It's all our fault, come on just admit it, teachers are at fault for most of what's wrong in the world:
Global warming - teachers' fault.
Riots - teachers' fault.
Over-fishing - teachers' fault.
The cancelling of Gladiators - teachers' fault.
Chelsea's under-performance in the Premier league this season - teachers' fault.
The lack of ambition in youngsters - teachers' fault.
Paper cuts - teachers' fault.
Middle East Crises - teachers' fault.
The existance of X Factor - teachers' fault.
Cuban Missile Crisis - teachers' fault.
The dog ate my homework - teachers' fault.
The dog ate my enthusiasm - teachers' fault.
Fine us until we are forced to work for nothing.
Great idea - well done.
Idiots...
Teaching's Pod: thoughts on education from an educator
Tuesday 27 March 2012
Sunday 25 March 2012
Michael "Braveheart" Gove
I was on duty on our school field recently when there was a small commotion by some gates overlooking the road that runs past the school. Around 4 kids who should have been in school were requesting an audience with a well-known fool on our role. The fool's mates all came over and started shouting abuse at these 4 "undesirables" safe in the knowledge that they were going to be in no trouble whatsoever due to the 3 metre high metal fence and a bunch of adults (us teachers) there to protect them. I said to one student "Ooh, aren't you brave calling the boy some nasty names when he can't get you. Now go away and stop being pathetic."
Had I been a member of the Association of School and College Leaders and attended their conference I would have said pretty much the same thing to Michael Gove. He gave a speech at the conference in Birmingham which is reported on the BBC News website (click here to read it) where we saw the man's true colours. Gove is trying to paint a picture of himself as a reformer. In fact he could do a passable impression (pun intended) of Van Gogh had the Dutchman cut both ears off rather than just 50% due to Gove's lack of listening skills. He, the Secretary of State rather than the painter, promised the conference that reforms were to keep coming thick and fast, which was quite brave I suppose as almost everyone in education is in agreement that he's rushing policy through without due care and attention. So a home run for Michael.
He then went on to back-track about no notice Ofsted inspections, saying that there may be a bit of notice, but palmed that decision off onto the "independent" Sir Michael of Wilshaw - which got a laugh. Not very brave from the Secretary of State - strike one Michael, and don't forget that you are out on the third strike.
Now if you're reading this blog, you are almost certainly involved in education in some way, and would have read or heard the constant slating of the teaching profession in the UK, headteachers, classroom practitioners - you name it, they've all felt the sharp end of the Gove tongue, metaphorically fortunately. But I quote from Gove's speech, and see if you can hear the distant sound of the reversing beeps: "We have the best generation of young teachers ever in our schools. We have the best generation of heads ever in our schools. And our whole school system is good, with many outstanding features." That's a huge turnaround from what we've been reading in the newspapers and hearing on the news bulletins where there's been rarely a good word said about educators and many of us could be facing the sack for being rubbish. Ironic that it was said in front a large audience of educators, don't you think? Not very brave Michael - strike two.
The speech finished only for the Secretary of State to be caught in the lobby by a group of handily placed reporters, whereupon he is quoted as saying: "If people say 'It's all just a bit too much', my view is 'man up!'". Michael, that's strike three I'm afraid - you're out.
Pathetic - I can kind of accept it from a 14 year old, but from a fully grown and well-educated man, it's frankly sad. I wonder what he'd say if I threatened him with a Chinese burn? I'd probably get all his dinner money.
Had I been a member of the Association of School and College Leaders and attended their conference I would have said pretty much the same thing to Michael Gove. He gave a speech at the conference in Birmingham which is reported on the BBC News website (click here to read it) where we saw the man's true colours. Gove is trying to paint a picture of himself as a reformer. In fact he could do a passable impression (pun intended) of Van Gogh had the Dutchman cut both ears off rather than just 50% due to Gove's lack of listening skills. He, the Secretary of State rather than the painter, promised the conference that reforms were to keep coming thick and fast, which was quite brave I suppose as almost everyone in education is in agreement that he's rushing policy through without due care and attention. So a home run for Michael.
He then went on to back-track about no notice Ofsted inspections, saying that there may be a bit of notice, but palmed that decision off onto the "independent" Sir Michael of Wilshaw - which got a laugh. Not very brave from the Secretary of State - strike one Michael, and don't forget that you are out on the third strike.
