New recruit teacher is inadequate

[BoboChic]

This, basically. DD in Y7 started secondary school 2 weeks ago. One - and only one - of her teachers is totally inadequate. He is a new recruit. Parents and pupils have noticed pretty quickly that he doesn't have the first inkling of the subject he is supposed to be teaching. One approach has already been made to the school to alert them. What are the best words to use to describe this situation? Inadequate? Lacking subject knowledge?

My children attend and have attended schools, both public and private where the attitude most certainly was one of provider and customer.

In both schools, one private and one public, the idea that he who pays the piper calls the tune is respected.

What if every parent wants different things, so you have upto 30 'tunes'. By all means say stuff, but to dictate is ridiculous.

That is why small groups of parents get together and present a united front.

It starts with a few parents unhappy with the fact that students from the private elementary school get placed in remedial or lowest streams in maths in all the high schools they attend, even those getting As in maths. From the grumbling a group forms. Much discussion goes on behind the admin's back, approaches are made to the school board members who are parents, and finally the administration becomes aware that a parents' maths committee has been formed. [True story, btw].

Or a group of African American parents suspects that black students are not getting a fair shake in the high school and get together to present proposals for a wide range of changes that they hope will result in less detention of black students, more enthusiastic encouragement by teachers of black students in honours classes, the hiring of more African American teachers, inclusion of more African American history courses and novels in literature courses, a spoken word poetry group, etc.

The pressure groups are well aware that the majority of parents are ambivalent or don't want to get involved or are even happy with their students' progress. But those pushing for change do not have to have all the parents behind them. All they need is a united front and a coherent set of proposals.

Dictation is not the right word for this. It is holding administrations accountable for their actions to those who pay the salaries of the administrators. In the case of the elementary school, fees are paid and parents expect results, not to see their students' life chances ruined by a bad teacher from age 12 to 14. In the case of the high school, high property taxes are paid and there is a very reasonable expectation of a return for that money in the form of a high school with a well earned reputation for excellent results for all students.

I have a question - how come the new teachers lack of subject knowledge has morphed into an inadequate curriculum?? What was the teacher from last year doing? Did he/she teach the inadequate curriculum and the incorrect subject knowledge or not teach the curriculum and teach the correct subject knowledge?

And thinking about it. Your original post only mentioned the teacher being inadequate. Where did the poor curriculum idea even come from? That wasn't even mentioned until after your meeting with the head

But the relationship between a school and a parent is not one of provider and customer. It is far more collaborative than that, there is no "sale" but a joint end goal, and the drive to see the relationship as such is a major failing in what is going on in modern education.

In a customer/provider relationship it is down to the provider to deliver the customers needs in order to ensure customer satisfaction. In a school it is possible to broadly do that, and to attend to very specific needs, but it is not possible to guarentee that in the customer will be satisfied. It involves a great deal more flexibility than the traditional customer/service provider relationship, and to cast it as such is inherently wrong.

In the fairly extreme cases above there is need for intervention, on this thread math many people were suggesting to the OP that calling for the head of a teacher two weeks into term, whilst throwing terms such as "moron" about was a bit OTT. She then comes back and says she and she alone has identified and glaring curriculum flaw which she is now (with messanic zeal) going to fix, it all sounds a bit odd, no?

"high property taxes are paid and there is a very reasonable expectation of a return for that money in the form of a high school with a well earned reputation for excellent results for all students."

Tax is not a pay in, get out system, its far more complicated than that, and you are well aware of it.

Want better results? Pay teachers more, respect the profession, don't teacher bash on public forums. The aspersions which are cast on teachers on here are awful.

Finally almost all of the research shows that your school/teachers etc etc have very little influence on your life chances, know what is the major influence by far? Parents, making remarks like "life chances ruined by a bad teacher between 12-14" are hyprbolic and a flawed post hoc argument tbf.

In the US, local property taxes pay for the public schools. There is also a state subsidy.

