Should teachers have to take tougher tests before they qualify?

[Solopower1]

What do you think?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20083249

Perhaps you could point out why, where and how I have ignored this?

I am interested only in behaviour. You keep bringing class into it. Why is class important? You obviously have a chip about some of your own experiences. I sympathise. But it's not relevant.

You would rather keep children in class who are disrupting the learning of others. To suggest otherwise is "foolish" apparently.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where I said "The idea it's foolish to not want learning to be disrupted is ..." as you have quoted ... you seem to be making up your own version Brycie

See above. No, not my own version.

I say - people who disrupt others' learning should be removed.

You say - that's foolish.

Conclusion - you believe it is not foolish not to remove children who disrupt others' learning

Reword conclusion - you believe it is not foolish for children to have their learning disrupted by other children

I've seen above and it doesn't say anything about not wanting learning to be disturbed

Brycie you posted about prejudice against middle class well behaved children with supportive parents. Wha about working class children who are well behaved and have supportive parents?

And Arisbottle - that post that you responded to was the first time I mentioned class. I believe there was some discussion about it earlier up the thread which I did not join in with because I don't think it's relevant.

I haven't seen a prejudice against them on this thread. What about them?

If you look you will see I said a blanket policy is foolish.
Teachers who are actually there are best placed to decide how each incident should be dealt with and whether removing a pupil is justified or whether a reprimand will be quicker, more effective and less disruptive to the class.

No we said the that you can't remove for every disruption . If a class are working in silence and someone sneezes that is a disruption. Should i send them to SMT for sneezing? If I say to a class, I expect you to work in silence and someone chooses to talk they may be moved within the class, they may be sent to work outside my door or in another room. If they deliberately shouted out loud, they may then be removed.

You were the one who mentioned the prejudice , as far as I can see. Jabed also mentioned up thread his horror at being educated with the working classes!

I agree it is irrelevant

Mrz - plainly it does. Plainly you would allow a disruptive child to remain in class and disrupt the learning of others. To think otherwise is foolish, you say.

You must be playing some kind of silly game where you're about to say - aha! but I can manage that child's behaviour so that it doesn't disrupt or aha! - something else (who cares) but none of that is relevant.

If it's foolish to remove disruptive children take it up with Raven's school or even with evil, or Arisbottle, or married or all the heads and all the teachers up and down the country who do it.

What on earth is the point of this ridiculous conversation.

It was in danger of becoming sensible and interesting there for a while but the "disagree-ers for the sake of it" came back.

Yes - I mentioned seeing prejudice on the thread. ie I was responding to something I'd seen a few times. I didn't bring it up.

Sorry this is pointless. Bye.

No Brycie ...If it got to the point that a child was causing disruption in my class I would deal with the disruption in whatever way was most effective and least disruptive to the rest of the class, that may in a limited number of occasion mean removal.

The fact that you can't see the difference between the view that a blanket policy of removing every child for every disruption is foolish and saying removing disruptive pupils is foolish aren't at all the same says a great deal

"If it got to the point that a child was causing disruption in my class I would deal with the disruption in whatever way was most effective and least disruptive to the rest of the class, that may in a limited number of occasion mean removal."

Absolutely agree with this.

Removal can be immensely disruptive to a class - much more so than an original disturbance. A couple of quiet reminders while the class is engaged in some other task - doesn't disrupt the class at all.

Equally you have to remember that some children, knowing that they would be sent out of class for a minor misdemeanor, would actually choose this easy way out rather than the harder (for them) option of staying in class and working at that particular subject. Having a 'predictable, robotic' response with no judgement from the teacher would result in such unwanted side behaviours. Genuine, proactive behaviour management tailored to the class and child and occasion does not.

(On my point about statemented children with slightly 'different' rules above - I think that you missed my point about them being statemented - ie they are children with very significant special needs in terms of physical, sensory, behavioural and learning impairments. One of them cannot sit still on the carpet, because their physical impairments make this very uncomfortable - so they, only, may sit on a chair. Another has very significant visual impairment - so they, only, may talk to their 1 to 1 worker to interpret what is on the board. That was what I meant by 'changing rules'. None of this will prevent others reaching their potential - and actually the educatuonal and social benefit in terms of lack of prejudidice, taking responsibility, appreciating others for what they can do rather than what they cannot [did you look at the Paralypics and say 'well, those athletes must have been preventing others reaching their full potential when they were at school'??] it is invaluable.

"How is differentiation preparing these children from the harsh cold realities of life."

The thing is, we as a society expect and toerate different behaviour from children of different ages. That which is cute in a 2 year old is not acceptable in a 6 year old. Behaviour expectations in a Reception class are not the same as those in a Year 9 class.

I am preparing ALL my pupils to meet the behaviour expected of them at the point when they leave school.... and of course where there is physical or sensory impairment involved, some of the expectations WILL be different [expecting a very partially sighted person to conform to the 'behavioural norm' of greeting a known person on the street would, for example, be unreasonable, as would expecting a physically impaired person to stand up out of their wheelchair to open the door for someone]. All of my pupils are on a journey towards this. The fact that some are 'behind' on that journey doesn't mean that they won't eventually get there - but 'sending them out' won't help, actually teaching them the expected behaviours will. And as teachers have said again and again on this thread, that teaching does NOT have to disrupt anyone else in the class.

(I suppose you can think of it like all differentiation - the fact that I have children working on number bonds to 10 using blocks does not in any way disrupt the learning of the children who are multiplying 2 digit numbers together. Equally, the fact that a few children have reminders, aids or differentiated rules and rewards to help them to behave does not disrupt the learning of the others - especially as sanctions are always available should there be behaviour which is genuinely disruptive.)

Gosh, is this still going on?

Brycie, I don't think a single teacher has suggested they would allow a child to remain in the classroom if they are being disruptive & it wasn't possible for the teacher to manage their behaviour.

In fact, in every school I know of, there's a behaviour policy, & if you don't follow it, you'd be hammered on Performance Management/by Ofsted.

But quite often behaviour management is the bit you don't see in a lesson - the seating plan that separates two students who loathe/fancy each other, or deliberately juxtaposes two competitive types so they spur each other on. It's the planning you do with support staff to ensure that the child who's been in Isolation is up to speed & doesn't kick off again to create a diversion from the fact that she can't attempt the work. It's moving to stand quietly by someone's desk because your spidey sense tells you he's about to stick his compass in his neighbour, or stopping back after the lesson to discuss who 'wins' at the end of the film version of 'The Woman In Black' with the two girls who've derailed your lesson on the novel by arguing about it...

You need to think like a swan - if you're doing it right, all anyone sees is the serene glide, not the legs paddling like mad under the water!

Well put rave

Well put raven

I agree!

I would agree (but Brycie will only accuse me of playing some silly game).

To go back to the OP. I don't think it unreasonable that teachers should have the equivalent of a grade B in Maths and English GCSE, but I think that the same standard should also apply to all MPs! They need to understand basic statistics (to avoid the "80% of children should achieve the average level at the end of year x" type statements and un-thought-out comments about cheapest utility tariffs!) Why anren't they campaigning to improve the mathematical standards of MPs?

I think we should wear nicer shoes

Can't argue with that ninah. I'd be far more effective with a trade discount at Irregular Choice.