Stokers, I have tried this more than once with our school but ultimately they refuse. How did you insist? It is depressing now with one child at grammar school to see the exercise books at home all the time littered with spelling errors and knowing the next child will be worse.

I have bred two children who at my school would have been considered semi-literate and yet they are considered among the best at primary. And incorrect spellings are marked as correct in primary school spelling tests. It is funny but dismal all at the same time.

What has happened to mark schemes and markers? Surely, if correct answers are not allowed by the mark scheme, the markers would have complained, had it rectified, and all affected questions would have been re-marked?

E
Yes. He wants it to be taught at secondary level, not primary school.

I do sympathise with his argument and like this particular article - if it is correct. His articles about phonics do not always distinguish between poor delivery in schools and what is actually expected.

I think his viewpoint illustrates a lot of the problems about primary education - a lot of teachers teaching a lot of stuff they know very little about. It's not a great thing whatever the subject and whatever the national curriculum.

A lot of money could be reallocated into teaching primary teachers the subjects that were not in their degree specialism.

I agree that grammar is not very high profile in English education. I did not study grammar at all at school (but I write beautifully ) and as a consequence I have had to teach myself a little along the way. My view is that the problem goes deeper and is actually linked to the death of reading. The more one reads, the more linguistically able one becomes. I didn't study grammar but I was always a voracious reader. I see little point in churning out grammar lessons for children who never read anything and are incapable of putting their learning into any kind of meaningful written context.

Children are becoming so used to flashing images and noise from a screen that they are finding it more and more difficult to absorb even simple prose, and as an English teacher I feel powerless to halt this appalling language holocaust borne of sloth, lack of imagination and screen addiction. It is a tragedy. I see A level students who consider reading to be a necessary evil - and sadly I am talking about English Lit A level here.

The Language GCSE took a massive nosedive the day the Spoken Language unit was introduced, IMHO; ditto the loss of the second Shakespeare text at A level, as well as the loss of compulsory Chaucer. Were the courses dumbed down? Oh yes.

Anyway, I agree with Michael Rosen. And just to amuse you all, I wasn't sure of all the answers on that Sats paper! (never held me back though, scaled the dizzy heights etc etc...)

Having seen English Language A level students who do not know the difference between a determiner, an adjective, an adverb and a preposition, I have to state straightaway that I am in favour of the teaching of grammar in schools ( whether in grammar or comprehensive ones! ). The way it is done since the reform has however raised more than one eyebrow ; and I cannot but laugh reading this text :

This is Biff.

This is Chip.

This is Biff and Chip's homework.

Biff and Chip are required to write down ten examples of fronted adverbials.

Biff and Chip have not a clue what a fronted adverbial is.

This is Mum.

Mum has not a clue what a fronted adverbial is either.

"We don't know what a fronted adverbial is," whinge Biff and Chip. "This homework is impossible. You will have to help us."

"It's not my homework, it's your homework," says Mum, thanking her lucky stars that she did not have to engage in any of this fronted adverbial bollocks when she was at school.

This is Dad.

Dad still struggles to distinguish between a noun and a verb, and would not know a fronted adverbial if one came up and punched him in the face.

Biff and Chip think for a moment about asking Dad for help.

They decide to Google instead.

This is Mrs May.

When Mrs May went into teaching she honestly believed she would be able to spend her time helping children to love learning. And putting on plays. Mrs May loves a play. She did not realise that a love of learning would not feature on the National Curriculum at all, and that she would instead be forced to meet a series of impossible and continuously moving goalposts which successive governments would put in place, and have to teach her classes about ridiculous concepts such as fronted adverbials which, in all honesty, are only ever likely to be of use if they end up becoming professors of linguistics. Or primary school teachers.

If truth be told, Mrs May has not a clue what a fronted adverbial is either.

This is Floppy the dog.

Floppy holds no truck with fronted adverbials.

Floppy eats the fronted adverbial homework sheet.

Floppy knows that he is a liability, and waits to be told so.

No one is more surprised than Floppy when the entire family gather around and tell him "Oh GOOD dog Floppy."

Floppy feels this is proof positive that some good can come from fronted adverbials after all.

Later at school, Biff and Chip are, for the first time, able to legitimately use the excuse: "My dog ate my homework."

Mrs May breathes a secret sigh of relief that that is one less set of incomprehensible and entirely incorrect homework that she has to plough through, and suggests to the class that they will all put on a play instead to celebrate.

I’d like to point out that I’ve read the original version of that, which contains lots more words that would mostly be asterisked out on this forum. so I appreciate that JE has posted a censored version.
(The woman who wrote this has written several Biff and Chip stories in the same vein, all hilarious, but very sweary)

I started school in 1969 and finished in 1982 and was not taught grammar to the level expected in the SATs. I learned it as a result of having to teach it.