Advanced search

It is not a school's job to control your children, it is a school's job to educate them - it is a parent's job to get them to school with the right behavioural attitudes and social abilities to learn

(172 Posts)
activate Sat 11-Jun-11 09:27:20

(excluding diagnosed behavioural SN) your thoughts?

rainbowinthesky Sat 11-Jun-11 09:28:03

If only that actually happened....

3littlefrogs Sat 11-Jun-11 09:28:50

Indeed. but try telling that to some parents..........

fuzzpigFriday Sat 11-Jun-11 09:29:56

I agree. My first thought was "well, duh..." smile

Although I don't place the whole responsibility of education on the school, I still see it as more our job TBH, especially while they are little.

But on the behaviour, yes of course!

missmapp Sat 11-Jun-11 09:30:23

It is a schools job to help instill correct behaviour and high expectations, but only alongside the parents, it is not a schools job alone.

meditrina Sat 11-Jun-11 09:32:14

I have an aged aunt, who spent a whole career (and much of her retirement) in education: she's fascinating on how schools have changed since she started teaching in WW2.

She did comment rather sadly, that as schools now (1990s, it was, I think) have to spend time so much time bringing children up then there wasn't so much time to educate them.

But schools then, now, and probably forever, do their very best by the children they have. There isn't really an alternative.

Goblinchild Sat 11-Jun-11 09:34:27

To be fair, of course I agree but it is hard to practise some of the necessary skills at home, like sharing within a group of peers and learning to wait your turn when you are one of 25. Or that your choices are limited by others.
Some children stay egocentric right into the juniors and beyond.
Doesn't mean that we should stop trying and reinforcing, just that it is sometimes more difficult for some than others because of family circumstances.

purepurple Sat 11-Jun-11 09:34:53

This is why the early years are of such importance and why they are called the foundation years.
If a child arrives at school without these key skills they are already disadvantaged.
Preparing children for school is about much more than teaching them how to count or write their name. It's about their attidutes to learning and willingness to learn, their social skills and above all their emotional development.

Wallace Sat 11-Jun-11 09:42:21

I'm sure I read somewhere that a child only spends 15% of their time in school.

fuzzpigFriday Sat 11-Jun-11 09:49:13

I totally agree purepurple - I have seen so many threads where parents ask "what should my child be able to do when they start reception?"

The answer from teachers is never "they need to know numbers, write their name, recognise the alphabet" etc. It is always "take turns, use the toilet, listen to instructions" etc. Basic stuff that DCs should be learning at home.

IgnoringTheChildren Sat 11-Jun-11 09:52:17

YANBU! It would also be nice if parents (and society in general) helped children to view education and school as a positive thing that enables them to learn useful skills for the future rather than something children have to get through in a place that they are dumped during the day while their parents work

TimeWasting Sat 11-Jun-11 09:52:58

School gets them at 3 though, there's only just enough time to potty-train them before they're out of parents hands for a big proportion of the waking time.

And I agree with Goblinchild the social skills that school requires of children can't be taught at home.

Also, perhaps separating 'education' from the rest of real life is a problem.

And of course, there is the argument that school exists mainly in order to control children, or provide free childcare so that the parents can all work hard for their industrial masters.

ragged Sat 11-Jun-11 09:56:04

Are all of you educators on this thread? I mean, why do you feel qualified to comment strongly on behaviour standards?

