Teacher quit and walked out

[Moonlitarsehole]

Nc'd to not out myself.

Ds informs me on the way home that his teacher walked out on his last class this afternoon.

Apparently she'd asked on numerous occasions for quiet, and threatened to not help with their coursework. Then said "fuck you lot, I quit", collected her bag and walked out.

I was like ds was vague and said he didn't want me to call the school, as they'd all had to make witness statements.

Anyway, dh is home today and asked ds if he'd been talking too (after I tell him what had happened) and really told ds off for being so disrespectful.

Ds is upstairs writing a letter of apology, not sure what the school's take is on it. Not even sure if she'll get it.

So aibu to think the teacher just lost their shit, which happens to us all?

The reality of the ancient world, when lads went to work as apprentices at 14-ish, was that parents paid for the first two years of the apprenticeship. In other words, until they accepted the need to be useful.

rooner, the vast majority of kids are great. We temporarily excluded a pupil in November and the rest of the class were an absolute pleasure to teach. Polite young men who were eager to learn, and they studied the syllabus in greater depth and interest than is required by the exam board. One even came in at lunch to apologise for being poorly behaved when allowing himself to be distracted.

Good communication is key. But that requires time, something which many teachers don't have. I'm very lucky, in that I don't have DC to get home to so if I have to stay late to contact parents I will. But where time is limited and you know you get into trouble (ie no pay rise in early career, pay cut in later years or capability measures as a precursor to unemployment) if you don't mark at least one set of books each night, which would you choose - contacting parents or marking the books?

This is exactly what the teachers strikes have been about. Being expected to do things which do little to help pupil attainment ahead of having the time to implement strategies which will. The media have done a delightful job of spinning that it's all about the money.

thevoiceofrosie what a lesson to teach children - that hitting someone smaller than you is good. Although it sounds apocryphal to me. Or American.

jessica I understand. This was in no way a criticism of teachers. But I feel teachers are being failed by a system.

My ds (fostered) is in his last year in high school. He hates it. It is a battle to get him there, and he very often walks out of class. Keeping him in some form of education until he is 18 is possibly the most insane thing ever to happen.
He just doesn't want to learn, has been let down by the education system for years before he came to live with us, and is now at the stage where he just does not care.
He's never violent to teachers, but his whole attitude is very anti school and teachers, and I do occasionally feel sorry for anyone who is trying to teach him anything.
Leaving education for a few years, and coming back to it when he wants to learn would be so much more productive, but instead we have to perform a daily battle to get him to school, and i think its an utter waste of time and money at the moment.
So he is probably quite disruptive, along with several other looked after children in his year, and i hate the thought of that, but we can't change an attitude thats been taught for all his life :-/ Schools are too rigid, there needs to be a lot more variety rather than the one size fits all, as long as you're academic.

The reality of the ancient world, when lads went to work as apprentices at 14-ish, was that parents paid for the first two years of the apprenticeship. In other words, until they accepted the need to be useful.

They also had to sign indentures, a legally binding document, which set out exactly what was required of the boy (or girl) in terms of behaviour.

I agree that school is not necessarily the right place for some boys and girls past the age of fifteen or so. They'd be better off learning practical skills, and earning a bit of money, so they can see the connection between effort and reward.

I know you weren't criticising teachers, I just didn't want you to think that all teens are awful. As frustrated as I get with the minority of troublesome students, I really dislike the media portrayal of teens as feral.

About a year ago I had to walk up a flight of outdoor steps in a city centre at night, and a group of teens were sitting in the way. I admit I was a bit nervous about potential conflict. But they moved over without being asked and apologised for being in the way. Most teens are awesome.

AnnieNoMouse, I'm not advocating violence towards children, but have you ever owned an animal? If you have, you may have observed a mother with cubs, kits or pups; the young ones are told what is okay (and what isn't) with a quick nip. It isn't a beating, just a short and painful reminder of what's expected. When adults dodge that responsibility (RESPONSIBILITY duty if you prefer) youth misbehaves. We have a society that prefers the cosy laziness of not stopping bad behaviour, and therefore condones it.

