The other day I happened to find myself with the rare opportunity to go to the pub for an hour or so, with no strings or any guilt attached.
My boys were being looked after by my mother-in-law and my wife was out having a treat at a locl health spa, which is why it was suggested that I might like to go out for a drink.
Off I went to a find bar in Buxton, where my mother-in-law resides, in which I could settle down with a paper and a pint... or two. I found a suitable venue, La Brasserie de la Cour, (literally: The Court Brewery) which is not a very imaginative name given that it is located in Buxton's old courthouse, but it is a suitable name for what customers can expect: French-inspired cuisine (with the inevitable 'twist").
To reinforce its French credentials there is the obligatory memorabilia (French road signs, black and white photos of Paris, old tins, and so on), which I have yet to encounter in any restaurant in France. However, the owners have managed to avoid an over-themed pastiche and I think what they have done with the interior does work.
I went through the main restaurant area and into the bar. I order a pint of '1664', turned my phone to silent and opened my newspaper, now comfortably perched at the bar.
Despite the availability of tablet computers, e-readers and other portable devices on which you can surf the internet and read the news, I still prefer the interaction with something tangible, which you don't mind if it's dropped, gets wet or ripped. Looking over a double-page spread means that you can scan a lot of information very quickly and you can soon settle on an article that catches your eye.
I am sure that e-readers and tablets have their place in the world, especially for academics, lawyers and anyone who once needed to carry tons of books around with them in order to do their job. In this respect tablets make a lot of sense, just as I have been using computers for my business, rather than typewriters and faxes.
But it still makes me smile when I see the advert for a certain e-reader that features a womon at a swimming pool lying on her li-lo floating whilst holding her device. Of all the possible places to use an e-reader I can't think of anywhere less suitable. I would certainly like to see the spoof version, where she drops the e-reader, and I would also like to see how she actually gets on and off the li-lo on her own without getting the device wet!
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
Tuesday, November 06, 2012
LEARNING BY NUMBERS
I often wondered why our French teacher had us repeatedly chanting tables of possessive adjectives, but I can still remember them after more than 30 years: mon, ma, mes, ton, ta, tes, son, sa, ses, notre, notre, nos, votre, votre, vos, leur, leur, leurs! At the time I had little interest in French (mainly because I didn't like the teacher) and couldn't see the point. Now, I am learning French and looking back she was a very good teacher (and the possessive adjectives finally have a use).
I also still know my times tables up to 12 (today, my children learn up to 12 at home but they only need to learn up to 10) because they were chanted in class until we knew them by heart.
So, one thing is for sure: learning by rote does work.
Recently, I had the chance to travel back in time. No, not like Dr Who, but me and my wife took our boys (8 & 9 years) to Blists Hill (one of 10 museums in Ironbridge), which is a very authentic recreation of a Victorian town set in the year 1900. The majority of the industrial installations are original, but most of the homes and shops -- whilst being built in Victorian times -- have been rebuilt on-site at the museum. That said, you would never know that they have been relocated and you genuinely feel as though you have been transported back to a time when things were much tougher than today.
The homes, shops and factories were all manned by people in authentic Victorian dress, and they talked to you as though they were still living in that time. However, one person who stood out above all was the school teacher, which brings me full circle to the subject of learning by rote.
In the classroom, which comprised rows of slightly-angled wooden desks all facing the front, around 50 adults and children were seated. At midday, the time when the 'lesson' was due to start a rather stern woman, with a long black dress, pristine long-sleeved blouse, round spectacles and a straw boater, walked to the front of the classroom and very loudly ordered everyone to be silent and to stand up (who had given us permission to sit, she demanded).
We started by bidding her a 'good morning' and then after a rendition of 'All things bright and beautiful' we were allowed to sit down. The lesson had started.
During the lesson we were subjected to about 15-20 minutes of what our great-grandparents and grandparents (it wasn't that long ago) would have experienced until the age of around 12 or 13. We had to chant our times tables and we were asked facts about the Iron Bridge that we had only been told during our time this 'lesson'. There was no real threat of punishment, but I remembered the 3 facts about the bridge for fear of being humiliated amongst strangers: the bridge was built in 1779, it cost over £6,000 and used 378 and a half tons of iron. They are three facts that I did not know prior to this 'lesson' and I am sure I will remember those facts for some time to come.
What was clear from this experience was this: there was no messing around in class; there was absolute respect for the teacher and you would be punished with more than detention or being removed from the class if you misbehaved or failed to learn.
Whilst we have moved on, in all senses, since the times when we had to know our place (the teacher made us all repeat a number of sentences that were designed to keep the poor down). you can't help think that we should not have thrown the baby out with the Victorian bath water. Getting children to repeat their tables is nothing but a good thing so that they automatically know an answer without thinking. As far as I am concerned, primary schools should be concerned only with providing the foundations for learning; children can start to understand why and what they know when they're at senior school.
If my children can read, write and do maths well by the time they leave their primary school they will be well-equipped to cope with what comes next. And, if any evidence was needed that the current education system isn't working, in this country we have increasing levels of innumeracy and illiteracy.
