Not impressed with the daily chanting. Do other secondary schools do this?

[ReanimatedSGB]

DS is in Year 8 and he has told me that, at the start of every lesson, they all have to stand up and chant together, something along the lines of 'we promise to be good and work hard' (OK that's NOT the wording, don';t want to give exact wording in case it outs us).

Every lesson FFS. This strikes me as a waste of time (DS told me that the class took to dragging it out as much as possible in lessons no one likes) and... well. a bit creepy and cultish. AIBU?

That's another thing - all these 'good schools' that go in for expensive uniform, 'respect' and discipline'... and are regarded as 'good' because EXAM RESULTS. These places are often riddled with bullying, very quick to exclude any pupil with SEN or EAL: if they are state schools and therefore not allowed to select the cleverest kids, they make sure there are enough factors to put off the poor families. They are not 'good' schools
Yawn.

So to summarise...
OP doesn't like chanting (fair enough. I think it's a bit daft).
But really they don't like discipline or consistency because it's essentially north korea.
They also are big on not following any rule they don't like.
They will back their children not following rules they don't like.
Any rules they don't like must be leading us on a path of blindly following authority where we'll end up like nazi germany.
Any examples of rules and consistency being good for a school aren't actually good for a school.
Oh and any school that is a good school and gets good results does it by getting rid of all the children who they don't fancy, exclude loads and are rife with bullying.

Crap. I guess my bog standard, non-selective, outdtanding state conprehensive with excellent results, strong pastoral care, hasn't permanently excluded in the time I've worked there (but has sent students on managed moves and received students on moves from other schools), has a large SEND base, has over 40 languages spoken in it must be awful and only brainwashing kids because we have behaviour standards and discipline. The terror. Parents are terrified of sending their children to us because they might end up leaving us as well rounded, articulate young adults who have a huge amount of potential and opportunities. I can hear the students complaining on results day that sure a strong future and educational record is great, but their futures were ruined because we don't allow jewellery or trainers.

And whilst OP thinks of another thing to add to their list of 'reasons i have a vendetta against schools', bullying happens in any school what it has to do with chanting is beyond me but anyhooo. I would never work in a school which claims to have no bullying. It's how you deal with bullying which is important.

But hey, OP probably wants a coasting bordering on failing school where the kids aren't expected to do much, they sort of follow 60% of the rules and leave with a handful of passes at GCSE. After all, there be no rules in life and you can stick 2 fingers up to anyone who says othetwise because you don't need no education and did just fine.
which is EXACTLY the type of entrenched attitude that people trying to turn these schools around are battling... which why consistency and rules in school are needed

Maisy, there's a massive gap between 'no rules' and 'pointless, excessive rules'. THIS is my problem - the idea that blind obedience is something to be encouraged (and the only solution for a struggling school is to bring in military discipline, an attention-seeking and overpaid 'superhead' and drop half the curriculum in favour of times tables and Latin). The current overall mindset for education is that you start with the petty bullshit and then exclude all the 'difficult' kids whose problems are SEN/EAL/poverty and watch your results improve. A bit. This is an interesting read about how well that shit works.

and the only solution for a struggling school is to bring in military discipline, an attention-seeking and overpaid 'superhead' and drop half the curriculum in favour of times tables and Latin

Well apart from the fact that doesn't happen.....

So has the chanting school dropped half its curriculum and introduced Latin?

Just read the whole thread and cant understand why its being called chanting? The children seen to be making a short statement at the start of class akin to a school moto relating to being ready to learn. This is not chanting.

Sounds pretty sensible to me.

I'm speaking more generally now. One of my day jobs involves schools so I see shit happening all over the place.

Has everyone forgotten the clusterfuck of the 'new' SATS a couple of years ago? Set the kids tests that are way beyond the age-capabilities of most of them, insist that schools throw in all sorts of extra homework clubs and Saturday tutoring and them blame the fact that about 50% didn't pass on insufficient 'traditional values'...

