Silly things teachers think will work

[NAR4]

One of the teachers at my child's school (he is in sixth form) thinks giving out yellow cards and red cards for 'bad' behaviour in class will somehow motivate 17 year olds.

At my 14 year old's school (a different school) he was asked to write a letter to Father Christmas during an English lesson. The teacher was dead serious. REALLY?

I pressume that nether of these teachers have children of their own, but should surely have been taught at uni that these things were completely age inappropriate.

Brycie, perhaps you have issues with teachers in general? That would explain why you're trying to argue that ET meant something she didn't say and says she didn't mean, because you think that teachers think that and want to try to pin it on them.

Issues with teachers would also explain why you dismiss everyone telling you you're wrong as a conspiracy of teachers who are always against parents, rather than being down to the simple fact you're wrong.

No, not at all - I've said it earlier (in fact I also said I don't think the red card is a silly idea!)

But perhaps you and other teachers have issues with parents in general? That would explain why you're trying to argue that ET said something different than she actually said.

Issues with parents would also explain why you dismiss parents telling you you're wrong despite the evidence - rather than being down to the simple fact you're wrong.

It seems unlikely that every teacher on this thread has general issues with listening to parents, especially as no teacher on this thread has agreed with your statement 'parents know nothing and shouldn't be listened to at all', including the one that you claim must think that because she wrote something that you (and only you) have interpreted to mean that.

It seems far more likely that the issue is yours, to have made that interpretation in the first place and to continue plugging it as correct despite no one else, including the author, agreeing with it.

I have found most of dc's teachers very competent, very informative and very good communicators, with a very few exceptions.

To me, the Father Christmas exercise, in the hands of the competent teacher (which I would say is statistically most likely) seems perfectly reasonable. Dd, who is 16, is delighted with her new drama teacher who is demonstrating the Stanislawski method by means of puppets; she feels she is learning on a whole new level. It would only be a bad exercise if it was badly thought out by a bad teacher. But I'd want to see some evidence for that.

And red and yellow cards is good enough for adult footballers so why not for teenagers? What other way would your ds prefer to be disciplined?

At the same time, I do sometimes find myself a little disconcerted by the assumption that because you are a parent you can't possibly know anything else: you can't possibly be the person who wrote the latest work on behaviour management technique or speaks fluent French or lectures on medieval witchcraft. Because if you're a parent you know your own child and nothing else. Other people have professional lives and know things, not parents. In particular, it never ever seems to occur to many teachers that the parent facing them across the table might actually be an experienced teacher. Which is odd. Because it is a well known fact that many teachers do indeed have children. I'm the child of teachers myself. Why would you assume that none of them would ever turn up at parents evening?

The only really bad lesson of the Father Christmas type I have come across was the one given us as 17yos by a would-be-modern teacher of psychology. He wanted to demonstrate the power of peer pressure so asked any girl to put up her hand who would be willing to come with him to the shops and try on denims and let him buy her some. When we all squirmed and looked at each other uncomfortably, he used that as proof that teenage girls are swayed by fashion and peer pressure.

Now that was a seriously bad lesson, not because it used an example to illustrate an idea, but because he was a naive man who had not thought through the issues of child protection and inappropriate behaviour, whereas his class of 17yo girls were not quite so naive. But hard to imagine that happening these days.

Brycie we are parents, so unlikely to have an issue with other parents. I suspect most of us are marrried or in a relationship with another adult who is a parent but not a teacher.

I am a teacher with responsibilty for behaviour across school and I will often ask parents for advice. There are times we make mistakes and I admit it and apologise. I have had parents come into school to talk to classes, to run teams and to talk to staff about their child.

Aris

Is that a declaration of love brycie?

Yes I do actually heart your measured tone and your attitude. Also the fact that you have capitalised your name and it's quite clever. These things matter

How the heck can teachers and parents stay up so late arguing, don't you have jobs/children to get up in the morning for!

Anyways, I would like to add an informed thought I had today which is relevant to my point of view. The director-general of the Confederation of British Industry today said and I quote, "employers were being forced to provide remedial tuition in the three-Rs to as many as one-in-five new recruits ? including those with good GCSE grades ? because pupils have been ?failed by the system?. That's the informed bit, next comes my thought which is only informed by my (and my friends) experience.

So I would like to suggest that these 'silly' (only in relation to the OP) techniques teachers use to entertain children might, in teachers opinions, work but in terms of equipping children for the real world are a huge big waste of time.

FYI: I am a parent, have previous teaching experience and training, but never in a secondary.

I went to bed. Too knackered.

I have to teach to get pupils through exams. 'Cos that's what parents demand and the school demands.

Unless they go on to have very specialist jobs, pretty much all I teach them will never be used again except in pub quizzes. Not my fault though - I'm doing what my job requires of me.

They do learn how to spell respiration, photosynthesis and the importance of a healthy diet and body though. Oh and about consequences for missing deadlines (I HATE getting work in late). Does that help?

I don't think anyone can blame teachers, specifically. It's the system that's at fault. I found the things the CBI had to say really interesting. The thing is, until the government stops using league tables in their current state, then schools will have no option other than to teach to the test.

Oh, and DH works for a major management consultancy. He sometimes vets CVs and covering letters, often from graduates of to universities. The standard of English so poor that his company runs courses for employees to brush up on their writing skills.

Doh- top universities.

