Talk:Department for Children, Schools and Families

Department of Curtains and Soft Furnishings
I reckon the Uxbridge Gazette is a rather questionable source it's a minor local paper (my own local, actually) and if there is any editorial effort, they've not taken time to verify the assertion about "decided to raise the school leaving age" or "rather be in training for a skilled job". The decision is not made by the DCSF (they recommend it and it was decided by parliament in the Education and Skills Act 2008), and it's raising the education leaving age, not school leaving age - so if someone wants to train for a skilled job, they don't have to do that at school http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/educationandskills/ Unless a more reliable source can be presented, I propose this reference is removed. PoisonedPigeon (talk) 13:17, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Mnenomics
Why on earth was the section on "Department of Cushions/Curtains/Carpets and Soft Furnishings" etc removed? It is a fact that many people cannot remember the correct rendering of the department's full name and abbreviation. And it is a fact that as such, many people, particualrly those in the education and youth social care sectors, have coined mnemonics to help amoeliorate this - a fact that was amply supported by citations which referenced articles in UK national broadsheet print media (Telegraph, Guardian and Independent), the then BBC's Senior Education Editor Mike Baker (a respected award-winning journalist and former Visiting Professor at the Institute of Education, London, CIPR National Education Journalist of the Year, 2008 and former BBC Political Correspondent, Foreign Affairs Correspondent and Deputy Home News Editor) and sector stakeholders/insiders (National Association of Head Teachers, Community Care). Just because you may not like the facts as they stand doesn't mean you should hide them from view. I find it ironic that there is a whole section on Brain Gym (which is frankly out of place here) which cites only a single individual. If the Guardian isn't a good enough source then why is it ok to be used for the Brain Gym criticism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.195.134.226 (talk) 16:46, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * It's probably worthy of a mention, but not an entire section (for example, there isn't an entire section on mnemonics in the article on musical clefs, or on rainbows - but reference is made to Every Good Boy Deserves Favours and Roy G. Biv. After all, it would be a reasonable assumption that most people coming to read an article about a goverment department is more interested in the structural and policy aspects of the department rather than how people remember its initials - as such I've reduced it to a throwaway sentence in the history section. PoisonedPigeon (talk) 10:36, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * IMHO it's now such a throwaway sentence that it looks out of place and probably ought to be removed completely.Andrewself (talk) 10:19, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Brain Gym
Restored the Brain Gym stuff as I guess it was deleted in error (Msrasnw (talk) 13:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC))
 * Incorrect. It doesn't belong in the lead, it's not worded in an encyclopedic manner and it relies upon a single source. Try expanding it to more than a one-line attack. (I was unlucky enough to have weeks wasted by this junk, and I think it deserves better criticism then that!) ninety:one 13:58, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the section is not really a lead - as the sections are generated by the headings of tables. I am not sure if this the right place for extending rather the Brain Gym article itself which has some more details. (Msrasnw (talk) 14:19, 5 August 2009 (UTC)) OK perhaps I will make a new section - but I think it looks strange (Msrasnw (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC))

Page Move from Department for Children, Schools and Families

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved. Propaniac (talk) 02:56, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Department for Education → —

I don't think this should have been moved from the DCSF page - the DfE should be a whole new page. According to the website (http://www.education.gov.uk) the department "was formed on 12 May 2010" so it's regarded as a new department rather than just a renaming of the old one. This would be consistent with the change from the Department for Education and Skills. PoisonedPigeon (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Agrree The DCSF article should be reinstated and a new DfE article created. Historically we have had a Department of Education before so the dabs will need sorting out too. Lame Name (talk) 04:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Rename and point "Department for Education" to "Department of Education" dab page, as this name is inherently confusing. 70.29.210.155 (talk) 05:02, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

More on the history of the names?
An interesting addition to the History section would be a list, with dates, of the various names this department, or its predecessors, has had over the decades (starting, I believe, with Board of Education). Something on its whizzing revolving doors would be good too - I mean the rapid changes of minister/secretary of state. I don't have the data myself. APW (talk) 06:52, 14 May 2010 (UTC)