I'm sorry, maybe too harsh but what the hell is going on in primary schools?

E.T.

E.T. wrote: »

Loads of the kids I've taught have educational toys, games, dvds etc but very few of them play with things like jigsaws, beads, threading.

I actually went looking for an abacus for a friend the other week and was hard pushed to find one anywhere. Eventually after asking a girl in Smyths toy shop (because I couldn't find it after 10 minutes of looking myself) I found one. Educational toys seemed to be reserved to things like those electronic VTech devices, with seemingly few physically involved educational tools. When I was young we had weekly trips to the library with my Dad, we were read bedtime stories and our toys included educational things like alphabet jigsaws.

While I have no problem with educational TV shows or an hour or two of video games a day, I just can't see how kids can learn efficiently without being actively involved in learning and having tools they can pick up and look at, whether it be magnetic letters on a fridge, a book in their hands, or even just the chance to use what they've learned in everyday life. I'm a person who picks things up better in theory than through application (eg. I took up addition of numbers better than I did the addition of apples, if you get what I mean) but I'm aware that my spatial awareness is an important part of being able to sort information in my head and visualise it. I can only imagine how much more important this is for people who pick things up better through application.

(I'm not quite sure if I've made any sense at all.)

E.T.

That makes complete sense true-or-false. I strongly believe that children need to learn through exploring with different senses, and many of the new games and toys tend to ignore the tactile and fine-motor elements. Some of the children in my class don't like doing jigsaws because they've never done them before. They take concentration and patience, and don't give instant feedback, on which many children seem to be dependent.

E.T.

E.T. wrote: »

...many of the new games and toys tend to ignore the tactile and fine-motor elements.

Yes, tactile was exactly the word I was searching my head for - maybe I need to go back to primary school!

Dionysus

implausible wrote: »

Spot on.

The problem I have with mixed ability is that entrance into schools isn't mixed ability. I'll give an example from the town I teach in - there are four schools - a gaelcholáiste where the fluent, brightest and best go, a convent school, a boys' college and a 'tech'. The first three take the brightest, the well-behaved and a disproportionate amount of middle-class students (the parents of whom can manage the enrolment fee, voluntary contributions and the full whack for schoolbooks). The vocational school ends up with the less able student, the special needs students (due to our 'wonderful' facilities), those whose first language isn't English, children coming from disadvantaged homes, those who have been 'asked' to leave other schools and a lot of traveller boys. In a fair system, 3 special needs students, 4 traveller boys and a smattering of Polish students wouldn't be an issue as they would be absorbed into the student body, mixed among different classes and be better able to conform and/or work harder. However, when you put the students I've mentioned into a class of twenty, the standard drops, the good student suffers and the below average student doesn't reach his/her potential.

Our school is falling over itself to promote mixed ability, while the other schools, where this would be far more feasible, carry on streaming as usual.

This is far too common. And what really rankles with me is that what teachers outside these effectively 'streamed' schools are told is "mixed ability classes" is increasingly not. The gap between the weakest and the strongest students is entirely misrepresented by the term "mixed ability". In very many classes it is impossible to use mixed ability methods because the ADHD kid in the corner cannot help it, especially when the ADHD kid in the other corner acts up. And so on. One of the biggest problem of all that I'm finding is the lack of money (between €800 - €1000 for the last student) for each educational psychologist's report. Until that's done, extra resources will not be made available in the form of SNAs etc, and the kids in question become more disruptive in classes and everybody suffers. This year, for example, we are having huge difficulty with second and third year kids who have just got SNAs and don't want to use them because of their pride - whereas kids who have SNAs from the get-go in first year have no such stigma attached to it. In other words, the year or two delay in getting the SNA has seriously impeded the effectiveness of the SNA, and thus of the teacher in the class. Not only are class sizes getting bigger but because of the cutbacks in funding for educational psychologists and SNAs the range within many classes now goes far beyond "mixed ability teaching".

