For teachers- do your pupils learn something new every day?

[jasper]

I am asking this due to the thread about taking kids out of school outwith holidays, where some of you explained it disrupted the teaching programme.

My question is do you really teach your pupils something different every day? This is a genuine question, not intended to provoke or criticise. I admire anyone who chooses teaching as a profession and the friends I have who teach are , to a woman, remarkable and inspiring individuals.
It's just that my memory of school (particularly primary school ) was of weeks and weeks of repetition of the same things.

That was my biggest compliant about school - it was boring and repetitive and I felt I hardly ever learned anything.

We were taken out of school for a week or two most years and there was never any notion of having to catch up or missing anything. Have things changed or am I suffering from false memory syndrome ? Might I have gone on to acheive greatness if it hadn't been for those fortnights in Harrogate?

So to repeat my question,which was not intended to rehash the holidays issue, do you teach a different thing every single day?

Are there people who HE right up to A Level?

I was a biochemist and I found it so hard! I was up half the night before that lesson, I was so worried that I didn't get to sleep until gone midnight! In the end we made very simple models of the sugars (out of playdough!) to 'follow' where the carbons and hydrogens went. They had a blast and so did I. Next lesson I get to do the electron transfer system, another doddle to teach.

I have no idea, but I was trying to follow through hmb's argument. Singingmum was querying why teachers need qualifications, and hmb was explaining why.

Sorry, the "I've no idea" bit was in reply to janh.

Perhaps I could come along to some of your lessons hmb, I wouldn't even need a postage stamp to write all I know about electron transfer . I've just realised this is probably why my students are so bored, they've done it all before at school.....

It isn't at the level they do it at university. They don't need to know any of the intermediary products, or the enzymes. But they do have to understand about NAD, FAD, and formation of ATP, where it all happens etc. But we don't have to do the detail on ATP synthetase (thank god!) Just getting them to understand the basic concept that it is the changes in stability of the products that provides the energy to 'drive' the formation of ATP is enough to blow their minds!

But I don't know why I paniced, it is all so easy that anyone could have done it.

Whilst I have been busy working.....after making sure ds slept for most of the afternoon by delibereately getting up early, stopping him from sleeping this morning and wearing him out.....the argument has continued. (I must be a bad mum aswell as a bad teacher!!)
I just showed dh this thread
He isn't a teacher but has been with me for over 6 years. He said he was disgusted that some people can say some of the things on this thread. He doesnt even know how much work I do as I 'hide' it from him as he would get cross - he thinks that I have a lunch break!! I also do a lot of work when he goes out on an evening.
SOme people are so quick to have a go at teachers - some of the media and some of the general public - I honestly believe that not many other professions are so readily criticised and so greatly undervalued. I don't want praise, or thanks, or gratitude or anything like that. I shose this job as many of you have pointed out. All I would like is a modicum of respect....
Is that too much to ask
(And thanks to those more recent posters for saying the coment about the brownies which I have had to bite my tongue to avoid saying...)

oooh - have i killed the argument?

looks like it, let's just tiptoe out verrry quietly shall we?

that sounds like a fab idea tamum!!

shall we have a drink girls, because I could use one after this thread!

What a civilised idea, G and T all round? Or a nice bottle of red?

tamum - the HE up to GCSE and Alevel question. Yes, there are people who do this - I know several people who have HE ed their children through GCSE's - a few have done it completely alone, but most either employ a tutor and supplement that work alone, or use a correspondance course that the child can work through.

I don't think I personally know anyone who has done A levels alone - the HE children I know all went to 6th form college at this stage. Again, I suppose a correspondance course would be an option.

None of these are entirely HE - and I suppose that that is the point. To some HEdders education is about following your interests and learning through living and not about formal qualifications at all, and so the purist would be far more likely to arrange an apprenticeship for their child (if that was what was wanted) than A levels.

Not argueing rights and wrongs here - just adding a view (not even my own opinion).

