Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

First World War in The updated National Curriculum Draft Orders


Stephen Barker

Recommended Posts

Hello,

You may well be interested in having a look at the new draft History orders for state schools, though not academies, to implement from the autumn of 2014.

The First World War is to be taught at KS3 (11-14).

Have a look here

Organisations with an interest in taking part should take part in the consultation.

Consultation responses can be completed online at:

www.education.gov.uk/consultations or

by emailing

NationalCurriculum.CONSULTATION@education.gsi.gov.uk,

I hope that you find this of interest.

Stephen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Stephen,

I wonder what they will determine to be the "key events", be interesting to see

Appreciate your post

Thanks again

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is worse than I feared. If you want to kill off study and enjoyment of History after the age of 14 take a look at this for 11-14 year olds. I can only thank my lucky stars that there was none of this rubbish during my 33 years of teaching history in state secondary schools.

The development of the modern nation

 Britain and her Empire, including:

 Wolfe and the conquest of Canada

 Clive of India

 competition with France and the Jacobite rebellion

 the American Revolution

 the Enlightenment in England, including Francis Bacon, John Locke, Christopher

Wren, Isaac Newton, the Royal Society, Adam Smith and the impact of European

thinkers

 the struggle for power in Europe, including:

 the French Revolution and the Rights of Man

 the Napoleonic Wars, Nelson, Wellington and Pitt

 the Congress of Vienna

 the struggle for power in Britain, including:

 the Six Acts and Peterloo through to Catholic Emancipation

 the slave trade and the abolition of slavery, the role of Olaudah Equiano

and free slaves

 the Great Reform Act and the Chartists

 the High Victorian era, including:

 Gladstone and Disraeli

 the Second and Third Reform Acts

 the battle for Home Rule

 Chamberlain and Salisbury8

 the development of a modern eco

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that looks remarkably similar to the syllabus I studied for 'O' and 'A' levels in he dim and distant '60s, and it didn't put me off history. Is it really 'rubbish'?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an overall outline (and for WW1 in particular) it looks good to me but then I am not a history teacher.

"... none of this rubbish during my 33 years of teaching history in state secondary schools." Why does this statement not surprise me?

However, beyond the WW1 syllabus I fear we are treading into politics so I will close on that note.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, that looks remarkably similar to the syllabus I studied for 'O' and 'A' levels in he dim and distant '60s, and it didn't put me off history. Is it really 'rubbish'?

Me too in the mid 90s.

My GSCEs were basically Britain in the industrial and agricultural revolution.

At A Level, we did two papers (and had a teacher for each). British history, starting in around 1815 and going through all the social and political change such as Peterloo, the Corn Laws, 1832 Reform Act, 1867 Reform Act, Gladstone and Disraeli, etc, etc, ending at around 1900.

Our other paper was European History which started at the French Revolution in 1789, through the Napoleonic Wars, Congress of Vienna, 1848 year of revolutions, Crimean War, etc, etc, and I think ended with German and Italian unification in around the 1870s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is horrendous news for teaching history in secondary schools. I teach in a grammar school and we will be hard pushed to fund these changes never mind finish the curriculum. As an option for comprehensive schools...I don't know what to say. When you also consider what is expected to be taught in primary schools its beyond the power of speech. We would never finish half of the primary curriculum in Key Stage 3. What planet is Gove on! We have just over an hour a week to teach the current curriculum per year group, and for most state schools that is a generous allowance.

With all due respect to those people educated in the 60s and 70s (myself included) there are now far, far more demands on curriculum time what with IT, PSHE, etc as well as all the traditional subjects. We finish teaching at 3.45, most other schools in my area at 3.00.

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me too in the mid 90s.

Same here for the (late) '80s, though we totally avoided WW1 apart from the Versailles Treaty and a brief 'general interest' (and terrible!) interlude on Gallipoli....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The curriculum designates conscription, but not the wider call to arms in 1914. One would have thought an understanding of the volunteers in the early stages of the war and the need for conscription would also be appropriate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many taught hours of history does a child receive when they are 11-14 years of age? (Is that three school years or four?) I am trying to work out how many minutes each of those subjects would receive ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

Altered my post above. About an hour each year, but I teach in a grammar school, this is not the case for the majority of schools. 3 school years.

