AIBU to want more from the school system academically than getting children 'where they need to get to'?

[Cortina]

It seems to me that there is no concept in the state system that the child is the client with an entitlement to an education that will enable them to 'be the best that they can be'.

Rather the client is the state and this means that all curricula are geared towards a common set of standards too demanding for some and too easy for others.

I've been reading a lot recently that seems to chime with the above.

A good teacher can work within the system to ensure that children work at their own pace and make steady progress. It's got to be tough though with large class sizes and low level disruption (in our experience).

I keep hearing that I should be reassured my children will get to where 'they need to get to'. They will meet the average goal for the end of the key stages so not to worry and all is fine and dandy. Of course the teachers would like them to do better than this but are reluctant to take steps that would increase the likelihood of this happening IME (not through negligence but by their belief their way is the safest way.) We, the parents, try to do that at home ourselves it seems.

Thing is, I want them to do better than reach an expected target, I want them to absolutely fly, I want any latent talent to be discovered, I want them to be the absolute best that they can be. It is as if some teachers have forgotten the bigger picture? Or are too scared of negative consequences of stretching children? The danger is many children have a habit of delivering exactly what is expected of them, mine certainly seem to.

Is it too much to expect this to happen at a state school, should I be grateful with average academic results going forward? Do teachers ever under estimate children? In some cases they might not realise what they are capable of and perhaps under estimate their potential for fear of putting them off learning or lowering their self esteem if things go wrong? I believe children should be stretched, do I have this all wrong? (I read over in the primary section about this sort of thing with reading etc and children demonstrating they are capable of much more at home etc.)

I hate the thought that continuous assessment means that a child can be marked down if they do surprisingly well at Maths or English (KS1). I hate the thought a teacher has the power to 'decide' whether or not a child is below average, average, or above average and potentially the power to make an ability label stick. Of course this shouldn't happen because of continuous assessment etc, most teachers are good and dedicated I am sure, but this doesn't mean to say that there are not flaws in the system?

Do any teachers find the NC limiting? Is there a way to teach creatively around it in a state school without being reprimanded? I am beginning to wonder. I know that many here say they use it as a rough guide which is very encouraging. Is it wrong to want your child to be the best that they can be?

Bonsoir, yes I do agree that there is lots of stuff that can be done with children at home, and we have taken the children to museums, historic houses and archaeological sites. I think that this is important not just from an academic perspective but in terms of developing a cultural identity.

But DS does not lack historical knowledge. He lacks the skills required for history. He doesn't have the ability to understand complex political or social situations which is essential to studying History.

I suspect this is not really related to the subject of this thread, and I may at some point start another thread asking why DS is so bad at History and what can I do about it.

tethersend - oh, I just jump in at the slightest opportunity ;)

It isn't being measured. Proxies are being measured, which will have distorting effects. But not measuring at all will result in some very poor schools and some children being abysmally poorly served.

Just because something is hard, doesn't mean you shouldn't try and do it. The problem is the fetishisation of measurement.

Oh, I totally agree with you wrt the fetishisastion of measurement

"But not measuring at all will result in some very poor schools and some children being abysmally poorly served."

I believe what we are doing is worse than not measuring at all. We are creating a series of misleading and inaccurate data which serve to construct an inaccurate and misleading picture of the education system, or rather, the children within it. It is also impacting (negatively IMO) on teaching and learning. And for what purpose? To continue peddling the myth that parents have a 'choice' in where they send their child- in reality, most parents' choice is limited to two or three options at best. Is it really necessary to publish such extensive league tables? After all, they only tell us who is at the top and the bottom of that league table, using that particular set of data- they do not tell us which school is 'good' and which is 'poor' (subjective terms in themselves).

We need to define 'poor schools'. Presently, the only definition we have is from this data, which seems only to perpetuate itself.

tethersend - I agree. 'Choice' is a particularly nasty concept designed to push responsibility for government failing back on to citizens.

That the current system is not adequate is clear. Even on the limited criteria of keeping up with international academic standards it is failing. But we HAVE to measure somehow. The alternative is having no idea how the schools are performing at all.

tethersend - we are talking at cross purposes, about different issues.

I believe that in principle there should be a partnership between school, parents and pupil. You are asking where your loyalties should lie when that partnership fails.

Bonsoir, I am saying that the safest and strongest partnership is one between teacher and pupil- even if the parental support of that partnership is strong.

TheCoalitionNeedsYou- the alternative to not measuring is not necessarily and absence of information. I believe we should be examining the feasibility of collecting qualitative data on which to assess a school's performance. A system of perhaps investigating one or two pupils from each year group in each school and assessing their academic achievement, along with their attitude to school and learning, support they receive, extra curricular participation and other factors which influence their learning could serve as a useful diagnostic tool with which to assess how schools are meeting their pupil's needs; and with which to target meaningful support. The pupils would be picked at random and would represent a cross section of the overall pupil profile of the school.

I am still not convinced that we HAVE to measure, though.

Oh gosh, I cannot possibly agree with that, tethersend. Teachers often have terribly inaccurate/incomplete views of a child's potential. Just as parents do.

Send you child to a school which runs the IB curriculum. Higher standards and a much more rounded education

I haven't read the whole thread, sorry. But I totally agree with you. YANBU. And with victoriascrumptious. IB curriculum is the way to go.