Now if you're reading this blog, you are almost certainly involved in education in some way, and would have read or heard the constant slating of the teaching profession in the UK, headteachers, classroom practitioners - you name it, they've all felt the sharp end of the Gove tongue, metaphorically fortunately. But I quote from Gove's speech, and see if you can hear the distant sound of the reversing beeps: "We have the best generation of young teachers ever in our schools. We have the best generation of heads ever in our schools. And our whole school system is good, with many outstanding features." That's a huge turnaround from what we've been reading in the newspapers and hearing on the news bulletins where there's been rarely a good word said about educators and many of us could be facing the sack for being rubbish. Ironic that it was said in front a large audience of educators, don't you think? Not very brave Michael - strike two.
The speech finished only for the Secretary of State to be caught in the lobby by a group of handily placed reporters, whereupon he is quoted as saying: "If people say 'It's all just a bit too much', my view is 'man up!'". Michael, that's strike three I'm afraid - you're out.
Pathetic - I can kind of accept it from a 14 year old, but from a fully grown and well-educated man, it's frankly sad. I wonder what he'd say if I threatened him with a Chinese burn? I'd probably get all his dinner money.
Saturday 24 March 2012
Excuses Are Wearing Thin
I'm not keen, as a classroom teacher, on phoning home about children when they misbehave in class. I have better things to do in my free time at work like plan "outstanding" lessons. I also would like to think that I could discipline most young people in my class with a mixture of humour and clear boundaries, and generally it works to be honest. There have always been some young young people who don't respond, but you tend to find that they don't respond to others either.
This number is increasing though, and what's the reason? Autism and ADHD apparently. I really don't buy into this. I'm not saying that autism and ADHD are figments of parental imagination - I have seen genuine cases where support is deserved and required, but due to more accurate "tests", more and more youngsters are being diagnosed with the conditions when actually they just can't behave or can't be bothered.
These are being used as excuses for poor behaviour and/or performance. These conditions are almost desirable for lazy parents, as it gives them some leeway and "substance" to their argument when teachers phone up to inform them that their spawn are going to leave school with few meaningful qualifications.
In a political climate where Wilshaw (Ofsted's head tyrant) is saying that he wants to get rid of the excuse culture and make teachers fully accountable for their students' performance, why do we offer the parents and students themselves so many excuses on a plate?
Hardly a level playing field.
This number is increasing though, and what's the reason? Autism and ADHD apparently. I really don't buy into this. I'm not saying that autism and ADHD are figments of parental imagination - I have seen genuine cases where support is deserved and required, but due to more accurate "tests", more and more youngsters are being diagnosed with the conditions when actually they just can't behave or can't be bothered.
These are being used as excuses for poor behaviour and/or performance. These conditions are almost desirable for lazy parents, as it gives them some leeway and "substance" to their argument when teachers phone up to inform them that their spawn are going to leave school with few meaningful qualifications.
In a political climate where Wilshaw (Ofsted's head tyrant) is saying that he wants to get rid of the excuse culture and make teachers fully accountable for their students' performance, why do we offer the parents and students themselves so many excuses on a plate?
Hardly a level playing field.
Headteachers To Leave The Profession
The Association of School and College Leaders, the union of many haedteachers in the UK, claims that over half of headteachers want to leave the profession having surveyed a number of its members. The union cites the fact that morale is at an "all time low" due to the constant criticism from government and ever-increasing responsibility as parents choose to palm off parenting on schools.
A headteacher's job has become more complex, it is claimed, with the skills required being "moral leaders, risk takers, media experts, creative accountants, prophets and networkers". And I'd agree with most of those, whether those traits are good for the school or the individual headteacher is more of a moot point.
A headteacher's job has certainly changed immensely in recent years, as they become further removed from day-to-day school life, becoming pen-pushers, rarely seeing children whilst holed up in offices, meetings and "training courses". Ultimately the buck stops with the headteacher when it comes to school performance, but with so much of the groundwork delegated, headteachers can seemingly do as much or as little as they want as the only people they answer to are the governors. Governors are volunteers, headteachers are paid enormous sums of money - I've never been sure why that has worked, or perhaps it hasn't depending on the nature of those governors.
The fact that so many headteachers are thinking of leaving - the news report says that one third are making preparations to actually leave - is actually quite worrying. Not that I believe that the profession would miss some headteachers, but because the case will be similar, if not worse with teaching staff. Schools can live without heads for a while (a couple of schools local to where I am actually thrived without a head), but schools cannot survive without teaching staff.
