What does one do about bad teachers?

[FriendlyLadybird]

DS is in year 8. There is a subject that he likes a lot and is very good at, but the teacher he has had last year and this has absolutely terrible classroom control. He has continued to do well in the subject because we can support him a lot at home but he says he really, really does not want to have this teacher next year and into his GCSE years.

Is it possible to talk to the school and make this sort of request? My instinct is to support teachers and to feel sorry for those who have poor classroom control, but DS had started to hate these lessons and I don't want him to lose interest in the subject.

The Head Teacher and the Deputies and the Assistant Heads ALL have to walk around the school, calling into the classrooms. They have to see what is going on and act to ensure it stops. They have to believe their teachers when they report problem children and they have to make sure the teacher has the skills to deal with some of these children whilst still teaching the rest. The school can and should deal with the worst offenders by removing them from the lessons. All schools have behaviour policies and sanctions for dealing with poor behaviour and encouragement for good behaviour. The fact that senior management allows this to continue shows their shortcomings. This is why there are continuing problems. They nay also need to work much more closely with the parents of the worst offenders.

Teachers do have to deal with disruption in lessons and can be helped by experienced staff in class management. Making sure pupils have appropriate work is important and setting high standards of behaviour right from the start is also key. Working in a school where the SLT does not shirk responsibility is extremely important because everyone must work together to combat this. I don't think it is helpful to get bogged down on the word "control" but management of behaviour in the classroom is part of a teacher's skill set and clearly the quality of teaching and learning is compromised if low level disruption is a constant feature in the classroom. There are plenty of schools that are calm places of learning so I would tackle the SLT on what they are going to do to improve behaviour in the school.

Interesting thread. I don't know how accurate a portrayal it is (and I'm sure there's selective editing and kids playing up for the cameras) but when watching the Educating Yorkshire/Essex series and the newly qualified teachers series, I was gobsmacked at how much chat/backchat/mucking about/disruption there was in lessons and how much the teachers seemed to tolerate it. It sounds from this thread that that's quite a normal situation.

I was in the same position as a pupil. A group of us approached the Head of Dept, and went for the approach of 'we're obviously not trying hard enough, but we're not managing to keep up in Miss X's lessons, and we wonder if you'd arrange some extra revision sessions' tactic. He was very helpful, and Miss X I think got some tactful extra support.

We did know that she was having out of school problems (carer for her elderly mother) - but OTOH she wasn't actually really providing any teaching in a lot of her lessons and we had her for half our A level maths curriculum. It's hard, obviously even as a 17 year old you can empathise with that sort of problem, but still if you do much worse in your exams because the course content isn't covered, that's a big issue as a pupil . . .

I am now in contact with the school and will let you know (if I can) how it goes.

I do wonder whether some of these problems came with the more recent (and in general thoroughly beneficial) emphasis on group work and more kinesthetic teaching strategies. When I was at school we all sat quietly at our desks, facing front, and talking only when we put our hands up to answer questions. And very boring it was too.

Now, because everyone is talking in small groups and doing things on ipads, the boundaries have got a bit blurred. It's only a small step from planning a project in your group to constant low-level disruption.

Yes, but a lesson should be far more structured than planning on an iPad. This is asking for trouble in my opinion! My children never planned in this way and they are not that old! Yes it is boring to be taught all facing the front and no interaction with the class or teachers. This is why schools have abandoned this as being effective.

There was disruption in the tv programmes but it also showed the teachers, SLT, including the Heads. dealing with it! In fact far too much of their time was spend dealing with it, but it did not feel as if every lesson was blighted by this and new teachers would not pass their assessments if this continued to be the case. In fact,when classes were not learning effetively in Young Teachers, the Head at the Uxbridge school really got involved and helped mentor the young teacher. They were very aware of the difficulties in the classroom inwhat, generally, appeared to br a very calmschool. The children found a weak link and they explited it. It is down to SLT to make sure there are no weak links!

