Consultation on a draft intermediate and secondary school English curriculum that prioritises Shakespeare, grammar and 19th century literature closes on Friday.
English teachers told RNZ they were worried the draft set unrealistic workloads for students and failed to mention the Treaty of Waitangi.
No mention of the Treaty? Oh God no!
[…] At Hutt Valley High, English teachers told RNZ they had worked through the draft together with the intention of making a submission.
The school’s Head of English, Derek Wood, said teachers were nervous about the scope of the curriculum and how much they would have to change.
We like some of it. The explicit teaching of grammar we think is really useful, but we are concerned that we don’t have time to upskill our teachers in that space,” he said.
Holy hell. You’re English teachers. You’re supposed to be able to teach grammar. It’s like being a kid’s rugby coach and not being able to teach them how to throw the ball.
[…] Wood said the insistence on Shakespeare and a 19th century work for senior students seemed Eurocentric and the absence of any reference to the Treaty of Waitangi was odd.
It’s not Eurocentric, you insufferable buffoon. Shakespeare is the greatest English writer of all time. As an English teacher surely you would know this. As for your insistence on the Treaty of Waitangi, shall we have English taught in Te Reo? Would you be happy then?
Is this a Monty Python sketch or something?
[…] Teacher Corey Spence said the curriculum felt aspirational, but the jump in expectations was large.
In year 10, our students will be expected to have mastered the Oxford comma and we’re still often looking at commas and sentence structure even deep into our senior levels,” he said.
For those who don’t know, the Oxford comma is the comma used before the final and or or in a list of three or more items. How hard is to teach a 15 year old that? It’s not like they’re having to teach their students how to use semicolons.
As for sentence structure, do you mean to say you’re still having to teach basic grammar even when your students are at senior level?
[…] The teachers did not agree with the draft’s requirement that schools teach Shakespeare and 19th century texts in years 12-13.
They told RNZ they enjoyed teaching Shakespeare and it was important that teenagers were able to encounter his works, but it should not be compulsory.
While we’re at it, why not just make English...not compulsory?
Convince me that this isn’t a Monty Python sketch.
As a side note, here’s why having a sound understanding of grammar is so important. It’s far more difficult to write simply and clearly than to write in a complicated or vague way. Grammar allows you write simply and clearly. It’s as easy as that. To see what I mean compare any article written by say Lushington Brady, Cam Slater or any of the Good Oil authors to any article written by one of the authors over at The Standard.
(Although I should also make mention of our amazing editor.) [And proofreaders, Ed.]
If you have kids, don’t enrol them at Hutt Valley High School.
Source: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/563995/english-teachers-voice-concern-about-proposed-curriculum-as-consultation-closes
Kevin is a Libertarian and pragmatic anarchist. His favourite saying: “There but for the grace of God go I.” This article was first published HERE
9 comments:
In defense of most high schools, grammer is an issue. As are other writing/ English skills. I would suggest that the author look at how primary schools are teaching English. High school's primarily work on the base that students key literacy skills have been well learnt. Though obviously this isn't the case. Maybe, a higher use of written literacy rather the use of lap tops at primary would be a good start. Auto correct is doing the work for students! Hence, they don't see why they need to know these fundamentals skills.
Teaching the original English version of the ToW is a good thing, but agree the school subject of English is not the correct place to do so.
When I was at secondary school in the late 70s, I studied Latin. That syllabus was often critised as being a dead language, but I found it very useful. It taught all the rules of grammar that English didn't teach, so indirectly, it taught us how to structure our thoughts in English as well as Latin. It was also useful to see where a lot of English words came from and their nature, as opposed to the Anglo-Saxon derived equivalents. It opened the door to classical literature, as well as helping when traveling around Spain and Italy. It also helped us understand some of the jokes in The Life of Brian.
These are English lessons, not te reo !!!!
Nothing at all to do with this bloody Treaty which these woke twits believe should be included in every sentence.
For Anonymous @7.35 'High schools' does not need an apostrophe; you are using a noun, but not in the possessive.
With reference to the original article, a Derek Wood used to be principal at Naenae College; I wonder if it is the same man who now is so unaware of the mechanics of language?
Don't forget the impact of text speak and American influences.
I agree with Anonymous 7:35 AM . Lack of teaching the basics effectively in primary schools is/ has been an enormous educational disaster to this country.
Changes are being made to introduce structured literacy and arithmetic as we used to have but we have an entire generation of teachers who can't spell and don't even know what a noun is let alone a conjunction or a past participle . How this happened is entirely due to looney ideology which dispensed with traditional teaching and common sense. Marxism for example dictated spelling lists were to be thrown out of classrooms since they were oppressive to lower class children!
Don't get me onto the total madness of Whole Nonsense oops Language reading method which has destroyed the academic achievement of millions of children and now after 40 plus years has been thoroughly condemned by research .
We have an enormous up hill battle to improve standards of literacy
because teacher unions , Min. of Indoctrination aka Education , NZEI , and the media are so bogged down in progressive ideology which for some perverse reason dislikes academic achievement in particularly the basics.
That only 2% of low decile 15 year old secondary students pass the writing requirements and tertiary students have difficulty reading set texts and writing essays is truly alarming.
Gaynor, I went through school from 1967 to 1980, and not one English teacher adequately taught me English language structure, participles, conjunctions or much beyond nouns and verbs.
I get by just on what "sounds right" and I guess since I still got A's and B's on all tests and exams no one ever felt the need to enlighten me.
So proper English teaching hasn't been good for a long time. I believe my older brother had to learn some Latin.
Yes, Anonymous 11:46, the insidious decline in standards started about 1950 , and it was happened gradually.
I was fortunate to have benefited from having received a NZ education , when it was still in its heyday , from 1950s to 1970s , before the ideological rot had really set in.
Some students do have a natural ability to achieve in written work , but I was not one of them and I believe I I benefited from many exercises focused on sentence structure and grammar . I still have copies of 'English at Work ' books , used in schools , in the '50s and '60s and students, today still find them very helpful. Clearly fluent written work is one of the most challenging areas to grasp with so few students now able to achieve in it , especially those from low decile environments. Then there is the spelling for which the English language is notorious and can only be described as fiendish.
Post a Comment