The NEU should support a knowledge rich curriculum.

I recently spoke at NUT/NEU conference against a motion on a Child centered curriculum and pedagogy. Motion 22.

The motion is here in the final agenda. P33

 https://www.teachers.org.uk/sites/default/files2014/14018-neu-nut-final-agenda-2018-low-res-pdf-inc-cover-gb.pdf

I believe that there is a strong social justice case for teaching a core body of knowledge.

 What is education for?

   

In its purest form, it means the passing of knowledge and understanding to a new generation. The motion makes a mistake in saying that Skills and knowledge are important in good pedagogy. As if they are distinct. This is a false dichotomy. Skill is bound up with knowledge. Skills are domain specific. For example, children shouldn’t play 11-a-side matches on full-sized pitches until they’ve learned ball control.

A dictionary definition of the word Skill means the ability, coming from one's knowledge to do something well. Knowledge precedes skill

Many will be familiar with the infamous Bloom’s taxonomy where knowledge is relegated to the bottom rung while evaluation is seen as a higher order skill. The first mistake it makes is that it separates knowledge from skills and the second is that it indicates that knowledge is not that important

But isn't all knowledge is relative?  Children no longer need to remember things. 21st century skills must be the foundation of all contemporary curricula.

I have two children. Times tables are important. Learning off by heart or rote with frequent low stakes tests and deliberate practice is the best way to learn them. Low stakes tests. Not high stakes tests.  Cognitive scientists have discovered that the act of memorisation involves transferring information from the short-term memory (in the hippocampus) to the long term memory (in the cortex), via the working memory. Various researchers have found that the transfer of information into the long term memory, ready for retrieval, can reduce anxiety and help a child gain confidence in their learning.

The motion also makes references to E.D Hirsch. I first found out about Hirsch not on a conservative website but through the AFT (American Federation of Teachers) Their journal “American Educator” features articles written by Hirsch. I do not agree with how he is portrayed as an ultra-conservative apparently advocating that school children spend most of their time memorising the names of dead white males.

 For example, in “Cultural literacy", E.D Hirsch explains the importance of the role of knowledge in reading. Background knowledge is the main driver of language comprehension, whether written or spoken. Disadvantaged students are disproportionately dependent on schools to provide the background information that will make them effective readers because wealthy students have greater opportunity to gain this knowledge at home.

  

As a National Union of Teachers, surely we can recognise the importance of a knowledge rich curriculum and contribute as trade unionists.  For example, the subject of history. Our Island history cannot ignore the Suffragettes, the Chartists, the international brigades to Spain 1936, Saltley gate 1972, Grunwick 76, the Miners’ Strike and Hillsborough 89 to name but a few.

What is the social and political agenda that lies behind the skills curriculum?

I fear that the emphasis on the separation of skills over knowledge in this motion leads us on a dangerous path where we will silo working class children off into the vocational pseudo apprenticeships. The NEU shouldn’t be agreeing with the CBI when they demand that we teach soft skills. For the CBI, education’s purpose is to simply produce workers. If a child wishes to pursue a vocational pathway after school, Good luck to them. But he or she should still know her Dylan Thomas,  Shirley Bassey, William Shakespeare, Zadie Smith, Mary Seacole and Rosa Parks because these things are his and hers too.

We need to be very careful as a union in falling into dangerous polarisations. The polarisation between knowledge and skills is mistaken.  We’ve created a false dichotomy. Skill is bound up with knowledge. Skills are domain specific. Skills are subject specific. the major paradigms in all the major disciplines, geography, history, biology, core elements of other disciplines, are not the preserve of dead white males but are our inheritance. They are radically egalitarian: blind to social class. Our President, Kiri Tunks yesterday quoted the great theatre practicioner Lillian Bayliss who said “All art is a bond between rich and poor, it allows of no class distinctions, more than that it is a bond between nation and nation”  Likewise Knowledge.

I absolutely agree that the end of education is skilled, creative, critical individuals who can sift evidence. It’s a question of how we get there and you can’t get there without a knowledge rich curriculum.