And those of you who are teachers - how do you get on with the simultaneous instructions that you have to encourage children to 'take ownership of their own learning'. 'move away from having the teacher standing at the front of the class talking ' and 'go back to traditional discipline' and do endless box-ticking and moderated assessment?

But piglet...Don't let the facts get in the way of the OP's school sized chip.

OP My issue is you feel you are judge, jury and executioner on what is/isn't pointless, which only highlights your own lack of awareness and ignorance (and to be honest paints yourself as exactly the type of person who create a climate of 'my DC will only do rules I like').

Do I think specific footwear affects learning? No. Do i think following a uniform is a basic part of most schools and it should be followed so people who see 'no trainers' and think eeeh I'll buy my lad black trainers and be all over the local press when my boy ends up in isolation are total idiots? Yes. Don't be a bloody idiot.

Do I personally think 'yes i would personally choose every rule' at every school I've worked in? No. Do I realise that nowhere is going to be to my preference all the time? Yes. Do i raise issues appropriately if needed? Yes. Do i understand that consistency is good for schools and that it sort of doesn't matter if I do ABC as a school routine or XYZ? Yes.

It's what makes me laugh on MN when you get people totally raging about something school-based whrn the reality is usually a reasonable middle ground or the issue is more nuanced than some raging caricature.

move away from having the teacher standing at the front of the class talking

You're out of date. We're allowed to tell the kids stuff now.

I'm speaking more generally now. One of my day jobs involves schools so I see shit happening all over the place.

So if its happening all over the place please point us in the direction if schools where military style discipline takes place and curriculum is dropped for Latin and times tables.

If it's happening all over the place then it shouldn't be difficult to give examples will it.

And those of you who are teachers - how doyouget on with the simultaneous instructions that you have to encourage children to 'take ownership of their own learning'. 'move away from having the teacher standing at the front of the class talking 'and'go back to traditional discipline' and do endless box-ticking and moderated assessment?
Quite easily.
For a start, I run a well ordered and calm classroom based on high expectations of behaviour. (Which means lots of stuff ypu would consider petty and would back your child not doing like entry routines to the room, routines for gettinf equipment, silent behind chairs to be let out).
I deliver good teaching inputs which develop pupil knowledge and then they apply it. (Remember ofsted say there is no set way to teach)
Traditional discipline - rules and respect. Not exactly groundbreaking but different from 'timmy flipped a table, now if you'd just done your lesson hooked to pokemon go and fidget spinners then maybe he woukd have behaved' crap of recent years)
Box ticking - meh. Part of life. Many jobs have their share of pointless paperwork.

And somehow i get great results abd have happy children.

There's a bit of a difference between 'military-style discipline' and chanting a slogan at the start of a lesson, don't you think?

noble
Not to the OP.
They've seen it all.
They know all about these widespread schools ran like boot camps with latin everywhere.
They also know that good schools aren't good schools at all.

Really they can't understand that things might be done for a whole range of reasons and that their personal opinion of a rule isn't some kind of authoritative judgement on whether it should be followed.

ReanimatedSGB

I haven't forgotten about the "clusterfuck" that was/is the new sats as we are still dealing with it.
I haven't forgotten about the "clustrefuck" that is the new curriculum or the new exams that are going through the final phase in, or the new new exams that are coming through.
I haven't forgotten about the grade boundaries that no-one knows and are going to be changed every year after the exams to ensure no grade inflation.

as for
how do you get on with the simultaneous instructions that you have to encourage children to 'take ownership of their own learning'. 'move away from having the teacher standing at the front of the class talking ' and 'go back to traditional discipline' and do endless box-ticking and moderated assessment?

we can go with SNAFU or FUBAR (at least until the new new ed sec changes it all again). Personally I would go with 'same shit, different day'

Great Yarmouth Charter is the school that got the new head and introduced very strict discipline - like Michaela, but I don't think either school offer Latin. West London Free School does Latin but doesn't have the really strict discipline.

There's that school in Plymouth(?) that's gone No Excuses. Not sure about their curriculum.