The difference is that headteachers can make preparations for leaving the profession - I imagine that it's easier to put some money aside on a monthly income of £5000 than it is with a classroom teacher's monthly income of around £2000. Teachers' morale is also at an all-time low, a fact that will come to light as the union conference season continues, but "ordinary" teachers don't have the disposible income to put some aside and leave, so what the young of the UK are currently getting is a demoralised workforce, which can't be healthy for anyone.
Ofsted, Gove, Wilshaw, Twigg and any other politicians who have anything to do with education policy or diatribe have a lot to answer for. Ignore the rosette as they are all as bad as each other. We are living in a time where education is seen as a major vote winner so successive politicians given power over education in Britain try desperately to make a mark and in the process end up criticising and confusing teachers through slating previous government policy and constantly changing school policy to shout about (or not, depending on its success) at the next general election. And these policies are based on what knowledge of the profession? None.
Is it any surprise that teachers are demoralised? Bossed by ambitious toffs with no idea.
I saw that a non-teaching friend of mine on a well-known social networking site had "liked" the "Get Into Teaching" page. I thought I'd click on it (not the "Like" button, I hasten to add) and see what people are saying about getting into teaching - the naivity was amazing and worrying. I so nearly posted to the young people being conned into teaching by promises of fulfilment not the bother, but thought better of it. They may well have to learn by their own mistakes.
A headteacher's job has become more complex, it is claimed, with the skills required being "moral leaders, risk takers, media experts, creative accountants, prophets and networkers". And I'd agree with most of those, whether those traits are good for the school or the individual headteacher is more of a moot point.
A headteacher's job has certainly changed immensely in recent years, as they become further removed from day-to-day school life, becoming pen-pushers, rarely seeing children whilst holed up in offices, meetings and "training courses". Ultimately the buck stops with the headteacher when it comes to school performance, but with so much of the groundwork delegated, headteachers can seemingly do as much or as little as they want as the only people they answer to are the governors. Governors are volunteers, headteachers are paid enormous sums of money - I've never been sure why that has worked, or perhaps it hasn't depending on the nature of those governors.
The fact that so many headteachers are thinking of leaving - the news report says that one third are making preparations to actually leave - is actually quite worrying. Not that I believe that the profession would miss some headteachers, but because the case will be similar, if not worse with teaching staff. Schools can live without heads for a while (a couple of schools local to where I am actually thrived without a head), but schools cannot survive without teaching staff.
The difference is that headteachers can make preparations for leaving the profession - I imagine that it's easier to put some money aside on a monthly income of £5000 than it is with a classroom teacher's monthly income of around £2000. Teachers' morale is also at an all-time low, a fact that will come to light as the union conference season continues, but "ordinary" teachers don't have the disposible income to put some aside and leave, so what the young of the UK are currently getting is a demoralised workforce, which can't be healthy for anyone.
Ofsted, Gove, Wilshaw, Twigg and any other politicians who have anything to do with education policy or diatribe have a lot to answer for. Ignore the rosette as they are all as bad as each other. We are living in a time where education is seen as a major vote winner so successive politicians given power over education in Britain try desperately to make a mark and in the process end up criticising and confusing teachers through slating previous government policy and constantly changing school policy to shout about (or not, depending on its success) at the next general election. And these policies are based on what knowledge of the profession? None.
Is it any surprise that teachers are demoralised? Bossed by ambitious toffs with no idea.
I saw that a non-teaching friend of mine on a well-known social networking site had "liked" the "Get Into Teaching" page. I thought I'd click on it (not the "Like" button, I hasten to add) and see what people are saying about getting into teaching - the naivity was amazing and worrying. I so nearly posted to the young people being conned into teaching by promises of fulfilment not the bother, but thought better of it. They may well have to learn by their own mistakes.
Friday 16 March 2012
Secretary of State for Education Michael Mugabe-Gove
Ok, so people aren't being starved or murdered by our Right "Honourable" leader, but the way he deals with people who disagree with him is certainly similar.
Remember Downhills Primary School in Haringey? That's the one where everyone except for Ofsted, including parents, staff and pupils were quite happy with things, but because Orville, sorry Ofsted said that they were failing and ought to be an academy, Keith Harris, I mean Michael Gove insisted they become an academy. I'm being harsh of course, as Gove did allow the school to be reinspected in the name of "fairness", and surprise of all surprises, Ofsted backed their original assessment. The headteacher resigned, against many people actually involved with the school's wishes, but still the governors resisted.