That's very true, Bonsoir. But when looking at this from an educational point of view, the partnership should be between the teacher and the child- if the teacher is not honouring that partnership, that is a separate issue, and it should not fall to the parent to ensure that the teacher has accurate information; parents sometimes do not have an accurate measure of a child's potential either.

Surely it is best to pool the judgements of all parties and have an open discussion, though?

We've had a few real stunners - DSS2's English teacher managed to tell DP that DSS2 was "bilingual". We knew she wasn't a very good EFL teacher, but even so. DP managed to tell the headmaster about this, and said headmaster did have the decency to blush and not defend the teacher.

Teachers are not omniscient about their pupils.

Oh, I am well aware that there are incompetent teachers out there, Bonsoir- I just do not believe we should adopt a principle which believes that all are.

I do understand what you are saying about pooling judgements of all parties, and agree with you on this; professionally, my loyalties will always be to the child over the parent though.

tethersend - that is still measuring, just more qualitatively than quantitatively. Like almost all schemes, the success of failure of your suggestion would depend a lot on the implementation and preventing manipulation. I think some form of measurement is ESSENTIAL though.

It is measuring, yes- my question about whether we have to measure at all was separate from my proposal, I should have made that clear.

Qualitative data is harder to represent in bitesized chunks in league tables and is in this case, I believe, a more accurate representation of a school's value.

I am just interested as to why we feel measurement of any sort is essential.

tethersend - if we don't measure at all, then a particular schools staff could just stop bothering, so the children would not get educated properly.

Wouldn't frequent inspections take care of that? Not that I am advocating such a thing, just hypothetically, you understand

An inspection is just another way of measuring as I see it. Sames issues of defining what you are trying to measure and how to do so.

True enough.

Milly R I teach history to 11-13 year olds and have more than one who sounds like your DS. they love the events and personalities of history, probably have read all the horrible history books a million times and can put me right on tiny bits of detail about the shape of a Roman legionary's sword but they can't "do" history because they can't get beyond that into the area of assessing information, sources, weighing up bias etc. They are so keen to know the story they overlook the source. It might be helpful to use a period of history or event that your DS is VERY familiar with using a variety of sources (if you the resources) and talk to him about why a first hand description from a Roman historian might be a more accurate one than the Horrible History (nothing against them by the way) or why the Tudor description of Richard Third might be inaccurate, or whatever.

Anyway, back to the thread!! So nice to read one that has real discussion and isn't just descending into abuse between MNetters

tethersend - I think your point regarding acting as an advocate for the child is particularly important, as increasingly these days there can be disagreement between the parents themselves about the child's performance and potential.

In the school where I work, 29% of the children are from split families, which I would imagine is fairly usual. Sadly, many of these parents don't always work cooperatively together as part of the 3 way child/parents/school partnership. In the worst cases, the child may be used (whether intentionally or not) as a pawn in ongoing conflict between the parents.

One case that springs to mind recently was where I was advising a Yr 12 girl on University applications. Her mother was pushing her towards high status Universities for all 5 choices. The father was encouraging her to include a couple of 'safety net options' as her predicted grades are very borderline for the top Universities. (The parents are separated; girl resides mainly with mother).My professional advice was also along the father's line - I thought it highly likely that the girl could get no offers at all on the basis of the applications the mother was pushing. As the conversation went on, it became more and more apparent that what was really going on was some ongoing conflict between the mother and father - seemingly based on the mother's feeling that she had married 'beneath her', and that she didn't want her daughter to attend a University that wasn't top rate!!

This is just one example - I could quote many more.

It's all very well talking about partnership between child, parents and school, and of course that is a central tenet of education, but we mustn't make the mistake of assuming that all children are raised in emotionally intelligent households with two parents who communicate respectfully and agree on what is 'best' for their child!

I think that's a really astute post, violet. In an ideal world, parents would be totally behind the teachers, and we would work together with the chidlren to ensure that they achieved the absolute best that they could.

In the school I currently teach in, I really can't take this for granted. Sure, there are a number of brilliantly supportive parents, but many really do see the school as the enemy. I have all but given up on using after school detentions as a sanction, as I can almost guarantee that parents will phone the school and refuse permission. Since most of the students are bussed in, there is no way of overcoming this.

I agree that, as a teacher, my main priority is to build a partnership with the student - if the parents are on board, then great, and I am enthusiastic about incorporating them into the partnership, but I can't, and don't expect it.

Yes - and it's true on so many levels.

In one sense, the parents who are just 'anti school' are more straightforward, in that you know they won't support things like detentions, or uniform policy, so you just do your best to build a relationship with the student, and accept that the home culture is going to work against school.

Then there are the 'grey' areas like the one I described, where the parents may seem outwardly very switched on and 'on board' (the parents I mentioned are very middle class, well educated etc) but there is some underlying conflict between them which gets transferred onto the child. One parent may have aspirations for the child, or ideas about their ability, which the other parent doesn't share - and the real issue may be nothing to do with the child at all! It may be that the parents have split and one is blaming the other, or they may even be together but harbouring some resentment and trying to 'score points' against the other parent. Then there are all the complexities of disagreements between natural parent and step parent - as a teacher you see it all, don't you? And the bottom line is - you have the child's interests at the centre.

Just to have a quick boast when DH went to parents' evening he sneaked at look at the teacher's notes and saw I was described as a 'very supportive mother'

Actually is that teacher-speak for PITA and over-involved