Competitively rank students by results say Gove

[noblegiraffe]

Our esteemed Education Secretary has praised an academy in London which ranks pupils every term by their results in each subject.

Now I'm sure that parents of the kid who comes top will be pleased and proud, but what about the poor kids who are less academically able or who have SEN who are destined to by told term after term that they are rubbish? That their achievements, though they may be the product of hard work and great determination are of less value than a more academically able student who has slacked off and winged a good result on the test? How will that do anything but completely demotivate them and destroy their self-esteem?

What the fuck is he thinking?

If any of you have any respect for Gove as Education Minister, I sincerely hope that this changes your mind.

'This brings me back to the 100% attendance certificate issue. Do you therefore think that the child who has the luck to be healthy deserves a certificate? Does it not matter what they do while they're at school?'

This certificate crap for attendance isn't done for teh child, it is for the school, so they can keep their figures up and meet their targets. You shouldn't get a certificate for turning up to class or get paid to attend class. That is a farce and devalues certificates and rewards yet again. It should be expected that you turn up.I don't believe in prizes for all and certificates for all, because it makes a mockery of prizes.

'That is entirely possible, because talent is the luck of the draw'

The luck of teh draw is life. Beauty and skill and talent are the luck of teh draw and part of life. Progressives think these things are "unfair", and they want to make things fairer by changing nature and not praising talent and excellence. Inb Fact they want to dumb down talent in order to make things "fair".

'If I gave a student a sheet of simple additions, something they find easy, and they got 97%, would you still say it was excellent work?'

Yes of course I would say it was excellent work, because I believe in praising everybody, including people who have teh misfortune to get 97% in your class.

But I would also ask you why you were giving such able students a sheet of simple additions, because I would worry that this may be dumbing down.

' I think it is unfair to suggest that Rembrandt was a slacker, I suspect he put the hours in.'

Of course he wasn't a slacker, he just had bags of talent. And equally the person who comes top in your maths class is also no slacker. They should both get praised for their achievements.

But claig, attendance and academic success are linked, just as talent and success are. The school has targets for attendance not just because it keeps the kids off the streets but because it does affect exam results. So why not encourage attendance?

I don't want to dumb down talent, but I don't want to praise a talented kid for phoning it in. I have said before, I will praise attainment that I think is the result of hard work and careful revision, because that is achievement.

I do praise talent too, btw, if I set a particularly tricky problem on the board and the talented kid spots a clever solution straight away, they will get praise for being quick. Or if I set a hard puzzle and they pore over it and figure it out when no one else could, then that is also praiseworthy.

"because I believe in praising everybody"

But you don't. You said you don't believe in certificates for all!

"But I would also ask you why you were giving such able students a sheet of simple additions, because I would worry that this may be dumbing down."

This is the nub of it. The test, to a very able student, may be easy. Like I said about my A-level maths experience, I found it easy, but there is no doubt that many, many other people found it hard, or even impossible. But you can't set the test for the very able student and to hell with the rest who have to sit it. Of course in lessons, the very able student can be provided with more challenging work to the rest of the class if necessary.

Whether that very able student should be accelerated through the curriculum is another argument!

'But claig, attendance and academic success are linked'

Of course they are linked. If you don't go to school, you won't learn anything. But that is obvious. These schools are cruel with tehir attendance certificates. They are social engineering to put pressure on children mainly so that teh school can meet their targets and please Ofsted and all the rest. We've all read the newspaper articles of children who are ill and didn't meet teh "attendance target" and therefore couldn't attend teh end of year disco with all their classmates. This is institutionalised cruelty and however much they pretend it is "for the kids", we all know it isn't.

"Of course he wasn't a slacker, he just had bags of talent. "

But he didn't just have bags of talent.

Look at Picasso, he was an incredibly talented artist. But if you go to the Picasso Museum in Barcelona (recommended, if you're into that sort of thing) you can see the sheer scale of effort he put into his art. He was constantly challenging his boundaries. And that is why he was so brilliant.

'I will praise attainment that I think is the result of hard work and careful revision, because that is achievement'

I think you are wrong to be so judgemental. I think you are responsible for teh work that you set, and if a child gets 100% on what you set, then they should be praised for it. They can only do what is put in front of them. If it really is too easy, then that is not their fault, it is your fault. I think that your way will inevitably lead to dumbing down, lack of motivation and reduced effort.

I agre that Picasso had talent and put effort in. I can't understand why you can't also see that teh top in maths in your class is also just like Picasso and also put effort in. If they did it effortlessly, then you are to blame for setting work that is too easy. If a child can effortlessly do what you set, how can they put effort into what is effortless. It's not their fault and not praising them is harmfiul.

'"because I believe in praising everybody"
But you don't. You said you don't believe in certificates for all!

I believe in praising everyone from top to bottom. But that praise is verbal, not in eth form of prizes. Verbal praise is more important than formulaic prizes, because it is personal and it is real, and all pupils deserve praise for effort, behaviour and attainment.

But not certificates. Prizes have valued because they are rare,m they are "prized" because not everyone gets one. Prizes for all makes a mockery of prizes dor anyone and everyone.

"We've all read the newspaper articles of children who are ill and didn't meet teh "attendance target" and therefore couldn't attend teh end of year disco with all their classmates. "

I haven't. What newspaper were they in, hmm? I know at my school that children who are genuinely ill have the support of the school behind them. I also know that the chancers who are off sick at the drop of a hat eventually have to produce doctor's notes or come in to school. That would seem reasonable to me as some kids, and some parents really do take the piss with attendance.