So now Gove has sacked the governors and put in place an interim governing body who will decide on whether the school will become an academy. The new Chair of Governors is a certain Les Walton. Heard of him? Didn't think so, but guess what, he's in charge of the Young People's Learning Agency - the academies' funding body. He's going to be dead impartial, what a wise choice Mr Gove. The school will become an academy as soon as is humanly possible one suspects, and with it educational choice in the UK essentially dies.
Schools who aren't yet academies are essentially being forced into becoming them as funding is squeezed. The only schools that can generate extra funding from government are academies. Guess what my headteacher is currently investigating in that case, although you could be excused for thinking that it's an albino elephant that has gripped their attention. Very recent data suggests that academy status makes little or no difference to school performance, which is hardly surprising since the same failing students are still wandering through the gates with their ties at half-mast and their trousers arguably lower whilst rolling their next cigarette. Some academies have even gone into special measures - those academies don't tend to be championed by the current regime in Whitehall.
Also in the news is the fact that literacy progress has stalled meaning that we are falling behind other, similar countries - naughty, lazy teachers, resting on their laurels; goalposts have moved you know, onto the next fad or target.
Maths needs to be taught in more contextual ways apparently - unimaginative, lazy teachers, still teaching the stuff that has seen society through perfectly well for the previous 200 years or so, you really ought to spend lots of time and money reinventing the wheel only to be told by 30 spotty teenagers that they won't ever use this stuff when they leave; they already know exactly what every jobs entails of course, and will walk into their number one choice.
Language teachers required urgently, loads of people want to take your subject now, which is almost as quick a U-turn as many a front-bencher in Westminster will undertake as only a few years ago language teachers were being told that they were no longer required and to seek employment elsewhere; please return to a grotty, smelly classroom from your better paid and relatively hassle-free jobs outside of teaching, all is forgiven.
Could it be that the last paragraph is the key to all this - perhaps it's not all teachers' fault. Maybe, and I'm throwing this one out there, it's the constant interference from people in Whitehall that is part of the problem, as they try desperately to make their mark before moving up the government pecking order. And maybe, careful now, it's the general public's opinion of teachers, schools and education in general, fuelled by a corrosive British media (on the whole) that means that school children and their parents have little/no respect for teachers, education or learning, choosing to question the word of a school and argue their child's innocence until they are blue in the face, even though they know that the school is right; it's a point of principal for them to prove that schools and their staff are below them.
Ok, so I'm ranting a bit, but the constant criticism by ministers and their puppets (that's you Wilshaw) is not helpful. Yes, there are some rubbish teachers and headteachers out there, but not all are below standard. If you want people to listen to what you want them to do then you need a smattering of praise in there occasionally, and not being politically caned at every given opportunity.
I was talking to my father the other day and he said "do you think education is the UK is perfect?". I replied that I didn't think it was, and he came back with something that made me think "Gove is trying to change something that you say needs change", which I suppose is a fair point. I'm not saying that he's doing things right, but education is the UK does need a change. Academies aren't the answer however, despite what Gove seems to think.
Remember Downhills Primary School in Haringey? That's the one where everyone except for Ofsted, including parents, staff and pupils were quite happy with things, but because Orville, sorry Ofsted said that they were failing and ought to be an academy, Keith Harris, I mean Michael Gove insisted they become an academy. I'm being harsh of course, as Gove did allow the school to be reinspected in the name of "fairness", and surprise of all surprises, Ofsted backed their original assessment. The headteacher resigned, against many people actually involved with the school's wishes, but still the governors resisted.
So now Gove has sacked the governors and put in place an interim governing body who will decide on whether the school will become an academy. The new Chair of Governors is a certain Les Walton. Heard of him? Didn't think so, but guess what, he's in charge of the Young People's Learning Agency - the academies' funding body. He's going to be dead impartial, what a wise choice Mr Gove. The school will become an academy as soon as is humanly possible one suspects, and with it educational choice in the UK essentially dies.
Schools who aren't yet academies are essentially being forced into becoming them as funding is squeezed. The only schools that can generate extra funding from government are academies. Guess what my headteacher is currently investigating in that case, although you could be excused for thinking that it's an albino elephant that has gripped their attention. Very recent data suggests that academy status makes little or no difference to school performance, which is hardly surprising since the same failing students are still wandering through the gates with their ties at half-mast and their trousers arguably lower whilst rolling their next cigarette. Some academies have even gone into special measures - those academies don't tend to be championed by the current regime in Whitehall.
