1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Bring Back Selection...

Discussion in 'Scotland - education news' started by MilkyBar Kid, Nov 10, 2007.

  1. Milky Bar Kid - good post, couldn't agree with you more.

    "why aren't we sticking up for these pupils" and "we have threads on here blaming the pupils" beggars belief. All pupils are treated with the same approach to discipline and behaviour in all schools I have worked in: that's what is called "pupil support". Root cause of classroom problems are pupils, ergo tackle that (and effectively) and problem contained or eradicated. Poverty is not the responsibility of schools or teachers and we can do nothing about eradicating poverty other than teach children.

    "I feel for the good kids that genuinely value education who are losing out" summarises the reality of today's classroom, and the sentiments of nearly all teachers.

    We all know where the majority of our tax dollars are going in education, and it ain't working. I, for one, hugely resent it. Socialism does not work.
  2. "Root cause of classroom problems are pupils"

    So it's NOT

    "the lack of support in place to follow [effective behaviour management strategies] through. "


    "Most schools have clear discipline policies that look good on paper but [not] in practice"...

    Funny, these are two statements from mbk that you have just said you couldn't agree more with. Oh dear, bj, how you twist in the wind...
  3. And your point is, Raybes? Good policies mean zilch unless implemented. The best bits of paper in the world won't stop misbehaviour or indiscipline.

    "Root cause of classroom problems are pupils" = true statement, whether you have decent policies - ie bits of paper - in place or not, whether you have supportive SMT or not. Look up the phrase "root cause".

    The phrases "why aren't we sticking up for these pupils" and "we have threads on here blaming the pupils" still beggars belief.

    What MKB is alluding to, I think, is that schools have policies - bits of paper - that are effectively meaningless, and largely ignored day-to-day.

    It is interesting, psychologically, Ray, that you seem to spend an awfy lot of time picking holes in what I say. That's woolly socialism for you.

    Oh dear, Ray, what Robbie Coltraine must think of you.
  4. "Good policies mean zilch unless implemented."

    "schools have policies - bits of paper - that are effectively meaningless, and largely ignored day-to-day"

    Yet, despite this non-implementation of policies and strategies to deal with disruptive children in the mainstream, the children are still to blame? Shouldn't we be implementing these policies and strategies BEFORE we kick them out of mainstream?

    Your position is one of utter confusion, bj: it is so abject it is silly. Given that, you're right, I'm not going to spend any more time "picking holes" in your argument: it's far too threadbare as it is.

  5. Raytsar, you've just lost it haven't you?

    Nothing you say makes any sense whatsoever, so just go away to somewhere someone will listen to your incoherent rants.
  6. "Nothing you say makes any sense whatsoever..."

    Lol! I don't suppose it would to someone who contradicts himself up his own backside in every post he makes!

    Logic has a way of passing by some people... especially those who have had a logic bypass.
  7. Now, now, Rayczar, just because you couldn't cut it in the classroom doesn't give you the right to tell everyone how to do their job, but it doesn't stop you, does it?

    The root cause of indiscipline in schools is pupils, now explain what's contradictory about that?

    1) The "lack of support in place" is not a root cause, it's secondary.

    2)The lack of "clear discipline policies that look good on paper" is not a root cause, it's secondary.

    It is good to see you resorting to name-calling and insults so early in this thread, it took you ages last time round.

    You just don't see the irony in your posts, do ya?!!!Logic? I'm surprised you can spell it.
  8. The root cause of indiscipline in schools
    1) The "lack of support in place"

    2)The lack of "clear discipline policies that look good on paper"

    Goin back to subject, I will add 2 other factors as well:

    3) In schools where I taught, I have seen a great deal of incompetence in teaching skills concerning some teachers. For instance, one class I was teaching, pupils put their hand up with me, but when the same pupils were with the math's teacher, it's a chaos and apparently the teacher find it normal.

    4) There are some pupils who should not be at all in mainstream. As it's been written already, it's a desaster for other pupils' future. At the end of the day, these same disruptive pupils leave schools thinking they can do anything under the ADHD or other rubbish labels.
  9. Ah! This wee thread brings back fond memories!

    Point 3 - I agree but I'd replace "incompetence in teaching skills" with "incompetence in behaviour management skills". It is truly dreadful that any teacher has to put up with consistently awful behaviour from pupils. Schools can't really do anything about it - mine is going through the motions of collecting evidence to try to get rid of on S3 pupil, and knowing that it is almost certainly all in vain. This is the harsh reality of school life today, there are no real penalties for misbehaviour.

    Point 4 - I've said that many times before. Ridding ourselves of such kids is the most effective (and cheapest by far) way of raising attainment among 99% of young people. But we can't send them to special schools because they've got rights, you know.

    Gawd, second post today even tough this new sits still sucks!
  10. Welcome to the forums and with a cute name too, Ms Terious.

    I am afraid that I disagree with you on several issues.

    Firstly, we do need, and we do have, special schools.

    I have two pupils to demonstrate. An S1 kid who is utterly incapable of being quiet. A nice wee lad, whose parents don't want any "special" help for him in lessons, he constantly fires imaginary pistols, makes paper hats etc. I often have to veer off course to deal with him, and so does the auxiliary who is in for some other pupils. In doing so, I have to neglect the remaining 17 children in that class who are equally deserving of my time and attention. A double dis-service here, in that the child does not get the attention he needs, and his colleagues don't get the teaching time they should. Essentially harmless and I do feel sorry for him.

    Another S3 pupil has a helluva homelife apparently. And he wants everyone to know about it. Cheeky, rude, a supposed "hard" man, and a dreadful pain in the erse in general. He does not learn much in my classes and this is his responsibility entirely. Nine times out of ten I speak to him because he misbehaves. I am limited in what I can do for the boy during the three hours per week I see him. Once again, there are 16 other pupils in that class too and I have a responsibility towards them.

    Now, would both of these pupils benefit from being outwith mainstream education? A resounding yes. Both, with different difficulties remember, would benefit from teachers specially trained to deal with "difficult" children. Both would benefit from the lower teacher/pupil ratio. Mainstream pupils would not have to suffer regular disruption to their lessons.

    Social inclusion is the problem in schools today and until this policy is changed, will continue to be.

    Teachers are quite right in stating that they are not social workers. I see my pupils three hours a week and I'm afraid all I can do in that time is teach them. I, like every teacher, have my own family to care for, provide for, and worry about, and that is no easy task. I work damned hard for my pupils but at the end of the day a simple fact is that I am not responsible for anyone else's children (whether they live in poverty or not).

    Let's remove such pupils from mainstream education and invoke a culture of learning into all of the country's schools and reap the rewards of higher attainment. After all, are we in danger of losing direction as to what and whom education is for?
  11. vforvendetta

    vforvendetta New commenter

    Couldn't agree more BigJ.

  12. Who reaps the rewards? The reason why we don?t have selection in the first place is to give everybody an equal chance in life through education to develop skills and be a part of society. Has this not always been the tradition of Scottish Education? It?s our job to help everybody to do this but not by segregating pupils into 'special schools' dependent on their socio economic or any other status.
  13. Bigjimmy, you seem to know what you are talking about and obviously have considerable experience let alone know-how in supporting all pupils in the classroom. Could you please enlighten me by explaining the difference between social inclusion, inclusive education and an inclusive school. I know this will be tiresome for you but I'm sure it will be of great help not only to me but to the many that hang onto your every word.
  14. "<font size="3">We need provision for extreme cases</font>": define "extreme". The two exemplars I gave are suitable for exclusion from mainstream schooling, for different criteria. After four years of mainstream they will have learned that there are apparently no downsides to possessing zero social skills and their fellow pupils will be heartily sick and tired of them.

    The assertion that what I described were "<font size="3">lower intervention scenarios that a classroom teacher can be assisted in dealing with</font>" rings only too true. The points I tried to make, and apparently failed to do, was that why should teachers have to deal with these types of behaviours? And why should other pupils have their education disrupted many times a day over many years? That must, surely, affect the attainment of virtually every pupil in the country.

    So, what I described "<font size="3">doesn?t sound like the behaviour is nearly extreme enough to warrant being taught in a special school situation</font>"? Er, yes it does. The S1 pupil is not getting the educational attention he needs in mainstream - simply put, he has a condition which is not, and will not, be met by mainstream education. The S3 pupil can't cope with his home life at the moment but that does not give him licence to attempt to create utter havoc in my classroom or others in the school. In general, because there's a reason for something does not validate that something. I am a bit skint at the moment but that doesn't mean I'll not get the jail if I rob a bank, does it? I mean the reason I robbed the bank was because I'm a bit short at the mo, but that doesn't excuse me from committing the crime!

    "<font size="3">I understand the potential disruption</font>" from what you've written, and that's all I have to go by, I don't agree.

    "<font size="3">action can be taken to resolve the situation</font>". I've been through the disciplinary system, formal and informal, had a word in the boy's ear to appeal to his better nature (why should I have to do this?), there's been exclusions etc etc etc and nothing is resolved at all. Just because there's a procedure for something doesn't mean it works. If there is action to resolve this situation then please tell me what it is, I'm all ears.

    "". No! That's not the main thing! You think teachers don't talk to each other, suggest things they've tried that work in similar situations? The main thing is this daft policy called inclusion, not to suggest something that happens many times every day in every school in the country.

