Showing a 15 film to 11 year olds in school

[chocolateflapjack]

Now, do please tell me if you think IABU

As part of a history lesson, year 7s (many barely 11) were shown an extract from a cerificate 15 film. (The Life of Brian). This extract was inocuous.

For homework they are ancouraged to access this extract for themselves on youtube.

The response from the head of history is this:
We have shown the clip in class for a number of years and it is always received well by students; they enjoy the comedy and it is a good introduction to the topic, and for this reason we will continue to use it next year.

My concerns are

1. A child is being introduced to something potentially unsuitable, which they wouldn't have come across otherwise, and it would be easy to view other (less suitable) clips from this film on youtube.
2. A 15 film classification decision is reached by trained film classifiers, so it's not really the teacher's job to decide whether this is OK or not.
3. I have the right to expect that the classroom at least will be a safe place, and that my child will not be exposed to unsuitable material BY THE TEACHER.
4. The fact that a film clip is "received well" doesn't justify it.

Does anyone know what the law says about this and has anyone any suggestions for taking this further? I am not quite angry enough for the Daily Mail. Yet.

oops, Xpost, serve me right for taking so long to post. YABU about clip itself, but I got the pink bikini bottom suggested afterwards which was distasteful at best. That would be my only issue about encouraging access on YouTube.

YouTube allows a safesearch option, I think?

I would be happy with the clip used. I would not be happy with them being told to access it via Youtube for homework. But I probably wouldn't make a huge fuss.
I don't like Youtube being used for homework, but sometimes it is helpful eg. a German teacher set homework involving finding named German bands on youtube and listening to one song, then writing about it.

in year 2 my dd was asked to watch 'where the wild things are' which is a PG as part of the CURRICULUM.

I had to sign to say i approved, but the thing is .... i didnt... i had tried to watch it with her previously and found it too far removed from the orginal story.

I was told, that she doesnt have to watch it, but then she wont be able to do the comparison for her homework!

some choice!

YABU about the clip. I'm unsure what the unsuitable material is that the teacher exposed them to. The film as a whole is rated 15, that particular clip wouldn't be.

Personally if my DS who is 11 wants to go on youtube then I make sure I am sitting with him at all times, the school can't be responsible for internet supervision at home.

Why do you want to take this further?

I had to sign to say i approved, but the thing is .... i didnt... i had tried to watch it with her previously and found it too far removed from the orginal story. I was told, that she doesnt have to watch it, but then she wont be able to do the comparison for her homework!

What would you have expected the school to do in that situation? The purpose was presumably to compare the book and film versions of the story. The fact that there were differences was probably one of the reasons why that particular text and film were chosen. The fact that you didn't think the filmmakers had made a faithful adaptation of the book was certainly NOT a good reason to refuse permission to watch it.

We had to sign a permission slip when our daughter started Y7 in Sept - said they would be showing carefully chosen clips from PG and 12 certificate films.

We could sign that it was ok, or that we could , if we wanted to, discuss specific issues with the teacher,could NOT just say no altogether (which I did think was odd..) . Most people just signed yes. I know some people discussed the LOBrian use in history and RE with the teacher as it does mock the followers of Jesus and they were religious.

One parent (Dad of my dds best friend) complained about the use of A Knights Tale due to it being completely lacking in depth and with a poor plot (it was being used to illustrate honour winning out in the end..)The teacher had a laugh about that!

I think Yabu and over reacting a bit.

The clip is, by your own admission, innocuous, so your child was not 'exposed to unsuitable material by the teacher'.

The clip is funny and would appeal to Year 7s and it opens up a debate. I can't see how your child would be at risk by watching it at home.

My son's school used that scene from LOB, but they wrote out the script instead of the Youtube version. Dh was very enthusiastic and we all watched it in the holidays, and I'm ashamed to say we decided it was a bit unsuitable Our ds 12 and dts 10 did not get the jokes!!

However, what we did think was somewhat was the same history teacher using a scene from Gladiator on screen, which consisted of Marcus Aurelius being killed by his son...

Final straw was Kick Ass at the end of the summer term, but that was a supply teacher putting on a fun DVD...

At my last school they used to show this clip in school, having first gained permission from the parents. They never showed the whole film.

Some people will always cry "lazy teaching" as soon as the use of a film clip is mentioned. It's not lazy- using something like a film clip to hook students and encourage their interest is well-established. As for suitability, it always amuses me that Baz Luhrman's Romeo & Juliet is a 12, yet the Zefirelli R&J (full view of Juliet's boobs) and Macbeth (about as gory as it gets) are both PG.

I would have not given permission for my children to see "Where the Wild things are" for my children, and may well have complained about the book. My children found it very scarey.

As to not doing the homework, I would have cheered (but I hate primary homework). The same message could be taught with many other films, although its quite hard to find one that is a U.