Also in the news is the fact that literacy progress has stalled meaning that we are falling behind other, similar countries - naughty, lazy teachers, resting on their laurels; goalposts have moved you know, onto the next fad or target.
Maths needs to be taught in more contextual ways apparently - unimaginative, lazy teachers, still teaching the stuff that has seen society through perfectly well for the previous 200 years or so, you really ought to spend lots of time and money reinventing the wheel only to be told by 30 spotty teenagers that they won't ever use this stuff when they leave; they already know exactly what every jobs entails of course, and will walk into their number one choice.
Language teachers required urgently, loads of people want to take your subject now, which is almost as quick a U-turn as many a front-bencher in Westminster will undertake as only a few years ago language teachers were being told that they were no longer required and to seek employment elsewhere; please return to a grotty, smelly classroom from your better paid and relatively hassle-free jobs outside of teaching, all is forgiven.
Could it be that the last paragraph is the key to all this - perhaps it's not all teachers' fault. Maybe, and I'm throwing this one out there, it's the constant interference from people in Whitehall that is part of the problem, as they try desperately to make their mark before moving up the government pecking order. And maybe, careful now, it's the general public's opinion of teachers, schools and education in general, fuelled by a corrosive British media (on the whole) that means that school children and their parents have little/no respect for teachers, education or learning, choosing to question the word of a school and argue their child's innocence until they are blue in the face, even though they know that the school is right; it's a point of principal for them to prove that schools and their staff are below them.
Ok, so I'm ranting a bit, but the constant criticism by ministers and their puppets (that's you Wilshaw) is not helpful. Yes, there are some rubbish teachers and headteachers out there, but not all are below standard. If you want people to listen to what you want them to do then you need a smattering of praise in there occasionally, and not being politically caned at every given opportunity.
I was talking to my father the other day and he said "do you think education is the UK is perfect?". I replied that I didn't think it was, and he came back with something that made me think "Gove is trying to change something that you say needs change", which I suppose is a fair point. I'm not saying that he's doing things right, but education is the UK does need a change. Academies aren't the answer however, despite what Gove seems to think.
Wednesday 7 March 2012
Help! I'm In Maths
Not a phrase you are liekly to hear at the moment, apparently. An "extensive" survey of 1000 students between the ages of 10 and 16 was carried out that stated the following:
Maths is not something British people readily admit to liking or having talent in. Many parents, if not most will open a parents evening appointment with the line "I was terrible at maths when I was young", or words to that effect. What they are doing is excusing their child's lack of work or effort due to them "not getting it" and the parents not helping.
Various "experts" , Carol Vorderman being one, are stating that the teaching of maths needs to change. As a maths teacher I could throw a cat among the pigeons by saying "I don't get it" and asking Carol to stand in front of a group of Year 11s and deliver this new, engaging curriculum. I can guarantee that she would turn a shade of green and run as far as she can.
I agree that much of the maths syllabus seems irrelevent, but in some jobs quadratic equations are essential, along with other areas of maths that appear of no use. I thought that the idea of education was to keep as many professional doors open for children. It's an accusation that could be levelled at any subject - I don't ever remember having to describe what happens to sodium when I put it in water, apart from now of course. No-one questions science though.
The main problem that maths teachers face is a national attitude towards the subject that it is generally useless in real life and therefore why try?
The curriculum may need to change, but the focus should be on attitude, of both children and parents.
- Most students would rather struggle alone than ask for help for fear of looking foolish.
- The older a student, the less likely they are to answer a question aloud.
- Girls are far less likely to contribute in maths lessons.
- Those who are good at maths don't like showing that they are good for fear of being persecuted as a result.
Maths is not something British people readily admit to liking or having talent in. Many parents, if not most will open a parents evening appointment with the line "I was terrible at maths when I was young", or words to that effect. What they are doing is excusing their child's lack of work or effort due to them "not getting it" and the parents not helping.
Various "experts" , Carol Vorderman being one, are stating that the teaching of maths needs to change. As a maths teacher I could throw a cat among the pigeons by saying "I don't get it" and asking Carol to stand in front of a group of Year 11s and deliver this new, engaging curriculum. I can guarantee that she would turn a shade of green and run as far as she can.