Before anyone swears at me I am NOT blaming teachers, I to think it is the system to blame and teachers are just on the front line so take the flak.

The solution I have advocated and believe in is selection by ability. As RainbowsFriend said many children are taught stuff that are an enormous waste of time and would be better spent teaching them to read and write. The only way to do this is to figure out (maybe age 14) which kids have the aptitude for academic study and which have the aptitude for more vocational study.

So perhaps anybody would care to put forward suggestions as to their realistic solutions, given that we are never going to just scrap exams of any kind. Scrap GCSE's and just do A-Levels?

Chloe, whilst I see your point, I don't agree with it. Selecting by aptitude at 14 would do a massive disservice to most kids. What about those whose lives mean they are unable to focus on academic study? What about kids who are simply late developers? Or lazy? What about those who are bright but have a passion for something "vocational"? It's surely a retrograde step- back to the days of grammars and secondary moderns?

I do think that there needs to be appropriate pathways for all- especially given Gove's desire to introduce his rigorous exams which plenty of kids will have no chance of passing, but I don't think that the "selection at 14" route you are suggesting would work.

As for alternatives? I say scrap selection. Make all kids go to their local school and bring back proper comps

Selection at 11 or 14 indeed might indeed let down some children but they are being let down now, the question is which system lets down the least. I don't imagine any system will ever be perfect.

Children whose lives mean they are unable to focus on academic study - whether by intellect or circumstance the reality is they can't focus on academic study and should do something that will make a positive impact on their lives.

The kids who are simply late developers - We cant hold the rest back for a few late developers, if they really are late developers then they will just have to catch up. Isn't that called real life?

Those who are bright but have a passion for something vocational would be given an advantage by selection, they could develop their vocational skills to a high level and be as successful as any 'professional'.

No-one is suggesting a return to the old days of grammars and secondary moderns. It is possible to select for skills in a positive way and not just winners and losers. Academic study isn't for everyone and it isn't the panacea for a wonderful life. Most scientists get paid less than teachers and have worse pensions (sorry a personal comment there). Countries like Germany manage it and vocational schools are valued as much if not more than academic schools.

At the very least why are we pushing children who are not academic to stay in school until 18, and do A-Levels? A-Levels should most definitely be for academics and I think many of the comments in this thread are about children who shouldn't be doing them.

How about we stop so many children doing A-Levels and just teach them to read and write? And while we are at it way to many go to uni, its totally pointless.

ET - are you suggesting we ban selection by faith? stopping all Grammar schools? Closing all Private schools? I can see its possible but how do you stop selection by moving house to expensive area?

Chloe, I agree that too many go to and that A levels are not for everyone. Unfortunately, we live in a society where vocational qualifications are thought of as pointless. BTECs, for example, are rubbished, often by people who have no idea what the syllabi contain, simply because they're not GCSEs. There would need to be a complete shift in perception before a selective system such as that you are suggesting would be seen as anything other than win/lose or succeed/fail.

And you're right of course, there is no way we could ever have true comprehensive education- things have gone too far now. I would like to ditch league tables and grammar though.

Too many go to university, that should have said!

Yes ET I guess we have come to the pivotal reason, perceptions. Why do the 'English' look down on vocational skills. I really don't know, other countries don't. I certainly don't, perhaps we should teach everyone a MFL. But I will hypothesize from local experience, when I want a plumber/electrician/tradesman etc you cant find a good one, they don't come out for days and when they do they are Eastern European. I know several tradesmen that earn 100k a year, it doesn't make sense. I will quite happily pay for a good job but we don't have a nationwide system of training experts in the various trades that I can trust. And I would be as happy to pay for decent work, just as much as I pay my doctor, architect or lawyer. I think if a government was brave enough to radically reform the vocational education so we could trust the quality then perceptions would chance. You could even make the choice of school voluntary and I think it would work. A plumber earning 100k salary and zero debt would be a much better career path than a scientist with 40k student loans and a 20k salary.

If you get rid of league tables, how would you identify and deal with failing or coasting schools? There are plenty.

I think that league tables are part of the problem. Schools teach to the test because those test results will be published. In trying too hard to increase the exam results, too many basic skills are missed. Perhaps league tables should be changed- again, it would need re-education of the general populace. I woul far prefer a reporting system which focused on levels of progress, say, than the % of kids getting 5 A*-C grades. Until we get over the obsession with "passing" exams, any alternative would be sneered at.

I, for one, value BTECs for what they are. In some subjects, they are a more appropriate qualification. Try telling that to most people though...

ummm ... arent the league tables already based on "the % of kids getting 5 A*-C grades"

Yes, but I don't think they should be!

Star girl, the GTC was disbanded last year. Just saying. You can work as an unqualified teacher in private education - or the new 'free' schools.

And I'm not sure what you mean by saying that teachers haven't been traine in College for years? Do you mean like a B Ed? Because every year we have ITT students from te local teacher training college affiliated with the University.

I don't think I'd use the cards (I have them for younger students) but I do find that Y12s have their phones out and are a bit too chatty). The teacher's sanctions are up to them and will/should be part of the whole school behaviour policy.

People who favour selection always bang on about Germany as if its school system is great. Germany's school system has been roundly slated by the UN for perpetuating social inequality. Somehow it's the better off kids that end up being 'academically selected' for academia, and the disadvantaged kids that end up being set on the vocational path. Its PISA scores aren't particularly great either.