to think that 'inner city kids' are not 'hardened'?

[CandiStaton]

just read this on another thread about shouty teachers and bringing bullies into line

a poster said you have to shout to get through to some kids, and you have to shout loudly if the individual is a 'hardened inner city kid'

ive heard it before

we are inner-city

kids are kids

you're as likely to find a hideous bully in the country or the leafy suburbs as you are inner-city

and LOUD does not equal naughty...

I did my teacher training in Tottenham in a very rough school.

Those kids were "hardened," and it is a tragedy and a travesty that their lives were so fucked up that they needed to be.

I never raised my voice though. If there's one thing they're used to, it's being yelled at. And they yell back, often louder and with more swearing.

IME, shout and they stop listening. Listen to them and treat them with the respect they deserve as human beings, and you can get them to do anything.

I saw an absolute arsehole of a teacher screaming in a 14 year old girl's face. A girl who had been abused by family and was currently in an abusive foster home. Who incidentally was illiterate. Wonder why she was misbehaving? Tosser. That was 9 years ago, still gives me the rage.

YANBU.

I grew up in a violent household. I was incredibly cynical for a 10 year old, but not 'hardened'. I was well behaved and attentive at school and did well despite the problems at home. School had routine and security compared to my crazy household.

they are not 'less kid like'

they are kids

they like doing different things ffreddie

Yabu

I had teaching experience in extremes of wealth and poverty. Both presented different challenges.

I did find some of the kids from the rough area to be hardened. They couldn't be reached with normal discipline, as other peoples anger washed over them.

The teachers in that school had adjusted their methods accordingly. It's pointless to say 'everybody is the same, so all teaching should be the same'. Everybody is not the same.

poverty doesnt equal rough kids. or hardened

A friend of mine was a teacher in high schools in London, in very deprived areas. He quit to become a policeman, and says he gets punched in the face and threatened with knives much less.
I think he'd argue that there is a definite tendency in a particular direction for kids in poverty ridden inner city areas when compared to leafy suburbs. Its a bit naive to suggest otherwise.

Likewise inner city don't = poverty

I'm pretty sure Kensington and Chelsea would be considered "inner city"

I lived in London, went to school there. My eldest went to primary there for 2 years also. We now live in a village in the UK, the kids are more innocent. Its hard to say how exactly, perhaps more childish?

I was happy to find this, I had expected them to be more 'streetwise' than the children I was used to (while we lived in rural America)

I work with and train in large groups young adults who are long-term unemployed, and could often be described if you are an igorant wanker as being 'hardened', oh and maybe 'losers', 'ferral' 'scroungers' 'wasters'.

I never shout EVER. I never speak to people with disrespect. I never assume that I am 'better' than them or have more 'power' than them, I never assume they are 'to type' unless they prove otherwise. We go in with a high trust model - i.e. I trust you, unless, not until, you do something to break my trust.

Weirdly, we get the best attendance without sanctioning, we get people engaged with the programme, we get people acting respectfully, we have positive relationships with all the attendees and more people back into jobs and taking control of their futures. It's obvious that if you treat someone like shit, they are more likely to behave like shit. Shouting is treating someone like shit, IMVHO.

People may be 'hardened' and I agree some of the inner city problems are pretty horrendous. It doesn't make them bad people.

I suppose it depends if 'hardened' is to be taken as a bad thing?

Lots of the primary school children my DS went to school with were hardened , but they were still delightful children. I'm talking about yrs R-2.

The kids that would get on the bus from the local comps, were scary though. Swearing . pushing and generally abusive.Many older people I knew , would avoid getting the bus when school got out...

The secondary school children here are softer home life and surroundings do make a difference.

Its sad (imo) that so much goes wrong during ages 6-16 to solidify such streetwise/ tough behaviour.

Candi, yes, of course they like doing different things, but from my very limited experience, my N & Ns are much more mature than my two. Less naive and childish.

