Why are the other teachers miffed with Gareth Malone?

[TooPragmatic]

Extraordinary School for Boys. Anybody else watching this tonight? One of the teachers just told Gareth Malone that there have been 4 complaints from members of staff about the way he'd treated one of the boys. What's that all about?

I thought he was great for an amateur.

But I felt really sad that the teachers/head hadn't felt that they themselves could make the curriculum more fun for both boys and girls - due to 20 years of National Curriculum and Ofsted brow-beating schools who are worried to death that they will be accused of not following the curriculum, etc.

We had the discussion about sports day a while back on here, my feeling is that a 'hybrid' sports day is the answer - fun team games for most of the kids (sack race, egg and spoon, and if done as my children's school do with the focus being on 'number of repetitions in 1 minute' rather than 'first to finish' then you don't have the kid trailing in at the end problem). The teams are HIGHLY competitive, and there is a winning team at the end. The best runners from each class then have a competitive running race at the end of the day, with medals for the winners. (They are selected via trials in PE lessons). So the non-sporty children join in for fun, but with an element of competition, but without the ritual humiliation that I remember from sports days. THe sporty children get to compete. There are individual winners from the best runners, and an overall winning team.

I have a real problem with the idea that it is ok to force children to take part in very competitive running races in front of all the parents - you would never make a child who was rubbish at the violin stand on a stage in front of the whole school and all the parents and get them to scrape away, and then tell them they were the worst at it. So why force children who are not good runners to do that? But I think it's good for everyone to join in, in a fun way, whilst allowing the best to compete. That's how sport is in real life - most of us enjoy recreational sport, a few will go on to proper 'competitive' sport.

As far as the programme goes, it was so clearly heavily edited to show a particular 'story' that I don't think any conclusions can really be drawn. Give any teacher 3 days a week to focus on literacy solely, and there will be massive improvements. Plus, the effect of the TV cameras may have been to encourage parents to help at home with the reading more. Statistically, the best thing you can do to improve literacy outcomes is to teach boys and girls separately, and it would have been interesting to have another group where they just did this, without all the tree climbing/rabbit skinning etc, and then compare outcomes.

It would also have been interesting to see if the girls benefited from the 'Gareth approach' in the same way. He seemed to think they were happiest colouring princesses pink, but there we go....

The programme was trying to prove a certain point about boys, so it had to concentrate on boys. I would imagine that if you asked the girls you would find that they had a wonderful time without the boys for once-without being anywhere near pink and princesses!

but pisces, how can you prove that boys need to be taught in a particular way, without seeing if girls benefit in the same way or not? You need the comparison to know if it was because they tuned into some innate 'boyishness' or whether it was because of the tv camers, or whether it was because they spent 3 days a week on literacy etc etc. Do you see what I mean? You can't teach ONLY the boys in a certain way, and then say it proves that BOYS should be taught like that.

And it was Gareth who mentioned the pink word.

I completely agree with UQD and LilyBolero.

It was a TV programme Lily-I don't think it set out to be a proper scientic test. As the mother of boys I think that the education system is better suited to girls-they are the ones who (in general) do best in course work. They have plenty of inititives-like 'take your DD to work' etc so I think it is nice to address the balance and try something for boys. Girls used to have a raw deal in years gone by-this has been addressed-so much so that I think it is a good idea to find out why many boys underperform.

You only have to read MN to know that girls are generally favoured! You have whole threads thinking that women miss out if they never have a mother/DD relationship and that women can't want to have a whole family of boys.

Yes it was a tv programme, but at the end Gareth started talking about 'reforming education to be more like this'.

I have 3 boys and 1 girl. I'd be pretty concerned for ANY of them if they were being subjected to stereotypical inferences that 'boys like climbing trees, girls like colouring'.

Yes, my dd loves art, and is very good at it. She is also very neat. My eldest boy is quite messy. But they both (plus ds2, ds3 is only 4 months so a bit soon) can be found up trees given the slightest opportunity. I am not naive enough to imagine this is improving their literacy though.

"this was in some way not an appropriate way to deal with a child in secondary school."

It was a primary school.