I also still know my times tables up to 12 (today, my children learn up to 12 at home but they only need to learn up to 10) because they were chanted in class until we knew them by heart.
So, one thing is for sure: learning by rote does work.
Recently, I had the chance to travel back in time. No, not like Dr Who, but me and my wife took our boys (8 & 9 years) to Blists Hill (one of 10 museums in Ironbridge), which is a very authentic recreation of a Victorian town set in the year 1900. The majority of the industrial installations are original, but most of the homes and shops -- whilst being built in Victorian times -- have been rebuilt on-site at the museum. That said, you would never know that they have been relocated and you genuinely feel as though you have been transported back to a time when things were much tougher than today.
The homes, shops and factories were all manned by people in authentic Victorian dress, and they talked to you as though they were still living in that time. However, one person who stood out above all was the school teacher, which brings me full circle to the subject of learning by rote.
In the classroom, which comprised rows of slightly-angled wooden desks all facing the front, around 50 adults and children were seated. At midday, the time when the 'lesson' was due to start a rather stern woman, with a long black dress, pristine long-sleeved blouse, round spectacles and a straw boater, walked to the front of the classroom and very loudly ordered everyone to be silent and to stand up (who had given us permission to sit, she demanded).
We started by bidding her a 'good morning' and then after a rendition of 'All things bright and beautiful' we were allowed to sit down. The lesson had started.
During the lesson we were subjected to about 15-20 minutes of what our great-grandparents and grandparents (it wasn't that long ago) would have experienced until the age of around 12 or 13. We had to chant our times tables and we were asked facts about the Iron Bridge that we had only been told during our time this 'lesson'. There was no real threat of punishment, but I remembered the 3 facts about the bridge for fear of being humiliated amongst strangers: the bridge was built in 1779, it cost over £6,000 and used 378 and a half tons of iron. They are three facts that I did not know prior to this 'lesson' and I am sure I will remember those facts for some time to come.
What was clear from this experience was this: there was no messing around in class; there was absolute respect for the teacher and you would be punished with more than detention or being removed from the class if you misbehaved or failed to learn.
Whilst we have moved on, in all senses, since the times when we had to know our place (the teacher made us all repeat a number of sentences that were designed to keep the poor down). you can't help think that we should not have thrown the baby out with the Victorian bath water. Getting children to repeat their tables is nothing but a good thing so that they automatically know an answer without thinking. As far as I am concerned, primary schools should be concerned only with providing the foundations for learning; children can start to understand why and what they know when they're at senior school.
If my children can read, write and do maths well by the time they leave their primary school they will be well-equipped to cope with what comes next. And, if any evidence was needed that the current education system isn't working, in this country we have increasing levels of innumeracy and illiteracy.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
4 times 4 equals ?
Following from my recent post about falling educational standards in the UK, this post provides several explanations why standards are plummeting.
Firstly, at a recent parents' evening we mentioned that we are helping our boys to learn their times tables. The teacher said that: "it would make her life a lot easier if more parents did that." Sorry, but aren't teachers meant to be doing that? I know that when I was at junior school, in the 1970s, that our tables were drilled into us and to this day I know them all up to 12 x 12, even though I have computers, telephones and calculators that can do the job just as well.
The admission that teachers aren't teaching the times tables ought to surprise and shock most parents; such news ought to ring the alarm bells at the top of government. Sadly, successive Education Secretaries only seek to undermine the teaching profession and opt for the headline-making pronouncements.
As much as I am appalled by the amount of work that we have to put in to our boys' education I am not surprised and I don't blame the teachers.
Which brings me on to my second point.
A good friend is a junior school teacher and she has to run lessons as though dictated by Stalin himself. Such is the rigidity of the lessons there is hardly any time to actually provide any quality teaching. They have to set out the lessons' objectives before they teach; they then work through the learning objectives and then there is a plenary session during which time the children assess if they have learned the things that were set out in the list of objectives that were defined less than an hour before.
Take out 15-20 minutes from an hour for pointless objective-setting and plenary sessions and you can see why teachers struggle to impart any knowledge.
In this Orwellian nightmare of a teaching system I know one thing: that if we don't help our boys with their maths and English that they would fall behind and not because they're... now, what's the politically-correct phrase?... stupid.
If you have children from broken, violent or otherwise malfunctioning families then is it any wonder that we have a growing underclass of illiterate and innumerate children who are unlikely to ever work?
If Education Secretaries let teachers do their job, rather than getting them to tick useless boxes, then those children who receive no support from their parents might actually get an education and pull themselves out of poverty.
Firstly, at a recent parents' evening we mentioned that we are helping our boys to learn their times tables. The teacher said that: "it would make her life a lot easier if more parents did that." Sorry, but aren't teachers meant to be doing that? I know that when I was at junior school, in the 1970s, that our tables were drilled into us and to this day I know them all up to 12 x 12, even though I have computers, telephones and calculators that can do the job just as well.
