Prince Charles opposes plans critics say will make 'theme parks' of schools

MARK HENNESSY London Editor

PRINCE CHARLES has opposed plans by the British government to reform the teaching of history and geography in English schools, following warnings by one of his closest advisers that they threaten to turn schools into ‘globalised theme parks”.

The current curriculum in primary schools would be slimmed down to just six subjects, with history, geography and society being taught together as one, along with themes such as global warming.

Pupils from the age of five would learn history and geography through studying blogging and Google Earth, though the learning of historic dates would be less emphasised, under the plan outlined by secretary of state for schools Ed Balls.

However, his ambitions were criticised by Bernice McCabe, the co-director of Prince Charles’s Teaching Institute, which supports traditional, rigorous teaching methods to offer children the best education.

Ms McCabe, understood to have been speaking with the prince’s authority, said too many children in English are being taught skills, rather dates, basic science concepts and classic books.

“He is passionate that these subjects should remain there in the curriculum. I would hope that the vast majority of people in our society would think that,” she told the London Evening Standard.

Teaching pupils in the fashion proposed by Mr Balls could see them getting “excited” about global warming, but they would not remember the scientific, historical and geographical knowledge that lay behind it.

“Sometimes there are too many shortcuts into theme-based teaching. That’s not what gets children learning. It’s not what gives them a sense of self-respect,” Ms McCabe told the newspaper.

Prince Charles established training programmes for English and history teachers “to put a stop to what might be termed the ‘cultural disinheritance’ that has gone on for too long”, adding that “timeless” teaching principles are being abandoned.

Six new subjects would be created under Mr Balls’s plans: including “historical, geographical and social understanding”, “understanding physical development”, “science and technology”, and “English, communications and language”, though maths would remain as it is. Facing questioning in the House of Commons, Mr Balls rejected Conservative opponent Michael Gove’s charges that he was “dumbing-down” the curriculum, insisting that he is giving teachers more freedom to teach.

“It’s a complete nonsense to suggest that it’s an either/or choice between learning history and geography on the one hand and learning about personal skills and wellbeing on the other. Children should learn both,” he said.

Dismissing Mr Gove’s arguments that the curriculum has already been watered-down, Mr Balls asked him to answer questions put to students studying for their GSCE examinations this year.

“First question – name the type of enzyme that digests stains containing fats. Sounds quite difficult to me, do you have an answer?” he said, before asking another – how fluoride atoms change into ions.

“You’re well-known as an erudite and intelligent man. What’s the answer?” he asked. “These are really hard. I don’t know the answers.

“These are hard questions in tough exams, which our young people are doing very well,” said the secretary of state.

Meanwhile, Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution will become a compulsory subject in all state primary schools from September 2001, which may provoke some objections from more conservative parents.

Church and other faith schools paid for by the state will have to obey the new rules, though evolution could be taught in a way which reflects a school’s ethos, as already happens with compulsory sex education for pupils under-15.

The legislation would give the secretary of state greater powers to close down failing schools, give pupils greater rights to one-to-one tuition if they are struggling and force teachers to undergo mandatory assessments.

Each local authority would be required to survey parents’ views annually about secondary schools in their areas – and where they are unhappy, the councils would be required to intervene.