While some attention is being brought to the increasing class sizes and reduction in SNA numbers, there is very little attention being brought to the worsening nature of these expanding classes. I never remember the PGDE/PDE lectures telling us how to handle classes where such a massive gulf exists between the strongest and weakest students. The solution for every diverse class was, it seems, the God of "mixed ability teaching". :mad:

Dionysus

storker wrote: »

Where I notice this most is in the media, radio in particular. I remember being told in school (Leaving Cert 1984) that anyone who was interested in a career in journalism would need to have honours English as a basic requirement. Yet listening to the radio these days I can't help think of how wrong this was as the mispronunciations, incorrect prepositions, could-ofs, should-ofs, instances of non-agreeement between verb and subject come flying through the ether.

Honours English? Semi-literate will do fine, it seems...

Stork

I can honestly say I never remember learning English grammar in school. It was only when learning Irish that I learned what the "genitive case", "pronoun" and other such things actually were: we never identified grammatical terms with differences in the language. In contrast, English grammar was beaten into my parents' generation. The difference is definitely generational.

As for modern-day "journalists", it's primarily ranters and ravers who write in the pages of newspapers like the Sunday Independent, Ireland's best-selling newspaper! Journalism as an art is dead. Even gifted writers like - dare I say it - Kevin Myers surrender their gift to the rant and recycling the same emotions rather than using emotion to write with a fresh perspective each day.

Dionysus

E.T. wrote: »

There was a scheme where a grant was given for each student for class/school libraries. It was around €2 per child as far as I can remember, and teachers got to choose books from the county library for schools. That was stopped a few years ago, no more money to replace books or purchase more since.

If I'm not mistaken our school got €500 last year out of, I think, the JCSP scheme for buying books. Or else it was from some DEIS scheme and if so that might explain why it doesn't exist in non-DEIS schools. At first I thought the scheme was a PC nod, but it's a surprisingly great scheme. The most unlikely lads are reading away on the bean bags - usually about Dublin ganglands (I kid you not), but they're reading. It's a little diamond in the rough of schemes and well worth keeping for it.

E.T.

It must be a DEIS grant because I've seen the letters saying that the scheme we had was no longer running. It was great for getting sets of staged readers for library books.

golden virginia

Dionysus wrote: »

If I'm not mistaken our school got €500 last year out of, I think, the JCSP scheme for buying books. Or else it was from some DEIS scheme and if so that might explain why it doesn't exist in non-DEIS schools. At first I thought the scheme was a PC nod, but it's a surprisingly great scheme. The most unlikely lads are reading away on the bean bags - usually about Dublin ganglands (I kid you not), but they're reading. It's a little diamond in the rough of schemes and well worth keeping for it.

The JCSP Library is a great scheme. But it does not exist a primary level. It is great to give second level students a second chance - eg age 14 with reading age of 8* but its even better to give them these books when they actually are 8.

* It means that they have a primary chance of being 14 with a reading age of 14.

E.T.

If more money was put into early intervention it would save a fortune down the line. I've heard of infant teachers with classes of almost 40, both single and mixed classes. That's just crazy, and there's no way one teacher, no matter how good, can get around to all of those children.

In an ideal world, there'd be a dedicated Learning Support teacher in every school, solely for children up to first class, to cover both English and Maths. In most schools there's absolutely no chance of children getting LS for Maths, because the slots are all full up already with English.

I've taught so many children who aren't weak enough for Learning Support, but aren't keeping up with the rest of the class, despite all the extra help I can give them, and help from parents (where willing). There's many different reasons - starting school too early is one, dyslexic tendencies, lack of support at home for example. If a lot of these children got some LS at this early stage it would save them ending up in LS for years.

Dionysus

Regarding the op, I find the standard of English in school to be abysmal. "I seen", "I done" and "He thron" (threw) are three of the most common errors. Any correction and little Anto will tell you something like "Yer not our English teacher!".

