Bloody geography teacher

[jennakong]

Son of 12 has a teacher who seems very chatty- one of those teachers who tells the class his life story kind of thing. My son said that today this guy started talking about nuclear war, in response to something one of the children said. He proceeded to describe the consequences of an all -out nuclear conflict (this is a year 8 class). My son is not particularly a worrier, though my younger child would be, and I certainly was myself as a child. I know the story is all over the news but I being unreasonable in thinking that adults should be shielding kids from this kind of thing? I was a teenager in the 80s and remember how awful the fear was during the Cold War. I don't think my life was enhanced by 'Threads' or When the Wind Blows - I think they scared me witless and kept me awake at night. Should geography teachers just concentrate on terminal moraines and ox bow lakes do you think?

I expect teachers to stick to topics on the specification. Our children have missed out on education during Covid and the last thing we need is a teacher who goes off track for most of a lesson, leaving kids unsure what they need to learn and revise. These teachers often fail to complete specification in time for revision.

YABU. Nuclear war has a big impact on our geography, so it may be off curriculum but it’s very relevant to geography as a subject. And what a loss for everyone if geography teachers taught only to the letter of the KS3 curriculum?

That’s quite apart from me seeing school as a general place of education and pastoral care so appropriate to discuss any topical issue.

When she was in Y8, one of mine had exam questions on the impact of earthquakes in Japan - so geographical disasters are fair game.

What a load of rubbish

The effects of Nuclear Warfare are horrific. But year 8 is definitely old enough to learn about it, and it sounds like the teacher was responding to a class discussion which is the sensible way to address this issue. Would you rather our child learnt about this from the internet, where they could be getting all kinds of misinformation?

But by sticking vigorously to a scheme of work that means shutting down the natural enquiry of the pupils and stops them developing their critical thinking skills.

of course sometimes it will be necessary for the teacher to bring things back on topic a bit but there should always be space for the lines of enquiry to develop naturally

If he was describing the effects of nuclear war on the planet then it wouldn't be off topic.

Children much younger are dying in the war, I’m sure your son can cope with hearing about it.

I taught my year 9's about 9/11 and we would discuss it in detail. I think by secondary school they are very aware of the world and what goes on so I'm not sure shielding them fro the realities of that is doing them any favours.

Year 8? 12/13yos absolutely should be discussing this IMO.

I was a teen in the 80s and although certainly aware, I don't remember an overwhelming fear, so I think your perspective isn't representative.

What did the teacher actually tell them?

It depends on what the teacher actually said. If he responded to a mention about Purim's current nuclear threats with a description of the aftermath of a full-on MAD conflict then I think that's unreasonable because what's being threatened on the news, though appalling, isn't Threads, and conflating the two is misleading.

Agree with reading Z for Zachariah in year 7 - also watched Threads at age 11. Year 8 is not too young imo

I expect teachers to stick to topics on the specification. Our children have missed out on education during Covid and the last thing we need is a teacher who goes off track for most of a lesson, leaving kids unsure what they need to learn and revise. These teachers often fail to complete specification in time for revision.

Where did the OP say this took 'most of a lesson'? Or indeed make any reference to the amount of time it took?

As for the 'Shouldn't geography teachers stick to Oxbow lakes' point - I imagine there would be quite a lot of effects of an all-out nuclear war which would be considered well within the remit of geographers.

Of course year 8 isn't too young. The topic of nuclear war also does come into all of the Humanities - Geography looks at the effect it has on the planet and human population; RS looks at the ethics of nuclear weapons and MAD; History looks at WW2.
Sounds like a brilliant teacher who can engage with current affairs related to their subject that pupils are actively thinking about and asking questions about.
FYI, teens talk about this stuff. It's a big news story. Be glad the Geog teacher took it up and had the discussion with them because I promise you it will be happening at breaktime anyway but with no adult guiding force or fact checking.

I'd rather a child who understands the world than one who just understand the curriculum.

I despair at the sheer lunacy of people who want to protect their precious little darlings from even just the harsh idea of reality.

No wonder everyone's fucked when you have people striving to prevent people from having any thoughts that aren't of sunshine and rainbows.

Year 8 is fine

Of course he's old enough.

My work friends daughter is 14 and she refuses to discuss the Holocaust with her, despite it rightly being taught in schools, because it is too traumatic for them and she 'doesn't need to know about atrocities like that'

You do realise 'bloody geography teachers' teach about more than oxbow lakes? Pupils are taught about human societies, climate change, physical landscapes, development - and taught to question things. Teaching by rote died several decades ago.

oh @jennakong I'm so with you. We're of a similar age and Threads gave me nightmares well into my 20's and absolutely terrified me.

Well we teach superpowers to yr7 and they learn about the cold war in that and nuclear threat and the multi polar world of today. Ukraine inevitably arises recently, in the past it was Afghanistan or Syria.

It's very definitely geography and relevant to the subject. It's in the A level syllabus for all exam boards.

He's a geography teacher.

Explaining geographical facts when questioned.

Don't deny it's really hard to hear. But what's better? Stay silent and let the, form their own incorrect assumptions and opinions or tell the truth?

We can't shield our young people from it. It's all over the news. They are informing their own opinions that aren't based in truth.

So personally I'd prefer them to be given it straight.

You're ds sounds great and what a great parent broadening his horizons to the world at a young age.

Lucky lad

Ex secondary English teacher - I can’t think of a single year I didn’t cover a book in y7 and y8 about the Holocaust, WW2, or an imagined post-nuclear event (like afore mentioned Z for Zachariah). Covering literature that asks the reader to consider situations very different to their personal experience is a big part of moving from primary to secondary, so there will be more heavy topics to come.

A lot depends on exactly how graphic the teacher's explanation was.

FWIW, the 1960s BBC film The War Game was partly filmed in the town near where I grew up. It was banned for years, and when I finally saw it in the '80s I recognised some of the actors because they had been recruited from a local amateur dramatic group (The Meopham Players) that my parents had later joined. So it had an even bigger impact than the creators had envisaged.