Keeping child in at lunchtime for failure to complete work

[Elizabeth1970]

Is this reasonable that my child's school have decided to keep her inside at lunchtime if she has not completed her work, she is in yr 1.
She struggles with writing so takes a long time even at home with no distractions ( only child ) to complete a writing task so I feel it's very unfair she is banned from going out after lunch, instead being sent back to class to continue the writing task.
Break times are unaffected so she has 15 minutes at 10am and another 15 at 2pm but this is all most days now.

For a start , I wouldn't just let them mess about routinely for lessons on end and then get them to catch up in break.

Well for me the key here is 'routinely'. But I am re the right for a whole break and lunchtime every single day. I would agree losing break time 2/3 times a week is indicative of a bigger problem.

I'd be interested to read the research that says being kept in for 10 minutes every so often harms mental health.

I am also quite interested that teachers who claim to care about mental health are seemingly less concerned about the mental health of their colleagues by possibly making them feel shit about their own classroom problems (and everyone has them) by promoting what a wonderful teacher they are.

And teachers have pretty much the worst mental health of any profession, there is lots of research that shows that.

How hilariously rude.

Which bit of my post did you consider rude or hilarious? Obviously you will admit that a few years teaching experience with a few hundred children at most doesn't mean your anecdotal experience with no long term knowledge of how your teaching affected them or any source of comparison against an alternative method of teaching gives you any authority to comment compared to those who have conducted large scale studies of educational outcomes in which they are able to account for external factors and compare hundreds of thousands of students. This I would consider to obvious to debate (as you put it). You sound incredibly dismissive of people who disagree with you because "you're a teacher". Which is silly because plenty of other teachers disagree with you and in fact educational research disagrees with you. It's concerning that if you are a teacher you're happy to ignore all of this research in preference for what you feel works in the short term. I would hope neither my doctor nor my child's teacher takes this approach.

Where has someone done that on this thread?

Seriously, we can't disagree with each other as it might upset Mrs Special Snowflake teacher and compromise her mental health?

My point is keeping children in at playtime has been illustrated to be negative in the long term this has been firmly established, it is also a right under EU law. That is the salient point.

Increasinglymiddleaged:

There is a 'right to recreation' but it doesn't specify that children should never lose any specific instance of recreation.

There is also a right to education. I would argue that includes your teachhera doing what they can do to make sure you don't spend your lessons pissing about.

Popcakes

As far as I can see you have cited no research at all in your responses.

To assume that the answers to all of life's problems can be found in an academic book/ research is breathtakingly naive.

I'd be interested to read the research that says being kept in for 10 minutes every so often harms mental health.

This is a wealth of evidence that the current lack of recreation time is damaging their mental health let alone reducing it any further!

PopCakes:

I would prefer not to engage with you as I think you have been deliberately rude. That is my last response to your posts.

Seriously, we can't disagree with each other as it might upset Mrs Special Snowflake teacher and compromise her mental health?

Wow you sound nice, I hope you don't teach my children.

Come on then reference it. Then people can decide on its validity for themselves.

BINGO tes veterans

But seriously, where did someone say 'I am a wonderful teacher' and this led to compromising someone's mental health?

Popcakes thank you for telling me how to conduct research and account for extrinsic factors.
Why assume I don't know that? prior to being a teacher i was a university lecturer in a scientific discipline and have nearly 50 published papers to my name.
Actually i am aware of extrinsic factors, and very much so about my students mental health, partly because we are very keen on getting that right where i work, and also because oddly enough i read the medical ( and sen) notes for every one of the 340 kids i teach every week and am well aware of those under the care of the GP, or CAMHS, or seeing our school counsellor. It would be negligent of me not to be.
I agree with another poster who said that a lot of educational research is poorly done, that includes lots of the published work from universities. All the more reason for practitioners in the field to carry out their own work.

But seriously, where did someone say 'I am a wonderful teacher' and this led to compromising someone's mental health?

It's the smug attitude of 'well I wouldn't let them'. I can't remember if it was you or not but it came through in bounds in a couple of posts.

I can't quote vast amounts of research but I can say that one of my children was not ready for school at 4, he was bright and as I said before has a first from a great uni and is doing really well with his masters but at 4 he was very young for his age. Starting school at 8 was great for him. One of his nephew's, my DGC, is very like him, his parents made the decision to send him to school at 4 as they thought it would help him and he needed the extra time. Like his uncle he "woke up" at 8 and has done fantastically in the last year and has moved up 4 tables at school, from bottom table to 2nd table. Unfortunately the previous 4 years have damaged his confidence and his self esteem. We are getting there with him but you know what, he started in school at 8 in pretty much the same position as my son academically but my son had 8 fun years and was confident and ready to learn. DGS was convinced he was stupid, very prone to crying if he couldn't get something straight away. I might not have taught hundreds or thousands, I might not be a trained teacher but I have seen both in two very similar children and I know which one I prefer. I hope my grandson fully recovers from the damage school has done him.

Parents can make an informed choice as to whether to send their child to school. Him being too young is not the school's fault at all.

Also there is a vast difference between children having fun and learning, purposeful play, and children outside tanking themselves up on sweets, sugary juices and crisps. Never have I ever excluded a from purposeful play activities.

Parents can make an informed choice as to whether to send their child to school.

They can indeed. Home education is a completely reasonable choice. But it being the best thing for one child doesn't make the it the best thing for every child up to the age of 8.

As a secondary school teacher I start teaching children a core subject at age 11. For many of them, home life is a chaotic mess, involving constant X box/DS, variable bedtimes, little outdoor activity, no books, no educational trips, no stimulating conversation.

The thought of those children being at home rather than school for an additional three years before someone begins to teach them to hold a reasonable conversation, let alone read or write, is frightening.

Considering I don't know a single school that allows primary children to take in sweets, crisps or sugary drinks I doubt they will be tanking themselves up.

Home education is wonderful but society isn't set up like that.

trifle I too am a teacher and was actually referring to the post above mine.

Alexander we must live in different countries. I've seen the children in my class plod on out with packets of fizzy laces, large packets of rainbow drops, two packets of crisps, two chocolate bars and whole lunch boxes filled with 'snacks' for that fifteen minute interval.
There isn't a jot I can do about it bar suggest that maybe one packet of crisps or bar of chocolate is enough otherwise they won't have time to play.
And yes, they come in on an absolute sugar high. Don't get me started on the chaos that comes after such foods and a wet, class based, break time.

But the answer for improved behaviour and improved diet is not to keep them in, is it? :)

As I said, they get to go out once they have finished. I can count on my one hand the amount of times and children I have kept in. I can also count on my one hand the amount of minutes it takes them to actually complete the task.

So no, I don't actually think the cumulative 20 minutes or so I have kept children in, over the 100odd school days this year, is in fact detrimental to their health or behaviour.

We seem to agree to disagree and that's perfectly okay. I am happy with my choice, my management and authority are happy with my choice and the parents of those children are happy with that choice.

sailorcherries:

Oh I know, sorry! Carried away

I'm in England. They get fruit at break time. Most schools only allow water though some get away with flavoured water.

Trifle, my point isn't that home education is best for every child, my point is that 4, 5, 6 year old are very young, they need to play, it is really important. Pushing this little girl to write more quickly and punishing her if she doesn't is unfair. The OP hasn't said anything about her child talking or having any complaints about her behaviour and yet she is punished.

sailorcherries it might be something you do rarely but this little 5 or 6 year olds is having this most days from the OP. Do you think that is appropriate because that is what the OP was asking about.