I hate the fact that girls were excluded from so many 'fun' activities. I certainly wouldn't have been happy if my DD was in a class where the boys were being taken out for so many extra curricular activities whilst my girl was left languishing in a dry, dusty classroom.

Learning needs a varied approach and shouldn't be restricted to literacy, maths, science in a classroom for either sex.

The irony of all this is, of course, that the boys, regardless of academic achievement at this stage, will undoubtedly go on to earn more than the majority of their female counterparts, will probably have a better social standing and will generally excell professionally speaking.

Doesn't say much for our society does it??

quite, huffy.

Many of those boys seemed to be quite seriously lacking in confidence. I think that they had to be separated from the girls for the experiment to work.

If the girls had been involved as well then the boys may have started comparing their results with the girls, and felt disheartened if they thought the girls were outperforming them.

I agree that both boys and girls would benefit from more of this type of teaching in schools and at home too (schools only provide part of a child's education).

And finally, that play they wrote and performed was absolutely brilliant. Lots of proud mums with tears in their eyes, which is always a good sign .

Lily

"this was in some way not an appropriate way to deal with a child in secondary school."

It was a primary school.

Oops. That was a bit sloppy of me. But my comment still stands. These kids are what, 10 or something? if a teacher tells them it's not time to get a drink of water, obviously they shouldn't amble off and get one!

I thought GM's treatment of Callum was reasonable. He asked Callum to come over and talk to him and he just stumped off - it was disobedient and he forfeited his opportunity.

I agree that you have to listen respectfully to children and let them put their side (how else do they learn how to do it themselves otherwise?), but it doesn't work when they are worked up in the middle of a row. You just end up in pointless, circular conversations.

agree callum was defiant and rude. I'm not sure GM dealt with him well but he had 30 odd other boys to consider who were doing as asked and didn't need the disruption Callum caused rubbing off. He was told more than once to wait. At 10/11 he knew he was answering back but I do wonder if the cameras may not have helped.

We don't actually know what the girls were doing-I bet they were having special time.

I think it was absolutely correct that callum had time out. I think it is important that the child understands that the teacher HAS listened to them and understood the issue and has then decided the punishment. Ten the child stands some chance of understanding that it is as a consequence of their behaviour and not because the teacher 'hasn't given them a chance'. They still get the sanction, but the message is clearer. This is v important - you only need to read some of the FB messages about Raoul Moat to see why. Otherwise kids may get into the 'teachers are unfair and pick on me' mindset. It's not being sappy to listen and THEN give the sanction, it's part of teaching respect.

Try reading Roald Dahl's Boy - he didn't respect the teachers who gave instant punishments, he despised them.

I wonder if they did same test for the girls and if any of them had advanced more by not being with the boys ?

I think there was a stunning contrast between this school and Sunningdale (the boarding school that had a programme about it this week). At Sunningdale it was all about competing, even down to class position. Reading and being intelligent were cool. There is no way any of those will leave primary school unable to read.

When I was at primary school I got the cane. I was waiting for my violin lesson and saw a friend walking down the corridor. I hid behind a door preparing to leap out at him when he reached me. Unbeknownst to me my friend turned off down another corridor and when I leapt at the person it was the headmaster. I wasn't allowed to explain what happened. I was 8. I still had to have my violin lesson, in the headmaster's office. Needless to say I never misbehaved at school subsequently (hadn't previously either for that matter). Why should a teacher be expected to listen to a child like Callum whom has shown no respect at all?

"Yes it was a tv programme, but at the end Gareth started talking about 'reforming education to be more like this'."

I took it to mean the whole of education to have more of it rather than dividing the genders all over.

the effort that GM put into a small group of boys simply cannot be replicated in the state system, unless class numbers are halved.

Yep, that will happen

Mollie - what a joyless man your headmaster must have been!

The fallout from teaching children they must never question authority and must never expect an explanation is huge. You end up with students doing GCSE, A-Level and (failing to) do degrees, who have no idea of how to question and rationalize decisions - all they have is 'it's true because the teacher says so'. Very damaging imo.

I really dislike what GM said about 'pink' and girls - why does he imagine that teaching the boys to sneer at the girls is a good thing (or anything to do with competitive spirit, for that matter)?