Speaking the same language over pointless homework

HOW much I agree with Jayne Dowle (Yorkshire Post, March 8) about the uselessness of homework. And quite a bit of the curriculum was not much use either.

In Mathematics, we were required to calculate how far two trains would be from London when they met, given that one left London at, say, 10am and the other left Edinburgh at, say, 10.30am

I made myself very unpopular with Sir by pointing out that, given the gradient profile, neither train could possibly run at 60mph start to stop, and things like signal delays, permanent way checks, and bad coal would all play havoc with things.

I started French homework when I was seven years old. Our textbook was French Without Tears, by Lady Bell. It really was! It was a misnomer: I wept hot tears over my homework. But help was at hand! My parents kept a pub, and one of our regulars was a Free French soldier named Jacques.

Pre-war, Jacques had been a porter at Les Halles in Paris. It was rather like a French schoolboy enlisting the aid of a Billingsgate fish porter with his English. Jacques did my homework. I got the cane next day for getting help, and the elderly maiden lady who taught us was genuinely puzzled by what Jacques had written. He probably told her to – well, let’s leave it there!

I was fortunate. While at grammar school, my parents arranged for me to have an exchange holiday with a French schoolboy. I very quickly found that the French spoken in Paris was very different to the French spoken in the Upper Fifth. And, in those three weeks, I learned more French than in the previous three years.

Ms Dowle, I fear, is trying to reconcile two quite different objectives. She seems to be wanting to give children the experiences that will help them in life. The schools are interested in children passing examinations. These two objectives ought to be the same, but I fear that they are not.

And it is those vital pieces of paper with the word “pass” written on them that interest potential employers when children leave school and start to look for a job.

And even here the employer can come unstuck. I once had to interview candidates for a position in my office. One candidate has a degree. My boss passed me a note: “She’s got a degree. Doesn’t matter what it’s in; it means she’s got a good brain.” I followed his advice – and lived to regret it.

From: Charlie Mann, Oughtibridge, Sheffield.

THE essence of the current education system is founded upon the erosive idea that intelligence is all – if a pupil achieves poor grades in their subjects (which are almost all intelligence-based, apart from a handful) they will be considered a failure.

Grades are everything. Pupils will be told that without good grades, they shall not succeed in life. What pupils are not told is that life’s greatest gifts do not require intelligence to enjoy. Not everyone has intelligence, but everyone has a talent. Until the education system lets a child’s talent flourish, whether it be academic or vocational, without infatuating them with the dangerous claim that one thing is better than another, or one talent is more favourable than another, it will be a failure.

From: ME Wright, Grove Road, Harrogate.

JAYNE Dowle’s shock (horror even?) at finding herself agreeing with Michael Gove is entirely understandable (Yorkshire Post, March 8). What is more, I fear it could be something to do with age.

Some time ago, a forty-something former colleague confided in me that he had started listening to Radio 4. I assured him that this was more growing up than growing old.