An interesting point a colleque makes vis-a-vis RS teaching, if they went back to traditional biblical teaching the take up rate at GCSE would be extremely low.

Its 2.45 on a friday afternoon, books out, its time for the clauses of the Congress of Vienna. It won't happen.

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should have said my list was not all of it. Here's a bit more for 11-14 year olds...

the development of a modern economy, including:

 iron, coal and steam

 the growth of the railways

 great innovators such as Watt, Stephenson and Brunel

 the abolition of the Corn Laws

 the growth and industrialisation of cities

 the Factory Acts

 the Great Exhibition and global trade

 social conditions

 the Tolpuddle Martyrs and the birth of trade unionism

 Britain's global impact in the 19th century, including:

 war in the Crimea and the Eastern Question

 gunboat diplomacy and the growth of Empire

 the Indian Mutiny and the Great Game

 the scramble for Africa

 the Boer Wars

The abolition of the Corn Laws and the Eastern Question - riveting stuff. The other amusing thing is that most of the books in the History Departments of state school now become obsolete. A boom for pubilshers methinks that is if there is the any in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole thing is ill-conceived. A huge burden on teaching the earlier periods is laid on primary schools who are singularly ill-equipped to deliver it. As Alan says textbooks and carefully-accumulated resources are rendered obsolete overnight. My guess is that those who are not obliged to stick to this schema e.g. Independent schools and Academies will simply ignore this farrago as much as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This does look surprisingly similar to what I was taught in the 1960s/70s but WW1 was considered "too modern". I think we had 3-4 hours a week on the subject - 2 hours on a Saturday morning - as you can guess nobody was really too interested in the subject as we were all eager to escape the classroom! I only remember one textbook that seemed to cover everything. It did, however, set me up for a lifelong interest in history. Teaching it ... I wouldn't like to try! Good luck.

Maricourt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quite like the range of topics listed on this document.

Current KS4 material such as the history of medicine and the revolution of surgery.......?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The curriculum designates conscription, but not the wider call to arms in 1914. One would have thought an understanding of the volunteers in the early stages of the war and the need for conscription would also be appropriate.

WW1: It would be good to see some mention of technological advances during the war (and not just tanks) and I agree that that reference to volunteering would fit in well. Contribution of Empire forces (and nations) might be a good inclusion especially as we have the same broad cultures today. Contribution/burden of France and USA?

Well, that looks remarkably similar to the syllabus I studied for 'O' and 'A' levels in he dim and distant '60s, and it didn't put me off history. Is it really 'rubbish'?

Exactly - O and A Level. This is to be jammed into to 5 to 16 when the teaching time available for history as a subject is probably rather less than in a 'golden age' when the good people got seven O Levels and the rather bright got eight (and that was only 20% of the population). There is now an additional 100 years to be jammed in since history stopped at the fall of Gladstone's last government in my day - and why not - my grandmother remembered him dying. i don't think that it's rubbish if there is time to give the content some depth but it just seems too packed.

What made/makes history interesting is what these people did and how they interacted. There is no point in knowing just that they just existed as in "Isaac Newton was one of the most famous scientists of the time and 'invented' [bet some history teachers go for that] gravity by looking at apple trees'. I suspect that many of us actually got a broad knowledge of history (or at least a framework) from reading outside the classroom. Certainly, that is how I learnt about Eilzabeth Fry from the first 'real' book I chose for myself at the age of 7.

Know and understand the broad outlines of European and world history - how do they fit in China and India, the Arab Empires ?

The abdication of Edward VIII and constitutional crisis: bit of a scandal and a lot of dithering but was it really a constitutional crisis of major proportion? The Bedchamber Crisis of 1839 might be more significant as it determined who was the Prime Minister (if I remember correctly form 50 years ago)

How are six-year old suppose to get their heads round Newton and Faraday, even at an elementary level, without understanding something about the science. Otherwise it becomes 'Once upon a time, there was a famous man called Michael Faraday'.

Stephenson, Brunel and Watt are 'innovators'? Engineers, i think.