It absolutely is a pay in and get out system. Rateable property values are the basis for the local taxes. Property values remain high in School Districts where schools are excellent. People move to good School Districts in order to send their children to the schools. They have a stake in the community remaining graffiti free, petty crime free, and in the reputation of the school upon which their property values depend.

The teachers are paid well above the going rate. This is because the community wants to attract the best and is willing to pay the high taxes that support that sort of investment. Most of my children's teachers have at least a masters degree. Many hold PhDs. They are respected as long as the school keeps on sending students to Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc,. year after year, as long as the weakest students are pushed as hard as possible and remain in school productively, and go on to either jobs or further ed courses, and as long as students report home that their university freshman year biology courses were a breeze thanks to the excellent teacher they had when they were 14.

Indeed your life chances can be ruined in the US by a poor maths teacher from age 12 to 14. Students intending to go to universities have to do core courses in English, maths, science, humanities and language. None of those can be dropped as they can in the UK. When high schools stream students in maths (which they do by means of assessments the year before you enroll) they often peg science to the level of maths. So students in the lowest maths levels do not get to do the honours courses in science either. There are lots of second rate universities that will take most applicants, including those with mediocre grades and those who have not done honours courses in high school. But if you want to get a job after university or go on to grad school, students need to apply for better schools.

You will want to get a job afterwards or go on to grad school, since the loans you take out to spend four years at a second rate university at a cost of perhaps $40k+ per year come due six months after graduation for you just as they come due for those who have borrowed to pay for their third level education in an excellent, very selective institution whose graduates are virtually assured of a job. Whether you make $10 an hour working in a supermarket after university or $70K a year you have to repay those loans after graduation. There is no income threshold.

How do you know how change comes about in organisations? Responding to client feedback is a very mainstream approach to honing your product.

Okay, now I know the OP is winding us up.

Tax is not a pay in, get out system, its far more complicated than that, and you are well aware of it.

I agree with mathanxiety's response to this. In addition, in some US states, there is a separate school tax (which is also an ad valorem property tax) that goes directly to the schools.

I know how tax works in the States Math, we are never going to agree. Your tax does not give you a right to dictate policy to the school also: " Students report home that their university freshman year biology courses were a breeze thanks to the excellent teacher they had when they were 14." Doesn't say much about the course content at US universities at undergraduate level does it? They come out top in the rankings, but that's mainly to do with post grad work and U.S universities cherry pick from the rest of the world there.

I will admit that parental discussion/input is needed, never said otherwise, but I will be vociferous in my opinion that parents should not "dictate" school policy.

It absolutely does give a right to 'dictate', encapsulated in the dictum 'no taxation without representation'.

That is the whole basis of independent school districts local control is preserved and it is why residential segregation in the US works to maintain relative educational advantage and disadvantage.

Those school districts whose residents 'pay in' with large annual property tax cheques receive a 'payoff' in the form of excellent teachers, excellent sports facilities, excellent extracurricular activities, schools with great and well earned reputations, and property values that are maintained. This is accomplished via keeping the pressure on the elected officials (superintendents) and elected school boards, who run the districts and are responsive to the interests of the residents. Wealthier districts tend to have residents who have money to put where their mouth is.

Those districts whose residents are unwilling /unable to pay for excellent schools get mediocre schools. Residents in those districts also elect their superintendents and their school boards, but these bodies represent what the communities aspire to and find reasonable to expect from their schools.

In the US there tends to be a direct correlation between average property value and income, and quality of public schools.

Students report home that their university freshman year biology courses were a breeze thanks to the excellent teacher they had when they were 14." Doesn't say much about the course content at US universities at undergraduate level does it?
You are wrong to extrapolate in the direction you have gone there. It reflects in the case of my DCs' high school a biology teacher with a PhD from an Ivy League university who could easily have taught at a university but for reasons that are not clear (perhaps a guaranteed job and excellent pension?) chose to spend thirty five years teaching biology in a suburban American high school instead.