I agree that much of the maths syllabus seems irrelevent, but in some jobs quadratic equations are essential, along with other areas of maths that appear of no use. I thought that the idea of education was to keep as many professional doors open for children. It's an accusation that could be levelled at any subject - I don't ever remember having to describe what happens to sodium when I put it in water, apart from now of course. No-one questions science though.
The main problem that maths teachers face is a national attitude towards the subject that it is generally useless in real life and therefore why try?
The curriculum may need to change, but the focus should be on attitude, of both children and parents.
No Music In Music Lessons
Ofsted have moaned that too many music lessons don't contain music, and you'd think that it would be a pre-requisite of music lesson - to play/create the stuff.
The trouble is, and this is true of all subjects, is that the teachers are receiving mixed messages from the inspectors. And by that I mean the following:
I'm kind of getting used to it now.
The trouble is, and this is true of all subjects, is that the teachers are receiving mixed messages from the inspectors. And by that I mean the following:
- A room full of children, many with a limited aptitude for music, trying to create a masterpiece would be most people's idea of hell and totally unrealistic. It would just be a cacophony unless headphones were employed and then the teacher can't actually teach because the class can't hear the teacher. The class need to learn the fundamentals of creating listenable music before actually attempting to do it. Very few people are capable of writing something good in their teens or below, unless they are named Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. And unless all that is produced, sound-wise, is recorded, there is little or no evidence of the children actually doing anything or crucially, making progress. Ofsted wouldn't put up with this - evidence in the form of data/marks is key to tracking progress. Ofsted slating immediately on the grounds of "how do you know they have progressed?"
- In order to gain evidence something needs to be produced by each and every child, and the obvious thing would be something written down by the class. Unless they play an instrument with their foot whilst writing something down (where's Daniel Day Lewis when you need him?). Ofsted want to see music though, so once again Ofsted slating is on its way despite the creation of evidence.
I'm kind of getting used to it now.
Sunday 4 March 2012
Homework
Michael Gove has announced that headteachers can decide upon their own school's homework policy based upon their clientele rather than being set guidelines from Whitehall. My initial reaction: that's good of him, to allow schools to make some decisions. My second reaction: what use is homework anyway?
Homework is arguably the most time-consuming part of a teacher's job. Teachers rarely like setting it and students rarely like doing it, so why does it exist? There are a number of reasons:
Teachers should set homework, when it's relevent, but no more than once per week and it shouldn't be very time consuming. Children can do the homework if they want to, and if they do, it will get marked. If a child chooses not to do the homework, even on time, then that's their loss. The same should go for coursework.
Thank you Michael for allowing schools this opportunity. Let's see who's brave enough to make use of it.
Homework is arguably the most time-consuming part of a teacher's job. Teachers rarely like setting it and students rarely like doing it, so why does it exist? There are a number of reasons:
- The most important one: parents expect it. It makes no difference what is set, but if a school had a policy of not setting the stuff, and there are good reasons for having such a policy which I will cover later, many parents would moan and the school's numbers would begin to fall, with the end result being its closure. Parental perception of homework is that it shows them what their child is learning in class, despite the fact that the parents themselves spend hours doing the stuff to dig their offspring put of a potential detention.
- It should reinforce what a child has learnt in school, but many homeworks are set for the sake of it, which is ultimately a waste of time. Current guidelines suggest that a 14 to 16 year old should have around 2-3 hours per night of homework. This is ridiculous - homeworks should be around 10 minutes long if a child fully understands what to do, and a little longer if they have to learn it again because they weren't paying attention in class.
- It gives the teacher some results and evidence (it's that word "data" again) to track a child's progress and performance over a year and possibly identify weaknesses in their knowledge. This is useful for the teacher and child, assuming that the child has the gumption to actually make an effort to fill these holes in their learning. Tests in class can also do this.
- There's not a student or teacher who "loves", or dare I say even "likes" homework. It worsens the work/life balance for both parties and is generally a pain in the rear end to do and mark.
- The amount of time teachers spend chasing up missing homework could be far better utilised planning "outstanding" lessons.
- It prevents school children from having a childhood, like running around the park or playing sport apparently, or so the report on the BBC website said. I would possibly swap the two activities mentioned with "drinking cheap cider and smoking at the park" and "playing XBox", but I know what they mean. Children ought to be allowed to have a childhood is the point.
