Grr. Why are all "bored" DSs allegedly unrecognised G&T? Teachers must tear their hair out!

[teslagirl]

Why is it that seemingly every 8 and 9 y.o. DS who announces he's "bored at school" is automatically regarded by his mother as being "very intelligent but under stimulated" by the school? Sometimes I feel I'm surrounded by it! I had 2 parents helping at the school disco who said this, separately. The DSs are both Y3- and as luck would have it, both in my DS1s class (he's Y4 in a Y3/4 combo) and HE said, when obliquely questioned that both DSs are in Maths 4 and Literacy 4- out of 5. As "very intelligent" Y3s they should surely be in 3 or EVEN 2 if they're REALLY G&T (bearing in mind group 1 is full of the brightest Y4s)!

I heard this also in the wash-up after Y4 parents evening- a few mums who told the teacher DS needed more work as he'd said he was "Bored", proof indeed that the school was evidently failing them... Surely it's cool for junior school boys to claim EVERYTHING is 'Boring'?- it's in the nature of being 8-11 esp whilst emulating the studied ennui of the older boys! It doesn't necessarily mean they ARE bored OR, if they genuinely are, let's not go assuming it's because our DS is an unrecognised G&T thus are under stimulated/failed by the school, but maybe entertain the possibility that DS can't be bothered/hasn't got the maturity to understand the value of engaging with his education! I know the DSs concerned and I don't see any glimmer of genius lurking within!

One further point- and I know this is thin ice: It also strikes me how many of the mothers concerned haven't got an O level to rub together. Perfectly nice people, all, but women who will admit they spent secondary snogging behind the bike shed but suddenly spout authoritatively on the nature of Education Theory and The Undiagnosed Genius.

MI, I have fizzy thick sheep too

My bright ds has however cottoned on to the fact that if you crack on and get on with your work, and finish it quickly, they give you more work. Like d'oh why would anyone in their right minds go for that deal?

X is a lively student ( I can't get him to sit down in the class)

Who is always happy to contribute to class discussions (never shuts up)

His written work is not as good as his oral contributions to the lessons (he never completes a written task unless I stand behind him)

To improve he needs to take control of his own learning (and do some work)

He needs to have a more consistent attitude to homework (he needs to do some)

He is capable of doing well, but he needs to concentrate on his studies (so it will be a cold day in Hades then)

MB, I didn't know you'd taught DS1...!

lol wendyweber....I think most of us here are tongue in cheek about our thick, sheepy daughters. It was the opposite of bright, bored boys. Not really serious (I don't think!).

I think we all recognise that boys are different. Equality my arse. At six and seven they're as different as chalk and cheese. And that applies even if you gave dd tonka trucks and fireman outfits before she joined school (and yes, I did all that gender levelling stuff) and ds a ballet outfit and ballet shoes!

Quattro - the Raising Boys's Achievement Programme introduced by the DfES is a big thing now in state schools. It's by no means a cure-all, but it has gone a long way towards identifying and addressing the issues.

I do see that private schools aren't necessarily perfect Bink. But hell, there are only about 12 kids in the class right? Surely that helps.

Quattro, how old is your son?

It can help, nkf, but it can also be limiting. My ds was in a class of about 15 and found it a disadvantage - he wanted more breadth. Also, unless a teacher really actively takes advantage of the fact that it's a small class, then it won't necessarily be an advantage IYSWIM. A teacher who says 'Hey, I've only got 15 kids in the class, I can plan a really stimulating, dynamic lesson and give the kids loads of individual attention' will be great. A teacher who sees it as an easy option (or doesnt know any different if they've never taught in the state sector) may not capitalise on the fact. Now, I know several teachers who have opted for the private sector precisely because they perceive it as the easy option - so they are not going to be working their socks off making their teaching better!!I'm not for a moment saying it's always like this - just that it's a misconception to think that private = better teaching - it doesn't.

