analysed texts in class. However, for the exams it was a case of remember what we'd read and analysed (same as how it had been for school exams).

I know that's not a full A level, but even if the exam has unseen text you have to remember a lot about how to analyse texts and key words and phrases they expect you to use when analysing and quite possibly comparisons to previously seen texts (which would be memory).

So while technically it involves something else the base of it is still memory. Without remembering a lot you can't possibly pass.

Flyonthewall

theoretica wrote: »

I disagree with the logic of your last sentence. Personally, I think that our modern school system has gone very wrong along the lines of everyone should be taught the same things when people are so very different. As you yourself say, some people learn many things out of school, some won't. Surely some better way could be found of sorting out the people who will benefit from classes in X,Y or Z than having them sit through the lessons? My school occasionally managed it, sorting classes and streams not just on results, but on learning style and interests, and offering optional classes (and strongly encouraging certain students to attend some of them) from self defence to technology shop skills, but it could have been done much more and better.

When I say the same things I meant in terms of the core subjects (English and Maths and basic IT at least) and the adult topics (tax, finance, voting) as they are all things everyone needs in life.

As I said earlier, for other things taster lessons could be an idea.

Person_one

Flyonthewall wrote: »

I did English Lit AS level, we analysed texts in class. However, for the exams it was a case of remember what we'd read and analysed (same as how it had been for school exams).

I know that's not a full A level, but even if the exam has unseen text you have to remember a lot about how to analyse texts and key words and phrases they expect you to use when analysing and quite possibly comparisons to previously seen texts (which would be memory).

So while technically it involves something else the base of it is still memory. Without remembering a lot you can't possibly pass.

That's not remembering dry facts or info though, that's remembering how to use a previously learned skill in a new situation. A completely different type of memory usage and one that's incredibly valuable in all areas of life and all jobs!

missbiggles1

Flyonthewall wrote: »

I did English Lit AS level, we analysed texts in class. However, for the exams it was a case of remember what we'd read and analysed (same as how it had been for school exams).

I know that's not a full A level, but even if the exam has unseen text you have to remember a lot about how to analyse texts and key words and phrases they expect you to use when analysing and quite possibly comparisons to previously seen texts (which would be memory).

So while technically it involves something else the base of it is still memory. Without remembering a lot you can't possibly pass.

Remembering a skill you've learned doesn't mean that it's based on memory!

Flyonthewall

Person_one wrote: »

That's not remembering dry facts or info though, that's remembering how to use a previously learned skill in a new situation. A completely different type of memory usage and one that's incredibly valuable in all areas of life and all jobs!

I never said it was. The type of memory wasn't stated previously, but regardless it's still memory in the end. You forget facts, you fail. You forget the skill, you fail. Both sides are just as important.

Flyonthewall

missbiggles1 wrote: »

Remembering a skill you've learned doesn't mean that it's based on memory!

You can't remember something you have no memory of.

theoretica

Flyonthewall wrote: »

When I say the same things I meant in terms of the core subjects (English and Maths and basic IT at least) and the adult topics (tax, finance, voting) as they are all things everyone needs in life.

I realise you did - and I disagree. But then neither of us run the national curriculum. It isn't the teaching that is important - it is the knowing and learning. The resident computer wizz doesn't need basic IT lessons. As another example, being numerate is very important, but I think there is a flaw in the logic behind the push for everyone to study maths to 18. If you don't want to carry on maths lessons you may stop them if you get a stated qualification (maybe B at GCSE?) might prod some people to work hard and get out of those lessons, rather than sitting in classes and not wanting to be there, not paying attention and not learning much for another one or two years.

Flyonthewall

theoretica wrote: »

I realise you did - and I disagree. But then neither of us run the national curriculum. It isn't the teaching that is important - it is the knowing and learning. The resident computer wizz doesn't need basic IT lessons. As another example, being numerate is very important, but I think there is a flaw in the logic behind the push for everyone to study maths to 18. If you don't want to carry on maths lessons you may stop them if you get a stated qualification (maybe B at GCSE?) might prod some people to work hard and get out of those lessons, rather than sitting in classes and not wanting to be there, not paying attention and not learning much for another one or two years.

You could argue the same about anyone who already knows a subject. The whole point of school though is to make sure the students know it and for them to get qualifications to prove they know it. So even an IT wizz should do IT classes.

I do agree with what you say about Maths though. I'd argue that B is quite high though. At my school only half the people were given a paper allowing them to possibly get a B or above. For the other half C was the highest possible and C is a perfectly acceptable grade, accepted by all colleges. It shows a good understanding of Maths.

For those who really struggle with academics or just maths even a C is really hard for them to get and it seems unfair to force them to spend years longer studying Maths to try and get a B at GCSE level that they'll quite probably never get.