As a maths teacher, I'm in favour of times tables. The most popular way to drill secondary kids (including at Michaela) seems to be Times Tables Rockstars which is a fun computer game where you pick a rockstar avatar and answer questions as quickly as possible.

I think a few things are being conflated here.

BoneyBackJefferson - yeah, understood. (One of the biggest reasons I want to get out of the education-related job is that I have no power at all and have to see all this shit and be complicit in it... What all schools really need is a) more money and b) more money and c) more money. And not be ordered to waste what little money they have on untried unproven nonsense.)

If you're not allowed to try it, then how can you prove it?

And if it's untried, how do you know it's nonsense?

I don't even know whether I'll bother to post this opinion but it seems that the "chanting is fine' camp have the majority now on this fascinating thread.

BUT and it's a big but. There has ,in my long experience, always been a very strange ignorance, in most schools, of what an adolescent actually is gong through in terms of biology.

We are more aware of child development where small children are concerned, we don't expect a baby to be born walking, talking and sleeping properly. But teenagers' problems and mental and physical development, also need for autonomy, are dismissed by schools.

They are conflicted and feel bad a lot of the time because they can't meet the expectations of the adults.( even though they wouldn't admit it to themselves). Peers play a huge part in their development too They get picked on for looking or just being different, and a strict uniform\anti bullying policy makes little difference.

I think that chanting is unnecessary and a bit humiliating . It reinforces the 'them and us' attitude of both the teachers and children and does nothing to help the children become autonomous, questioning thinking adults.

We studied adolescence as part of initial teacher training. Not sure if all tt courses do but if you work with hundreds of teenagers you’d be hard placed to ignore the effects of puberty and adolescence. It’s a hard time.

My feeling all though my DCs school education was that the teachers were doing a brilliant job in increasingly difficult circumstances, often with very badly behaved children and parents.

I picked my battles very carefully, and only interferred if I felt any child was actually in physical or emotional danger.

I was very aware that sending them to that or any school was entirely optional, and by choosing to send them there I should support the staff as near to 100% as possible.

30 seconds of "chanting" I wouldn't even have given headspace to.

Yes indeed Mistress I often wonder if anyone remembers their own adolescence and how horrible it was without the insensitivity of schools and some parents!

ppeatfruit

Without knowing what the chant is, it is hard to say how 'bad' it could be.

The OP has quite rightly not said what it is.

However, I don't see anything wrong with something like
"I will work my hardest, do my best and respect the rights of others to learn"

It reinforces the 'them and us' attitude of both the teachers and children and does nothing to help the children become autonomous, questioning thinking adults

I don't want this to come over as arsey as it might seem, but how do you know this for certain? Someone upthread likened the 'chanting' to saying prayers in a faith school. My family were strict Catholics, I went to a RC school, Church every Sunday, at one point we went to Mass everyday through the summer holidays - fun times! (So it was a tad more than saying a few words at the start of the lesson).

I'm a staunch atheist and have been since I was about 9, despite all the drilling at school and family pressure.

Teachers and students are them and us. Teachers are employees, wear their own clothes, have their own staffroom, toilets, can issue sanctions and instructions and expect to have them followed.

Why would anyone worry about chanting reinforcing this? Are we supposed to do everything that the kids do in case they realise that we're authority figures?

I suspect a lot of it is about horses for courses: what works well in one setting might be totally disastrous in another.

In some settings it might reinforce a joint "them and us" feeling in staff and students alike, in others (where the new effort is perceived as alien to local culture and patronising) it can drive a "them and us" wedge between school management otoh and staff/students/parents otoh.

This is what happened in ds' school: the new head put himself across as the saviour who was going to show us for the first time what aspirations look like. The local community did not take kindly to this, pupils openly poked fun at it, and most of the best teachers left within a couple of years because they felt their experience was no longer valued. As a piece of management it was a disaster.

But in a different setting, with a different history, it might have done very well.

chanting won't work in any situation. It's insulting to the students and teachers alike.