ChatterBank1 min ago
One in 5 children failing in English, why ?
28 Answers
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-120414 0/One-children-failing-English-Sats-results-fa ll-time-15-years.html
Could it be because----------------------------?
Latest figures translate to some 470,080 pupils in primary schools and 354,300 pupils in secondary schools whose first language is thought not to be English.
Certain areas, such as inner London where 53.4% of pupils do not speak English as a first language.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7372853.s tm
Could it be because----------------------------?
Latest figures translate to some 470,080 pupils in primary schools and 354,300 pupils in secondary schools whose first language is thought not to be English.
Certain areas, such as inner London where 53.4% of pupils do not speak English as a first language.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7372853.s tm
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No, because before they came, there was poor literacy.
Victorian times before there was mass immigration, literacy was far worse than it is now.
I haven't looked up the stats, but I would guess that literacy in better now than it ever has been. That is not to say it could be better.
We are 17th= in the world ratings for adult literacy.
Victorian times before there was mass immigration, literacy was far worse than it is now.
I haven't looked up the stats, but I would guess that literacy in better now than it ever has been. That is not to say it could be better.
We are 17th= in the world ratings for adult literacy.
The inability of large numbers of people resident in the UK to speak English is one of the great scandals of our time. It is scandalous because it remains largely unaddressed, being a taboo subject with those seeking to raise it being denounced as racist.
There is no doubt that large numbers of people settled here do not speak English, have no intention of trying to do so and extend that lack of intention to their children. They do themselves no favours and do their children even less. The outcome is the type of results cited in this question.
Meanwhile the largely liberal ruling elite fawn over themselves, seeking to disguise this national failure by suggesting that it enriches the cultural diversity of which we should all be so proud.
Let�s see how enriched those who cannot read and write become when they reach adulthood, and how enriched those of us who can do so become as we have to keep an ever increasing number of illiterates.
There is no doubt that large numbers of people settled here do not speak English, have no intention of trying to do so and extend that lack of intention to their children. They do themselves no favours and do their children even less. The outcome is the type of results cited in this question.
Meanwhile the largely liberal ruling elite fawn over themselves, seeking to disguise this national failure by suggesting that it enriches the cultural diversity of which we should all be so proud.
Let�s see how enriched those who cannot read and write become when they reach adulthood, and how enriched those of us who can do so become as we have to keep an ever increasing number of illiterates.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
And, no, Gromit, literacy is not better now than it has ever been.
I received my primary education in the 1950s. I lived in a working class area, my father was a painter and decorator and my mother a clerk. I went to the local primary school, where I was taught in a class of about 36.
The abilities of those 36 obviously varied but all of us could read and write competently, most of us by about age 9 and all of us by eleven. It was unheard of for anybody of my age (unless they were disabled) to be unable to do so by the time they moved on to senior school.
I�m not sure what the situation was in Victorian times, but certainly at the time my parents and I were educated (and that�s all the first hand knowledge I have), the idea that anybody should be unable to read and write after six years of primary education was unthinkable.
I received my primary education in the 1950s. I lived in a working class area, my father was a painter and decorator and my mother a clerk. I went to the local primary school, where I was taught in a class of about 36.
The abilities of those 36 obviously varied but all of us could read and write competently, most of us by about age 9 and all of us by eleven. It was unheard of for anybody of my age (unless they were disabled) to be unable to do so by the time they moved on to senior school.
I�m not sure what the situation was in Victorian times, but certainly at the time my parents and I were educated (and that�s all the first hand knowledge I have), the idea that anybody should be unable to read and write after six years of primary education was unthinkable.
Whilst English as a second language may be an issue in the early years at school I do not think it is a major issue at secondary school age.
From my experience in schools I think it's likely that even among those whose first language is English one in five will fail English in secondary school. Some of the best writers and speakers of English at this age are those whose first language was not English.