The head at my daughter's school has one response to such concerns "the staff have reassured me that behaviour is the classes you have complained about is high and there is minimum disruption". It has been like banging one's head against a brick wall. It is lying and I haven't liked it and have list respect for the SLT who are not good role models.

I never suggested a petition AGAINST the teacher. The petition my dc signed laid out the pupils' frustration in not being allowed to do the work they were capable of, and in not being stretched because the teacher was constantly distracted by troublemakers.

There is nothing wrong in that sort of communication. It's very similar to what another poster has described. Perhaps my use of the word 'petition' has led posters to assume it was a demand to get rid of the teacher.

Not is it anything remotely like having a group of colleagues hanging up on you. If you insist on a business analogy, it's more like a group of clients being unsatisfied with the product being supplied, and saying so.

Yes it is boring to be taught all facing the front and no interaction with the class or teachers. This is why schools have abandoned this as being effective.

Quite the reverse, this is by far the most effective form of teaching, and far from being "boring", students learn that genuine satisfaction comes from progress made from their own efforts, rather than through some moronic fancy schmancy "entertainment" from the teacher. genuine students find this shitty ofsted crap "Boring". it is only the spoilt 5 second attention span triple screeners that expect and demand the whole world to be served up in interactive sound bites with learning objectives and smart targets for the whole of their lives.

I wouldn't insult an intelligent student with a learning objective or a smart target. My DS are in the top sets in a grammar school. Every now and again they get some NQT with their head stuffed with this shit, and they treat it with the derision it deserves.

Intelligent students working towards eventually acheiving high level degrees from Russel group universities deserve teaching with a bit more meat.

Students with very limited academic ability, or those who have developed no self control or attention span can be pandered to with the type of "interactivity" you are refering to, but it gets them no where in the long run.

Ofsted are out of their tiny minds, as I'm sure you know most people in education agree. Humans have taught their children very successfully for several million years, and ofsted come swanning along with their pseudoscientific airy fairy nonsense, and force schools to comply with it, then wonder why children behave badly and don't learn.

Future generations are going to look back at Ofsted in disbelief, that any organisation so stupid hod so much influence and power.

Agree with Beaufort Belle re "If you insist on a business analogy, it's more like a group of clients being unsatisfied with the product being supplied, and saying so". To which one can add, a group of clients who often do not have the option of taking their business elsewhere, and who are legally obliged to attend the sessions. Whereas if you're fed up with your colleagues, you can always look for another job.

Oops, sorry, Oinkballoon not Beaufortbelle...

"My DS are in the top sets in a grammar school. Every now and again they get some NQT with their head stuffed with this shit, and they treat it with the derision it deserves."

Because of course what works for the top set in a grammar school (unusual that, by the way, grammar schools don't usually set for anything but maths) is going to work for everyone. . One hopes that they manage to treat NQTs with respect and courtesy, despite the derision?

Friendlyladybird, I would be very worried if my Dd's school was introducing extensive group work. There has never been any proper evidence that this is an effective way of teaching, and there are a lot of problems with it, in terms of what psychologists call "social loafing", students embedding mistaken ideas, and just general time-wasting. Many educators recommend paired work instead, in order to avoid these problems. Kinaesthetic learning is also problematic except in very small doses, as children can often end up remembering the activity rather than whatever it was supposed to be teaching them.

There is no reason why teacher-directed lessons with desks facing the front cannot be lively and interesting, with plenty of interaction between students, in the hands of a good teacher using good methods. One of the biggest problems with too much group work is that you tend to get very little learning for the time invested. It's important to remember that teenagers are typically only in school for about 20% of their waking hours, and that time needs to be used to advantage.

*"My DS are in the top sets in a grammar school. Every now and again they get some NQT with their head stuffed with this shit, and they treat it with the derision it deserves."