With attendance certificates, you are making the link between attendance and success and praising it. Why is that different to rewarding a kid for getting good marks that they can get standing on their head?

'This is the nub of it. The test, to a very able student, may be easy.'

Then you should differentiate. It's not "fair" to give an able child an easy test and when teh child gets 100% not to praise it, but to praise teh rest of teh class who got 60%.

You say you found maths A levbel easy? Did you go on to do a maths degreee and did you find that easy too? What year did you do your maths A level? Was it after teh dumbing down and grade inflation had begun?

'I haven't. What newspaper were they in, hmm?'

The best newspaper in the world - the Daily Mail.
Progressive newspaper won't mention this type of institutionalised cruelty, they don't think it is newsworthy enough.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1235790/Grieving-boy-barred-schools-Christmas-disco-taking-time-father-died-cancer.html

"all pupils deserve praise for effort, behaviour and attainment. "

You are happy for me to praise Damian for putting pen to paper once this lesson as opposed to the zero times he did it last lesson? Or do you only want excellent effort, behaviour or attainment praised? I think you need to be careful here!

"Prizes for all makes a mockery of prizes dor anyone and everyone."
But so does endless prizes for top attainment and nothing else.

Incidentally, in my department each teacher gets a prize to award each term to the person of their choosing in each of their classes. The first term in a top set I invariably give it to the top kid, because that's easiest. When I say 'there's a prize' they always go 'oh, it'll be Johnny, he's the best at maths'. I then say 'Now that Jonny's had the prize, he won't be getting it again and it's now up for grabs'. I can then award the subsequent prizes for homework, effort, putting your hand up, doing a good bit of maths etc. Would you rather that I always gave the prize to Johnny?

'Why is that different to rewarding a kid for getting good marks that they can get standing on their head?'

All children deserve to be praised and rewarded (but not by certificates, by kind words of a teacher). It's not the fault of the able pupils if you set the bar too low and they can hurdle it with ease.

'You are happy for me to praise Damian for putting pen to paper once this lesson as opposed to the zero times he did it last lesson? Or do you only want excellent effort, behaviour or attainment praised? I think you need to be careful here!'

I want praise for excellent effort, behaviour or attainment, not for not disrupting teh class. Although, even there, if a child has problems and improves, they should also be praised for that.

"The best newspaper in the world - the Daily Mail. "

I thought as much. I notice from the article that the school says it was an error and if the mother had spoken to the right person it would have been rectified. So it wasn't institutionalised cruelty, but a balls-up.

"If they did it effortlessly, then you are to blame for setting work that is too easy. "
I explained this. The test has to cater to everyone in the set (in fact the top 2 sets), not just the top student. Work set in lessons can be more challenging and individualised.

"Prizes for all makes a mockery of prizes dor anyone and everyone."
But so does endless prizes for top attainment and nothing else.

No it doesn't. Not everyone gets a gold medal in teh Olympics. That is why it is a prize worth winning. It means something. Giving prizes for tying up shoelaces will lead to prizes becoming meaningless.

'I thought as much. I notice from the article that the school says it was an error and if the mother had spoken to the right person it would have been rectified. So it wasn't institutionalised cruelty, but a balls-up.'

And you believe that?

'I explained this. The test has to cater to everyone in the set'

Well then everyone should be praised for doing well, including teh top performers. It's not their fault they found it easy.

I was always top of the class at primary school. I was awarded certificates every other week. I didn't put any effort in whatsoever and I was a September birthday which made a massive difference.

At secondary school I went out of my way to come last and felt really proud when I came second from bottom in French. It was a badge of honour for me I was no longer the class swot. Ranking is pointless and does not motivate children. Michael Gove will be advocating the return of the cane and being humilated in freezing cold showers if we are not careful.

Why are the Tories so nostalgic? Everything they implement seems like a massive step backwards.

"You say you found maths A levbel easy? Did you go on to do a maths degreee and did you find that easy too? What year did you do your maths A level? Was it after teh dumbing down and grade inflation had begun?"

It is interesting that your first thought is that my A-level was easy. Like I said, many others did not find it easy, I think there was one other A in my class and quite a few Ds and Es and drop-outs.

Yes I did do a maths degree. I found some of it easy, some of it not so much! I had a housemate who did find it relatively easy and got a 1st without putting in as much work as I did (and I know how much work she did because I lived with her). I did up the challenge by studying at a German university for a year and that was hard. Not because of the language, mind you, but because the maths was harder....getting back to international comparisons here.

claig, I am deeply suspicious of any story that appears in the Daily Mail and it wouldn't surprise me if the whole thing was made up tbh.

This is what was said

'She said: 'We have an attendance disco and within that policy we look at the children who have a 100 per cent attendance record.
'It's not instead of all the normal Christmas parties, it's in addition to that as a reward.
'We are trying to build a community that attends school and regards school as absolutely vital for the future.
'It's so strict that, for example, families who have a lot of lates are not invited to the disco because we are committed to getting children here.
'I would feel so sad to take away this reward for excellence because some people are sad that they are not invited.'
Mrs Clarke said the school always supported families that suffered bereavements and was sympathetic to the Watsons' situation.'

It's their policy, but do you think teh little 6 year old understands the "logic" of it when they are excluded from social events which teh rest of their class attend.

noblegiraffe, this is not the only story like this I have read. There are many similar ones.