Thinking of moving DD from her school at end of year 7 due to poor handling of closure period - anyone else in the same boat

[fancymcfancypants]

That's it really. We've been really, really disappointed with provision from the school during the closure:

• nothing whatsoever in the way of 'live' teaching
• not a single call from the school, pastoral or otherwise, until 2 weeks ago when a teacher that DD had never spoken to before called to check in on her (as if she'd be comfortable sharing any concerns with someone she doesn't know from adam)
• virtually no effort at all put into lesson planning (sample maths lesson 'here are the answers to Tuesday's worksheet, go over anything you got wrong')
• in instances where children have fallen behind by a long way e.g. one of DD's friends who didn't submit work for two weeks, no contact from the school at all

Complained to HOY (as have many other parents) and was told they were going to try and do more live teaching but some of the teachers 'aren't comfortable' online.

She likes the school generally. It's viewed very highly in the part of London that we're in, very sought-after etc and before Covid we were fairly happy with it. But what she's getting just isn't anywhere close to proper schooling and the thought of it all dragging on into next year is really dispiriting.

They are now saying they aren't sure KS3 will be back at school in September and I'm thinking of doing whatever it takes to somewhere else for her. We recently moved and are now in the catchment for a local academy that seems (according to other parents) to be handling this stuff better so was wondering about going to ask them to put her on a waiting list for an occasional place (which I'm told do come up). Alternatively, we can afford to pay private school fees but wanted DC to go to state schools. But now I feel we'd be letting DD down if we don't explore other options that are available to us.

I suppose I'm just putting this out there to see if anyone else has been massively disappointed with how their DC's school have handled the past few months and is also considering moving.

And that’s where most independent schools are having better outcomes, because the expectations are higher.

You know people on MN often accuse teachers of not living in the real world but it’s clear that teachers have a far better idea of the ‘real world’ than many.

Independent schools have a vastly different access to resources, as do their intakes. All the expectations in the world can’t change that for state schools.

I haven’t seen anyone reference a ‘full timetable of live lessons’...that’s a conjecture that’s been sprung up somehow in retaliation. I do think what is very obvious on here, is that there are too many people willing to make excuses..and if we can’t all have it, then sitting it out together is the only way. My late mother used to often say, ‘you can makes excuses in life..or you can make it happen’...and this was at a time when we had lost our home, and couldn’t even afford the bus fare to get to school.
If parents and teachers are making excuses on behalf of their children, what hope do they have.

My daughter has been getting an almost full timetable of live lessons. (9.30 -3/4pm instead of 9-6 with a longer lunch and 15 min breaks between classes instead of 5 mins). But her school is unique and provides a unique kind of education. It’s not a typical private school in that about half the kids have their fees paid by the government but even just applying indicates a level of parental involvement.

Mum if you don’t think that there’s a general assumption that private school kids are having school as normal but live online I’m not sure what threads you have been reading.

if we can’t all have it, then sitting it out together is the only way

What a lot of people don’t realise is that while they might be concerned about their children, schools are concerned about all their children. If live lessons actively screw a large proportion of their cohort then it would be unethical to pursue that. In addition to the fact that the evidence appears to show live lessons aren’t any better than pre-recorded, the notion that schools should expend a large amount of its time and resources pandering to a minority of poorly-informed parents or they’re being negligent is bizarre.

Obviously if their remote learning provision is inadequate, that’s a separate argument.

In addition to the fact that the evidence appears to show live lessons aren’t any better than pre-recorded

I have no issue with pre-recorded and I know that for us it works better as sometimes the toddler is loud. We pause, rewind etc

Pre-recorded would be nice, but as I said Oak provide that rather than the school. There’s nothing you can do but fill the gaps and make the best of it. I do think teachers teach and worksheets generally go over stuff they know so using online lessons has been key.

