Ben@Forest wrote: ↑19 Jan 2022, 9:27am
reohn2 wrote: ↑19 Jan 2022, 8:59am
Ben@Forest wrote: ↑19 Jan 2022, 8:55am
Citizenship education has been a statutory subject in the English National Curriculum since 2001. It must be taught as part of the school curriculum to all pupils aged 11–16 years old in maintained schools in England.
Politics is one of the four key areas, the others being financial skills, volunteering and law.
But how much time is given to it in a crowded curriculum?
How well is it taught?
At secondary school in the 1980s and before citizenship was on the National Curriculum or, later, compulsory we did 'Life Skills' - which included politics. I can't really say if it was well or badly taught and I wasn't a good student, but I think teaching about our political system has been around in one guise or another for a long time. And of course it is generally at least partly covered in history - or even economics - both subjects I did at O level.
But more interestingly most children now stay at school till 18. It could be argued that leaving school at 16, getting a job, knowing a workplace, actually having the feel of real money in your pay packet and giving some of that to your Mum for housekeeping (I did that but from 18) was a far better education in reality than a classroom subject. It's odd that people clamour for 16 year-olds to get the vote, but actually the 16 year-olds prior to about 2007 (possibly about 1997 looking at the focus on university education) would have been better equipped to do so than those now.
I agree with most of that though leaving school in the 60's I had no political teaching and wasn't interested in politics until 20's.
BITD in an industrial economy there were plenty of jobs for people who weren't interested in academic study and so the real world became apparent sooner in life,15 in my case,13 in my father's.
Children stay at school longer to keep them from extending dole queues some in mickey mouse academic studies with qualifications that lead nowhere,in colleges and universities run as businesses rather than centres of real education.
That I suppose is the result of the country focusing on a ""service economy" as a result we now have a generation not interested in getting their hands dirty,a sweeping statemne agreed but generally true.
IMO social media has a lot to answer for with regard to ignorance of politics though that can be a two edged sword.
But the point is what quality of political education is being taught to a generation more interested in celebrities,Whatapp,Tiktok and palying the latest games on their PC,phone or iPad.
Meanwhile the owners of such media make billions and skip paying taxes due to offshore tax havens,provided by corrupt governments they own.
A jaundiced view?
Possibly,but it's hard getting out of that trap set,especially if you're from a poor family,if you're of colour harder still,and people wonder why we have a drugs problem?