What does Katharine Birbalsingh do different?

[User2346]

I can’t say I like her but I am intrigued as to how she gets the results which are remarkable.

I know the model of zero tolerance etc but this is copied in a lot of academies without the resounding success.

Is there something different with the teaching methods? Is there an element of selection weeding out children with SEN and EHCP’s?

I would love the perspective of parents who have their DC at the school.

Indeed, @IdaGlossop . You had the right approach! Fortunately, many parents are like you, see the relationship with school as a partnership and reinforce expectations and learning. There are a significant number, however, who will side with their child, no matter what. Even in the face of cctv evidence.

I have met these parents as a school governor chairing permanent exclusion panels, including a mother who persisted in her view that no-one should have been scared by the BB gun her son brought into school when it was pointed at them from the opposite end of the corridor 'because it's obvious it's not a real gun'. She maintained this view even when I asked for the BB gun to be brought into the meeting room.

DS with his untucked shirt and excellent GCSEs has caused the school very little problems over the years.
The kids who fight, vape and bully are more problematic.
But you can make this to be my problem if you wish.

Good grief.

Indeed - lots of teaching colleagues who are leaving the profession cite the reason as ignorant/lazy/bolshie/entitled parents rather than the poor kids who don’t get decently parented.

I know his is going to sound clichéd, but one of my DDs struggles to wear a blazer. She has mild sensory issues as part of her neurodiversity. I think I've seen her blazer on her twice. Luckily, she doesn't have to be wearing it at her school, but I'm sorry I even bought it. Whilst not a big part of the decision, she won't be going to a secondary that has blazers.

So if you want to be inclusive, you need some flexibility on things like this.

That's not uncommon. We have students who have modified uniforms because of sensory issues, she won't stand out. We have quite a few who wear those noise cancelling headphones as well. She certainly won't be alone at any secondary in the UK.

Yes, I've come across a lot of very rude and aggressive parents, but in all honesty the ones who worry me the most are the well intentioned weak ones. "Can you tell him about punctuality, he won't listen to me?", "Can you talk to him about homework, we just can't make him do it" "Can you tell her she won't get a good grade, we can't discuss it". They expect the school to do the parenting. Often these are doctors, university lecturers, barristers, business people etc. it's like they're too scared to parent properly.

Yes I suspect many don't like to see Black and brown poor children doing well.

Uniform rules are just window dressing, they don't solve real problems with behaviour. We have no uniforms at all in my country so teachers don't have to waste time policing uniform so they have more time to focus on teaching, and consequences for behaviour are more meaningful because they're not getting them for silly things like untucked shirts but for actual bad behaviour.

Totally disagree. Almost all schools which get great results have strict uniforms, as they understand it sets the tone.

Schools which allow untucked shirts and blazers off tend to have very poor behaviour in general as DC know they can get away with it.

The best school in the UK has consistently been St Paul’s Girls, which has no uniform.

Brits are extremely and, in my opinion, irrationally wedded to uniform as a solver of all ills.

The girls at St Paul’s could pretty be thrown a textbook to teach themselves and they would still get top grades. The entrance exam take at 11 picks out the top of academic ability alongside the most motivated of professional parents. All the arguments about the purpose of uniforms do not apply here. Now there are similar schools which also could choose not to have uniforms as well for the same reasons but choose to have them but it usually isn’t for discipline reasons.

To be fair in the office when I see someone wondering around with an untucked shirt I am thinking in my head "sloppy person".

No schools have uniforms in my country, good results are still achieved and behaviour is no where near as bad as in British schools, from what I'm always reading on here about secondary school behaviour. So uniform does not improve results or behaviour.

Of course they apply. It just doesn’t suit those mindlessly wedded to uniform as a solver of all ills, which many countries, especially our fellow European countries, manage to do without. And of course they don’t solve those ills given that bad behaviour and bullying happen in schools with uniform.

Why can’t British kids learn unless they’re dressed like civil servants from the 1950s but kids from other European countries can? What exactly is it about British kids? Or is it that their parents simply can’t see beyond uniform?

It is the most colossal waste of parents’ money and teachers’ time. But we mindlessly carry on with it because we don’t have the imagination or curiosity to look beyond our own borders or experience. I guess that’s what a British education gets you.

That’s exactly the mindset that keeps British schools mindlessly wedded to uniform. Well done you.

No idea of your country but you cannot compare 2 different cultures and potentially standards. British standards are higher than most countries. For instance children in the UK are at year ahead of teens in the US at 18 which is why US school leavers do 4 year degrees as they need that extra year to learn missing skills that UK tees already have. (This was confirmed by a top university admissions officer from the US who explained in depth the differences between the 2 systems). Children have far less leeway to do badly at any point. We don’t allow people to stay down or move up years like they do in the US (expect for exceptional circumstances). It is very rigid and mean that the qualifications have weight but the system does not allow for any flexibility for individual children who are struggling. Uniform is one way to encourage the children to enter school ready to learn. If you look good, you feel good and the fact that they all look the same and start feeling a sense of high standards matter then it translates to higher standards in all their life. Now do some schools go to far- yes absolutely. Some are completely bonkers but most aren’t and the point still stands, those school aside.

British standards are not higher than standards in most European countries that don't have uniforms. How do you account for that?

Why aren't you thinking about your work? How would you reconcile that with someone who is demonstrably very able and competent who doesn't tuck their shirt in?

The US isn’t the only country in the world that doesn’t have school uniforms as standard and I’m not sure why you’d chose them to compare us to rather than the European countries that we are much more close to in various ways and that don’t have uniform.

How to we compare to them?

Again, different systems, different demographics, different problems. What are you not getting here?

Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean you get to sit all morally superior about it.

I loved my uniform. I was gutted to not wear it any more. It tied my to my school- I felt part of a group, all levelled by the the clothes we wore. I never had to think about what to wear in the morning. When we were asked if we don’t want it anymore, pretty much every person voted to keep it.

why does the army wear uniform when not in combat? Seems pointless to me honestly. But they still do.

I have no idea honestly but a quick google put the UK consistently amongst the top countries in Europe for educational standards

I fully support the school on sensible rules, but what on earth is the big deal about wearing a blazer? How does that enhance learning in any way?

DS hated the feeling of long sleeves (still does) and therefore never wore the school sweatshirt. They didn't make an issue of it except in assemblies. We got the occasional whinge about it but no teacher could ever explain to me why it mattered, and to their credit they never bothered to take it any further. The fact that he worked hard and was lined up for straight As probably had quite a lot to do with it. If he had been at a school that obsessed about blazers and made a big issue of it, we would simply have taken him out, which would have put a bit of a dent in their exam result stats.

The UK specialises early which allows for deeper depth in chosen gcse/a level subjects whereas my country doesn't specialise in the same way - they all have to do all core subjects until at least 18 so can't go into such depth but standards are still high (especially the standard for foreign languages - far far higher than in the UK). Children can be held back though, which obviously helps, but its not very commonly used (though I know of two in my small town)

Uniform doesn't make all children feel good though, its often uncomfortable material (polyester) which is horrid for children with sensory issues. How can you learn well if you're itchy and uncomfortable? And how much does a child learn if they're sent to isolation because of uniform issues? Or how much learning happens when teachers are busy enforcing uniform rules?

They feel high standards matter here not because of what they wear but because they know they are responsible for their education and know there will be consequences if they don't pass.