LeQueen Sat 11-Jun-11 10:00:34

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

googoomama Sat 11-Jun-11 10:00:35

It should be a team effort I think. I'm a teacher of 9-13 year olds. I'm happy to help to reinforce good patterns of behaviour, remind kids about manners, talk to them about the way they reacted to an incident (because we are in loco parentis afterall when the kids are at in our care) but it's always good when you klnow that the child has been brought up with boundaries and taught to be polite and considerate of others. Most of the kids at my school are wonderful - I love it there - but the few who have so obviously never been told that no means no (and I'm mainly talking 12 yo boys here) often ruin it for all the others. Picture a 12/13 year old boy having a toddler strop but with much riper language!!!

googoomama Sat 11-Jun-11 10:01:27

sorry about typos!

ragged Sat 11-Jun-11 10:03:37

ack, just realised this being MN, that all of you are going to think I took issue with the thread title, whereas what I really didn't understand is how so many could so confidently say that so many children were behaving badly solely due to bad parenting, and that (implied?) whenever bad behaviour is present, it must be due solely to bad parenting, and not due to other possible causes (personality conflicts, immaturity, undiagnosed SN).

I can't comment on any of that with confidence (I can't refute it either, admittedly). I'm just not qualified to say. So wondered how so many of you could be so confident that bad parenting was always to blame for bad behaviour in the absence of diagnosed behavioural SN.

LeQueen Sat 11-Jun-11 10:03:48

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GrownUpNow Sat 11-Jun-11 10:05:12

I'm trying really hard with my DD's behavioural issues, but I think school is going to be the place where these rules are really cemented, seeing how everyone else is around her and having focus for her intelligence.

I always thought that it was a bit of a joint effort, teach them basic rules/behaviour and support with homework, whilst the teachers teach them literacy and numeracy and support with behaviour/basic rules.

Georgimama Sat 11-Jun-11 10:05:13

Some behaviour can only be learned and put into practice in a group environment - school isn't just about learning the three Rs, it is about learning to be part of society. That's an important part of school IMO.

Children should be starting school equipped to learn both social skills and to be educated - unfortunately many aren't. But then a lot of adults seem to have missed out on some pretty basic social skills somewhere along the way too. It's not surprising their children haven't got a clue.

Georgimama Sat 11-Jun-11 10:06:49

Also Timewasting an important motivator in introducing compulsory schooling in whenever it was in the 19th century was to remove children from the labour market to create more employment for men.

corsilk Sat 11-Jun-11 10:08:59

I'm in two minds about this. I've taught in a school where the kids were running wild. A decent Head/deputy team being drafted into the school were able to make a massive difference. Kids that were climbing out of the windows, fighting, swearing, storming out of lessons and around the school grounds whenever they fancied, very quickly began to behave themselves and enjoy school.
I've also worked with colleagues who have been lazy, doing virtually no preparation, not bothering to mark books, undertaking no training etc and were unable to control their class as a consequence.

cory Sat 11-Jun-11 10:11:41

I always think of it as cooperation. I expect the teacher to go on reminding them of the good manners I try to instill at home, and the teacher expects me to remind them of homework and the importance of reading and taking an interest in the world around you. We reinforce each other.

I am sure I make dcs' teachers' work easier by reinforcing what they do and demonstrating the value of reading and writing in my own life, and I have been happy to see that my work as a parent is made easier by the ethos of the schools they attend. It would be far harder for all of us if we did not sing from the same hymn sheet.

P.S. Not being able to dress yourself at 5 is not necessarily a sign of bad parenting: not all SN are diagnosed that early; ds wasn't; I felt a bad enough parent without worrying about other people's judging.

purepurple Sat 11-Jun-11 10:14:30

I also think that poor quality nursery care is just as much to blame, it's not all bad parenting. Lots of children will have spent a long time in group care already by the time they get to school but if the quality is not that good then it's the children who will suffer the consequences later at school.
This is why it is important that the early years workforce is as skilled as it could be. Except it isn't going to happen without a huge government investment and we have no chance of that under Tweedle Dumb and Even Dumber.

MightyAphrodite Sat 11-Jun-11 10:16:03

ragged - I don't think anyone is saying that bad parenting is to blame for behaviour issues in the classroom. It's more lax parenting, maybe. I teach 6 - 12 year olds and sadly I'm often stunned at the complete absence of basic good manners that contribute to a successful learning environment.

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now »

Already registered? Log in with: