Inset - didn't it, historically come out of teacher's leave?

[GeorgianMumto5]

Please can you clarify that for me? Elsewhere on the Internet I have waded into an argument about pupil absence for term-time holidays being OK because teachers make them absent when they have inset/polling days or strike.

If there's comeback, I'd like to get my facts right, re. Inset. Yes, I know I was stupid to wade in, but there it all was, glistening with factual inaccuracies and it got my goat.

Thank you.

Not from caroldecker's link, hulababy. As I said above, that refers to a test of the Maths skills of a sample of adults aged 16-65 which concluded that 78% of the respondents could not currently achieve a level equivalent to GCSE Grade C in Maths.

So does that mean that, say, art teachers are not entitled to their rights on the basis that pupils don't fulfill your pass rate requirements in an entirely different subject which they have never taught?

'Well I thought it was a teacher's job. They have the children for around 25 hours a week, 30 weeks a year for 11 years - over 8,000 hours and the basics - reading, writing and adding up should come into it somewhere.
Or maybe I misunderstand what teachers are supposed to do?'

Well, yes. I'd rather be teaching the three Rs than jumping through all the hoops and having to include so many other things that used to be seen as parenting role responsibilities, and having no backup other than redoubling my efforts when a child refuses to engage in their own learning.
Sadly, that's not what state education looks like.

I'm not good at maths, but I have a A at O level. I learned the methods and the vocabulary and passed without ever wondering why something worked.

1 in 6 is 16.6% not 18%

also 11 year old children who are reading at their age equivalent can actually read quite well....

That is a strange statistic and doesn't really tell us much

Presumably the standardised score of an adult who has a reading age of 11 is below 85 and therefore below average. That would be what you would expect to see on the bell curve surely?
But the link should make that clear.

I'd also like to know what reading test was used and I can't see that info.

...also reading is a skill that is improved through practice.

Some adults just don't read anything that will enable them to maintain the reading level that they achieved in school.

I'm a maths teacher and can confirm that I have never signed a contract saying that I had to get all my students a grade C in GCSE maths. That would only be achievable by cheating and since they scrapped coursework in maths, not really possible any more anyway.

Could we get the kids to sign a contract saying that they have to get a GCSE grade C in maths? Because you know what with some of them with their SEN or their chaotic homelife or their inability to attend school due to illness or their bunking off and can't-be-arsedness, they are really not playing ball.

So the 78% includes those educated in a different country, those who are old and left school at 14. Those who did get a C but have now forgotten those skills and those like my Mum who were written off at 11 and only allowed to do practical skills. I only started teaching in 1996. I can't be responsible for all of those!

Fully understand the bell curve, but if 40% fail to get a C, we are saying that a c is about average (agree will be between b and c).
However, the GCSE paper is not difficult enough IMO for a C to be accepted as average. I see too little ambition in teachers to improve things or an ability to accept that things are not good enough.

Maths GCSE is not fit for purpose and plenty of maths teachers agree, however it is not within our power to actually improve it.

It's in Gove's power, but he is inexplicably ignoring all the recommendations made in the report into maths education that he commissioned, and that teachers broadly welcomed.

noble it is within your power to drive improvement. As far as I am aware Gove is trying to free schools up to allow teachers free rein - what works will then be adopted ,more widely.

I am thinking of retraining and everything I have read would absolutely contradict the notion that teachers have a working year of only 190 or 195 days. Surely that merely refers to pupil contact time? I would imagine most teachers work throughout the majority of the so-called "holidays" don't they?

caroldecker - I take it you are reasonably comfortable with maths. Try to think back to a subject you didn't do so well with at school and ask yourself honestly if you could now achieve a C at GCSE. As the old cliche goes, a question is only easy if you know the answer.

I would happily take a modern GCSE in any subject I took at school and happily get better than a C. I also believe I could get better than a C in any GCSE with only a months study (oral exams in language an exception as I have severe hearing issues and as I have mentioned above, do not expect 100% as there are children with disabilities)
gaelicsheep yes I was talking contact time, you cannot teach them when they are not present.

Well you are clearly fortunate enough to be well above average compared with the general population. Congratulations.
Regarding teaching time, presumably you would not wish your child to be taught by a teacher who did not plan and prepare in advance? When do you imagine this is done?
You are being deliberately inflammatory so I will not be engaging with you any further.

Carol, 'driving improvement' is a bland statement isn't it? It isn't in my power to change maths GCSE into the double qualification recommended by the Tory maths report.

It didn't take long for the teacher bashers (or basher) to wade in did it? What I always say to this is "if you think you can do a better job than the current teachers, train to be a teacher yourself"

You also have to remember that these are 15 and 16y old Children with far less general experience than adults do. And also study for 8-10 GCSEs all at the same time, whilst dealing with the various hormone activities going on, general growing up and a 101 other distractions. And that is just your average student. Now add in those with dyslexia or learning difficulties. Or add in home troubles or friendship issues. Keep going.... Children are not little identical robots all the same.

Carol's basis of failure sounds like it omits the free will and inclination of the children.

I provide healthy food for my children. Two of them eat it, the third chooses not to. That's not a cookery failure (even if it's a bloody worry in other respects).

I provide a warm house, food and a cat basket for the cat. It chooses to sit out in the rain, eat slugs and drink from the neighbour's stagnant pond. That's not a pet-keeping failure.

I could go on...

He eats slugs? Mind you, they're probably high protein and very nutritious.