[mrjonathanr]

Newsflash; some kids are brainier than others.

To claim that 100% of boys should be level 4 by [the end of? ] Y6 is nonsense.

By way of comparison my digging suggests a typical tabloid has a reading age around 9 (reading age depends quite a bit on the method used to determine it and there are several so it's just an approximation).

I'd agree if the argument was that some children have backgrounds sufficiently deprived to impair their development, but you appear to be saying that the target is mis-set ? I'm not a yr 6 teacher so I'm interested in your opinion here.

If L4 is an attainable target for the average child then by definition those below average in ability or development will struggle to attain it.

It's hard to know what's realistic. Governments bandy sound-bite terms around which aren't really as clear-cut as they appear. Take the maligned SATS for example. They're group tests and so are not valid for measuring individual attainment. But they've been used that way by Government and schools alike. Nonsense.

[Baron]

Well, its not really drivel though is it. Every class I've ever taught has about the same proportion of BA kids.

Kids should be encouraged and supported to fulfill their full potential, which is variable, and may well mean than 1:7 are indeed not at L4 by Y6.

They don't come out of cookie cutter you know.

[mrjonathanr]

Well, its not really drivel though is it.

what are you talking about here?

They don't come out of cookie cutter you know.

What a daft comment.

[Baron]

Enlighten me

[Baron]

Apologies, my reply was to slopers previous post

[slackline]

The coalition know what to do about it....cut all funding for free books for kids.

[mrjonathanr]

They're great aren't they, 'The Coalition'? This is a Tory government with THE mandate to roll back the state, bar none, and the irony is they didn't even win the election.
The Liberals in the Liberal Democrat party must be gasping for air, as well as coming to realise their party is now a spent force. They're just a bit of window-dressing for a Tory agenda - and one devoid of credibility. I predict a schism.

[Sloper]

Getting rid of free books for all is a disgrace and what's more it won't save, in real terms, any money.

the counter agrument is however, that's its just a free handout to parents who would (and could afford to) buy the books in the first place.

Personally I would make benefit claiming parent's benefit contingent on theri children reaching the average standard of education (excepting special needs etc).

I think then you'd begin to see a 'step change' in attitude.

[bobkatebob]

Good one Sloper
Pile on the presure to the kids shoulders as to wether their family will get benifits food. 

I personally think that a child can only do their best and that if they work hard to achive their best then that is all anyone should hope for.

[slackline]

Perhaps doing away with free books isn't such a bad thing if everyone can access the internet, although it would be useful if they actually cited a source that had researched whether the "attainment levels" of those with and without access to the internet at home does actually differ and if so by how much (yet more poor journalism from the BBC).

Personally though I don't think learning to read (and definitely not write, with all the auto-"correct" features) via the internet is that good an idea.  Its not conducive to developing a decent focus/attention span on what you're doing due to the linked nature of every web-page.  Nothing beats sitting down with a good book in peace and quiet (or even on a busy train and shutting out all the noise).

I can't comment on sitting and reading with your kids (which is no doubt rewarding to both parties).

[grumpycrumpy]

I can't comment on sitting and reading with your kids (which is no doubt rewarding to both parties).

Indeed it is Slack-line .What is even more rewarding to both parties however is when they start to read themselves , it really does give them a boost of confidence .

This is only a personal view , but I think with teaching the basics of reading , writing and maths the onus is more on the parents than on the education system . We have the time to make making these life neccessities fun , playing counting games etc , even Ispy plays a part in learning how to spell . The loss of free books is almost criminal , but if someone was to set up a scheme where you donated the ones your child has grown out of and were thus passed on to others gratis it could work almost as well ......     

[Sloper]

Good one Sloper
Pile on the presure to the kids shoulders as to wether their family will get benifits food. 

I personally think that a child can only do their best and that if they work hard to achive their best then that is all anyone should hope for.

Of course a child can only 'do their best' but that's no reason to accept a syste, that reinforces failure and social exclusion.

I for one think that it is totally unacceptable to 1:7 children to be, in effect illiterate.  If some parents need to be pressurised into being better parents and spending time with their kids and supporting education then so be it.

[webbo]

however you are likely to asking parents who are themselves are not up to much academically to bring their kids up to scratch.
sloper have you ever met other than possibly defended someone who is a second or third generation benefit claimant.

[Sloper]

Indeed, I met numerous examples (when conducting research) and the one thing I always noted was that they were on 'giro standard time' and knew how to play the system to the last tweak.

Believe me, in my experience, if their lottery and fag money was contingent upon their kids meeting a basic level of literacy (we're not talking reading greats at Baliol) then their kids would make the grade.

[webbo]

yeah i supposse its piss easy growing up on a council estate in a socially deprived city where theres been no industry since your grandparents time.
beats spending your time avoiding getting bummed at public school i guess.

[Sloper]

You seem to forget that when there were grammar schools and so on large (in comparative terms) numbers of people from very deprived backgrounds received an excellent education and then went onto university.

I am reliably informed that it used to be the mantra 'I want better for my son' etc and education used to be prized and teachers and schools supported.  This is demonstrably now not the case.  Your attitude is one of the reasons we have the current problem, in that it suggests that people are not responsible for their inaction and failure, it's all someone else's fault, Thatcher's probably.

As for no industry, shock horror, we're still a large industrial power and there's plenty of industry the difference is that it doesn't now require large numbers of semi literate unskilled people.

As for your point about buggery

[slackline]

The UK has pretty poor "social mobility" these days.