Because of course what works for the top set in a grammar school (unusual that, by the way, grammar schools don't usually set for anything but maths) is going to work for everyone. hmm. One hopes that they manage to treat NQTs with respect and courtesy, despite the derision?*

They are in the top sets at grammar school because they have learnt to learn, rather than sitting watch teachers entertain with a box of tricks. not because of any inate ability.

Get rid of the ofsed lead shite and far more students will achieve far more.

Their response to student teachers varies according to the child. Most suck it up with a forced smile, grumble later and do the real work at home. Some refuse to copy down learning objectivs, or SMART targets.

If you were to add up the thousands of hours wasted in UK schools every day with writing out learning objectives the total would be profoundly shocking.

Oh, Charis, you are funny!

I would talk to the Head of the Department but in confidence and ask them to be discreet. The teacher needs support. If they are getting complaints and observations without initial support I do feel it is unfair. As an not I received great support and the mentors walked into all of our lessons so the pupils knew poor behaviour wouldn't be tolerated.

I do feel for your son as i was the quiet pupil in my secondary school and the crap the teachers have to put up with is disgusting.

Why should he suffer though ?

"Quite the reverse, this is by far the most effective form of teaching, and far from being "boring", students learn that genuine satisfaction comes from progress made from their own efforts, rather than through some moronic fancy schmancy "entertainment" from the teacher. genuine students find this shitty ofsted crap "Boring". it is only the spoilt 5 second attention span triple screeners that expect and demand the whole world to be served up in interactive sound bites with learning objectives and smart targets for the whole of their lives."

"They are in the top sets at grammar school because they have learnt to learn, rather than sitting watch teachers entertain with a box of tricks. not because of any inate ability."

Charis - I am a tutor. I teach and have taught students of all sorts of abilities - including bright an able ones. What you have said is actually offensive.

You are very blessed that your ds's don't have any subtle processing problems or issues such as dyslexia/dyspraxia/ADHD (and there are many that do, a significant proportion undiagnosed). Students who do have processing issues struggle to learn in conventional settings even if they are bright. They need information presented in different ways depending on their problem in order to take it in properly. Your heart would break when you hear them say things like "My hand won't do what my brain tells it to." or "I'm letting my class down because I can't write fast enough." or "I understand it so why can't I remember it" or " I just don't get science, I sit in class and it all just goes over my head" - this last from a student who then went on to get full marks in his GCSE science papers having benefited from appropriate teaching. Do these sound like "spoilt 5 second attention span triple screeners"? They would have serious problems trying to learn in the way your sons are doing though.

I am no lover of ofsted and think some of their aproaches are just daft. I also agree that some students need to learn self-control and respect for themselves, peers and teachers but you would be amazed if you knew how often difficulties such as those outlined in my previous paragraph are at the root of "bad" behaviour.

You have very capable sons. Be glad. Enjoy them and their achievements and their inate abilities (believe me - they have them), but don't insult or look down on those who have more struggles with learning.

"Students who do have processing issues struggle to learn in conventional settings"

I would question this, except for the most severe cases. My elder daughter is dyspraxic. She learns best from information clearly presented, and from plenty of practice, not from groupwork or kinaesthetic learning. The same is likely to be true of most children with splds. ASD students in particular are often very ill served by busy, noisy classrooms without clear expectations and routines. That's one reason why ASD is more of a problem in our schools than it used to be.

Children with SPLDs may need extra time, or special help, or particularly clear and well-sequenced instructions, but for the most part the idea that they need to learn in different ways has little evidence to support it. In particular, VAK learning styles have been shown to have no evidence base.

Kesstrel - it depends on the particular processing issue. I have one student with auditory processing problems who really struggled with maths but improved by about 3 years ability in less than a year (as assessed by an ed psych) when the information was presented to him extremely visually. In contrast I have another student who has severe visual processing problems. She really struggles to learn or understand any maths when presented in written, diagramatic or image form, but does better with 3d manipulatives and anything she can learn by turning into a song (eg times tables).