YABU if the clip itself is innocuous. A film may be given a 15 certificate because of the swearing/violence in it. However, if the 5 min clip that is shown contains neither of these then it is perfectly suitable for any age group and the clip itself would be rated a 'U' most probably. Obviously showing an entire 15 film to a group of 11 year olds is unsuitable - but not picking a perfectly acceptable part of it.

I think YABU. Yo can get age appropriate clips and the clip you talk about falls within your category.

If you are still worried, it IS possible for you to look up the Classification Board's reason for deciding to make it a 15. I'm sure you will find it is for reasons that are not included/displayed within that clip (eg swearing, nudity)

I think the trouble is with it having a 15 certificate and the teacher deciding the clip is ok - it might NOT be ok for SOME parents and you can't take back what has already been seen.

(and I thought Where the Wild Things Are was the biggest load of crap ever made - it is the only film I ever walked out of at the cinema - after reading the rave reviews I did wonder if I'd seen the same film..)

themumsnot thats is my point. they should have taken a book and a film with a U certificate and compared them. Where the wild things are, the film is full of violence and the first 1/4 shows monsters and the boy completely destroying a village, to the obvious upset of the other monsters. when we watched it at home, my DD was clearly upset and we switched it off.

Now she HAS to watch it at school or she cant do the work.... thats simply wrong.

things are certified for a reason and i think that the school should respect that.
also it is giving the kids the go ahead to ignore the classification of all films

I personally don't have a problem with this. When I take my children to the cinema they may see PG-rated trailers for films rated 12A or 15. The "what have the Romans ever done for us" clip is funny and inoffensive apart from use of the word "bastards" near the beginning (assuming the whole clip was shown - the school could have skipped that bit). It also makes a point in a way that a Y7 is far more likely to remember than simply reading it in a book or hearing it from a teacher.

No laws are being broken. The school may not supply a DVD of this film to a child under the age of 15 but they can show it to underage children. It would be good practise for them to get parental consent before doing so but this is not compulsory. Had they sought consent I suspect most parents would have given it.

We watched top gun at school at 11.

I use LOADS of clips from 15 & 18 rated films in school.

Particularly enjoy making year 8s scream at the scary twins in 'The Shining', although the bit with the head in the boat in (PG) Jaws makes them jump just as much.

The only complaint I've ever had was from a supply teacher who was appalled at me showing a Jason Manford dvd to a class of 15-16 year olds (it's a 15) as part of their work for an assessment on Spoken Language - accents & dialect, he does a sketch on Mancunians & Scousers abroad...

I don't show entire films that are classified above the students' age unless I get permission (eg. a comparison between a ghost story & The Sixth Sense with year 9).

I show bits of Troy (which is a 15) to my year 8s. I skip the bit where Brad Pitt is in bed with two ladies and you can see their boobs. The rest of the film is fine - a bit gory in places, but 12 year old boys love gore.

I won't show anything with swearing in, though. Accidentally played an inappropriate YouTube clip at the end of term once, without realising it contained the word 'fuck'. That was pretty mortifying.

I wouldn't show anything more than a PG.

The teacher should have more imagination than this.

For goodness sake trust the teachers and don't be so precious. There are far worse things out there and, at secondary school, they are no longer your babies but pre-teens who often need creative and imaginative teaching to get them involved and interested. Teachers are being expected to use media in a creative way to connect with pupils. No doubt the class has a mix of abilities and this allows them all to be involved in ways a book might not. Nothing wrong with books but they are no longer the only way to teach.

Yabu and I'm sorry to say a bit bonkers. The clip was innocuous and was an effort on the part of the teacher to make their lesson enjoyable and grab the interest of students. Lazy teachers wouldn't bother to do this. If you make any more fuss about this you risk being thought f as a loon at your dc school. Not. Only that but it is highly likely that your dc will start being very selective about what they tell you as they grow up.

The teacher should have more imagination than this.

Poor teacher.

They have obviously spent time and energy trying to make the subject interesting and amusing for their students. Nobody on this thread has any idea about the context of the lesson - time of day/class dynamics/prior learning.

Maybe they should just stick to the same old boring worksheets and textbooks in future - save all the fuss.

I showed a clip from the Italian job as part of my observed PGCE lesson. It was to illustrate moments and counterweights (bus off edge of cliff). The lesson was rated as outstanding. I am so glad nobody complained about the fact that the words 'you're only supposed to blow the bloody doors off' are used elsewhere in the film.

Showing a clip on YouTube is breaching copyright. Telling kids to access it at home is breaching copyright.

Showing a clip on YouTube in a school is NOT breaching copyright. Schools and other educational establishments can show copyright works for educational purposes provided the audience is limited to teachers, pupils and others directly connected with the school.

Telling children to access a YouTube clip at home is NOT breaching copyright. Actually viewing a YouTube clip may be a breach of copyright but even that is highly debatable as videos on YouTube are streamed, so you aren't technically creating a copy. It is highly unlikely that any action would be taken against you for viewing a clip on YouTube. Any action would be against the person who posted the clip.