Michaela School and behaviour - AIBU

[herculepoirot2]

AIBU to think that you might read this behaviour policy and think it is authoritarian and unnecessary, but to also think that, with results four times better than the national average, these people might have a point about the benefits to young people of being expected to work hard and behave well?

mcsbrent.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Behaviour-Policy-11.02.19.pdf

Maybe they have the time because their school doesn’t do triple-impact marking, excessive data analysis or 6 different differentiated worksheets for a lesson.
Maybe they have loads of energy left because teaching there isn’t a soul-sucking exercise in waiting for kids to be quiet and listen or cajoling them into maybe doing a bit of work.
My school is not anywhere near as strict as Michaela sounds but we have clear expectations and the kids behave themselves. I’m no Tory right winger but I’m with Katherine Birbalsingh on the fact that the low expectations that some schools have of working class kids, or BME kids or kids with SEN is a huge problem.
In my subject (history) there was huge demand from some teachers for foundation books (despite the fact that our papers aren’t tiered) for the new specs. The publishers have now released Target Grade 5 books. I’m not going to lie, I’m pretty horrified by that. Last week I had a student predicted a 5 get a grade 9 (I also had one last year) and a good number got grades 6-8. I see history teachers on Facebook despairing that the new exams are expecting “comprehensive school kids to sit an Eton level exam” and there is a general perception that the new exams are just too hard and that the challenging content isn’t engaging for working class kids. Some have even suggested just not teaching one paper to their lower sets as it’s too hard and therefore demoralising. I’m sure that there are lots of history teachers out there sitting on our hands trying not to call that utter bullshit, because we know these people mean well and want the best for their students. Why should “comprehensive school kids” not be reaching the same standard as kids at Eton though? I had kids in my class who are every bit as bright as any in theirs.

Why should “comprehensive school kids” not be reaching the same standard as kids at Eton though? I had kids in my class who are every bit as bright as any in theirs.

Darned straight.

By the same token, do you have any kids in your class who are bright enough to pass but, because they have never been taught how to behave, have never really learnt to read, retain or revise information?

This is the problem as children get older: we start to confuse performance and potential performance.

Fuck going to that school

“Why should “comprehensive school kids” not be reaching the same standard as kids at Eton though?”

They do.

BertrandRussell

In 2018 in Maths, Eton recorded 256 results. 77% of them were grade 9. In English Language, 77% of students got A. Those %s at grade 9 or A are higher than the national averages for 4s.

Could you explain what you mean?

To compare like with like I suppose you'd need to cmpare the top sets in com,ps with Eton or pupils at a state grammar with Eton or compare Millfield (private, not very academic) with a secondary modern. Even so great they are aiming high and doing well.

It doesn’t start as they get older it starts in reception. All sorts of stuff which might need early intervention gets written off because of home background/sex/month of birth/they all catch up by seven/we start school too early.

To compare like with like I suppose you'd need to cmpare the top sets in com,ps with Eton or pupils at a state grammar with Eton

The usual proportion of 9s is about 5%, isn’t it? Across the board.

All sorts of stuff which might need early intervention gets written off because of home background/sex/month of birth/they all catch up by seven/we start school too early.

Oh yes: “They all end up at the same point anyway, so 🤷🏻‍♀️“

Except that they don’t. They end up on the arse end of a bell curve.

There is a concentration of very bright boys indeed at Eton. You can’t compare to a comprehensive school.

Isn’t the exam for getting into Eton really tough? You’d expect them to be getting grade 9s.

There is a concentration of very bright boys indeed at Eton. You can’t compare to a comprehensive school.

I’m obviously not expecting them to have comparable results on the whole. That doesn’t mean children of comparable ability do as well in a standard comp as they would at Eton. That wouldn’t make sense, given the other advantages they have, and just isn’t true.

Isn’t the exam for getting into Eton really tough? You’d expect them to be getting grade 9s.