Kelper we face the same problem too. I feel if our ds could have a couple of years to burn off his excess energy and aggression eg in national service then go back to studying, he'd probably do so much better.

A year out of academic work would suit some, not others. In the UK, universities would not like academic students (the ones they want) being distracted from concentrating on difficult STEM subjects like physics and maths where they frown on gap years because momentum is lost. It isn't easy to keep that thread of concentration going during a year out.

cresset, that depends on the placement. Universities don't like travel gap years for STEM students, but are often impressed by STEM-related working years.

AnnieNoMouse

"ThevoiceofRosie what a lesson to teach children - that hitting someone smaller than you is good. Although it sounds apocryphal to me. Or American"

Not apocryphal, not American, completely true. This happened in England about 20 years ago. I wrote this to illustrate how the school children responded to what they believed was the ultimate sanction, not to condone any type of parent-on-child violence. These children lived in a violent and deprived area and, sadly, were no strangers to the infliction of pain upon each other. Indeed, it could be assumed that soft sanctions like missing out on a pleasurable activity would have little effect on (regrettably) street-hardened children who have witnessed more extreme actions. Perhaps only strength or might warranted their respect?

In 1995, I was teaching primary in a very rough area where we had regular riots and the police wandered around in fours. Our school worked with the community without threats of violence to make the children compy with our rules as they'd already had a lot of experience dishing it out and usually being on the receiving end. Consistent, firm boundaries by professionals who listened to them and consequences that weren't linked to pain were vey effective. took a while for some of them not to be confused.
We were also one of the first schools to have an OFSTED inspection, and a genteel team from Richmond turned up, almost wetting themselves as they drove through the ghetto.
We got the top grade and they were astounded at the friendliness and the respect shown by our children, and the way that the community school was an oasis in one of the poorest areas in Europe at the time.
Didn't stop their nice cars being borrowed or damaged, but that wasn't our current students.
So no, I think children from a violent culture that uses physical punishment don't need more of the same. They need to be educated out of the idea that the only way to be top is to be aggresive, challenging and non-compliant because doing what you are asked to do is for the weak and the weak don't survive.
If the teacher had spanked her child in school, she'd have been told that it wasn't the ethos of the school and it wasn't to happen again. No violence meant all of us within the walls, however many gangs and criminals were less than 100m from the school grounds.

I've thought for a while that what some teenagers - say 14+ - need is the chance to take a year or more out of school. If they wanted to later there could be some sort of voucher system that would allow them to top up their education to the equivalent of Y13 via full time, part time or evening classes.

In that year put they could be apprenticed or take a low wage job or whatever worked for them. It would let them realise what the adult world was like, recognise the link between graft and money and hopefully pick them up before they became completely disillusioned with education.

Thanks JessicasRabbit, that's really useful to know. DS is a bit immature for uni and not sure what he really wants but we have been warned that swanning around for a year is not going to impress, and can make it harder to recall good study habits (not that his are that impressive ATM!)

I did primary (yr 2) in an affluent area, outstanding school. Kids were awful, they were too used to being freespirits whose every word was so so important that it had to be said straightaway. Totally unable to take turns and sit down.
I find it sad that the op's husband is being congratulated for ensuring their son apologised. Remember the days when it wouldve been the norm to treat a teacher with respect? I understand that the op's son wasnt involved in any bad behaviour towards the poor teacher

every word was so so important that it had to be said straightaway
Oh, yes,w as thinking about this yesterday. in my case it is teenagers, but the same thing. It is 'Miss!' 'Miss!', 'Miss!' and if you don't come to them straight away they get huffy and complain about being ignored. They really cannot have un unexpressed thought, or hold a thought - even in exams.

I work at a school in an affluent middle class area. The social skills of many of children are awful. I totally know what wizzywig meant when she said every word was so important it had to be said right away.

