How important are 'modern' teaching methods?

[NormaSnorks]

DCs were in a very good (but large!) state primary school which was highly ofsted rated.
I helped out in class a bit, and the style of teaching was very modern, progressive, 'hands-on' doing-type stuff....

DS1 was doing OK, DS2 not so well(too big class & struggling) so we moved to an independent primary.

They are both happy and doing 'well' academically & socially. However I find myself frustrated by what I see as very old-fashioned, and frankly quite dull teaching methods - lots of written work, less 'all-round project work', less use of ICT/ white board/ interactive resources and 'hands on' learning.

How important is this if the school is getting good results, and the kids seem OK?

I just feel as if I know there are so many good resources available these days, and the school isn't using them...
Should I be talking to the head about this?

Most of the parents at the school have no experience of the state sector, so wouldn't necessarily 'see' this direct comparison...

pisces - I do intend to talk to the Head about this at some point. There are ways of raising these things though aren't there?

I won't be saying I think all your teaching is crap, I'm more likely to be asking 'what methods do you think you could use if some of your more traditional ones don't seem to be working so well for some (my?) children'

Or something like that - I haven't worked it out exactly.

I doubt she will be mortally offended - she isn't like that.

Norma, you know her I don't, but I'd say she could easily take offence if you say it like that, no matter how true it is. Why not try and get her to talk about her methods by an opening gambit of something like you've being intrigued by the differences in teaching methods from your last school. If she bites and starts discussing it with you you can easily hear her take on it, then it should be easier to find the right way into saying what you want to say.

Smee - you're right - anything that could be construed as a 'challenge' outright will be unlikely to be well-received, so yes, I need to find the right sort of approach.

If the traditional methods are enabling them to read, write, do arithmetic and learn science well, then I don't see the point of ditching them. Too many state schools (and the odd independent here and there) are so dazzled by "modern" methods and new technology that lessons aren't being taught properly - with poor literacy and numeracy levels, and failure to grasp basic scientific principles. But the pupils leave school knowing how to turn on electronic gadgets and operate graphics tools (but not actually draw!)..... It really depends on how the resources are being used. I wouldn't criticise a teacher who is educating his or her class well using just traditional methods. I would suggest modern ones if the teacher and the class both seem bored and uninspired by the lessons though. (this would be my answer to bontastic's question also - it depends on the user, ie the teacher.)

Why don't you move them back to their original school?

Is there any research that says small class sizes is actually better?

I had a feeling the research doesn't back it up.....

If this school gets better SATs it's not because of the small class sizes....

ABetaDad: if you look at this thread again - grateful for a link to the league tables you mean. I've never heard of one for prep schools, nor any consensus on what is a "top" prep, and I'd be fascinated to see it.

But at heart, this isn't a state/private debate - it's a straight comparison by one parent of two individual schools.

This is why it's always recommended that you take the time to look round a variety of schools, and to do so whilst the pupils are there. Then you can decide in the light of what the school offers all round.

To assume schools from one sector will always be worse/better than the other in any particular aspect would be unwise.

Personally I wouldn't be happy with that style of teaching. Not sure what I'd do in this situation though

Why are people trawling through old threads? This one is over 2 yrs old! Much better to start a new one. I keep getting caught on this so check the dates now.

This thread is over two years old, so whatever Norma decided to do, she's probably done it long ago...

Since it it so old it would be nice if OP came back and told us how the Head reacted to her 'helpful' suggestions!! (however she probably won't see it-I think it is a bit unfair to go back 2 yrs when the person who started it quite possibly thinks differently).

OP, I think pisces' point was that you had the opportunity to choose the school whose teaching methods you (presumably) supported.

You cannot go wading in teaching the HT how to suck eggs.

HTH

oh balls...

Indigobell - research states that small class sizes make a difference in the early years but don't make much difference at secondary level. I think a lot of the modern and trendy techniques used in the state sector are not needed. If you have teachers with excellent subject knowledge and an ability to control the class you're half way there! A lot of the curriculum in the state sector is about social engineering and making children 'mix' and social cohesion etc etc. The Independent sector doesn't have all that rubbish, teachers are just able to get on with teaching. I think there's a lot to be said for traditional teaching but that doesn't mean it has to be dull and uninspiring. I've seen very animated teachers in the private sector and the children are listening AND learning. It's all about expectations. And education at this level is not just about reading and writing! What about all the wonders of science, geography, history, art etc? These subjects contain knowledge too and ther's great scope for creativity. But you need the knowledge first. Oh yeah, and learning can be hard work too - contrary to the belief in the state sector where EVERYTHING has to be fun!