World rankings of universities are based on all sorts of criteria. Some place great store in them and some do not. It remains that some universities are extremely selective, by which is meant they admit under about 15% of undergrad applicants. Admission rates like that mean they pick only the best undergrad prospects America and the world can throw at them.

"no taxation without representation' means that you have right to be represented, not that you have the right to push your individual values/opinions on others.

Parents have the right to input into schools, they do not get to dictate policy, democracy means that the needs of all are served ( something the original "taxation without representation" forgot, many needs were not served.)

Undergrad courses in the US are not ( for the first few years anyway) as academic as those in the UK. Students persuing something like my subject (Econ) would find that the first two years at least are almost comparable to A level, even at Ivy League schools. This is what results in things like "pre med" and "pre law" sets of courses at colleges. Where as in the UK our students would start at 18.

I've taught in the states, in both good and challenging areas, I have fundamental issues with the way the taxation system works in terms of schools, but sadly in the UK house prices near good schools are driven up as well, so its probably similar.

Math
from what I can see on this thread we have three (possibly four) different school systems represented.

It isn't entirely possible to compare one system to another.

Chelle - the fundamental flaw in the thinking behind the choice of curriculum only emerged from a long and in-depth exchange with the head. It can be hard to work out where someone is coming from.

As to parental voice in schools: it depends entirely on the structure of the organisation. Here in France there are schools with private international sections, hosted within state schools, that are created and run by parents. The head is employed by parents and reports directly to them. Of course parents get what they want!

bobo

So now that you have discovered the 'real' reason behind your issues, how are you going to sort out the issue that you have started for the teacher?

So in this brave new curriculum world, what will happen to the "inadequate" teacher of the OP?

Can I just say that, having read this thread, I am delighted I don't live in France where my children's education would seem to be at the whim of the playground queen bee.

I worry that academies could well lead us down a similar path

Can I just say that, having read this thread, I am delighted I don't live in France where my children's education would seem to be at the whim of the playground queen bee.

Completely agree.

As for of course parents get what they want you make it sound like a good thing. I know it may be a strange concept to you but parents can be wrong you seem the type that would never admit that though

People in the UK are far too accepting of problems in the state education system.

It's one of the reasons things don't improve.

I visit lots of schools and whilst teacher pay /conditions is obviously a problem, many of the reasons for poor outcomes in my area of expertise are easy and cheap to fix. They are cause by poor decisions and fixed ideology from the SLT.

mathanxiety, the US system sounds very wrong. It means how much money your school has, is directly linked to how much money the parents have. Here schools with a large number of children from por families, actually gets more money from taxes.

I'm a bit confused. Unless things have changed since I left, French teachers don't apply for a job the way we would here. As a teacher you're a 'fonctionnaire' (civil servant?), you're employed by the government and as such you don't really choose your school, you're kind allocated a school (and pray for the best...).
Also the French system is different in that you don't have all the hierarchy you'd find in the British system, it's usually Headteacher>deputy head> teachers, there is no Head of department for example ( again things might have changed since I left).
Try having a meeting with the teacher, if nothing comes out of it contact the Headteacher and at a last resort get in touch with the ''Académie' of your school/ region.
Good luck with trying firing him (if that's what you have in mind) it can be hard in the French system.
Maybe wait and see? Give him a chance as it' only been 2 weeks (hides for cover...)

Boney - the teacher isn't my problem. My problem is the quality of my child's education (which we pay for) and the quality of the education of her peers. In coordination with other parents we shall pursue the matter with the right people (those who have decision-making authority and hold the purse strings) until we reach agreement. I've done it before - it's hard work, largely because one has to get inside the heads of people very different from oneself and persuade them to change their underlying thinking - but interesting and rewarding too.

liha - you are describing a French state school. This a private sous contrat school.

SheGot - I very much agree that many problems in schools are easy and cheap to fix. A little new expertise goes a long way.

OP you are sounding more and more like you are on anew ego boosting exercise, tgat yiu know better than anyone with an element of you will do it my way and I will continue to badger you until you do