Like Stephen Fry, I am of the opinion that language should not be viewed as a fixed and immutable thing. Invariably, words, meanings and the rules of grammar and punctuation will evolve over time. Only a hardened pedant will (fruitlessly) attempt to prevent this.
Similarly, I am all for the subversion of the rules of language for literary effect. Of course, this relies on a pretty good understanding of those rules in the first instance, otherwise one might come across as somewhat illiterate.
So does the author of this embarrassment of a document, covered in delicious detail by Gill, really think that he or she (for despite what it says, I don't think the author was Peter Traves, Corporate Director of Children and Lifelong Learning; he is far too important to spend time on anything longer than one side of A4 paper - sound familiar?) is in any way qualified to ascertain whether my child has an "understanding [of] English, communication and languages"? Even if it was actually within his or her remit to so do?
Perhaps the author should take some time out to become an:
"independent enquirer - process and evaluate information in their investigations, planning what
to do and how to go about it; take informed and well-reasoned
decisions, recognising that others have different beliefs and attitudes"
before attempting to assess others' competency, as it would appear that his or her education has been somewhat lacking in this area.
Matt's website, detailing his experience with the bureaucracy that is Staffordshire County Council's Department of Children and Lifelong Learning, can be found here. And you even get some Rage Against the Machine! I do however suggest that you engage in some deep relaxation breathing exercises before you read it.
(Carlotta covers this here too.)
