A teachers union says something I agree with. I'm in a state of shock
And that doesn't happen very often. I regarded the introduction of a national curriculum as a huge error at the time - it is overly prescriptive, limits the scope for schools to specialise and was legislating for a 'problem' that did not really exist. How many schools has anyone heard of that do not teach literacy and numeracy?
Anyway, the ATL is not happy:
"ATL leader Mary Bousted said the system was failing to engage children and should be replaced by a skills-based curriculum drawing on local knowledge. But the government says the national curriculum is broad and balanced, with scope for flexibility and innovation. Dr Bousted said: "We believe giving teachers greater freedom to set the curriculum would help raise results and keep more children engaged in learning so that fewer leave school at 16 feeling failures, having been failed by the system."
Sounds, on the face of it, quite sensible.
Anyway, the ATL is not happy:
"ATL leader Mary Bousted said the system was failing to engage children and should be replaced by a skills-based curriculum drawing on local knowledge. But the government says the national curriculum is broad and balanced, with scope for flexibility and innovation. Dr Bousted said: "We believe giving teachers greater freedom to set the curriculum would help raise results and keep more children engaged in learning so that fewer leave school at 16 feeling failures, having been failed by the system."
Sounds, on the face of it, quite sensible.
Labels: Unions
This entry was posted
on Thursday, September 28, 2006 at 11:58 am.
You can skip to the end and leave a response.
» Post a Comment