The latest report on the state of primary school education in England, based on Key Stage 2 assessments, states that 40% of primary school pupils are failing to achieve the required level (level 4 or above) in English.
The opposition parties, not surprisingly, are blaming Labour. However, in the Conservatives' case ast least, this is somewhat disingenuous. Ripple fade back to Bristol, 1997, where my friend, S, was working as a supply primary teaching since graduating from a four-year teaching training degree at a post-1992 university.
One afternoon, S rang me in a panic. She had been assigned to a "posh" school where she was expected to teach adjectives and adverbs, and she had no idea what these were, never mind how to teach them. Could I help? Well, yes: I could and I did, rather wondering what her alma mater had been teaching her for four years.
Years later, I am still wondering what is being taught in schools. Students studying literature often arrive at university without an understanding of the basic terminology and use of language. Adjectives and adverbs are employed indiscriminately, and past participles incorrectly (sat for seated is almost ubiquitous); the nomenclature of verb tenses is unknown; students seem unaware that the expression of the English present tense can be simple or continuous, and find it hard to grasp the nuances in meaning between the two; sentences are filled with subclauses and continue for half a page with little punctuation and sometimes no active verb. (Many, however, have been taught more sophisticated expressions; lexis and register are recent buzzwords.) Consulting a dictionary is an alien concept.
Schoolteachers have long complained that grammar is "boring" for students (do they really mean for themselves?) and promoted a more flexible approach to teaching based on "encouraging creativity". Yet the naming of parts is a basic principle in every activity. Children are accustomed to learning specialized terms in a range of hobbies and interests: music has its notes, rhythms and scales, ballet its steps and movements, football its moves and rules. Withholding the specialized terms of language does not encourage creativity, but conflicts with the way all specialist pursuits, creative, sporting or academic, must be learnt.
The government has recently promised a further expansion of higher education, with a focus on science, engineering, mathematics and technology; but undergraduates in these disciplines need effective communication skills to understand their subjects and articulate their knowledge. Language is fundamental to all learning and is the key to self-expression in all degree courses, not just those in languages, linguistics or literature: mathematicians, scientists and information technologists also need an understanding of oral and written language in order to communicate adequately in their academic subjects and in their future jobs.
With more people than ever going on to study degrees, schools need to teach sound English expression and that, just like football and music, includes the naming of parts.
The opposition parties, not surprisingly, are blaming Labour. However, in the Conservatives' case ast least, this is somewhat disingenuous. Ripple fade back to Bristol, 1997, where my friend, S, was working as a supply primary teaching since graduating from a four-year teaching training degree at a post-1992 university.
One afternoon, S rang me in a panic. She had been assigned to a "posh" school where she was expected to teach adjectives and adverbs, and she had no idea what these were, never mind how to teach them. Could I help? Well, yes: I could and I did, rather wondering what her alma mater had been teaching her for four years.
Years later, I am still wondering what is being taught in schools. Students studying literature often arrive at university without an understanding of the basic terminology and use of language. Adjectives and adverbs are employed indiscriminately, and past participles incorrectly (sat for seated is almost ubiquitous); the nomenclature of verb tenses is unknown; students seem unaware that the expression of the English present tense can be simple or continuous, and find it hard to grasp the nuances in meaning between the two; sentences are filled with subclauses and continue for half a page with little punctuation and sometimes no active verb. (Many, however, have been taught more sophisticated expressions; lexis and register are recent buzzwords.) Consulting a dictionary is an alien concept.
Schoolteachers have long complained that grammar is "boring" for students (do they really mean for themselves?) and promoted a more flexible approach to teaching based on "encouraging creativity". Yet the naming of parts is a basic principle in every activity. Children are accustomed to learning specialized terms in a range of hobbies and interests: music has its notes, rhythms and scales, ballet its steps and movements, football its moves and rules. Withholding the specialized terms of language does not encourage creativity, but conflicts with the way all specialist pursuits, creative, sporting or academic, must be learnt.
The government has recently promised a further expansion of higher education, with a focus on science, engineering, mathematics and technology; but undergraduates in these disciplines need effective communication skills to understand their subjects and articulate their knowledge. Language is fundamental to all learning and is the key to self-expression in all degree courses, not just those in languages, linguistics or literature: mathematicians, scientists and information technologists also need an understanding of oral and written language in order to communicate adequately in their academic subjects and in their future jobs.
With more people than ever going on to study degrees, schools need to teach sound English expression and that, just like football and music, includes the naming of parts.
No comments:
Post a Comment