Oh squilly, I have fizzy thick boys too (wheelerdealer DS2's shirt has just sold for £40 )

FTR, thanks for that. I googled a bit and found out that boys underachievement is a key priority in education. I'd still like to hear from the teachers on this thread about whether they recognise it as an issue and how they address it though.

Because reading the OP, it doesn't sound as though recognition of the issue and therefore addressing it, is something that is widespread.

Um- hi, there, I'm the original poster. This thread has taken lots of twists and turns (as the 'biggies' always seem to, with a dash of state v. private thrown in!) BUT really the point I was making is how irritated I get that the assumption goes unchallenged that a "bored" DS seems AUTOMATICALLY to be considered bright (and it would seem a badly behaved DS gets awarded the same label..), as if it's a foregone conclusion! I want to know by which educational yardstick these un-O levelled mums assess their DSs? OK, OK, I KNOW an O level is a crude assessment of intelligence or ability in deductive reasoning but do they really expect the rest of us to believe that a DS who is in the 4th out of 5 ability groups for all the 'core' subject IS bright? Says who? Yet it's rife!

IS it so they can then blame the teachers/the school for their DSs lack of success? Rather than accept the fact DS is a normal child who may have decided to disengage or can't be bothered or lacks the maturity to recognise his own role in the learning process? Like all DCs from time to time? Surely, as others have posted, if that DS is SO clever, he can work out for himself the benefits of 'staying ahead of the game'. And surely continuous 'boredom' perhaps indicates a lack of creativity in the thought process? Not really the mark of a 'bright' child, is it?

Yes, I KNOW we use narrow and defined yardsticks with which to measure our DCs in our society. Why has an appreciation of drumlin formation taken precedence over long bow archery in our curriculum, for instance? But the reality is schools attempt to prepare DCs for the big wide world that values drumlins over long bows, as it were, so them's the rules and the genuinely 'bright' DS should be clever enough to see that- not to dismiss those things that don't light his fire and STILL expect to have the G & T accolade bestowed upon him!

I do feel the issue has become more prevalent with the evident lowering of standards- DCs are perhaps lead to think they're cleverer than they really are by the 'all shall have prizes' mentality of modern state schooling but boy, is this reinforced by mums who seem to genuinely believe that a lack of tangible results in their (self-labelled?) G & T DS is proof of external forces at work, NOT, forfend, their DS's average IQ.

Our universities are full of youngsters thinking they're really rather clever cos they're AT UNI studying for a DEGREE in - well, you insert your own pet 'non subject here!- whereas I recall uni being a place where clever, inquiring, nimble minded polymaths went- the sort you'd think twice before engaging in an argument because they might run intellectual, eloquent rings around you. Now you'd get 'Wotevah'.

I will readily agree the OP was a bit of a rant- I can do it on here but would be unwise to say "Oh COME ON! Don't be so ridiculous! It's his age! They ALL state they're 'bored' because it sounds cool. Don't buy into it! Your DS is no smarter than mine, he might just expect everything to be all singing/all dancing and if it's not, you're trying to claim it's the school that's failing your average son. If he got his head down and rear up, he might get more out of the learning experience."...but I daren't!

Quat: my point is IS that DS underachieving or are they working at the limit of their ability? You appear to start with the basic assumption that the mere fact of being male seems to mean any negative attitude or utterance ("I'm bored!") somehow implies the education system is failing that DS! They're not ALL 'bored' because they're clever and under stretched!

God, I think this is a massive issue. I posted on a thread about it last week or so. It was from Mums of litle hidren saying that they were being pushed into gender roles by pink or tanks or whatever.

I posted saying that the sexes were different in the fields of education, and no one believed me!

It is huge imo. Girls perform better in coursework, which is one of the reasons for their improvement in GCSE. Boys tend to perform better in exam based work, which is one of the reasons why they are not doing s well. (Boys like to compete). Boys prefer structured short tasks with a lot of visua learning. Girls prefer extended tasks.

