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

And who can forget Hannah's sweets?

Sneakily putting quadratics into a probability question....

A classic example of using what you know in a different way and having to think and apply.

I am just talking about spoon feeding facts vs applying what you know to new situations. Of course, total discovery learning is bad but I do think it's important to be able to apply without having to be spoon fed everything.

I agree that it is possible that one of their tactics is informally excluding children who can’t adjust to their environment

Informal exclusions are illegal, and their job is to educate all pupils placed with them, not just the ones who "fit" their environment and don't need help and support to do so. Breaking the law is hardly setting the best disciplinary example to their pupils, is it?

sn’t that noble’s point? When you get 30 kids to do it practically it doesn’t come to anything like pi

TBH, if I was teaching Pi, I would just teach it.

But I think there has to be a balance between just being given new facts and mastering them and thinking for yourself.

I have an ancient a level in Maths. When it comes to measuring, it is a bit hit and miss, just tell me pi is a number and that is enough for me.

(We will gloss over the fact that my job involves reading plans and we don't talk about mis-measuring for new carpets)

TBH, if I was teaching Pi, I would just teach it.

But the same issues crop up with anything you want the pupils to discover for themselves instead of you telling them. They’re not Isaac Newton, they’ve only got an hour, you’re going to end up telling them anyway to make sure they’ve got the correct info once they’ve done their bodge job.

I don’t think too much can be inferred from the lack of EHCPs in terms of admission practices. My school takes in around 180 students per year. There are typically between 1-3 EHCPs/statements in each year group. For the last 2 cohorts of year 7 we had 0 EHCPs. In the incoming year 7 we have 8. When you are dealing with such small numbers you do get anomalous results.

But the point is that we are talking about a 120 a year intake over five years. It would be extraordinary to be as anomalous as this over that length of time. When you put that together with the fact that neither the SEN policy nor the admissions policies mention EHCPs, you get a very worrying picture.

I think it very much depends on the subject and person. With science and knowledge-based stuff (eg Latin) the patterns are more obvious. You’ve never seen ‘uxor’ before But you came across uxorious in your English lesson which means fond of your wife... I still remember the lessons I was shown a graph of 1st IEs across a period in AS and ‘discovering’ about sub shells.

I guess for maths maybe doing the number triangle for addition and subtraction and showing what 1 - -1 equals (knowing that the 2 numbers at the bottom add to the top number). But I think most other stuff in maths would be hard to ‘discover’... maybe some geometry stuff - like polygons and equivalent angles???

My DH who did maths at uni doesn’t understand the discovery stuff. He’d Rather just know facts.

But the same issues crop up with anything you want the pupils to discover for themselves instead of you telling them

I do think that a "What do you think", "Why do you think" and "Can you explain" are important questions in a class. Even in maths.

I do think that a "What do you think", "Why do you think" and "Can you explain" are important questions in a class. Even in maths.

None of these questions mean that you need to do discovery learning.

But we do know, there are examples in the book.

I do wonder whether those highly identifiable children with SEN gave permission for their personal difficulties to be publicised - if they exist.

My point is, that no institution can be run on the needs of a minority

Schools don't have to be. What they do have to do, however, is to meet the SEN of all the children placed there, not just the ones who conform to a very rigid disciplinary régime.

and Michaela copes extremely well with the minority of its students who do need support.

But not apparently well enough to get EHC needs assessments and EHC Plans where they may be necessary.

I can't comment on the fact that some children with additional needs are either discouraged from applying or are managed out. There is no evidence, even anecdotal, to support this.

I think there was at least some upthread from the poster who referred to ex Michaela children ending up at another school. However, the more important evidence lies in the lack of EHCPs which simply can't be brushed aside, particularly when you put that together with the SEN and admissions policies.

Isn’t there a cost benefit decision to be made here?

Short practical task that helps children get a sense of what’s going on and can’t really go wrong -probably worth it
Pissing about with bits of string almost certainly getting the wrong answer - complete waste of time
Longer practical tasks - might be worth it depending on your objectives and how much time you have to cover the SoW

It looks like their SEN policy has changed but when I read it a couple of years ago they had a policy of automatically putting all students with an SEN in the bottom set.

