The government’s announcement about a boost to the teaching of Latin in state schools doesn’t seem to have been met with universal approval.

The DfE notice said that:

The Government is also announcing the next phase of the £16.4m Mandarin Excellence Programme, and the fourth year of the £4.8 million modern foreign languages pilot, which supports schools to teach French, German and Spanish up to GCSE.

In addition to learning Latin, the new programme announced today will include activities such as visits to Roman heritage sites to give pupils a deeper understanding of Classics, and life in the ancient world. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/thousands-more-students-to-learn-ancient-and-modern-languages

So, good news for the many sites and museums along the length of Hadrian’s Wall, and no doubt the City of Bath, as well as many Roman Villas around the country, where they can expect more school parties descending upon them in the future.

In view of the data about applications to teach modern languages, the government has to do something for the teaching of modern languages lest it start to disappear from some school curriculums. The further push for Mandarin is welcome, but we are nowhere near the target for such teachers set out when Michael Gove was Education Secretary.

The announcement about languages was no doubt supported by Mr Gibb’s recent speech about a ‘knowledge rich’ curriculum that paid scant attention to the relationship between schooling and the real world. Now I have nothing against knowledge, and am all in favour of knowledge as vocabulary. But what about subjects such as design and technology.

Will the government axe design and technology from the curriculum as not knowledge based? And, too difficult to find staff to teach it? In order to teach Latin to more young people you need either to stop teaching something else or to lengthen the amount of schooling young people are exposed to each week. To do the latter would cost more money, and doesn’t seem an option in the present economic state of the nation. So what to drop in favour of Latin?

Teachers in 1870 used knowledge in the absence of textbooks to drill facts into young minds. Do young people need to know the name of a Nineteenth century Prime Minister or, more importantly what a Prime minster is? Knowledge of or knowledge to be able to do something? Which is more important?

Is it more important that young people knows the names of prime ministers or that they know how important in a democracy it is to vote? Which will increase voting patterns among 18-25 year olds once they have the vote?

Similarly, do we need to ensure all young children know how to use a knife and fork at the same time that they have learnt their alphabet? Is leveling up just about teaching everyone the same things or ensuring a common set of knowledge and skills acquired mutually through home and school? Those entering school this September will not retire from work until 2070, and any may well see the next century arrive. The school curriculum is for their needs. So where does the environment and climate change fit into the knowledge agenda of Ministers?