    OK, tell me how to be sensitive to pupils who are hungry every morning. How do I adapt teaching to those pupils? Do you mean being good-mannered and good-natured to pupils? Done. Every pupil. But how do I adopt my teaching of speed = distance / time just because a pupil is hungry. I'd love to know. Knowing that pupils live in poverty is not the same as being sensitive towards their feelings.

    What rewards? I am looking to raise attainment. Just because a rich kid, a poor kid, and the proverbial middle class kid go to the same school does not make everything fair. If some of the children whose rightful place is out of mainstream simply grasped the fact that teachers' sole role is to help them then we wouldn't be having this debate. We are promoting a culture of rights and not responsibilites.
  15. Bigjimmy, you have always displayed a remarkable capacity to deconstruct the arguments of others, your analytical skills are equally impressive. You clearly have a profound knowledge of educational policies and practice particularly in the field of pupil support. I would be grateful if you could share your expertise in these matters with a neophyte like myself by responding to my query posted above.
  16. I don't know what social inclusion, inclusive education andinclusive schools are, obviously, so I couldn't even attempt to explain the difference (differences?) between them.

    Where does my "considerable experience" come from? I've never claimed such. Tiresome? Who hangs on to my every word? Thanks for the profound knowledge stuff, I'll take that as a compliment. See, sarcasm is soooo easy.

    I obviously irritate you yet you chose sarcasm for your argument, why don't you engage constructively in the debate, eg by deconstructing my arguments. I have stated opinions and it's your business if you interpret those as "expertise". Perhaps you are content with sweeping generalities in dealing with various teaching scenarios. Perhaps you could enlighten me with some detail as to your solutions wrt the problems discussed on this thread. Dare I venture that you're relatively new to the profession? Nothing "bad" about that, just a statement, I'm quite new to teaching myself.

    I don't want to get involved in a ping-pong trade of sarcastic insults between ourselves, that is tiresome to me and other readers. I'd suggest you simply get involved and let us know what works for you, how you turned round those wee rascals in your classes.

    Apologies for not replying earlier, I don't hang around here too often any longer, and indeed, who does?

    Should I hold my breath?
  17. Yes I did mean 'differences' - sorry about the typo. You are also quite correct in stating that it is an opinion thread and you have made your opinions clear.
    It is interesting to note however that you hold such strong opinions on important issues which on your own admission you do not understand -
    >>I don't know what social inclusion, inclusive education andinclusive
    schools are, obviously, so I couldn't even attempt to explain the
    and in your ignorance you would happily consign certain groups of pupils to be removed from one sector and placed in another sector of which you are also clearly ignorant. I'm not interested in trading insults either, but if you are genuinely interested in your professional development as an inexperienced teacher then I would suggest you learn more about the area in which you are offering your 'opinion'. The arguments you put forward date back 100 years.

  18. "It is interesting to note however that you hold such strong opinions on important issues which on your own admission you do not understand": it is also abundantly quite clear that, whilst you are happy to dish out sarcasm, you don't recognise it when you see it. Example two: "and in your ignorance . . .".

    The arguments I put forward are mere statements of facts and I apologise if you do not agree with those facts (they're awfully difficult to argue against, facts). Low-level interruptions and misbehaviour are cited regularly in teacher surveys as their biggest detractor in preventing them from carrying out their primary job function (which is to teach, remember, not to "manage" misbehaviour). Don't ask me what surveys because I don't walk about remembering that sort of stuff, but look in a 2003 copy of the mag we all get from the GTC (before your time?).

    If this country has a policy of true educational inclusion (not quite sure I understand that, remember) then why do many schools spend so much time and effort collecting evidence so that they can exclude pupils. I've seen this happen in so many schools. Can you explain that to me, please, because I just don't understand that. If this country has a policy of true educational inclusion then why do we have special schools at all. Again, can you explain that to me, please, because I just don't understand that.

    Now, could you please explain to me the differences between social inclusion, inclusive education and an inclusive school? I know this will be tiresome for you but this would clearly help me lots in my CPD, and I'm sure you agree with that.

    I am also interested in your counter-arguments to what I have been saying. Are we going to get any? Or will you just content yourself with mundane generalities? How do you cope with "difficult" children in your classes? What strategies do you use. How effective are those strategies? How do you objectively measure that effectiveness? Would you be happy if your own children were in a class with a few pupils who repeatedly adversely affect their education? All day? Five days a week? In summary, what are your alternatives to my suggestions? I would be grateful if you could share your expertise in these matters with a neophyte like myself by responding.

  19. Hope this is helpful and not too boring!

Share This Page