Teachers should set homework, when it's relevent, but no more than once per week and it shouldn't be very time consuming. Children can do the homework if they want to, and if they do, it will get marked. If a child chooses not to do the homework, even on time, then that's their loss. The same should go for coursework.
Thank you Michael for allowing schools this opportunity. Let's see who's brave enough to make use of it.
Saturday 3 March 2012
Naughty Michael!
Could this news story [Click here!] be the saviour for education in the UK?
Michael Gove, controversial Serectary of State for Education, has been told by the Information Commisioner Christopher Graham to disclose some private emails (under the cringe-worthy name of "Mrs Blurt") involving government business. This doesn't sound too major a deal initially, but the reason Gove used a private email is because he didn't want the subject matter to be available to Freedom of Information requests. More interested? I certainly am as the subject matter is likely to be education-based. The arrogance of the man to believe that he could dive under the radar is not a huge surprise.
With his aggressive stance towards educators in general and his insistence upon bludgeoning through any policy he believes to be a good idea without any apparent thought for the consequences, I rather hope that Gove has discussed something that he really shouldn't have, and is currently drafting his resignation.
One can but hope!
Michael Gove, controversial Serectary of State for Education, has been told by the Information Commisioner Christopher Graham to disclose some private emails (under the cringe-worthy name of "Mrs Blurt") involving government business. This doesn't sound too major a deal initially, but the reason Gove used a private email is because he didn't want the subject matter to be available to Freedom of Information requests. More interested? I certainly am as the subject matter is likely to be education-based. The arrogance of the man to believe that he could dive under the radar is not a huge surprise.
With his aggressive stance towards educators in general and his insistence upon bludgeoning through any policy he believes to be a good idea without any apparent thought for the consequences, I rather hope that Gove has discussed something that he really shouldn't have, and is currently drafting his resignation.
One can but hope!
Over Half Of Adults Are Poor At "Maths"
Would you openly advertise that you couldn't read or write? Very few will. But people will openly admit to not being able to do "maths". A report by a new group called National Numeracy claims that just under half of adults have the numeracy skills expected of an 11 year old and only about a fifth of adults are capable of gaining a C grade at GCSE.
The body is unfortunately fronted by Carol Vorderman who is not only awful but also knows absolutely nothing about education beyond her personal experience as a student. The report does have a point though, and is absolutely correct when it says that being poor at maths is a "badge of honour" and a "British disease". Celebrities are cited, even named and shamed as openly admitting to being awful at maths, usually followed by a laugh on a chat show. I invited our local MP into school recently and he even asked why we we bothered with algebra, which is like asking why you need bricks to build a house, which is encouraging!
Once again the kicking of the teaching profession begins - all students should be enthused when it comes to mathematics, despite clear and obvious parental/family influence to hate the subject. The government has repeatedly said in the recent past that they would like all students to continue with mathematics until the age of 18, for no other reason than other countries do it. I want an ipad2 because loads of my friends have one, but it won't make me any more efficient as a person, in fact it may well lead me to neglect other areas of my life. Totally pointless.
Maths teachers are under-qualified and lack the knowledge to enthuse and stretch their students, apparently. The desire of both government and National Numeracy is to get the top graduates, those with first class or upper second class degree to become teachers. Good luck with that - quality mathematicians are few and far between and will almost certainly be offered (and accept) jobs that pay far more than that of a teacher, and could well be less stressful. Those who do end up teaching (it sounds worryingly like the bum deal, doesn't it?) are perfectly well qualified to stretch the students and make the subject accessible. Politicians are dreaming if they think that teaching is currently a desirable profession.
The problem is that the politicians (people who talk about stuff, but actually do very little) are targetting the wrong people. Those they need to target are the pupils, their families and their attitude towards maths rather than the teachers and the curriculum. The curriculum is essentially fine, although the questions could be more geared to real-life situations i.e a little more relevent. The problem is that many children refuse to even attempt the work despite the best efforts of their teachers, and this behaviour is condoned by all the parents of those children who immediately say at parents evening that they can't help because they are rubbish at the subject. Giving up in maths is seen as acceptable to everyone but a teacher.
My "solution":
Educate the parents as well as the children. I already teach an after-school course for parents at our school, but funding is limited and take up is relatively low. It needs to become an embarrassment to be poor at maths and those who should be getting the snide comments should be those who are poor mathematically rather than those who are good at the subject as currently happens. No-one wants to be embarrassed, so people need to be embarrassed when they have insufficient skills in the subject - it should force them to improve. Enough of the covering in cotton wool, these people need to know the truth.