@noblegiraffe - I think most independent schools like ours, are offering a mix of live & pre-recorded lessons, plus setting work for completion etc. I certainly haven’t interpreted any post referring to live-lessons, as being a timetable filled with back to back live-lessons? None of the schools we know are doing this. But they do have expectations for completion and submission of work, and a structured timetable. That’s the point I’ve been trying to make, in terms of comparing output and motivation of the child.
And while many state school parents are disappointed by the lack of live-lessons or indeed, any interaction with the children..it naturally raises the question as to why uptake is so low, when they DO eventually offer something? There’s really little excuse for that...other than assuming it’s all down to lack of parental resource..which is certainly not the case for all. There’s an underlying gap in expectation, and that’s the key difference I believe. Rightly or wrongly!

I certainly haven’t interpreted any post referring to live-lessons, as being a timetable filled with back to back live-lessons?

That’s because you know what is actually being offered.

Look at this headline, what assumption would you make?

It says ‘Full timetable’? So no, to infer that suggests back to back live-lessons, is very much a conjecture. A full timetable can mean a whole myriad of things...from a live zoom lesson to completing a sheet on your own. I would say most people could decipher that?

And although I haven’t seen the article, I have heard of some schools refusing to offer video format at all...because not all teachers were comfortable with that. Which certainly wouldn’t go down very well in a private school looking to maintain their business!

That’s a stretch, mum. The headline is clearly only referring to live lessons. Why would teachers be embarrassed about providing worksheets and PowerPoints? Why would ‘full timetable’ be interpreted in any other way in the contrast to state pupils receiving no live lessons?

‘Clearly only referring to live lessons’ Sorry I don’t agree. It simply doesn’t say that. And to assume that, is conjecture.

But I should add, as you rightly pointed out, that my interpretation is naturally influenced by my own experience...so it’s hard to look at it from a different perspective. I do get that..

Well I'm not making things up but feel free to think that if it makes you feel better.

I will use dd's school as an example, except for games she has the normal school timetable i.e. the same subject lessons with the same subject teachers at the usual times, all lessons are exactly 1 hour in length as per usual. She also has tutor periods but no assemblies although there are videos to watch. Attendance is 100% because absence has to be reported in the usual way and if you're not in a lesson it is noted and queried. Her school is very strict and when DD missed one lesson because of a family dispute with her lovely brothers I was contacted. The class size is small and any absences are noted by everybody.

No more than 50% of lessons are meant to be live on zoom because it gets very tiring for the pupils, this was quickly found out by parent/teacher/pupil surveys way back. Non live lessons can be videos or work to complete. The teachers for non zoom lessons usually start the class on zoom to touch base, say hello etc, take questions and then whatever work is set must be completed that day and submitted for the next working day. This ensures that the pupils keep up to date with work and don't get left behind. DD always has very strong relationships with her teachers and it is the pupil/teacher interaction that has been so important for her and has kept her motivated during the last term. The teachers are also making a point of making more personalised comments when marking. And for anyone struggling the school has been able to re-introduce the science and maths clinics via zoom.

if you're not in a lesson it is noted and queried
Meaning attendance isn’t 100%

It’s like me saying that I’m getting 100% work completion because it’s noted and queried when work isn’t done.

Come on now..that’s getting a little too pedantic. The discussion has been around level of uptake..and expectation. Everyone is expected to attend (100%)..there are of course going to be the odd minor exception. Our daughter missed a couple due to hospital appointments...but they were notified accordingly, and she watched the lesson later, as they are recorded also.

It’s a huge difference between this scenario, and that of state school teachers, saying they stopped offering them, or felt like not bothering..as only 10% bother to show up. HUGE difference.

You are nitpicking noble.

DD missed one lesson in a whole term because of a huge fight with her brothers and I was informed the next day although I already knew. According to her there have been very few absences at all even for sickness this term. DS2 hasn't missed a single lesson all term.

Some schools for various reasons have made this work.

I am entirely sure that uptake of lessons at private schools is excellent. I’m paying for my kid to have zoom guitar lessons and I make sure he attends those too.

You don’t see how paying for them might make any difference?

