Teacher showing photos to kids of victorian dead children - slightly disturbing

[whyiwonderwhy]

I am finding this so disturbing I can't sleep! However I might be being oversensitive, who knows. It is the "but - WHY?" bit which is bothering me most.

The lesson was about the industrial revolution, and the subject of photography came up, 2 of the earliest photos were shown to the class (13-14yo) and then....I wish I could say the teacher showed photos of some of the extraordinary engineering inventions of the day, or of busy streets, or China, or something wonderful and extraordinary...but no, the teacher showed 10 photos of dead children and talked about how the Victorians would photograph dead children as though they were still alive, with the rest of the family, in a commemorative way. I have seen some in the past (I didn't learn about it at school however) and they are moving and tragic and disturbing. Nothing else, just these photos.

Just wondering...why? why would the teacher do this? Any ideas?

This teacher has form by the way. A lot of it. But this has for some reason blindsided me.

That's a bizarre thing to say. I'm from a culture where open coffins are the norm and it's not remotely disturbing. It's comforting for mourners to say goodbye to their loved one, not a wooden box. I kissed many a corpse as a child and I'm fine.

You've decided that the most important thing about the Victorian era was the engineering, and become fixated pm the fact the teacher didn't show images of this - but it's important to remember here that other people are not you, and that some people find different things interesting/important. The majority of the children would find Victorian customs around death more interesting than engineering, I imagine, though of course that will not be true for all.

What I am very surprised by, is how you know exactly what happend in the lesson. Do you expect your child to come home and tell you exactly what each teacher says, what pictures they show etc?

If so, that's excessively controlling and you need to stop. Some counselling might help if you struggle to stop this on your own.

Good luck!

Lessons often go off on tangents when you’re having a good discussion with your class. It’s a sign of an engaged teacher and pupil.

I’d tell upper primary kids about the death photography but wouldn’t think twice about showing secondary kids.

I saw some of these photos as an adult and they freaked me out. You couldn't tell if the child was dead or alive due to the propping up and open eyes. In my children's secondary the teacher would be in big trouble for having showed those pictures. It makes no sense at all because they are not studying "death photography during the victorian era".
Both of my sons would have reacted badly to this. Hell, I was profoundly troubled by these photos as an adult. I think the teacher wanted to shitstir and I would definitely talk to the teacher and ask for what purpose these photos were shown. Why are you afraid to speak up?

Surely the most interesting part of history is it’s impact on people and how similar these seemly disconnected people really are to us?
I’m sure you’d hate some of my English lessons but I love a bit of how scandalous Byron was and it makes his poetry a bit more interesting too!

People have explained to you why the teacher may have made that decision, and you have rebuked all of them because you “know exactly what you’re talking about”. I think there are some valid reasons for the decision (engagement etc), but would be surprised if this was absolutely all that was mentioned on the topic at all as that doesn’t really delve into what the Industrial Revolution actually was.

I can see that if it’s a topic you’re passionate about that you might feel annoyed if you perceive that aspects of it have been ignored and glossed over. What I would say is that if this is a unit of work, this might not be all they cover on the IR. Also, you’re judging a lesson you weren’t in, and therefore you don’t actually know how in depth discussions prior to the photos were.

(Also - I never found that when I taught it in Year 5 that the kids were remotely as grabbed by it as they were by things focusing on what daily life was like for Victorian people, but maybe that’s just due to the fact it was at a primary level!).

Your kids never played a video game where they kill each other or watched a film/tv show that might be slightly grisly? Not 18 certs etc but something a tad ‘risky’? Sheltered.

You can't talk about the Industrial Revolution without talking about its effect on social history. Otherwise you are teaching as though history happens in discrete sections which doesn't make sense. Death photography (and some of those pictures won't even have been of dead children; people got very confused as to which pictures were which) is part of the whole social history of that era.

Oh and the Victorian photos - your child really got to teenage years without knowing about them?

My children were much younger. I think because my dad was a photographer and always engaged them in the history of photography etc, they were much younger, 7/8 maybe. It didn’t scare them, why would it? I find them quite beautiful tributes to loved ones.

I had a Latin teacher who sounds very similar to you and your husband. She would have us out on the lawn, marching and reacting to commands. I adored her, and as a result, the subject. I regret not taking classics further than GCSE.

Re the OP, it sounds exactly like the kind of interesting lesson that would have piqued my interest about the Victorians.