I agree that busy noisy classrooms are not helpful for most children especially those with splds. I agree with "clear presentation" but what that means can vary for different students as outlined by my two admittedly rather extreme examples above. There are forms of "group" work that are not helpful, but other forms that may be. Kinesthetic/manuipulative work can really help. I have found it amazing how a student's understanding of tenths and hundredths can improve dramatically when they are asked to physically cut a 100 square up into tenths and hundredths rather than only drawing/colouring tenths and hundredths in a hundred square on a worksheet. Have a look at some of Richard Dunnes work for how a very kinesthetic approach can help young children's understanding of maths.

My response was mainly for Charis, who seemed to think that as long as children all sat in rows facing the front and were silent listening to the teacher, they could all learn as well as her sons! Students with auditory processing problems, for example, would find this very difficult and I found her sweeping comments derogatory and unhelpful.

Educatingarti, Thanks for clarifying. Yes, clearly there are a small number of children who do have special learning styles, who won't be picked up by quantitative studies.

But there are also a lot of children out there learning basic maths in primary schools who are being expected to learn primarily via "enquiry" involving manipulatives and more manipulatives, when what they actually need is some explicit instruction and clear modelling by the teacher, plus plenty of practice. And a lot of teachers who are expected to waste time planning differentiated VAK activities for all their students.

My elder daughter is dyspraxic. She learns best from information clearly presented, and from plenty of practice, not from groupwork or kinaesthetic learning. The same is likely to be true of most children with splds. ASD students in particular are often very ill served by busy, noisy classrooms without clear expectations and routines. That's one reason why ASD is more of a problem in our schools than it used to be

Completely agree with this! And also that some children need more visual/practical support, etc.

Well - do VAK activities have to be "enquiry" led? Explicit instruction and clear modelling can also be done by use of VAK methods and I think this is really beneficial. This is what Richard Dunne does.

I think all children react differently to different methods...so it is hard to generalise. But the ability to move around a classroom etc is a green light for some children to misbehave.
I used to help a boy with dyslexia/ADHD about 20 yrs ago so I had training/mixed with specialists etc.... Someone who worked with children like this all the time said in some severe cases the best approach was a cubicle (like a voting booth) with blank white walls and you (the teacher) only talked to them from behind -they had absolutely zero distractions.

My DD1 just diagnosed with ADHD at 14. She struggles to concentrate and will drift off if not engaged. I think she can do that just as easily as part of a more informal group or in a traditional setting. What is good for her is a break from prolonged sitting and writing (which she finds difficult) and tasks broken down into smaller goals. However talking to her in the first years of primary school about why she was not finishing her maths work (a recurrent problem even now) she blamed the colourful maths workbooks with pictures. (I can see now why she found them distracting -at the time it was considered a lack of maturity -she is young in her year).

That's interesting, Unlucky83. The prevalent classroom style and methods used today in primary classrooms were thought up in the 1960s, well before anyone had any real understanding of splds. They simply weren't taken into account.

Similarly, it didn't occur to anyone that enquiry learning might favour those children who came to school with greater background knowledge and larger vocabularies, while leaving their less advantaged peers behind.

The entire VAK classification system is an obsolete ideology that has been proved to be nonsense.

This is half the problem. All this speudoscientific type educational theory. The people that come up with this rubbish are typically scientifically illiterate, and wouldn't have the faintest idea how to go about evaluating the evidence or the research methodology. So this type of crap gets perpetuated by a bunch of cyclically self affirming " experts", even though there is absolutly no scientific basis for it what so ever, and it lasts until somehow scientifically disproves it, or it is just dropped for the next wave of superstitious gobbledegook, like brain gym, or learning objectives, or "two stars and a wish" praise sandwiches, or similar. Everyone's time is wasted constantly. We should be getting on with education in schools, not having to constantly field these crapballs.