@cakeisalwaystheanswer - Yes many schools have made this work, and what’s really apparent with this, is that when the school and the parents..and the pupils, all engage as a team, it can be incredibly successful. It’s quite sad when people feel the need to denigrate it somehow, or pick holes in its ‘success’...or worse, accuse people of making it all up. Quite worrying too, when some of the people doing this, are teachers themselves. This whole process has been a real eye-opener, in more ways than one.

@noblegiraffe - I completely agree! However when I tried to argue this on a different thread, that was somehow challenged too! Because this suggests that state school parents aren’t really arsed If their kids log on or not...because it’s free, and well who cares?? It’s a parody for sure

@Mumto2two - I agree, this has been eye opening for me as well. But I do believe that some local state schools have risen to the challenge because I have no reason to think my friends are lying. Although as I said up thread this may be because most of them do seem to use ipads already so they probably had a head start.

It would be nice to hear from someone at Tiffin boys as they were forced to break up well before lockdown due to pupil covid cases and went immediately to zoom lessons mid spring term. I suspect that attendance and standards there are also very high as it is a school with very aspirational, driven pupils.

If live lessons actively screw a large proportion of their cohort then it would be unethical to pursue that.

So you're arguing that be a some children would miss out on teaching and learning opportunities then all children should miss out? How is that ethical?

Because this suggests that state school parents aren’t really arsed If their kids log on or not

Some of them aren’t, for sure. But that’s not even half the story.

Private school parents pay a lot of money for their kids’ education, which is very often academically selective. This means in general

1. Parents who care about the quality of their children’s education
2. Parents who are invested in making that education work (literally invested) hence will have an incentive to carve out the time, space and resources for their children to access the education
3. Parents who have the money to pay for any additional resources needed to fully access online classes (laptops, a desk, decent wifi, pen, paper, textbooks etc)
4. Children who have been academically successful in the past and therefore have an interest in maintaining that academic position and a history of engaging with education

Put those together and you would expect a high percentage of engagement with live lessons.

Compare with state schools

1. It’s compulsory and attendance is enforced in various ways including fines as parental engagement is not assured
2. Attendance at online lessons is not compulsory or enforced in any way. Nothing material is lost by not attending, but the cost of attending is quite high.
3. Many households do not have the equipment or space required and simply cannot afford the space or equipment required. An increasing number of them cannot afford to feed their families - foodbank use has gone through the roof.
4. Many children in state schools have not experienced academic success and have previously not been engaged with education.
5. Child and/or parents have SEN which means they cannot engage with the requirements

When you put together the various combinations for state schools - parents care but kid does not (see threads about rows with kids over homeschooling), kid and parent both care but they simply cannot afford the space or equipment, kid cares but parent doesn’t prioritise buying the equipment, kid cannot access the work and so on and so on, there are far more families in state schools where the outcome is not attending live lessons.

So you're arguing that be a some children would miss out on teaching and learning opportunities then all children should miss out? How is that ethical?

The assumption there is that live lessons are the only way of delivering education and that teachers have said ‘fuck’em all’. Which is pretty insulting to teachers, don’t you think?

There are several options.

1. providing online lesson materials to children to access at their own convenience. These may include pre-recorded videos, narrated powerpoints, subscriptions to educational websites.
2. rather than re-inventing the wheel, directing students to Oak Academy or BBC Bitesize who are doing a similar job but with higher production values.
3. getting selected students into school for access to the online work
4. providing equipment to students to access it at home (the government failed woefully here, and many schools simply don’t have the equipment to give out)
5. providing paper-based work to those who cannot access online resources (Vic Goddard’s school got absolutely slated in the Times for not providing online work when his school has made a Herculean effort creating and printing off resources and delivering to every student to ensure they all have access).

Well, I don't agree with all the posts you've made this afternoon, noblegiraffe, but that post of 18:43 is superb, and is the distillation of what I was trying to say earlier but being far less eloquent

I have actually slept for three hours this afternoon as I am exhausted I don't think I've been doing my best work today!