The admission that teachers aren't teaching the times tables ought to surprise and shock most parents; such news ought to ring the alarm bells at the top of government. Sadly, successive Education Secretaries only seek to undermine the teaching profession and opt for the headline-making pronouncements.
As much as I am appalled by the amount of work that we have to put in to our boys' education I am not surprised and I don't blame the teachers.
Which brings me on to my second point.
A good friend is a junior school teacher and she has to run lessons as though dictated by Stalin himself. Such is the rigidity of the lessons there is hardly any time to actually provide any quality teaching. They have to set out the lessons' objectives before they teach; they then work through the learning objectives and then there is a plenary session during which time the children assess if they have learned the things that were set out in the list of objectives that were defined less than an hour before.
Take out 15-20 minutes from an hour for pointless objective-setting and plenary sessions and you can see why teachers struggle to impart any knowledge.
In this Orwellian nightmare of a teaching system I know one thing: that if we don't help our boys with their maths and English that they would fall behind and not because they're... now, what's the politically-correct phrase?... stupid.
If you have children from broken, violent or otherwise malfunctioning families then is it any wonder that we have a growing underclass of illiterate and innumerate children who are unlikely to ever work?
If Education Secretaries let teachers do their job, rather than getting them to tick useless boxes, then those children who receive no support from their parents might actually get an education and pull themselves out of poverty.
Monday, January 30, 2012
Down with skool?
There's no doubt that governments, irrespective of their political inclination, absolutely love good news especially when that good news leads to bold and positive headlines.
But if there is one annual announcement that is guaranteed to frustrate me (and I suspect many employers and like-minded parents) it is when the GCSE and A-level results are published. Every year the incumbent education secretary will seize on the 'fantastic news' that the number of pupils achieving the highest grades has (yet again) surpassed the previous year's results.
There are at least two things wrong with these results.
Firstly, examination results always used to be graded in line with the normal distribution curve, which would guarantee that only a certain proportion of students would fail, a certain number would get low grades, some would get the top grades but most would attain average grades. To ensure that the results were in line with expectations, test examination papers were set to ensure that the distribution of grades would be appropriately allocated; if too many achieved higher grades the exam was deemed too easy and modified. If the exam was too difficult the results would be skewed toward lower grades with a higher failure rate, resulting in having the exam paper amended to deliver the expected distribution of grades.
Given that students, by definition of the laws of distribution, cannot be getting clever, the conclusion is all too obvious: that the exams must be getting easier and easier.
Sadly, every year the naysayers (those who argue that education continues to 'dumb down') are shot down by bumptious politicians who confidently assert that the results due to the hard work of teachers and pupils. Calling all elephants: can you please leave the room now?
My second point is that employers are surely better placed to judge whether standards in education are falling or rising. They are the ones who take on school-leavers and graduates, and they are the ones who can see, first hand, just how academically able their new employeers are.
The conclusion drawn from the anecdotal evidence from employers, and from the many reports available on the internet, is that standards are falling. Education is failing more and more students, and there is an increasing number of children who are both illiterate and innumerate, who go into adult life without the basic skills that even the working poor attained 100 years ago!
From the perspective of a parent with two boys at primary school and it is all too obvious where things are going wrong: the (very well meaning) teachers are forced (via the inflexible national curriculum) to focus too much on peripheral subjects, which leaves less time to teach the core basics of reading, writing and 'rithmetic (yes, the good old 3Rs). We are having to teach our boys their times tables (up to 12 and not the more popular 10) and we are helping them with their reading and writing, which is in addition to their daily homework tasks.
Education is failing our children, which in turn will have an impact on our economy. There needs to be a speedy return to a focus on the 3Rs and there needs to be a return to having children sitting at desks all facing the front, not at trendy round tables in which they 'share' tasks and rarely face the teacher.
From a teacher's perspective (my father taught at a secondary modern for over 20 years) it is also so obvious where things are going wrong. Teachers are not given the flexibility to go 'off piste' with what they teach and they must stick rigidly to a system that has been created in isolation. The problem is that we have educationalists that in trying to improve standards have achieved the exact opposite; they have undermined a system of education that drilled pupils in the basics in their early years so that they were equipped to explore, experiment and challenge once they had the building blocks of knowledge.
No wonder so many children are metaphorically falling over: they are being forced to run when they don't know how to walk.
Until we change this standards will continue to fall.
Education is failing our children, which in turn will have an impact on our economy. There needs to be a speedy return to a focus on the 3Rs and there needs to be a return to having children sitting at desks all facing the front, not at trendy round tables in which they 'share' tasks and rarely face the teacher.
From a teacher's perspective (my father taught at a secondary modern for over 20 years) it is also so obvious where things are going wrong. Teachers are not given the flexibility to go 'off piste' with what they teach and they must stick rigidly to a system that has been created in isolation. The problem is that we have educationalists that in trying to improve standards have achieved the exact opposite; they have undermined a system of education that drilled pupils in the basics in their early years so that they were equipped to explore, experiment and challenge once they had the building blocks of knowledge.
No wonder so many children are metaphorically falling over: they are being forced to run when they don't know how to walk.
Until we change this standards will continue to fall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)