As I posted at the time, as did Jimjams, the issue is not that HEing is good or bad, but that it is very different to teaching in a classroom. The point had been made, by a home edder that teachers didn't need qualifications, because , basicaly anyone could teach anything. The point I was making is that, unlike home edding, we are tied to a strict curriculum, and this can be *highly technical and intelectually demanding. In order to teach this sort of stuff you do need to understand it yourself, and in practice this means having studied the topic at university level.

Agreed - very VERY different to teaching in a classroom. I can teach my son - probably better than his school teacher can - because I know him better and I can easily cover the level at which he is learnig (he is 6). He would learn different things with me than at school though. Could I teach a class full of children? No way. Wouldn't know where to start. It is VERY different - a teacher CAN'T be expected to know what makes every child in the room tick, and even if she did, she couldn't possibly teach to every child's personality at the same time. I would say that it is very different and hugely harder. Teaching your own child (things you know) is relatively easy - an extension to teaching speech/ colours/ counting. Am I rambling again?

Rambling in a positive way!

Yes, I agree. And as a mother I have also taught my own kids and I recognise what you are saying. As a teacher you try to get to know your kids, but I teach 8 different classes, some with as many as 28 children in them. So I don't know them as well as their parents. However, I do know their current level of attainment, and specical needs, I get to know their prefered learning style and trying to get to know a little about their personality, likes and dislikes, interests etc can help.

What would worry me about HE whould be not knowing enough, outside science I'd be stuck! But I recognise what you have said about tutors and that home edders also learn along side.

Goodness gracious!

Well I was an untrained teacher- with a degree, but I was teaching in a slightly strange place (a tutorial college- loved it I have to say). hmb can I admit I rather liked teaching repsiration as the exam questions on it are so predictable. Now get me teaching Ecology - no thanks- yuck yuck yuck!

Robinw I have to say I think that what you are expecting from a school is probably unattainable. You want your dd to have an exciting all round education. Teacher's these days are totally constrained by the NC and by testing. Education and being taught to pass exams are not the same thing- and I'm certain most teachers would agree with you. Their job is to ensure that the greatest number of children in their classes do as well as they can in exams. They can't ensure that your child will do exciting things all the time because if she did she may well not pass her SATS. The fault here lies with the govt (haven't children's authors been bandying together to say how SATS have led to the death of exciting, creative english classes?) not the teachers.

You can get a broader education from HE. You may or may not get the same qualifications. It is getting harder to get qualifications as a HE child becuase of the coursework requirements which can be hard for HE to do.

Jimjams - I made a similar point about the Nat Curr earlier in the thread - I was reassured by Lara2 that things are imroving there, and the Nat Curr is becoming less of a straitjacket.

Oh missed that Oaky
I do think though that parents have to remember a teacher is teaching a "class" so they are never going to be able to give the individual curriculum that a child can get at home. I think hmb has made that point, but wanted it to come from a semi- non- teacher.

Jimjams, I don't think that you could be called unqualified! Without teaching certificate poss! But as a research scientist I bet you did your fair share of teaching undergraduates, because I know that I did! Re the A level thing I was rather meaning first degree qualifications rather than the PGCE/GTP qualifications. Being taught how to teach is very, very important and useful. Understanding your topic is vital! And I know what you mean out the respiration questions. The topic is horrible, but the questions are easy. My real bete noir is Plant biology!

I used to whine and sulk if asked to teach Edexcel module 2 biology (But would teach module 2 human biology- although that was bizarre as it was all hand tools and prehensile tails etc)

No my teaching brief was easy- Here are potential drs who have screwed up- get them A's in a class of 7 or less. Much much much easier than teaching a standard class. Ans they were 19 so were on the whole pleasant

oh module 2 was plant biology and ecology..... yuck!

HUla - what's up with dd's teeth??

I hope everything goes well with both appointments. If they measured my heart when I was teaching my year 8 I dread to think what it would show.