I have massive respect for teachers, whether they're coping with difficult classes or not, and I couldn't do their job. I know from friends the sort of hours they work, and I think in particular it must be really difficult having in effect to perform full time for several hours a day. In my job, if I'm feeling under the weather I can coast, but with 30 children to teach, you just can't.

That said, I have known teachers who give up because they simply aren't up to the job. I remember in particular the NQT who taught my dd's class in primary. They weren't at all a difficult class, but she just didn't seem up to it. I remember once she lost the homework of three children, dd included, and was really unpleasant about it, refusing to believe them and insisting they hand it in the next day come what may, even though dd was off sick. Dd was so worried that she insisted on redoing the work despite a really bad headache and the lack of half the necessary information. Subsequently the teacher handed back both the original and the second versions without a hint of an apology. At half term, we heard that she'd decided it wasn't for her, she couldn't cope, and she left. Most of the parents were absolutely delighted, particularly as her replacement turned out to be an excellent teacher. I hope original useless teacher is now in a job she can do and where she's happy.

I managed two terms in secondary. Never again. I went to a rough boys' school as one of 4 supply teachers, who had all got a term's contract. I was the only one who made it past half term. One left within a week. Another South African teacher - young and pretty - thought she would be fine as she'd taught in impoverished townships and in Soweto. She was astonished by the disrespectful behaviour. Just couldn't understand why these working class children didn't want to better themselves.

I was offered a permanent contract at the end of term immediately after the deputy head stood in the doorway of my classroom and watched me teach Shakespeare to one of the bottom set year nines. What he didn't realise was that it was the only proper teaching I'd done all term, because it was the only time the kids engaged. The minute he left they went back to flicking pencils at each other and talking.

They could have offered me 100k a year and I wouldn't have taken the job. Went to teach in FE instead - shit money but no classroom management issues.

You do all realise this is a centuries old situation? Nothing to do with the disaffected youth of today with no boundaries or discipline (I bet that's what they said at the time then, too!).

Read ER Braithwaite's "To Sir With Love", DH Lawrence's "The Rainbow", RF Delderfield's "To Serve Them All My Days", Flora Thompson's "Larks Rise", Laura Ingalls Wilder's "Farmer Boy", Thomas Hughes' "Tom Brown's Schooldays"... I could go on.

They all describe school situations over the last few centuries with out of control children or classes, teachers struggling to cope with them. In "Farner Boy", the older pupils are described as having killed a previous teacher, evidently with no repercussions.

The age of school leaving used to be 14, then 15, then 16.
Before that, it was 11: no secondary education. It made no difference as you can see from the periods covered in the books I mentioned, many of them autobiographical.
In Tudor times, they disciplined, even executed their out of control apprentices.

None of it ever seems to have been personal, just kids testing the boundaries and seeing how far they could go.

Tanith
"just kids testing the boundaries and seeing how far they could go."

The problem is that at some point this excuse, (and it is an excuse) no longer works.

At what point do people expect pupils to take responsibility for their actions?

I have seen 25 year olds at uni bring in their parents to berate lecturers and course leaders because they expect to get away with no work and have been kicked of the course that they are on.

I have seen people in jobs continue to bully the people that they have bullied throughout school and in to the job until the people there have taken them to one side and "explained" the situation to them.

A lot of behaviour is excused by saying "they are just pushing boundaries", or "it not personal" at what point do people think that this should stop?

I was pretty shocked at a recent uni open day that parents are able to load up a shopping card that can only be spent on food. At what stage will kids grow up if their parents are still managing their budgeting at 20?

Jesica, that card's been around for years and I did one for my very capable daughter for the first two terms.
You do realise that the loans only cover fees and if you are lucky, the rent? if you are going to survive, you need top up cash from amother source. But if you suddenly get hammered for cash that you weren't expecting to have to pay, knowing that you will still be able to eat is comforting for an 18 year old hundreds of miles from home for the first time.
By the summer, she'd found her feet.

tanith I agree with you - thus has it ever been.

However, not all developed countries have the same problem with widespread poor behaviour in school. British kids are apparently some of the worst behaved in the world!