There's no reason why every teacher can't make a point of correcting students' grammar. I do it all the time and it has definitely made a difference to the point where they correct each other now when I ask them what's wrong with a sentence. Most kids really appreciate it and usually ask me to explain it. In fact, if they were all just taught (not thought!) the difference between the Present Perfect (have seen; have done; etc) and the Past Simple (saw; did; etc), the standard of English in Irish schools would rocket.

E.T.

We were told in lectures in Mary I not to correct phrases like "I seen" and "I done" as this was disparaging to the language of the area, and the language used by the child's parents.

Just ridiculous.

dambarude

E.T. wrote: »

We were told in lectures in Mary I not to correct phrases like "I seen" and "I done" as this was disparaging to the language of the area, and the language used by the child's parents.

I'm there now and we're told the same thing - but in fairness they do say we should model the grammatically correct version.

E.T.

That's fine orally, I'd say "Oh I saw that too" or "I did that too". You can model it when writing on the board, but if a child continually writes "I seen" or "I done", I feel that you do need to actually say that it's incorrect.

dambarude

E.T. wrote: »

That's fine orally, I'd say "Oh I saw that too" or "I did that too". You can model it when writing on the board, but if a child continually writes "I seen" or "I done", I feel that you do need to actually say that it's incorrect.

I agree! It's very hard to get out of habits like this, and it needs to be drawn to their attention.

I think teacher's need to be aware of the language they use to (student teachers in particular - I've heard many clangers).

I had to get out of the habit of saying 'I do be .....' myself. It does be said a lot around where I'm from (!).

Seanchai

gbee wrote: »

Personally I blame Irish. I've long since blamed Irish for our high level of illiteracy. I personally don't think Irish should be taught until a foundation language is formed ~ now that language could be Irish as you know, but it has to be native and Irish just isn't ~ it's syntax is the exact opposite, like the cat is on the table means the table is under the cat.

So we don't know whether it's table or tabla because they are in different places.

The ignorance, the scapegoat seeking, the undereducated loser mentality - but totally unsurprising coming from the poster who demanded that Irish be removed from all road and street signs in Ireland a while back. Cultural fascism at its finest.

spurious

Ah now, I don't be minding 'I do be' myself.

On the subject of patience, persistence, play etc..

'In my day' we used to have Bunty and similar magazines. On the back was a paper lady and a dress to cut out and hang on her (once she had been stuck to a cornflake box). If you were sloppy with the scissors, or cut off a tab or made a mistake, her dress fell off, so you learned to take your time and do things right. If this week's wardrobe was a write off, you made sure next week's wasn't.

My brothers and I made Airfix models - again, you had to be patient and develop fairly fine motor skills. All these skills that we learned in play stand to us. The experts today would call them cross-curricular and spend a day and a half telling us how fabulous they are to introduce into a school.

We had books like Leonard DeVries' Book of Experiments (.pdf - I highly recommend it) and long winter evenings.

I remember once for some reason deciding at about the age of six to make a cube out of cardboard, so I meticulously measured my four squares and had each one of them precisely right before I went to put them together. Of course four was not enough and I learned my lesson. I could have read a hundred times about a cube being six-sided and it may not have ever truly sunk in, but in that afternoon, I learned a great deal - about squares, cubes, area, volume, accuracy, checking and double checking.

I don't know where we went wrong. I am so glad sometimes to be towards this end of my career rather than starting again.

gubbie

When I started the PGDE, I went down to my local primary school to get a feel of what my students should know. I got a 6th class book and went through it. Then when I compared it to the Text & Tests book I realised that a good majority of it was being repeated in 1st year Maths. I was told by other teachers to assume they couldn't remember any of it. It's a waste of a year.

A part of me also wonders if the reason our results are so much poorer then our European counterparts is because less time is spent in school. My hours are 8:50 - 3:15. Some european countries have students 8-5 and Saturday school.

