Jamie's Dream School

[londonone]

20 in a class
No curriculum
TV Cameras

And they still piss around! Maybe people will start to get a real idea about how perhaps some of the students are in fact not vitims but the architects of their own downfall!

It looks like Jamie is trying to prove that good teachers can do good stuff but that there are not enough good ones out there so lots of students get left behind. Cos he has also set up Dream Teachers www.youtube.com/dreamteachers where he is trying to get real teachers to upload videos of themselves being inspiring for students to watch and get help. Its on YouTube so it might be somewhere my kid would be willing to watch a teacher as I cant see him ever going on an education website. It will be interesting to see how good the real teachers look in comparison to the celebs. Let's hope they wipe the floor.

Gabby - can you please let me know why you end all your posts with "Gabby". I find it perplexing.

*Rennie - This listening thing - how do you get them to (re)start listening once they've given up?
*
Socy I actually think that getting them to listen to talk radio, preferably Radio 4 is a great help. Listening requires practice and I don't think that listening to music does it.

I know this is anecdotal but my son walked out of his A2 year and basically did very little for the next year. On a visit to the US he became inspired to study Spanish (yes I know it's unlikely but...) and is now in year 3 of an MFL degree at a RG uni.
He swears by Radio 4, and says that listening to it was the greatest habit I have passed on to him. If you are to do well at MFL listening is actually more important than speaking IMO.

If your ds is a bright spark he is bound to find something on their varied output. Anyway that's my tip.

I haven't read the whole thread so apologies if this is repetition, but the thing that really got me was how Jamie kept saying these kids had been 'failed by the system'. The implication - over and over again - was that their schools and teachers were at fault, with no need for them to take any responsibility at all.

That said, when David Starkey kept calling them failures I was shouting at the TV - hardly motivational. I also think it's ridiculous calling the celebrities 'Star Teachers' - it was patently obvious that they're not teachers, had had no training, no classroom control, no lesson planning etc. Being an expert in something does not mean you can teach it - I'm an English grad and teacher and love Shakespeare but that doesn't mean I can act! Rolf Harris was by far the most successful because he was teaching a skill he has himself (and he's used to kids I expect). Why put Simon Callow in charge of English, why not let him teach Drama?

I thought so much of the idea itself was flawed, but overall it did make bloody good television, and I think anyone who wants to give kids a second chance is alright. It certainly led to a lot of debate in my household of two teachers!

It will be interesting to see how the kids' behaviour changes over the episodes as hopefully some of them become more engaged. At the moment they seem to be competing against each other/vying for status with displays of attitude and disruption. Some of them must be motivated by appearing on tv, rather than grabbing a unique learning opportunity.

Starkey for me represented the most appalling kind of 'teacher' - probably the kind that had turned the kids off in the first place. Totally unimaginative and archaic in his methods of teaching and communicating.

Simon Callow was disappointing too. His subject might have been tricky (assume it was his choice) but he could have been a bit more imaginative in bringing Shakespeare's characters to life (costumes, role playing?).

I thought Robert Winston was surreally over the top in his approach, but at least he tried to do something to capture the imagination of his students, and did not rely on his presence alone to be enough of a draw.

Rolf Harris seemed terribly sweet and unassuming, and genuinely disappointed that he hadn't got through to all the kids.

Henry seemed to be desperately trying to rebel against a middle class privileged upbringing. He seemed pretty uncomfortable in his own skin.

Looking forward to next week. Can't wait to see how Alastair Campbell and Cherie Blair get on.

Bit shocked by David Starkey. I do love his programmes but really not on.

I love Mary Beard. She epitomises for me the very model of the enthusiastic, measured academic. That Guardian article posted by ohmeohmy is fab.

Is it wrong that I'm just highly jealous. I'm not academic but love learning, didn't mess around much at school but struggled as I don't tend to think in the same way as others. I had 6 french teachers in my first year and never caught up for example.
I would love to go and learn off these people.

Maybe the first thing they needed to do was show what they normally do so Callow could show a scene from something they will have heard of, maybe 4 weddings. Or... just tell them how much they earn!

I couldn't bear all the chatting and fidgeting going on! I shudder at the thought of my dcs trying to learn in that kind of environment.

Did you notice the only person they shut up and listened to was Jamie? That guy has so much charisma. Brains alone will not make you a good teacher, it's being able to hold the attention and fire the imagination of a roomful of teenagers. Anyone who can do that deserves a medal.

Ellen Macarthur, in the first programme we've seen, was by far the best teacher and role model to these young adults. She trusted and respected them and generously offered them a brew and a chat and was clearly well within her comfort zone. I'd like to see more of her dealing with teenagers as she knows what she is doing with them. Maybe she frightens them just a little bit, because she is so courageous and single-minded.

i can say that mary beard's WILL YOU JUST SHUT UP is from ep 3, and the kids are coaching her in being more assertive with them. so she's not lost it, for the record. she is absolutely LOVELY.

"why waste such a brilliant opportunity on them? What about all the quiet, middle ability, sensible kids that this rabble has disrupted in classes for 5 years solid ? Why not reward them for quietly plodding through and making the best of a bad situation?"

In a way I agree. My DM is a TA and has worked with some pretty disturbed children (like an 8 y/o who called her a "fucking whore". Her response "oh, so you don't mind if I sue you for defamation?" child "because you're saying that a) I have cheated on my husband, which is untrue and b) that I work selling sex for a living, which is also untrue" child ). Most of the time, it's crowd control and she, and my teacher friends, have also said that the worst behaved children get the most attention - which means it's taken away from the well-behaved children who want to learn.