It does say that children identified as needing additional support during baseline testing are automatically placed in the bottom set. Although they talk about other types of support that children with SEND may receive, interestingly there is no mention of sensory or motor support.

Has anyone else noticed the 'Donate' tab on Michaela's website?

I do wonder whether those highly identifiable children with SEN gave permission for their personal difficulties to be publicised - if they exist

You really have decided Michaela are unethical bastards haven’t you? 😂

It’s interesting- would you have felt the same way about them if their results had been poor?

Informal exclusions are illegal, and their job is to educate all pupils placed with them, not just the ones who "fit" their environment and don't need help and support to do so. Breaking the law is hardly setting the best disciplinary example to their pupils, is it?

Actually, by your own admission, no it isn’t. If they cannot meet that pupil’s needs in their environment without it interfering with the education of the rest, they can say so. “Reasonable adjustments” does not mean “any adjustments needed, including changing your whole set-up.”

But I do see your point; they’re probably walking a fine line.

As I said upthread, if the implication of following the law is that the education of 90% of their students suffers, I think the law is wrong and needs to be reviewed anyway.

But not apparently well enough to get EHC needs assessments and EHC Plans where they may be necessary.

May be necessary. May not be necessary. If the children are coping, they don’t need an EHCP.

I feel like I waste a lot of time in class trying to pull out things like the meanings of words from children. I agree with the idea of telling them the simple, factual stuff, then saving the time I have available for more exploratory stuff for debate where there is debate to be had.

Nobody benefits from a 15 minute conversation about the possible meanings of “catharsis”. Students might well benefit from a 15 minute discussion about how Romeo and Juliet creates a sense of catharsis. After we have read it.

I feel like I waste a lot of time in class trying to pull out things like the meanings of words from children

Yeah. Better to give them the definition then challenge them to use it in a piece of writing later in the lesson.

hmmmm... not sure Alex Quigley agrees with you on that.

I spend a lot of time on this. I love words! Why should I assume young people don't have the same curiosity about word roots?

The worst to me is the teachers who 'teach' a long list of subject terminology and drill children to use them, as if this equates to high performance. Students come to us from a particular feeder school parroting words like anadiplosis but can't spot a noun. AQA and the EMC have a lot to say on this. Our students genuinely think they are clever and entitled to a 9 because they know these words. I taught one boy who got an A* in A Level because he could parrot these words and bullshit with the finest. But he was very clever and could apply all this to an unseen, which suggests proper understanding.

Not sure where you stand on that OP but it's definitely the knowledge people who advocate drilling in terminology. There was a list circulating somewhere. Personally, I sit somewhere in the middle of the debate, but tend to think they remember a tricky word like catharsis better if they understand it means 'pure' and can link it to the girl's name Catherine. I do lots of fill in the blank activities to work out words and to recall them.

Yeah. Better to give them the definition then challenge them to use it in a piece of writing later in the lesson.

Which I generally do. I am also thinking about my first years in teaching where we would spend whole lessons “inventing our own superheroes” in preparation for a scheme of work on classical literature or Beowulf, and you would end up with thirty cut-price Batmans and nobody any the wiser about Anglo-Saxon anything. 🙄

Piggywaspushed

Couldn’t agree with you more. I liked a lot of what Quigley said about vocabulary poverty but I do not think that poverty is alleviated by drilling them with words out of context.

The problem is that our students aren’t exposed to high quality language in its context. There is nothing wrong with the judicious application of subject terminology, where it is actually adding to the analysis. For its own sake it’s very silly.

I guess in English figuring out the meaning of words you haven’t seen before might be considered as skill that they could employ in an comprehension exercise.

Which is different to technical vocabulary that they might need to know for, say, maths.

And yes, using etymology to understand and remember words is great.

When did teaching become so much 'this is the right way to do it, and if you do it another way you are wrong.' ? Perhaps the online world just makes it more obvious but I feel like teaching is more divisive these days.

I guess in English figuring out the meaning of words you haven’t seen before might be considered as skill that they could employ in an comprehension exercise.

But the best way for them to be able to do this is for them to have an extensive vocabulary. Then they naturally begin to make connections. Sitting there trying to guess the meanings of words when you could be learning sort of misses the point.