Caraville

I just think primary school teachers are asked to be all things to all men and the curriculum is completely overloaded. They don't have the time to be teaching the basics when the department are asking them to do so much more.

I'm a secondary school teacher and I just get so depressed at the state of spelling. I'm sure text speak doesn't help, but it's certainly not the main reason the spelling is so bad. I totally agree with the poster who mentioned a lack of patience on the students' part. They don't want to take the time to figure out how to spell something or to sound it out when reading a difficult word when everything else they do in life is instant. When I do projects with Transition Years they all think that copying and pasting from Google is sufficient. In Irish they Google Translate everything (which 99.99% of the time is completely incorrect). Everything has to be instant for them and learning something over time and with effort is alien to them. I agree that rote learning can be a bad thing, but I continue to be a major advocate for the fact that it definitely has a place in education.

And secondly- education begins in the home. Teachers have zero chance of making any improvements in literacy so long as things continue the way they are as regards the diminishing respect for education in Ireland. Parents need to spend more time with their children, reading with them, asking them spellings and buying them books. This idea of the parents being the primary educators just isn't acknowledged in some homes, and literacy is continuing to suffer as a result.

byhookorbycrook

At last!Back to a proper keyboard, have been following the debate with great interest.

Teaching children to read is not an easy skill.
Well-meaning parents start doing letter sounds at home and actually end up giving the wrong sounds.They often say "Muh" for mmm "ay" for ah and "tuh" for tttt, blend these three sounds and it certainly doesn't give you "mat".I think it is not up to parents to teach their child to read.Likewise,parents teaching children to write often means incorrect letter formation, pen grip etc. which will have to be corrected at school later.

That said, parents can and do play an essential role in reading readiness. Children learn the correct reading direction for sharing a book with their parent, they learn to use visual and contextual clues as well as prediction from being read to from ilustrated books. Their language skills are developed through verbal interaction. Phonological awareness is developed through the use of nursery rhymes,rhyming stories etc.

When I began teaching 25 + years ago (eeeek!)it was a given that almost every child starting would know the alphabet, days of the week, colours, have a good deal of independent living skills,listening skills,excellent gross and fine motor skills.

Now children start school who may never be spoken to except to be told to go watch t.v.,play your X-Box etc. They are often "babied" beyond belief- so can't /won't manage to use the toilet starting school,tie their coats,open their lunch etc.Concentration skillls are limited to short spells of noisy t.v/games etc. things like Snakes and Ladders that taught counting skills, turn taking and language like it's your turn, who's next,how many more to win etc are often overlooked and some children will throw hissy fits because a) they are always left win at home or b) they don't want to wait their turn etc.

The things we would have done as children like sorting socks,laying the table, helping with baking,buying our own things in a shop all laid the foundations for early maths skills.

Spellings are often not taught in school,giving a list of words to learn for the "traditional" Friday test is not teaching spelling. Our school has adopted the Brendan Culligan approach, whereby we concentrate on words each individual child needs to learn and there is strong emphasis on the high frequency writing words and using words in context.

Rote learning is a dirty concept it seems, children very rarely learn poetry off by heart as we would have done and some schools don't insist tables are learnt off- with the result that many children struggle to recall even basic number facts.

I have seen parents on many websites giving out about teachers using red pens on written work or imagine,teachers actually asking children to do corrections. There seems to be a culture of "get it done" rather than "get it right".When I was in school,any corrections had to be done ten times and then you re-wrote the whole thing into a "good copy".That wasn't right either but a balance between the two would encourage children to take more care in written work.

And then we come to currciulum overload,Irish, English, Maths, religion,history, geography,SPHE,music, visual arts,science have all been vastly expanded and many schools, like our own, have another European language as well.

It seems that under the new initiative that schools will now have to submit standardised test scores to the DES three times from primary school.This will mean nothing but teaching to the tests.It will not improve standards on anything else but paper. If the bould Ruairí were to be in any way serious about literacy and maths standards ,he could start by giving us money for basic resources like books and concrete material for maths.It sounds good to have the DES telling us they will raise standards, but it's all a P.R. excercise as far as I can see so far.