It's a tough one though, because on the other hand, some of these children (not all) are so screwed up because they come from completely screwed up families; families were shouting and swearing at someone is the norm, and in worse scenarios where violence is the norm. This is their blueprint for what is "acceptable" in society. It's not entirely their fault they have such a warped view.

But did they listen to Jamie because of his charisma, or because he is famous? Would they still have listened if he was a random guy on the street?
Simon Callow hit the nail on the head when he said that all the kids were concerned about is money and looks. He asked them who they looked up to, who they aspired to be like and the answers were Bill Gate and Katie Price

Can't believe some of the attitudes on this thread. Talk about demonising youth. These are OUR children, our young future, and some people are being so bloody disparaging, writing them off without any empathy for why they behave in that way. Frankly, on a parenting forum, I'm really shocked and upset by that sort of attitude.

i think people are just a bit tired of hearing the excuses, however valid tbh. fact is, regardless of life experience thus far, all of these kids are now too feral to realise that they are appearing on a television show that will exist forever as a record of their ghastly behaviour and possibly haunt them for the rest of their lives.

that's what's amazing to me, tbh, that they can't rein it in so that they look good on the telly. is that because they have medical issues or is it because they genuinely see no need to, and think that being inconsiderate to everyone around them is a perfectly valid way to behave?

ep3 and the head is in tears, btw.

'Talk about demonising youth. These are OUR children, our young future, and some people are being so bloody disparaging, writing them off without any empathy for why they behave in that way. Frankly, on a parenting forum, I'm really shocked and upset by that sort of attitude.'

All of them are legally adults now. No one can tell them what to do.

As people move through adulthood, there is generally decreasing sympathy for those who continually blame their backgrounds for their atrocious behaviour because, for most, they mature enough to realise they are in control of this behaviour, as adults.

My daughter has learning difficulties, the diagnoses keep coming in as she grows up, but she knows very well this is not an excuse to phone it in on life as long as she's living under our roof.

Once she becomes an adult, however, I will have little control over how she behaves.

Aitch - from what I've heard from teachers (some in really rough schools) - some of the children honestly think that's an acceptable way to behave. They've never been taught any differently.

And to be honest, as a society things like looks and money are what we are encouraged to aspire to, what we seem to value. What gets attention/news time? Looks and money. So many people (like footballers, actors, musicians, politicians) are lauded and valued for their looks and their money, not for the content of their character, their devotion to other people. For e.g, all these shenanigans with footballers shagging each other's wives and girlfriends, treating women like dirt - do they get berated? Do they lose their jobs? No. Nothing.

Quite, Abs.

And Dream School is part of that, imo. What do we really learn watching slebs doing it? I'd much rather see a programme that follows some of the best teachers in this country working over a year to raise achievement in a school where the students haven't been 'auditioned' for tellyworthiness.

(And that's the point for me Aitch - these children were auditioned and presumably are expected to play up for the cameras to highlight the 'difficult challenges' the teachers face - never mind that they mark themselves as 'troubled' in the process. I'd really like to know what care was taken by the production company to explain to the long-term effects appearing in the programme might have on them)

I find it an utterly cynical programme. I saw some clips of the World in Action '7Up' series recently. There's a huge gulf between genuine investigative tv like that and some celeb-fronted reality show. And that gulf's as much about programme makers' expectations of their audience as it is about anything else, imo.

And, , I doubt there would be any attempt or move from say, the government, the leaders in our country - keep people distracted and stupid and they won't really notice what you're up to, be that cutting vital services, expensing yourself into oblivion or raising the price of food above inflation, simply profiteering.

EDAM Rights and Responsibilities in Hampshire.
In my NQT year, there was a guy who was heading up PSHE who had taken a group of teachers to Canada to see a school where there was an emphasis on both.

It was inspiring listening to them and watching some of the video footage they had taken.

It's a shame that it worked in the primaries that implemented it but faltered later as it wasn't followed through. It seemed to make such sense and to see that it had impacted on chn in schools in Canada, that it actually worked.

You have a right to a voice but also a responsibilty to listen to others.

You have a right to an education but also a responsibility to allow others an education too.

You have a right to be safe but also a responsibilty to not cause harm to others.

If I remember rightly, unicef have some good resources for this, looking at where children don't have the basic human rights met.

It's this kind of stuff that I wanted to teach. I would ideally love to be full time PSHE/ Citizenship teacher as I feel that it impacts on teaching/school life as a whole but it is often side lined and thought pointless. It just needs to be taught properly and be valued as an integral part of the whole school experience.

Children need to see their place in the world and where they fit in, how we all make up the whole adn how we can make a difference in our own lives and others around us.

Another teacher here who deals with these sorts of kids every day, as does DP who said, on seeing that Starkey was a 'star teacher' - "this is going to be car crash tv". Very prescient. I start every new class with a lesson on rights, responsibilities, rewards and sanctions and we draw up a class agreement on expectations. Am a big fan of expectations, particularly high ones... You find students will behav according to your expectations. But then I did do 7 years of post-16 education, including teacher training. Unlike Starkey. And I challenge any non-teachers to stand up in front of 30+(where I teach) unruly adolescents without any experience of 'classroom management' (a large part of my training) and not be reduced to either tears or rage. Or both.

x post with Sirius but that is exactly what my intro lesson is about. See Bill Rogers - great stuff!

When I did my childcare classes, we were told that unless you could point a child in the right direction, by the age of about seven, it would be really hard to remould them. Most of the time teachers can do it, then long summer holiday comes along and some kids regress to square one as no real back-up at home.

Its nurture not nature that makes unruly kids.