shiraz1

There's no data that the true believers in benefit spending single parents and immigrants as the root of all eVil will ever accept.
They just "believe"

The huge falls in crime over the last 15 years are clearly down to mass immigration, rising single parenthood and gold plated jobseekers allowance, lol.

Millhouse

I did not say that.

I am confident however, that those who can't use a pen or knife and fork by the age of 11 are also supported by the state. Don't get me wrong, poverty is the issue here, not immigration or single parents - But I do firmly believe that incentives are not set correctly when the safety net is too high.

When long-term NEET have no reason to seek employment (and many choose not to) - something is wrong. I feel sorry for these people, they have been failed by the very system that was designed to help them.

scrubbedexpat141

If you can't read and write by age 11, the problem is pretty catastrophic.

I wonder what % of kids are age 11 and can't read/write. I bet it's miniscule.

Beakersful

Literacy standards to be only determined by complete illiteracy?

What about those whose level is too low to function effectively in society? Haven't the education or social skills to open a bank account and use it effectively, can't write a CV, are unable to follow simple instructions such as "only use blue or black ink", "write in capitals", can't write a job application cover note, unable to use a cooker, change a plug/lightbulb, tie a tie (or even shoelaces!) can't shave properly, can't look a conversation partner in the eye or merely mumble at them, can't pay bills timely (handle household finances). I remember kids 'unsuitable' for GCSE's whose special units in schools were giving them certificated courses in "letter writing", "using a shop till" and the like. Advertising fliers coming through your letter boxes are aimed at a very low 'reading age' for very good reasons

Millhouse

http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/adul...lts_in_england

I would say that a couple members of my immediate family would probably meet the definition of functioning illiterate. Simply it is not in our family's culture to read.

When I started senior school (age 11) - I was tested and had the reading age of '7'. Caught up in the end but it took work. It happens - and there are lots of reasons why people drop down the ranks.

I would say that my son (age 6) is a much better reader than when I went to senior school. I have only just discovered the joy of reading - I've read more books in the last 2-3 years (as a result of buying a kindle) than in the previous 30.

Beaverstate

None of my business but 20 seconds of googling came up with an article stating 20% of British adults are illiterate and even more at mathematics.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...meracy-prisons

Bahtatboy

That's not the best sentence to choose to discuss illiteracy.

Beaverstate

Its even worse here.

scrubbedexpat141

I just can't fathom it, apparently I could read and write before I was 3. Which to me, seems about right.

If someone hasn't even held a pen until age 11, they'll have to bust a ****ing gut to get their writing skills to a suitable level to pass exams at age 16 (GCSE's, or O-Levels to you oldies).

I level the blame at everyone. Parents, schools, the kid. Even take the 'holding a pen' bit out, just straight can't read and write to a suitable level....what the **** have they been doing at school?

Shit spelling and grammar is forgivable, to an extent (frustrating, annoying and inexcusable when on a computer). A 55yr old bloke taking the English Language GCSE tomorrow may well fail but may be a sound, functioning, letter-writing somebody who has a good job and is 'literate'.

If I had to take my Maths / English / Science GCSE's tomorrow I'd probably fail bits without doubt. I mean, I cruised English Language at GCSE and A-Level but now look at the way I write or speak.

Millhouse

You're way off. Only a handful can do that by the age of three. Even fewer boys.

Beakersful

Check the .pdf report on this page there: http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/rese..._of_the_nation

Apparently between 1999 to 2012 writing skills jumped from 54 to 75%

......or perhaps teach-to-test, coaching replacing other educational takeup, and dumbed down examination systems explain this leap? It's hard to dispel the notion there are more hardliner chavs around on the streets than at any time before.

Eeyore

As Millhouse says, it's not at all common in the UK, and even less so in continental Europe, where in many countries kids don't start learning to read and write until age 6 or 7 - and they don't have problems with literacy or numeracy.

I could read at age 3, but that was because my parents were actively encouraging me to read almost as soon as I could crawl. My Mum was a primary school teacher, and apparently our house was covered in cards with words written on them specifically so that I would get to recognise the shapes (because that's all learning to read actually is, shape recognition) - "door", "window", "kitchen", "stairs" etc

Early reading's no big deal though, most kids who learn to read earlier than the norm usually don't end up with any advantage by the time their peers have caught up, typically around age 5 or 6.

scrubbedexpat141

Interesting.

I was at a BBQ at the weekend and one woman was banging on about baby-signing. All about getting a baby to make their hands do things to tell you what they want. EG: bawling their eyes out at 2am and clench/unclench fist to show they want a bottle.

Seemed quite impressive but must take some 'programming'.

Beakersful

Can you skim and speed read? I was taught to read early then advanced reading skills (at about 9 years old) I enjoy reading still, unlike primary school kids of today who are forced to read x amount of books in a year as part of the curriculum. They frequently see reading as work, not pleasure, and as such their reading skills I think freeze at that point, which hampers higher education, reading for leisure and general knowledge acquisition.

Eeyore

Baby signing is great. We did it with our kids, after learning about it from friends of ours years before we started our own family. It's almost like magic when you see it in action, and it can significantly cut down on crying, because the baby is able to communicate very specific needs rather than just cry and leave the parent to try and work out what the problem is.

It's actually dead easy. All you need to do is make the signs yourself as you talk to the baby. "Look, there's a big red car" - and as you say "car" you make the car sign, which is like hands wiggling a steering wheel. Or "It's time for some food", and as you say "food" you make the food sign, which is a bit like putting a sandwich up to your mouth.

You have to train yourself to make the signs every time you talk to the baby, and you have to be prepared to be doing it for up to three months before you start seeing the baby make the signs back to you - but once you do, it's as exciting as hearing the first word, and it means that you can actually have meaningful two-way communication with your child long before they can talk.