There is another point to be made: I think that what the politicians mean is "numeracy" rather than "maths". Maths involves pretty complex stuff that you wouldn't necesarily expect most people to understand or use outside of the classroom, although you'd be surprised at the uses of some mathematics. Numeracy is a necessity for people to function efficiently in the real world - stuff like percentages and fractions of a numbers, estimation. No wonder so many people get into horrible debt (including some mathematicians!) if they don't understand the interest they pay (percentages) and how much they're spending (estimation). I had a conversation with a class with whom I was teaching linear graphs, when one child asked what they were used for. I suggested a profession as an example amongst many, to which a few said "Oh, I don't want to do anything like that, so I don't need to learn this".
When anyone asks me when they are going to use this in later life, I now have a standard reply, which is: "During your GCSE exam, which will lead you on to a job decent job, assuming that you get a decent grade".
Still, it's all their teachers' fault, not a dreadful national attitude towards the subject.
The body is unfortunately fronted by Carol Vorderman who is not only awful but also knows absolutely nothing about education beyond her personal experience as a student. The report does have a point though, and is absolutely correct when it says that being poor at maths is a "badge of honour" and a "British disease". Celebrities are cited, even named and shamed as openly admitting to being awful at maths, usually followed by a laugh on a chat show. I invited our local MP into school recently and he even asked why we we bothered with algebra, which is like asking why you need bricks to build a house, which is encouraging!
Once again the kicking of the teaching profession begins - all students should be enthused when it comes to mathematics, despite clear and obvious parental/family influence to hate the subject. The government has repeatedly said in the recent past that they would like all students to continue with mathematics until the age of 18, for no other reason than other countries do it. I want an ipad2 because loads of my friends have one, but it won't make me any more efficient as a person, in fact it may well lead me to neglect other areas of my life. Totally pointless.
Maths teachers are under-qualified and lack the knowledge to enthuse and stretch their students, apparently. The desire of both government and National Numeracy is to get the top graduates, those with first class or upper second class degree to become teachers. Good luck with that - quality mathematicians are few and far between and will almost certainly be offered (and accept) jobs that pay far more than that of a teacher, and could well be less stressful. Those who do end up teaching (it sounds worryingly like the bum deal, doesn't it?) are perfectly well qualified to stretch the students and make the subject accessible. Politicians are dreaming if they think that teaching is currently a desirable profession.
The problem is that the politicians (people who talk about stuff, but actually do very little) are targetting the wrong people. Those they need to target are the pupils, their families and their attitude towards maths rather than the teachers and the curriculum. The curriculum is essentially fine, although the questions could be more geared to real-life situations i.e a little more relevent. The problem is that many children refuse to even attempt the work despite the best efforts of their teachers, and this behaviour is condoned by all the parents of those children who immediately say at parents evening that they can't help because they are rubbish at the subject. Giving up in maths is seen as acceptable to everyone but a teacher.
My "solution":
Educate the parents as well as the children. I already teach an after-school course for parents at our school, but funding is limited and take up is relatively low. It needs to become an embarrassment to be poor at maths and those who should be getting the snide comments should be those who are poor mathematically rather than those who are good at the subject as currently happens. No-one wants to be embarrassed, so people need to be embarrassed when they have insufficient skills in the subject - it should force them to improve. Enough of the covering in cotton wool, these people need to know the truth.
There is another point to be made: I think that what the politicians mean is "numeracy" rather than "maths". Maths involves pretty complex stuff that you wouldn't necesarily expect most people to understand or use outside of the classroom, although you'd be surprised at the uses of some mathematics. Numeracy is a necessity for people to function efficiently in the real world - stuff like percentages and fractions of a numbers, estimation. No wonder so many people get into horrible debt (including some mathematicians!) if they don't understand the interest they pay (percentages) and how much they're spending (estimation). I had a conversation with a class with whom I was teaching linear graphs, when one child asked what they were used for. I suggested a profession as an example amongst many, to which a few said "Oh, I don't want to do anything like that, so I don't need to learn this".
When anyone asks me when they are going to use this in later life, I now have a standard reply, which is: "During your GCSE exam, which will lead you on to a job decent job, assuming that you get a decent grade".
Still, it's all their teachers' fault, not a dreadful national attitude towards the subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)