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. I'll get on to that tonight! I can't make out, from the tone of your post, if you are just trying to be helpful, or are incredibly naive, or just pompous.

    Anyhoo, we all work in inclusive schools and have the teaching qualification. We all know what inclusion means, and its ramifiations for both pupil and teacher.

    Let's make things straightforward here with a simple closed question that summarises my entire argument. Would attainment of your pupils rise if those few who regularly attempt to disrupt your lessons were permanently removed? Yes/No.
     
  2. Incredibly naive of course BJ! Tell you what why dont we just remove all of the pupils that may be problematic in some way because the only ones that are important are the ones heading for higher education - they want to be there, they're quiet, so much easier and fun to teach and involve much more interesting planning and preparation, and, of course, theyre the ones that give the attainment figures (sad thing these days is that they will probably end up unemployed as opposed those who do non-academic routes!)

    But where do you want to put the others, there are no special schools for this group (why dont you try visiting one to see then report back to the forum on your findings?) - do we need to build some more then?Would they be PFIs? what would you call them? and who will teach in them? what will be the selection process? will there be a national standard of behaviour dictated by consecutive govenments ? What if pupils dont fit in there either?

    Depending on where you draw the line and where it might end, perhaps you or I would never have had the opportunity to become teachers?
     
  3. Who said one pupil was more important than another? Show me where I said that.

    Planning for my Int1s is a lot more interesting than planning for my Standard Grades.

    They ARE the ones that "give the attainment figures", but I take as much satisfaction from folk getting an Int1/Access 3 as Higher and AH.

    Do you equate poor behaviour with lots of noise? Mmm, many of my classes are pretty noisy, I guess my pupils don't learn much . . .

    I've worked in special schools and it just ain't my cup of tea, as with most of my colleagues I imagine. Clientele ranged from poor wee souls deserving of the utmost sympathy and help to complete wee bar stewards. Why should/shouldn't they be PFIs? What does the name matter? As far as I know they're already called special schools? Why is almost every school in the country trying to get their own two or three disruptive pupils and/or poor wee souls into these schools? Is that what you call inclusion?

    Can you simply answer my yes/no question? Do I know your answer already? How many times must I ask?
     
  4. Svarts and Ms T, I'm still waiting on a "yea" or "nay".
     
  5. I don't know why you want my opinion on this and I have no interest in any engaging in any further debate with you on this matter as it is pointless. In my opinion ( hard to argue against, opinions) you are not capable of logical argument and your inability ( in my opinion) to distinguish between fact and opinion makes any debate futile with nothing other than defensive cut 'n' paste responses from you. If you are interested in an empirical study that addresses your questions here it is:
    Dyson, A., Farrell, P., Polat, F., Hutcheson, G., and Gallanaugh, F. (2004). Inclusion and Pupil Achievement. London: DfES Publications (ISBN 1 84478 319 7)
    This was a large scale study, the researchers found no evidence to support the view that inclusion has had a negative impact on attainment.


     
  6. I want(ed) your opinion on this simply because you challenged my argument. That is the nature of debate. Do you know why now?

    I think this matter is not pointless, I think it is perhaps the most important matter in education today. The message we send out to young people wilth this silly and ineffective policy of inclusion, and the wee pretendy way in which it is implemented, is that it's OK to behave awfully. Witness any major city centre in this country at the weekend, full of young people participating in the cover-all "antisocial behaviour".

    Opinions are the lifeblood of debate and you can have "right" and "wrong" opinions and that magical grey area in between, where most of the interesting bits are.

    I thought one of the main points of this forum was to engage in debate and if you don't want to do that then you just have to ask yourself whay you participate in the forum. Perhaps, and I venture an opinion here, you just want the reassurance of communicating with colleagues online, perhaps you just want a psychological pat on the back.

    I you don't like my "cut 'n' paste responses" then too bad. I find it effective so that you know exactly which of your points I am addressing. "Defensive"? Eh, naw. It's not my fault if I find deficiencies in your argument.

    I have read many articles on inclusion, most for, the minority against. I also have the intelligence to make my own judgements and form my own opinions, as demonstratated here. Much research is skewed to support a certain point of view, and I'm not saying the above is in that category, but, again, this is true.

    Finally, and you may not have thought about this, but we just do not have genuine inclusion in schools in this country: fact. "Special schools" do exist and young people who cannot fit into mainstream "inclusive" schools attend those institutions: fact. A genuine implication of your argument is that these long-established special schools should be disbanded and their pupils returned to mainstream "inclusive" schools. Then, could we genuinely conclude that there was "no evidence to support the view that inclusion has had a negative impact on attainment"?

    All I'm saying is that the present arrangements should be extended in order to meet the educational needs of all of our youngsters A line has already been drawn, and we need to move it.
    Go on, find holes in my argument.
     
  7. I agree that this is one of the most important issues in Education today. Pupils with behaviour difficulties were always going to be the hardest to nestle into the inclusion agenda. It is much easier to teach a class pupils with any number additional support needs but put in one disruptive pupil and its a very hard job! Dont dis the whole inclusion agenda just because of this though I have seen very beneficial results in inclusive mainstream schools (not all are yet!)not just for ASN pupils but whole classes where teachers have had to really think about and change their teaching methods and approaches. There will be one or two very disruptive pupils for whom alternative provision should and usually is available - not arguing about the need for this either! but the particular cases you quoted BJ were not at that level, unless theres more you didnt mention?

    To answer your question, yes of course achievement (depending on how you define it) would increase with less disruption thats obvious isnt it? but there are much be a better solutions than excluding pupils from mainstream education after all they have a right to be there.
     
  8. At last some debate. Thank you!

    Much of your last post makes sense.

    The two exemplars I used were for illustration, there's nothing missing and I have no hidden agenda. All teachers would recognise pupils like those. As I said previously, all I'm looking for is the present line to be redrawn. Of course, I do think that more pupils should be accommodated outwith mainstream.

    Take a pupil who, for whatever reason, regularly disrupts (negatively, and whether intentionally or not) each lesson for 5 minutes. In secondary, that's 15 minutes a week, nearly a whole lesson every three weeks: around 10% of lesson time - that's far too much in my opinion.

    If there are better solutions then I'd be delighted to know.
     
  9. If you are an outstanding teacher you shouldn't have a problem.
     

Share This Page