to wonder if school staff rooms involve much parent bashing?

[lottielou39]

A comment below (in the thread about childcare being too expensive for people to do poorly paid part time work) from someone who worked in a nursery and said the weekly meetings were mostly about parent bashing, got me wondering. What are school staff rooms really like? I'd love to be a fly on the wall. Are parents slagged off on a daily basis? Which parents cause the most dread? Is it ever possible for a parent to have a valid gripe (in the eyes of the school staff room) or are they always stupid and annoying?

Plus all those (mainly science) teachers with doctorates in their subject would never go into teaching.

Even in the US it is only Principles of High Schools who tend to have doctorates.

BTW my DS has a SMART IEP !

Yes, a hierarchy of senior teachers with doctorates training junior teachers... With government funding of course, like uni professors and Educational psychologists... More money and effort needs to be put in...I know it sounds idealistic in the current climate but that's what I believe. I also think every school should have a team of educational psychologists... Expensive I know :(

Lord yes. I'd spent 7 years in full time higher education before I became a teacher. Really, it would have been an indulgence too far...

Not that I wouldn't love to do an education doctorate though. I think it would be fab.

A team of educational psychologists? You know how limited our access is to Ed Psychs?!!

'Because OFSTED keeps changing what they actually want and don;t ever leave a system in place long enough for anyone to become adept at it'

Yes. I'm not denying that. I don't think all teachers are shit btw. I DO think a number of them are shat upon. What I DON'T understand is the contempt I have had from many teachers/schools for having a child with SEN and more knowledge about how he learns than they do, and fwiw how thing can be applied efficiently and cheaply without much effort or change to classroom practice.

I don't understand why I was ganged up on to try and prevent a statement (2schools), and why I was lied to about the provision being in place (2 other schools) or why no school supported the way it was written that woukd ensure the provision could not come out of their own budget but directly from the LA.

One school decently let me write the IEP but were not prepared to keep data on the progress and target-meeting became a matter of 'professional opinion' rather than evidence.

TheFallen, I have limited knowledge of secondary education I admit.

fallen it shouldn't be like that in an ideal world... That's my point.

The Ed Phy visited DDs primary school once a year to check on a pupil with one to one support.

HT said he'd get him to see DD at the same time as far as I know he never showed up.

There didn't appear to be more than one Ed Phy avalible.

Tbh I don't really understand the 'point' of Ed Psychs either.

After you've been teaching for a few years surely you know exactly which generic strategy is going to be suggested by an over stretched EP who only sees the child for 20 mins?

Learning is a science. That is fact. It should be treated as such. Its not just about teachers knowing their subject area, it's about how to engage the mind of a child in an appropriate way with regards to their learning methods and capabilities. That's what is missing from education IMO.

I'm not sure learning is a science.

Mind you, I'm not sure psychology is completely a science either...

I'm not sure learning is a science either, but teaching should be.

Wtf are class sizes 30?

I know the answer but does anyone else?

Ed psychs can be great, because they just see " difficult " children they have far more concentrated experience of the causes of behaviour outside the norm. Most teachers have had very little training in SEN, unless they take an interest in it.

On the other hand, if a school gets 1 visit a year, you may be very unlucky and that one visit is from a not very good Ed Psych, or even just one having an off day.

"Learning is a science. A fact". Link please. I'm not holding my breath.:o

"Teaching should be a science" - what on earth is actually meant by this? I'm trying to think of control groups to measure the efficacy of one methodology/ pedagogy against another. Or the placebo effect of not teaching at all, see how they get on in the test.

Teachers should not have to experiment or DO the science, just 'apply' the science that already exists. Learn about and follow the scientific principles of learning. Understand motivation and reinforcement and above all the significance of practice. Have and apply training in pedagogy.

Some of this is harder than it used to be as the training involved is usuly about latest government 'ideas' rather than science or creative application of the above, making for the teacher robots I mentioned before.

But some teachers do manage it. I see a number on here who not only apply the science but have time to extensively MN.

I don't normally have tie to extensively mn. I am currently off sick following a mc. This is supposed to be taking my mind off things, as I can't concentrate on anything actually useful.

I do normally spend the time to apply the 'science of learning', although apparently that science keeps changing all the time too. Various different theories have been brought in and then abandoned as out-dated or bad science in just the 7 years since I started teaching. I have stopped following the recent 'advances' and now just do the things I know work, so the kids in my classes make the progress they should be making. I use different strategies for different classes, and even for different pupils in the same class. It does take time but I think it is worth it.

For those of you upset by the idea of what teachers say to each other about the children in the staffroom I would say that you also need to be worried about the parent governers. My DCs' school has one that regularly tells other parents confidential information in the school playground and in the pub ("Hey, did you know that X has SEN. It's no excuse for his awful behaviour though" etc). I have complained twice to the head....

I didn't know governors were privvy to that kind of info.

Sometimes they are. Lucky there's not a war on because her loose lips would certainly be sinking ships.

What did the head say when you complained? I'm trying to think about why a governor would be told this kind of thing, especially if it involved naming particular children. Very unporfessional.

professional, even.

The headteacher told the school governors all about me at a meeting. Tried to get one of them to 'befriend' me to encourage me to leave. She told them I record conversations in secret and that I had been banned from MN for spreading propaganda. The Chair downloaded my Facebook and linked in pages to put on file and told them that I claim disability allowance fraudulently.

That is only ONE school though, but the 'information' must have come from somewhere, ie previous school and LA!

Bloody hell starshit! That's insane!

Lionheart - I assume she gets a thrill from gossiping and that is why she does it. Or thinks she is somehow being helpful when telling other parents in our DDs' class the plan outlined for the very disruptive child with EBD. The head was absolutely livid the first time I spoke to her and spoke to all the governers about confidentiality. I'm not sure what happened the second time as it was just before the holiday and I haven't seen the head yet.

This an outstanding school high in the league tables with excellent reputation for inclusion. Chair of Governors is Head of Admissions for another Council.

I am making assumptions but there appears to be systemic corruption at least in some parts of the 'system'!

Star, that is truly awful.

shrinkingnora, I hope the head comes down hard on her. Sounds like she shouldn't be in that role at all.