It is tough. I would expect them to do very well. But I also expect some very bright kids to do well in comprehensives. They sometimes do and they sometimes don’t. How many able kids have you taught who fell well short of what they were capable of because they (take your pick) pissed about, didn’t attend school, didn’t revise, didn’t do homework?

Learning environment matters.

Not sure how Harry and Wills got in, though.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I don’t think comprehensive schools need to be getting the same proportion of grade 9s as Eton. What I object to is the idea that it’s ridiculous to expect “comprehensive school kids” to sit the same exam as Eton kids. It’s not.
I would certainly like to see the proportion of grade 9s in many comprehensive schools increase but it’s clearly ridiculous to expect them to get the same number as a highly selective school.

That doesn’t mean children of comparable ability do as well in a standard comp as they would at Eton.
I would expect a child of comparable ability and reasonably well supported to do as well academically. But I wouldn’t send my child to Eton for the exam results- I would expect the best results my child was capable of To be a given.

I would expect a child of comparable ability and reasonably well supported to do as well academically.

But they don’t.

OP- If I’m honest I’d say the vast majority of the kids that I’ve taught who have not got the 4/C have not got it, at least in part, because their behaviour and attitude for learning weren’t good. I’ve had SEN kids with targets of 2 get a 4 or 5 and bright kids who did no work get grade 2. I’m not going to lose any sleep over the latter.

Actually, having said I don’t lose any sleep over those that don’t work hard I really do. I don’t self-flagellate or blame myself but there are plenty of those kids that I still worry and wonder about years later.

If I’m honest I’d say the vast majority of the kids that I’ve taught who have not got the 4/C have not got it, at least in part, because their behaviour and attitude for learning weren’t good.

We now know that the teenage brain is pretty underdeveloped when it comes to planning ahead, understanding the longer-term consequences of their actions, self-control, resisting peer pressure etc. So why do we think it's fine to expect them to have the self-motivation and self-control of adults when it comes to working hard in school?

Middle-class people who want their kids to be "free" at school mostly have the money and social resources to pick up the pieces and ensure their children have other chances in life, if their child doesn't get decent GCSE results. It's the children of less advantaged people who suffer.

It's the children of less advantaged people who suffer.

Exactly. No money to invest in setting up a business. No money for private resits. No money for tutors. No physical space for rent-free accommodation while you catch up. Bedroom tax. No money to fund an internship.

For some people, exam results are THE difference between a hard life and a less hard life.

Just for anyone interested in the figures of ECHP etc: www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/140862/michaela-community-school/absence-and-pupil-population

You can use this tool to look up and compare any state school in England.

I do think the ECHP figure is unusually low, and I don't think you can just brush that off.

I do also think the school's results are impressive- as others have said, it'll be interesting to see if they can sustain that with a full school cohort now in place. I'd be interested if the model could be transferred to an area of the country where school funding is lower.

I suspect that at least some of the school's current success comes down to more teacher input, maybe slightly smaller classes and not being completely underfunded.

I do think there are probably some useful strategies that could be adopted though- the corridors thing is interesting, especially when a lot of older state schools can have very narrow school corridors that can be intimidating/dangerous.

I do think not offering Computing/Computer Science and the arts is problematic, though. Yes, you can do them at uni without studying them at GCSE and A-level, but many students will be reluctant to do so (especially girls in CompSci). Equally, I think the arts have lots of benefits for teens/young people and it's a shame if students get no/limited access to these at school.

Kesstrel- that’s just it, isn’t it. I think it’s important to have structured, disciplined school environments because many kids just haven’t mastered self discipline yet.

That has really irritated me, that attitude that 2s and 3s are only for shirkers or the idle. Plenty of hard working students get 2s and 3s, many because large aspects of the curriculum remain inaccessible to them : it would after all be pointless if all students achieved a 4 or above. The public attitude that you are worth nothing, even it seems shared by some teachers, if you have less than a 4 really saddens me.

There were kids at ds’s old school where turning up and registering for an exam was a massive achievement.