That glass ceiling! Part 2

[var123]

Continuing the discussion about artificial limits placed on G&T children, and the resulting impact on their health and happiness (not to mention futures).

Do they really matter less because they have a perceived "advantage"?!

original thread here:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/gifted_and_talented/2507232-The-glass-ceiling-for-very-able-children?

Wood, your school would drive me mad. DS and DD's school exercise books look much like mine from my schooldays - a progressive mix of notes, in-class work and homework. They are taken in regularly to be marked, but mostly remain in my DCs' possession.

In primary, there is an exercise book for each subject, mostly sent home at the end of the year, though a few exemplars are usually retained for inspection purposes or as 'here's what a good one looks like' reference point for future years.

For some subjects textbooks are invaluable: MFL requires systematic coverage of grammar and logical build up of vocabulary that only a properly researched textbook can provide. Series of textbooks, even.

My kids have big exercise books for every subject. Depending on the teacher, notes and exercise can be together, or they write the lessons at one end of the exercise book and exercises at the other.

Homework is usually done on loose paper so it can be handed in (exercise books aren't usually handed in for marking - they review and correct the exercises in class - but the teacher will check and grade the books at least once a half term, with the mark counting towards the student's grade average for the term).

And, like Mistigri, our DC in France have always had textbooks. Very useful they are too.

What is the difference in income between a state secondary and a private school?

Private schools typically charge £15-20k pa. I don't know if they do 2nd child discounts (probably not).

How about state schools? Does it vary much when a high % of pupils are on the pupil premium?

And is there any big differences in what the money si supposed to fund? e.g. do state schools have a separate budget for teachers or TAs or building maintenance whereas private schools are expected to pay everything?

YY Mistigri - class notes ("les leçons") are kept quite separate from exercises (another exercise book) and "devoirs maisons" (hand in homework)/tests.

Textbooks make learning easier because all the lessons follow a similar recognized format which the DC get accustomed to. They can therefore concentrate on the content, rather than the graphics and layout.

Var,

It varies across the country. For my county, it's just over £4,300 per pupil. London, particularly central London, is better funded, mostly because there is a higher cost of staffing there. Outside London, it's almost always less than £5,000 except in a few big metropolitan areas.

There is extra money attached to each pupil premium child, yes. Just under £1,000 extra per pupil premium child, just under £2,000 for a looked after child.

AFAIK, though i am not an expert, schools pay everything out of this, although it is possible to apply for grants towards big building projects - either for new buildiings or, less excitingly, to upgrade / renew drains or roofs. Again, AFAIK, LEA schools pay a certain levy to the LEA to provide certain services (e.g. specialist SEN advice / support), whereas in academies, the money remains with the school to spend on providers of such services directly.

"Textbooks make learning easier because all the lessons follow a similar recognized format which the DC get accustomed to."

I had one teacher - elderly - who taught from a textbook like this when I was at school. It was tooth-itchingly boring, even then.

IME, lessons follow a similar structure - say a Maths lesson might well start with some quick mental work, then some teacher input, then some exercises - but within that there may be huge variation in terms of the style and content of each part. I don't need a textbook to give me that loose 'structure', and nor do my pupils.

found it!
Private secondary schools typically charge parents about £17000 pa - not sure what happens regarding tax though - and state schools have a median spend per pupil of £5944.

It looks like the £5944 pays for everything, including electricity and maintenance on the building. Assuming that tax isn't an issue (charitable status?) then private schools have 2.8x more to spend on pupils. No wonder there are some huge differences!
The only bit I can't understand is why state education today is worse than I received in the 80s?

I am obviously very out of touch with what modern textbooks include, as I'm not a teacher and my DC have mostly only experienced primary school teaching in the UK so far. For me at school, textbooks in subjects were essential - including in Maths and Science - and often covered work in more depth than the teacher was able to in the lesson (so good for more able children). In some cases, they also compensated for poor teaching as they provided better explanations than some of my teachers could. I can see that in the Internet age this is all less essential, but perhaps results in an unhealthy reliance on Wikipedia.

var, what do you mean by 'worse'?