They're not 'hardened', they're still kids, but they are more streetwise

I haven't read any of lovebunny's posts on other threads but I am quite shocked by the personal attacks and sarcastic digs about her here. Just shocked to see that kind of thing on MN generally. And putting up pics to giggle over, WTF? Sorry but it's just bitchiness. It's the kind of bitchiness 13 year old girls are particularly good at, and tbh most 13 year old girls are nicer than that too.

When I was teaching I once posted something honest that reflected the way I was feeling that day - I think I dared to say that a C grade was fantastic for some students. Someone told me I was a disgrace to the profession. It upset me for days; I was a good teacher, I worked hard, I really cared.

It's a shame because this is an interesting topic.

Kensington and Chelsea has its fair share of deprivation.

Some of the posts on here make me laugh. I'm a fantastic teacher. Kids come back years later to see me and try to come back to my class a year after they have left because we have a great time. But sometimes I shout. Sometimes im sarcastic. sometimes i use humour. I wish people would stop teacher bashing on here. Most of you don't do the job and to be quite frank most people would struggle to teach testy inner city kids on a daily basis. What I tend to find is if the kids know you are doing the best for them and you respect them they are with you. So many people they come across have not tried to do their best for them. They quite often have an overriding sense of being let down by parents, social workers you name it.

freddie naive, childish, streetwise, mature....are all description of kids

but to say a child is 'less kid like' (because they are not like yours) is just

I quoted someone else who said in their experience they were "less kid like earlier than those in rural areas"

sorry, posted too soon.

IME with my N&N, they have outgrown the more kid-like activities faster than mine (mine are v typical of the children in the area we live)

I don't think this is teacher bashing to say this, however I see it may be seen as such.

I work with young adults every day who have been expelled / excluded from school and have left school - usually about 14, with no qualifications, self-esteem on the floor and anger bubbling out. Maybe some of the teachers might explain to me, HOW IS THIS HAPPENING?

Yes, I probe and find out that they have been aggressive towards teachers perhaps.......but is that it? We just leave them. Aged 14 to rot. No attempt to try and recover their behaviour other than through exclusion??

It makes me so frustrated.

havent read all but think city kids are more streetwise,regarding going out,busy city to navigate,greater diverse of people,more chance experiencing crime, to me thats differrent from hardened

i was a youth worker and the kids that came from chaotic homes were deffo more streetwise,because alot of the time they become more self sufficient eg,they wanted to eat then they had to cook for themselves,needed clean uniform they had to wash it,not many rules etc about times in,loking after siblings and im not talking the odd hour either

but to me thats streetwise not hardened that can be any child in any part of the world

mcmooncup it is so hard to exclude students! I taught for 11 years and only saw very few permanent exclusions, which in the majority of cases came after years of interventions and behaviour strategies. I applaud what you do and can see how it must be frustrating but, unless the exclusion has come about as the result of one appalling incident, I think 'no attempt to try and recover their behaviour' is simply not true. IME experience schools bend over backwards to try to keep students in!

How they've got like that in the first place is a whole other discussion - I have no answers on that one and share your sadness and frustration.

Interesting thread

Thanks Iheart. I know it is hard to exclude someone. I know the behaviours they present are often horrendous.

I guess I just see the minority who are excluded. And it is just heartbreaking. Their vulnerability under their aggressive and cocky exteriors ('hardened') is just, well, unexplainable.
I just see they were children who were reacting to their often difficult situations in their ill-equipped way, and not being heard or understood. And it never seems to stop there - their futures don't suddenly get any better.

I see a lack of love. And that is why the OP is interesting for me.

Yes the kid who used to return to sit in my class in FE was excluded at school. She had thrown a desk across the room at a teacher. Mimicking her dads behaviour. A teacher she hadn't trusted. It is sad and doesnt always end well but she turned out great.

more exposed = less naive. Seem, older somehow.

That is my observation. I don't think it's better or worse, but I do notice the difference. I can't pretend I don't.