I teach a subject with a lot of different parts to it, which do tend to be sex orientated. I have to structure lessons with majority of boys very different to lessons with majority girls. Thy are so different when you have classes of nearly all one or the other. Boys are much more restless and physical. I think the ducation system was letting them down at one point, but I do think it is being addressed abit

There are other issues, like girls want to do the best they can, and boys are often happy with good enough

I suppose what I was getting around to is how do you know that the parents are wrong?

Presumably you've tested their cognitive abilities or IQs or whatever yardsticks you have, then worked out what they are capable of achieving then worked out they are doing no worse than you would have expected them to.

Or have you?

ANd it has nothing to do with my expectations either. I expect the same standards from both, but despite this, it is more often boys rather than girls I need to chase about homeworks

What's the use of an IQ or a cognitive ability test if the EVIDENCE in the classroom reveals an ordinary, run of the mill DS who'd prefer to be mucking about with his mates, can't be a*ed to pay attention in class- at least, no more than is absolutely necessary and is in the 4th of 5 ability groups for all core subjects? He'll get by, he'll 'do OK' but there ain't nuffin' 'clever' about that boy.

On the other hand, grammar schools tend to be full of what I'D class as 'clever boys'.

fircone, it took my children some years to discover that there was a "B-word" other than bored/boring - I ban those words too

And in no way did I equate the statement "I am bored" with understimulation.

I just explained that my personal experience which was that my DS was not engaging with most of his subjects. I do have evidence that he is bright. The school does now agree but it has taken them longer than it should've done to recognise the issue.

Now I might be wrong but I reckon his issue would never have been recognised in a state school, because it is not acute. There would have been no chance of it being meaningfully addressed.

I thought actually that girls used to do rather better than boys in the 11-plus exam and that the intake was slanted to take this in? (Will find Edam. She's the one who knows this stuff.)

I also, as it happens, get pissed off with the implication that my daughters do well at school because The System Is Slanted In Favour Of Girls. Sheep-like, thick, and only doing well because of inherent educational bias. Can't win, poor little loves, all for the want of a Why Oh Why Chromosome.

Haven't read the whole thread but wanted to share a conversation I had with a colleague who has a son the same age as my DS. After establishing that my DS is very happy at the workplace nursery, and that I'm happy with the state school place we've got for him, said colleague proceeded to regale me with the information that his DS was so bored at the same nursery that they had to take him out - and is clearly way too intelligent for state school - in fact, so intelligent is this sprout, that they are considering a Steiner school for him! My poker face got a real workout.

Quite, bluestocking. Been there (and it would seem am currently there!)

MI you are determined to take offence, why? It's a recognised phenomenon that girls do better than boys for all manner of different reasons. But isn't it worth trying to examine what it is about the system, and various teaching methods, to try and engage boys? You might not think it is relevant to you, having girls, but it's surely relevant to society as a whole.

There is a difference between people being silly and unrealistic about their children = which is what bluestocking's post is about and a recognised educational issue, is there not? Obviously not recognised by some teachers, rather worryingly.

Even grammar schools full of 'clever' boys have a fair few parents who think their dc' boredom must be a sign of their unappreciated genius .

I thought this was an interesting article, despite the provocative title.

The currnt system is not achieving the equality it was meant to imo. The girls I teach are certainly neither sheeplike or thick. They are ambitious, motivated forward thinking and independent, which is quite right. Boys are also like this, but they do seem to have lost their way a bit ATM

There needs to be a balance between the two, so all learners are given the chance to suceed

IME it depends pretty much on the boy. My DSs have been through the same schools with the same teachers (all the same ones at primary, & many of the same ones at secondary) - DS1 has always been just like MB's school report translations which I picked up on earlier; DS2 has always been keen, quick, interested and hard working, and is doing startlingly well.

There is 5 years between them, so the curriculum will have changed a bit; also DS2 is more self-raised than DS1, with less pushy parent input (which may be very significant ) but broadly it's down to the individual and I don't see why schools should have to bend over backwards to cater for lazy talkative opinionated sods like DS1.