eeep! MN on BBC2 now! Doc about schools

[Meglet]

John Humphreys programme....

sorry, I didn't see your thread! Just posted the same thing!

this will just wind me up i think. when i was at school everyone went to the local school, rich/poor/religions all mixed.

i really do blame the middle classes for buggering the system up for everyone.

skies I know, I just spotted yours too .

I don't know why I bother watching schools docs, they just stress / depress me.

it is the same stuff that gets churned out each time. I was just a bit alarmed at how big the gap can be by the age of 3?

I love the bossy head .

Why did that Headteacher tell the mother in the playground to stop carrying her toddler? Did anyone see that?

What a school, she's fab.

I love her approach. Will be interesting to see how the school performs?

I think she was a nursery child. So not a toddler who doesn't yet attend at the school - they don't have a uniform.

lionheart, if she is able, shouldn't she be walking though?

I assumed it was a reception / nursery child she was carrying?

that some of the children hadn't been in the park. I've always dragged mine to the park, thought that was pretty standard.

I assumed when she said 'she should be walking' that she knew the child, so attended the school.

Maybe what they were trying to show is that in order for a child to succeed and break out of the cycle of deprivation, it is not only the child but the parents who need to learn. The same thing with showing the head telling the man to take his staff out of the playground! It seems teachers always get the blame, when if children are falling a year behind at 3, it is parents that need educating as well.

The child was Diddy and it looked like they were heading towards the gate after dropping the older sibbling off.

If she's able, she should walk but that's between her and her momma, not the Head.

Unless I didn't see what I thought I saw.

I had to rewind the blooming thing.

"You need to be walking," (to the toddler) "Put her down!" (to the mother).

I may be missing the point but she came across as something of a bossy, patronising, I don't know what....

TBH that head was AMAZING for what she was achieving and the opportunities she was offering those kids.

So I'll forgive her the bossiness over toddlers frankly.

Really really really fascinating programme.

It was a really good programme. Bit of a downer at the end though - nothing's going to change

She did come across as bossy but I didn't think she was patronising. i thought she came across as very driven, and if some parents had to be told what to do, then so be it. It's a mountain of a job turning a school around and ensuring children take advantage of the opportunities given to them. The one thing the schools that had been turned round had in common was the discipline and you have to be a certain kind of person to be able to do that. Private school teachers aren't better, they just have less children they have to discipline. I feel the head teacher and the other head teachers were trying to do this. Its a means to an end.

I agree that she did come across as bosy, but I do think that that is probably what that school needed? I agreed with her (if the child is school age), that she should be walking. I also think that it is good that she is looking at the wider picture, instead of soley looking at what happens in the classroom.

But, if the child doesn't attend the school, then yes, I agree with you lionheart

I think, as the programme is discussing socio-economic background as a factor in educational attainment, then it is applicable in these circumstances to be looking at the role parents are playing.

Very interesting programme, especially the stuff about the fast track teachers and the huge numbers of parents opting for private tutors.

It totally bugged me that the about three nanoseconds were devoted to Stoke/Kirkby, incidentally both places I know very well and have strong connections to. The vast majority was then concerned with JH chatting with good headteachers in London. That kinda got my back up.

Programme just finished and to be honest it scares me. We had to appeal to get our kids into the LOCAL ! church school and now our daughter has gone into year six and we are worried about the next school and the fight as the local high schools are in frank a mess!

But this problem is not a new one. This problem existed with the old tertiary system too. The middle class children always had a much better chance of passing the 11+, as both their parents and primary schools were more able to help them prepare. They had more access to books (obviously before the age of computers), and then there was still the option of extra tutoring. This is the reason the comprehensive system was introduced. And fast forward to today, this is the same reason the 'Academies' were being roled out. It is an age-old problem that no-one seems to have the answer to, but a lot of education comes from outside the school...

Ha! my tutor told me off for carrying a 20 month old when I was doing my EYPS!