Back to WW1. To get all this material into a child's head and for it to mean something (a considerable challenge according to the FT ) might affect 'in depth' study of WW1. The specification calls for a mixture of overview and in-depth study. The evidence, it seems to me from the queues for chocolate poppies in Ieper and interested students at Tyne Cot) is that students find WW1 interesting; the main battlefields are quite compact and fairly easily accessible (often at the expense of the free time of teachers) and there seems more stuctured material (for the present) than for WW2. We have 2014-2018 approaching so I think WW1 will continue to be a focus for some time. The fact that it remains in Key Stage 3 (the three school years spanning 11-14) removes it from the immediate pressure of GCSE exams.

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I observed a Year 8 (2nd year in old money) lesson yesterday that I judged outstanding. The students were captivated by the materials they had to work with, even those on our SEN register. They finished the lesson with both a good understanding of how the slave trade functioned and also what kinds of evidence exists to back it up. Talking ot the kids was a joy for someone like me with a fascination for history. They love studying history; they already have a keen and critical sense of historical sources and many will become avid readers of the subject in future years, even if they do not take it further.

All that will be gone in 2014 if consultation does not steer this government away from its 20th (if not 19th) century ideas of education.

Man I'm glad I am out of this game in 2014.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see much problem in the list. I covered pretty much all of that up to O-Level in my time at at school. Mind you, we didn't spend endless time on the Nazis as they do now - our history master had the view that past events weren't 'history' until everyone involved was dead.

I think it's important to separate the syllabus from considerations of how best to teach it - we don't say that we have to ignore important concepts in Physics, say, just because they're hard to teach.

Anthony

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting, we at my Sec Mod school did away with Tudors and Stuarts, and had Industrial Revolution, expansion of the British Empire, something about the Corn Laws which I have long forgotten, both World Wars and the Russian Revolution. Which was basically the world has arrived in this current state (1965) because of these events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contribution of Empire forces (and nations) might be a good inclusion especially as we have the same broad cultures today.

Ian

That is a very good point. Whilst the cultral mix of children has changed, there may be a common factor that forefathers served in WW1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the 1980s my history lessons skipped from the Medieval straight to 1850-1945 European. I am due to start teacher training in September, as a secondary school history teacher, so the posts from current/long serving history teachers above has been a real eye opener. I observed a year 9 WW1 lesson last week and they were concentrating on DORA and propaganda.

Another worrying thing is the lack of history being made available at the younger age groups - my son is in Key Stage One and he hasn't touched any history, however remotely. To that end I'm home-teaching it (and geography) to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have taught a lot of boys whose families came from the Indian subcontinent over the years and although many have shown great interest in the First World War only one has ever displayed knowledge of an ancestor who fought in the conflict. My quest for a ribbon for this soldier's 14/15 Star was the subject of a GWF thread some years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Following the massive outcry over the original proposals, which rumour had it were drawn up by Mr Gove and a couple of civil servants on the back of an envelope one Sunday afternoon, major changes have been made. The content is much less prescriptive with lots of 'this could include...' and the like, elements of wider world History are reintroduced and by and large the current structure of teaching at Senior School: Middle Ages, Tudors and Stuarts, Empire and Industrial Revolution, Twentieth Century, is retained. The First World War survives, in this section of the Key Stage 3 (Senior School) proposals:

'Challenges for Britain, Europe and the wider world 1901 to the present day

In addition to studying the Holocaust, this could include:

women’s suffrage

the First World War and the Peace Settlement

the inter-war years: the Great Depression and the rise of dictators

the Second World War and the wartime leadership of Winston Churchill

the creation of the Welfare State

Indian independence and end of Empire

social, cultural and technological change in post-war British society

Britain’s place in the world since 1945'

The textbook publishers, not to mention teachers, are breathing a sigh of relief! The idea that Primary and Secondary schools would have to change almost the entire content of what they taught was crackpot; no thought was given, for example, to the cost implications of rendering virtually all existing textbooks and other teaching resources obsolete overnight. Lots of others would have been adversely affected, for example museums, stately homes etc which would suddenly have found their existing school visit clientele, like Primary schools studying the Victorians or Egyptians, swept away. Common sense seems largely to have prevailed in the end.

The full framework, for History and the other subjects, can be studied at:

https://www.gov.uk/g...ent_-_FINAL.pd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good article on the changes in yesterday's Guardian by RichardJ,Evans. Historians are myth busters not myth creators!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...