I took my (younger) kids to an industrial museum a few weeks ago and whilst I found it fascinating, they were bored - except when the demonstration of the machines talked about how the little children would be forced to do dangerous jobs.

This lesson sounds really interesting and exactly what would have made me engage with the future, less intriguing ones.

Do you really think kids of that age are remotely interested in extraordinary engineering?

Unless you’re one of DS’s autistic friends, then you’d never get off the topic.

Death traditions are much more interesting to most people and others have already pointed out, can be made relevant to the topic.

Kudos to the teacher for having a bit of creativity to be honest.

I’ve taught History (yes a qualified History teacher) for 15 years and to my knowledge have never used a photo of dead Victorian children in my teaching for Y9.

I find this whole conversation odd, and having taught in very challenging schools no I did not feel the need to use these kinds of photos to shock Y9 children into paying attention.

It’s all very strange!

Have you ever tried teaching a bunch of teenagers about the spinning Jenny?! This sounds way more interesting for them then going on about making cloth, building bridges and railways

For teaching factual historical events to school children in their history lessons apparently. How very dare he!!

I get the impression that you are not keen on the teacher and that this is another example of 'form'. As you are keen on context, it might be worth sharing that.
I'm a teacher and increasingly avoid showing/discussing anything other than very uncontroversial things because of these kinds of complaints. A couple of years ago I had a complaint from an A Level student's parent about teaching Frankenstein (because some people die in it) to her 17 year old.

I do think this is part of the problem with resilience. Ostensibly, (in school and with parents) children seem to be increasingly sheltered from every uncomfortable emotions/ideas and then some seem struggle to deal with challenging feelings appropriately. Meanwhile, some (though not all, of course) see very disturbing things online without the support of parents/teachers.
I terms of it being 'out of context', I would say a whole lesson solely on this may be a little OTT but perhaps it was a 'starter' to get the students talking about the period. These students seem to have found it memorable as they talked about it at home. I don't suppose the engineering marvels of the Spinning Jenny are quite so engaging to share! In a way, job achieved. Bringing topics home to discuss is a real win in teaching.
You may have said, but did your child object? If so, perhaps he or she could ask the teacher how it links to the topic? If they didn't object, I'm not sure what the problem is.

Did you attend this lesson, you seem to know a lot of detail.

I’m sure your child has, like the majority of other children, zoned out at all the boring Ismbard Kingdom Brunel and Stephenson’s Rocket stuff. It’s dry as hell when you’re in your teens. It only becomes interesting once you’re an adult. Learning about the advent of photography is a big part of history lessons. Just like learning about other methods of recording evidence.

The kids will remember those pictures. And they’ll be viewing far worse on Tik Tok.

What does your child think of the lesson?

@whyiwonderwhy are you a history teacher too? You know a lot about the sequencing of the lessons and what the curriculum and content should include?
It sounds like you have previous grievances with this teacher and wonder whether that makes you examine this subject more deeply (or do you analyse each lesson to this depth?).
As they are secondary school age then lessons are generally prepared and shared across the department, so it wouldn't just be your child's class receiving this content.
You don't want to address the teacher directly, but can you contact the head of department (if that isn't them) and ask them to explain the content of the lesson and I am sure they will be able to give you the rationale for it.

OP have you heard of the internet?

I can promise you these 14 year olds have seen a lot more disturbing things than Victorian death photography on their own mobile phones.

How many do you think have watched things like Game of Thrones or Dexter?

It’s a rubbish idea for a lesson but considering they study the holocaust and WWII at most schools in year 9, it’s really not a big deal.

I'm 40 and my text books had images of death in them, especially around WW2 and the Holocaust. I think the thing that's more recent is people being upset by historical accuracy.

How fascinating. I would not mind my children learning that.
It sets their minds wondering about what we treasure, how we store a memory of a loved one, how history is kept, monuments of special people etc. etc.
In future they might learn about our voices being stored on memory sticks, or our videos of weddings etc.

There is more to worry about with the kids watching the news of today.
And old WWI pictures etc are thought provoking.
Life is varied and cultural practices change over time.

The only thing I remember about my history lessons in school was a discussion with the teacher about his new contact lenses. We managed a double lesson dedicated to these new things in 1981 or 1982.

Well there's a huge teacher shortage at the moment so here's your chance. Retrain and show them all how it should be done.

Yabu. Meanwhile if you turn the TV on the pope is in an open coffin.