David Davis
Christina Speight, an old mate from eurorealist, comments on her own place:
“The trouble with education in Britain is that we have now gone full circle. The youngsters who were not taught properly 20 years ago are now the teachers of today, knowing nothing, but high on waffle and vague theories. They therefore find themselves unable to teach history, geography, literature, languages, art and music because they don’t know these subjects themselves.
So they campaign to institutionalise their ignorance.
At a time when 9 out of 10 young men who want to join the army are rejected by the recruiters as incapable of fighting a modern war (some admittedly from general unfitness or drug use) we should be grateful that at least 10% have been educated properly enough to do a man’s job. TEN PERCENT - and “education, education, education” was to be top priority.”
Head teachers want to drop National Curriculum in schools
By Julie Henry
A range of school subjects could be swept away under new teaching proposals.
The attack on the National Curriculum, which has dictated school timetables for 20 years, could spell the end of separate classes in history, geography, literature, languages, art and music.
Instead, schools would be allowed to decide how they teach big themes such as global warming, conflict and healthy living.
The present list of subjects would be reduced to little more than English, mathematics and computing. The National Association of Head Teachers, responding to a select committee inquiry into whether the National Curriculum is “fit for purpose”, said its structure of 14 compulsory subjects should be replaced by a “minimum framework” that would be “skills and competence-based, rather than prescriptive and knowledge-based”.
Growing calls for flexibility, coupled with a series of curriculum reviews ordered by ministers, represent a serious threat to the future of the traditional timetable.
Academics defended the National Curriculum, saying it was the best guarantee that children were exposed to vital areas of study.
“We haven’t arrived at these subjects by accident,” said Prof Alan Smithers, of Buckingham University. “We have discovered a number of ways of making sense of the world which have been formulated as the sciences, humanities, social sciences and expressive art. It is reasonable to require young people to engage in these vital subjects for a spell of time.”
For Life, Liberty and Property
7 responses so far ↓
Tracey // 30 March, 2008 at 9:10 pm
If the requirement is diminished further we’re going towards a society that does not know how to handle the world.
English, mathematics and computing obviously play an important role in education but they are hardly the only things that matter in life.
It is frightening to see that young people are being prepared for a part as cog in the wheel of economy rather than a citizen in a free society.
The US has done a great job of stupefying its children, save the few chosen ones, what this will mean in 10 year’s time when the people who ought to be running the country won’t have clue one about what is going on in the world beyond their small town is nothing short of the destruction of society.
If the UK follows suit the societal consequences will be worse than war.
It is high time that people stopped being politically correct, they should get rid of the tyranny of the relentless drive for money [the results of which are on shameful display today] and the notion that some subjects are not even worthy of consideration.
The UK invented the 19th century practically on its own. If the current trend in education continues people will devolve into peons, looking for a handout from the East.
David Davis // 30 March, 2008 at 9:13 pm
The above comment is approximately worth a whole post here about this, on its own. I could not agree more.
The question is, what can be done?
Otto // 31 March, 2008 at 12:39 am
And I thought the national curriculum was bad enough!
Steven // 31 March, 2008 at 4:58 pm
The thing is Tracey, it’s not a matter of Political Correctness itself. ‘Political Correctness’ is just a statement of order, such as Mathematical correctness, Grammatical correctness and so on. Most of the things that are today lambasted as being ‘Politically Correct’ are in fact wholly politically incorrect, it’s just that the ruling class has commandered the term, out of convienince mostly, in order to occupy the moral high ground.
I mean come on, look through your city’s version of the (I think) monthly Council brochure, or look at the policy statement on thier website. Are you telling me that if I compiled any of that facism and racism they call policy and contrasted it with thousands of years of the best legal traditions of the Indo-European peoples, any of it would stand up in court? Of course it wouldn’t. The Judge would probably be so scared he’d take early retirement, eh?
This is the problem we’re facing. But there is one thing that the ruling establishment can’t very well guard against, and that is the autonomous thought of good decent people, such as those who compiled those thousands of years of Law and Order.
Oh, I’m not referring to myself of course. I have much better dress-sense than those people. What kind of food do you like, eh?
.-)
Just don’t say you’re English « Centurean2’s Weblog // 26 June, 2008 at 2:12 pm
[...] pupils don’t seem to learn any more, Of writers like Shakespeare, Milton and Shaw. Of Agincourt, Hastings.Arnhem and Mons. Where [...]
Goodbye To My England. « Centurean2’s Weblog // 5 December, 2008 at 10:26 am
[...] pupils don’t seem to learn any more, Of writers like Shakespeare, Milton and Shaw. Of Agincourt, Hastings.Arnhem and Mons. Where [...]
Goodbye To My England.. « uk1884 // 5 December, 2008 at 10:28 am
[...] pupils don’t seem to learn any more, Of writers like Shakespeare, Milton and Shaw. Of Agincourt, Hastings.Arnhem and Mons. Where [...]