You only have to read some of the postings on AnswerBank to see the poor standards of written English displayed by some people.
From my experience in schools I think it's likely that even among those whose first language is English one in five will fail English in secondary school. Some of the best writers and speakers of English at this age are those whose first language was not English.
You only have to read some of the postings on AnswerBank to see the poor standards of written English displayed by some people.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
well, ummmm, this little boy speaks wonderful English and did even before he started nursery, he is 4.
His mum and dad are both pretty good too, his mum is even fun to talk to as she understands jokes and sarcasm too.
The Polish parents could probably adjust all the little notices on the board to read correctly. lol
I think that the parents of all children should take responsibility and not entirely blame the schools etc for their child's skills.
His mum and dad are both pretty good too, his mum is even fun to talk to as she understands jokes and sarcasm too.
The Polish parents could probably adjust all the little notices on the board to read correctly. lol
I think that the parents of all children should take responsibility and not entirely blame the schools etc for their child's skills.
-- answer removed --
Eleggantly
more old git daily mail crap.
No need to blame the Daily Mail, 'our children failing in English', is reported in most of today's newspapers.
The figures of pupils who do not speak English as their first language is from the BBC.
Incidentally, forgive me for the criticism, but your English is abysmal.
more old git daily mail crap.
No need to blame the Daily Mail, 'our children failing in English', is reported in most of today's newspapers.
The figures of pupils who do not speak English as their first language is from the BBC.
Incidentally, forgive me for the criticism, but your English is abysmal.
Judge,
I received my primary education in the 1950s... the idea that anybody should be unable to read and write after six years of primary education was unthinkable.
Maybe you were just ignorant in the 1950s of how bad literacy was then. if you think it is very bad now, a Cambridge University study seems to imply, we have dropped down to 1950s level.
The study comes weeks after a report by Cambridge University labelled Labour's �500 million literacy strategy a waste of money, as reading skills were no better than during the 1950s.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1570895 /England-slides-down-world-literacy-league.htm l
I received my primary education in the 1950s... the idea that anybody should be unable to read and write after six years of primary education was unthinkable.
Maybe you were just ignorant in the 1950s of how bad literacy was then. if you think it is very bad now, a Cambridge University study seems to imply, we have dropped down to 1950s level.
The study comes weeks after a report by Cambridge University labelled Labour's �500 million literacy strategy a waste of money, as reading skills were no better than during the 1950s.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1570895 /England-slides-down-world-literacy-league.htm l
factor30
Some of the best writers and speakers of English at this age are those whose first language was not English.
You only have to read some of the postings on AnswerBank to see the poor standards of written English displayed by some people.
How do you know also, that these people do not possess English as their first language?
Some of the best writers and speakers of English at this age are those whose first language was not English.
You only have to read some of the postings on AnswerBank to see the poor standards of written English displayed by some people.
How do you know also, that these people do not possess English as their first language?
Again from the National Literacy Trust...
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/About/FAQs.htm l
Many more children reach the expected level for their age in literacy than in 1997, before the introduction of the National Literacy Strategy. The key indicator, the percentage of pupils reaching level 4 (the level expected for their age) in national tests for English (reading and writing) at age 11, has increased from 63% to 78% in this time. In the mid-1990s just half of children reached the level expected for their age. Current literacy levels also represent a significant improvement in children's skills since the mid-20th century, since targets apply to all children, of all abilities and social classes, including those who speak English as an additional language.
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/About/FAQs.htm l
Many more children reach the expected level for their age in literacy than in 1997, before the introduction of the National Literacy Strategy. The key indicator, the percentage of pupils reaching level 4 (the level expected for their age) in national tests for English (reading and writing) at age 11, has increased from 63% to 78% in this time. In the mid-1990s just half of children reached the level expected for their age. Current literacy levels also represent a significant improvement in children's skills since the mid-20th century, since targets apply to all children, of all abilities and social classes, including those who speak English as an additional language.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.