John Lonergan gave us a staff talk one year. He firmly believes that literacy is the key and that some of the 200,000 per year it costs to keep one prisoner in Mountjoy,invested at early primary would keep a lot of people out of prison.There are huge number of prisoners who are functionally illiterate. Sending in test results isn't going to address anything but will keep the DES busy and make it look like something is being done.

Caraville

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Spellings are often not taught in school,giving a list of words to learn for the "traditional" Friday test is not teaching spelling. Our school has adopted the Brendan Culligan approach, whereby we concentrate on words each individual child needs to learn and there is strong emphasis on the high frequency writing words and using words in context.

I'm not familiar with this- does that mean that students never get tested on whether they can spell these words or not, and it's just through constantly using and writing them that the students learn them?

I still think there is a place for spelling tests personally. Maybe I'm old fashioned (even though I'm only in my 20s!) but I just think that students need to be tested on spellings. It can still be done in a context- via theme or whatever, rather than a random list of words- or even by putting the words into sentences for the test rather than simply calling out the word to them and expecting them to spell it. Either way, something has gone terribly wrong in recent times with spellings and it just seems a little too co-incidental that this ties in with the abandoning of the traditional spelling test. Although I do also think parental support and curriculum overload are the other two major players in the whole thing.

byhookorbycrook

The spellings are tested through weekly dictation and children keep a personal notebook of words they need to learn .I find that under the old system children will spell a word correctly for the test and then mis-spell it an hour later in their writing. The Culligan system certainly takes some setting up but it really does make a difference. Instead of constantly correcting the same words week in,week out, in written work,we are seeing a big change already-and we are only using it for 18 months or so.

Caraville

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

The spellings are tested through weekly dictation and children keep a personal notebook of words they need to learn .I find that under the old system children will spell a word correctly for the test and then mis-spell it an hour later in their writing. The Culligan system certainly takes some setting up but it really does make a difference. Instead of constantly correcting the same words week in,week out, in written work,we are seeing a big change already-and we are only using it for 18 months or so.

Sounds like a good system. To be honest, I'd be open to schools exploring any option of improving the spelling, because whatever's going on now isn't working. I honestly sometimes have no idea what a student is trying to say when I'm correcting their homework. And as for calling out notes to them- even in 5th & 6th year- sometimes it's just not worth it because you know they're going to write it wrong into their notes copies and I hate the idea of them having incorrect stuff in their copies.

What's bothering us in secondary schools the most though is that this year the department have been getting on to us to come up with a plan to implement a focus on numeracy and literacy in all secondary school subjects. I just feel that I have enough to be doing trying to cover the syllabus for the exam without having to worry if someone can spell sufficiently. I'm not an English or a Maths teacher- and although I will correct something that's added up wrong for an answer or spelled wrong in my subjects- it shouldn't be up to me to teach that student how to fix that problem.

Delphi91

Caraville wrote: »

...What's bothering us in secondary schools the most though is that this year the department have been getting on to us to come up with a plan to implement a focus on numeracy and literacy in all secondary school subjects...

This is "closing the stable door after the horse has bolted"!

Has anyone asked the question - why isn't the department doing the same in Primary Schools? Is it an admission that the primary system doesn't work and that if the department ask the second level system to remedy the problem, they won't have to do anything about it at primary level?

Both myself and my colleagues (in second level) have been asking this question for as long as I've been teaching (over 20 years). As a maths teacher, I've noticed a horrendous fall-off in the ability of students coming to my school. Basic mental arithmetic is non existent. Any problem that might involve more than one operation has kids diving for calculators straight away (worst thing ever to allow in a school prior to LC level!!). Tables are non-existent - a vital piece of knowledge in my opinion.