In the 1980s, my brother was taught entirely the wrong history curriculum for O-level, because it had diverged from the CSE syllabus a few years previously and the teacher had decided he culdn't be bothered to teach a different syllabus for the 2 children doing O-level.

My dad found this out, and challenged the school. Nothing was, or could be, done. No Ofsted at the time, teacher the local NUT rep. It was CSE history or drop that O-level entirely and take another outside school (which was what he did).

That sort of thing wasn't hugely uncommon (we went to lots of primary schools, and some were...unfathomably awful, in a frozen-toilet-and thrown-blackboard-rubber sort of way)...

WoodHeaven- I really suggest having a look round the school website, there might be more there than you think. Most secondary schools I know anything about have quite extensive revision sessions.

"The only bit I can't understand is why state education today is worse than I received in the 80s?"

Var- are you absolutely sure it is? Because what my children got/get seems to me to be significantly better than what my older nieces and nephews(now in their mid to late 30s and early 40s got. And my comprehensive educated dp, who is in his early 50s says it's better than what he got too.......

"Textbooks make learning easier because all the lessons follow a similar recognized format which the DC get accustomed to."

Sounds utterly ghastly. And completely at odds with what most of the people on this thread seem to want.

But teacherz - you don't "teach from the text book" (that would be tedious). The text book is there to provide a concise summary of what you taught in the lesson and relevant exercises for homework and for parents to use to plug gaps.

"In the 1980s, my brother was taught entirely the wrong history curriculum for O-level"

Mind you, that happened a couple of years ago in a different subject. at our grammar school. Quite the local scandal, it was.

Bertrand - publishers use the same format in books throughout to facilitate comprehension. This is true of all books.

So on Day 1, does the teacher start on Page 1? Or do they at least have the freedom to pick and choose or (heaven forfend) skip sections that their class doesn't need? Add in extra material? Go off-piste a little?

I went to a very ordinary Scottish comprehensive. It was chosen based on being up the road, and that was the end of the selection.
The teachers taught, they did not skim. We learned and passed exams, which involved memorising formulae etc (I did 3 separate sciences).

If we read a book in English, then step 1 was to read the book from cover to cover.

When i went onto university afterwards no one said that we weren't familiar with the basics.

Some things weren't as good. If I wanted a plan of Tutankhamen's tomb then I had to draw it myself, copying from the board, so its not as fast as wielding a pritt stick but on the other hand it helped remember it.

By the time, I'd been learning a language for 3 years, I could speak it and write it and I was very familiar with the various types of verbs -re, -ir, -er. My homework would be to memorise some more vocab or read a passage in French and answer the questions in French. My teachers always marked my work and gave some brief feedback.

Sorry, but it was just all round better in my normal 80s comprehensive than what my DC get today in their "outstanding" one, apart from corporal punishment which was still widely used at that time - usually a ruler than the belt but still...

I know England was different. The problems in English schools were making headlines even then. I remember one episode of BBC question time when they kept going on and on about something called a LEA.

If you don't follow a text book in sequence you risk making complete nonsense of the carefully constructed build up of knowledge and skills. Take my earlier example of a MFL text book: the sequence in which grammar knowledge is acquired cannot be played around with. It's like building a very complicated house to an architectural plan. There's no point painting the walls before you put the roof on.

teacherwith2kids - I suppose the question is why would the teacher want that freedom to move sections of the book about? Wouldn't it be easier, for the students and the teacher to teach it in order so that the child's understanding has a chance to build with new concepts being introduced only after the ones they rely on have been covered?

My DD, in history, is, like every Sixieme (Y7) in France, studying the ancient world. In chronological order

It makes sense. She researched and gave a presentation on the founding myth of Athens this month and next month she will research and give one on the founding myth of Rome. There is a sense to this.

AprilLady Seconded.

(A lot of private schools are nearer £10k a year actually and ours (London) is £15k and some of that goes to fund poorer children on bursaries so I am not sure the difference between £6k state and £10k private less the bursary cost is so huge althogh I'd support abolition of all state schools, privatisation and a voucher you could use at any school and top up)