OK Again,

The link was not for this issue. Here is the text I received concerning the 
education of GW.....Sorry for the.....well.... swimming recommendations.

*Unravelling current confusions around the national curriculum and the 
school curriculum*
 
*We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our 
children*. 
Native American Proverb
 
Thank you for your enquiry on this very important matter.
 
Very few people read past the headline of the Guardian article of 13th June 
(*Climate change should go from school syllabus*). Many people have missed 
the point. For example: websites are saying ‘Keep climate change in the 
school curriculum’. This is a confusion. It confuses the National Curriculum 
with the School Curriculum. If we desire our National Curriculum to be 
robust, enduring and not overbearing, then we need to have some strong 
principles about what is in and what is not.
 
The *National Curriculum* lays down, in law, the fundamentals which all 
children should be taught. It should be lean and precise, describing the 
essentials of human knowledge and understanding. The National Curriculum is 
part of, but not the totality, of the School Curriculum.
 
The *School Curriculum* should be broad and balanced, consisting of rich 
learning programmes devised by teachers who understand which topics and 
issues would most motivate and engage their pupils.
 
The national and international evidence scrutinised by the Expert Panel 
giving advice on the National Curriculum suggests that this is a vital 
distinction which we, in our education system, have lost.
 
The National Curriculum should provide a clear statement of the essential 
elements of learning which underpin – and form part of - a broad and 
balanced School Curriculum for children from 5 to 16.
 
A slimmed-down National Curriculum is intended to be a positive development, 
empowering teachers and schools. It increases the ‘professional space’ in 
schools, giving the opportunity for teachers carefully to select themes and 
issues which will maximise learners’ motivation and engagement.
 
It’s precisely BECAUSE the environment is so important that we need children 
to engage with these complex issues with comprehensive and incisive 
scientific understanding. The National Curriculum should focus with great 
intensity on what this understanding comprises. We want increasing 
attainment and understanding amongst those taking science and related 
subjects in Higher Education; we need all children to be prepared well for 
engagement in ALL of the vital issues which confront our society.
 
As the Chair of the Expert Panel, providing advice to the Secretary of State 
on the content of a new, more robust National Curriculum, I am seeking to 
assert the distinction between the National Curriculum and the School 
Curriculum, precisely because we want issues such as climate change to be 
discussed in such a way that the right actions will be taken by the next 
generation, and generations to come.
 
Once again, thank you for your comments on these vital matters.
 
 
Tim Oates
Cambridge, June 2011 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/geoengineering/-/LOur2co_7uIJ.
To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en.

Reply via email to