And don't get me started on spelling and reading ability. I've come across 1st years (12-13 years old) this year who have the reading age of a 6-7 year old child!! How in all fairness can this be justified???? The DES have some cheek asking the second level to implement Numeracy and Literacy programmes when children are allowed to leave the primary system with these sort of reading ages.

Simtech

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

The spellings are tested through weekly dictation and children keep a personal notebook of words they need to learn .I find that under the old system children will spell a word correctly for the test and then mis-spell it an hour later in their writing. The Culligan system certainly takes some setting up but it really does make a difference. Instead of constantly correcting the same words week in,week out, in written work,we are seeing a big change already-and we are only using it for 18 months or so.

I am but a parent. Could you explain The Culligan System or perhaps provide a link?

This is a very interesting thread, I thank you all for your insights.

vallo

I agree with a lot of what has been posted.
Can I add that I was quite surprised at the amount of time devoted to religious instruction for communion and confirmation.

byhookorbycrook

Simtech wrote: »

I am but a parent. Could you explain The Culligan System or perhaps provide a link?

This is a very interesting thread, I thank you all for your insights.

He is a lecturer in Marino and has written a number of books. We asked him to do some staff workshops and he also gave a talk to the parents.It's basically using words the children need to learn, there are dictation excercises which help you sort what each child knows/needs to know.it also involves looking at written work that the children do and picking out the common errors.He places a high value on playing with spelling,looking at visual patterns, using words in context.Have copied below from part of our policy.

General Points:


1. There is no single answer to the spelling problems of each child.
2. All spelling activity must be a written one.
3. Oral spelling is of very limited short-term value.
4. Encourage children to write from memory.
5. Spelling should not be a copying exercise.
6. Avoid words that the child cannot read.
7. Priority must be given to “everyday words”.
8. Very good / excellent spellers “catch” spelling unaided.
9. Train them to look for words within words from as early as possible, e.g. “I can see “hug” in “”Huggy”.
10. Help them to generalise with letter strings, e.g. clever and uncle.
11. Do not isolate letter strings from one another because they do not sound the same, e.g. one /bone /gone.
12. Do not focus on words in isolation, use context and when the child “knows” a word, let him/her use it.
13. Teaching spelling rules does not help the weak speller. There are too many exceptions to most rules and if the rule is complex, the child may not understand it in the first place.
14. Children’s own writing gives clues to their spelling problems.
15. Each child should have a “personal dictionary of errors” into which troublesome words may be written.
16. Have “buzz” sessions with the children (“share a troublesome word time”) What is your troublesome word? What part causes the problem? What do others think of this? Does it cause anybody else trouble? Has it got any “easy” bits? Are there any small words in it? Etc.
17. Writing out spellings a number of times is a totally inefficient procedure (even more so if it is seen as a punishment exercise)
18. Be wary of spelling homework. Be alert to the amount of words and the probable time taken to complete the task of learning at home.
19. Spending a long time at spelling in class will be counter productive. You must have short snappy sessions.
20.Getting a “list” of spellings correct is not a real indicator of progress. Improvement will only be seen in “free writing”.
21. Spelling must be seen as :
· Something enjoyable
· Something to be done in short, snappy informal sessions.
· Something to be praised for rather than reprimanded; and
· Something in which progress is being seen to be achieved.



Where should we get spellings from


· Frequently used words

· Words from reader

· Words from lists e.g. Corewords, Spelling Book, Dolch list

· Word Families e.g. -at words etc.

Methods of Teaching Spelling


1. Train children from early on to recognise words in words, see patterns of letters, make words with similar letter strings.

2. Use – Look-Say-Picture-Cover-Write-Check and Use method

3. Corewords and dictation method as outlined in Brendan Culligan’s book.

· Each child is given a copy of the corewords at the start of each month

· Each child will have a notebook alphabetically ordered which will be used as a dictionary of personal errors

· The teacher dictates sentences the number depending on the age and ability of the children. Allow time for the child to check and self correct.

· The same sentences can be given all week, so that after day one some children will have got all spellings correct, day two more will have got all correct and so on until by Friday most of the children will have mastered the sentences being used that week.

· The child or teacher highlights the words that have been misspelt on the coreword list.

· The child compares his word with the correct one to see any bad spots or good spots

· The child writes the word into his/her personal dictionary

· The word then becomes the child’s spelling homework

· If many of the children are inaccurate with a particular word then it becomes material for teaching spelling. The bad spots are looked at and strategies for remembering how to spell the word are worked out with the class. It may lead to a nemonic being made up or a short TROUBLESOME WORD session.

· The next time the child meets this word and gets it right it is highlighted out of his personal dictionary

How do we correct spellings?

Point out what part of the word is correct

Point out the part that is incorrect

Explain what is in correct about it

Fuinseog

peanuthead wrote: »

I'm a secondary school teacher of English and languages.

Sorry, I don't mean to come across as overly harsh here, but what the hell is going on in primary schools today that means students can't spell??

I have bitten my tongue on this one for a long, long time because I wasn't sure who was at fault exactly. Having students come in to me not able to spell the most basic of words, even the ones who would be considered the more intelligent students, has both annoyed and frustrated me for a long time.

I often thought to myself, maybe it's harder than just repetition, spellings tests, games etc and that if the majority of students are having problems with it, it's not that primary schools are not approaching it, just maybe doing so in the wrong way.

But this year has been my first year to teach my language subject to first years and I am utterly appalled at my findings. After two months of doing this language, my students can spell better in a foreign language than they can in English!!

Can any primary school teacher (or anyone with a bit of insight into this) please explain to me what the hell is going on in primary schools that students don't know how to write things like "should of" and "we carrie are books in a schoolbag" correctly?

We are being asked to jump through hoops in secondary with relation to literacy and numeracy, but to be honest, after 6 years of doing it wrong, although I would never say it is too late to learn how to spell, it's a lot harder than if they had learned the right way in the first place.

As a secondary school English teacher I am losing my patience with students arriving into first year, having studied Junior certificate poetry, read junior cycle novels and completed huge chunks of junior cycle textbooks.

I also know from interviewing a 6th class teacher for a Curriculum research paper I wrote 2 years ago, that there is a heavy emphasis in 6th class on 1st year of secondary school, giving students extra homework, getting them to read more books.

With the greatest respect (and directed more at the system/powers that be/syllabus authors rather than the individual teachers) - can you not just stick to your own syllabus, focus on the basics/literacy and leave the secondary syllabus for the secondary teachers???

A big rant I know and hopefully not too OTT

I have experience of the primary system and when you have a class of up to 35 its hard to give everyone the attention they need. Bear in mind that the European class size average is 20.
They learn little or no grammar whether it be Irish or English, which I regard as unfortunate.
There is more emphasis placed on fun and games rather than teaching the kids how to write.
a lot depends on the parents. in our primary school the PA came together and organised the library, which was well stocked and staffed by the parents themselves. in other cases however parents do not encourage their kids to read.
in the world of text speak when do kids need to write anything?

Fuinseog

I think another issue is the poor standards teachers themselves set. they give a spelling test and if the word is nearly written correctly they give a half mark. Its either right or wrong but the current thinking is the child should always be a winner.

byhookorbycrook

Fuinseog wrote: »

I think another issue is the poor standards teachers themselves set. they give a spelling test and if the word is nearly written correctly they give a half mark. Its either right or wrong but the current thinking is the child should always be a winner.

Culligan would hold you tick the correct parts, no marks awarded for it,so it's not a competition. The child who spells "night" as "nite" is a better speller than the one who spells it "qers" and the correct parts should be recognised,but that's it. Child still needs to learn the word correctly.

befriend1

I have three third level qualifications and still have a serious issue with my spelling, grammar and syntax. I went to a DEIS primary and secondary school and can honestly not recall ever learning about grammar. It is a joke!!