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 professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

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

    Dismiss Notice
  3. The Teacher Q&A will be closing soon.

    If you have any information that you would like to keep or refer to in the future please can you copy and paste the information to a format suitable for you to save or take screen shots of the questions and responses you are interested in.

    Don’t forget you can still use the rest of the forums on theTes Community to post questions and get the advice, help and support you require from your peers for all your teaching needs.

    Dismiss Notice

Poor teaching?

Discussion in 'Primary' started by moonshine79, Feb 7, 2012.

  1. moonshine79

    moonshine79 New commenter

    Hello. I was just wondering whether each and every child in your lesson 'gets' the learning objective (eg in Numeracy) Nowadays it seems to be a failing of the teacher if some children need further reinforcement of a concept ....any views?
  2. moonshine79

    moonshine79 New commenter

    Hello. I was just wondering whether each and every child in your lesson 'gets' the learning objective (eg in Numeracy) Nowadays it seems to be a failing of the teacher if some children need further reinforcement of a concept ....any views?
  3. IMV, one of the main reasons why many children do not learn nearly as well as they could is the inconsistency of English spelling (e.g. learn nearly) which makes learning to read and write exceptionally difficult http://englishspellingproblems.blogspot.com
    Children who struggle with reading inevitably struggle in most other subjects too.
    Intelligence and parental support make a big difference, but not teachers.
    Sadly, the myth that poor achievement is mainly the result of poor teaching is now heavily promoted by the advocates of SP, and government ministers have jumped on that bandwaggon with glee.
  4. upsadaisy

    upsadaisy New commenter

    I also think it's silly to expect a child to move on after one lesson, I don't. I expect them to move on by the end of the unit or after 3 or so lessons. Yes I do expect my HA to move on quickly, but then I do plan for that. But I expect my MA to need an intro lesson to have a go, another lesson to practise and correct, another lesson to get better, another lesson to reinforce.
  5. I was told on a book scrutiny a couple of months ago that too many of my children were meeting the learning objective! I suggested this meant the objective, support and resources were well-matched to the children. The headteacher said it meant none of that, but that the objective was too easy.
    Sometimes you just can't win...!
  6. That's happened at my school too, apparently too many ticks in their maths book is a bad thing. Better for a child's confidence than a whole lot of crosses though...
  7. Quite right. If too many children achieve the learning objective it's too easy, if too many don't then your teaching is poor. We'll never win!
  8. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    You need a vague learning objective. Mine today was to multiply a number by a unit number.
    Fantastic - top group got onto HTU x U whilst lower ability did TU x 3,4 and 5.
    Then they have all met it (well almost) but the objective is so wide and open to interpretation that you can't say it was too easy or difficult!![​IMG]
  9. I totally agree with this. So many people make their learning objectives so complicated and context dependent - 'WALT write a newspaper article about a volcano from the viewpoint of Sam' - really you should just stick to the key skill being taught - WALT write a newspaper article. Otherwise the next time children are asked to do something similar, they can't apply what they learnt before. "I know how to write newspaper articles about volcanoes from Sam's viewpoint but how do I write a newspaper article about a school play?"
  10. Ours have to be very specific and measurable. We are also told that they need to be context specific!
    I wouldn't be able to use the nice vague multiplying one above - I'd have to have something like:
    LA - I can use cubes in an array to multiply UxU
    MA - I can use partitioning to multiply TUxU
    HA - I can use the grid method to multiply HTUxTU
    The goal posts seem to be different wherever you look!
  11. mrajlong

    mrajlong Established commenter

    Sometimes I feel that if the children 'get' something that it is seen as a failure as they weren't challenged. Is a lesson successful if the child struggles or is it more successful if the child feels they have achieved something and it builds their confidence. If I managed to juggle 3 balls would I then never practise this ever again because I have achieved it? Reinforcing something you can do until it becomes second nature is the key. No one passes their driving test after one lesson. However, if I was observed in a lesson where the children were finding something easy, it would not be viewed as being down to good teaching, but as pitching the lesson too low. No child likes to fail at something - neither do adults. Challenge when the basic skills are in place - not before - or watch the house of cards tumble down around you (sorry for the excessive use of metaphor in this post)
  12. Msz

    Msz Established commenter


  13. All this would be resolved if the people assessing our work looked at progression across a series of lessons instead of just one. If the children make progress across a series of lessons, then they're making progress in individual lessons.
    There would be no need to fart about with criticising learning objectives, or pupil attainment, unless you can see that the children aren't progressing - which you cannot do from a single look at a single lesson.
  14. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    I totally agree. How one earth can anyone come and say a child has or has not made progress when they observe? What evidence have they got? Progress is complicated enough - children move forward, stay still, go back, forward and then eventually it is secure. Probably. I have tutored enough children to realise that progress and "secure" understanding is extremely complicated.
    I am impressed by anyone who can - in 20 mins or an hour tell me that a child has made progress, let alone a whole class.
  15. Anyone want to join my campaign to challenge OFSTED inspectors (who point out that your lesson was only good rather than outstanding because not everyone progress/was challenged) to get off their bums and darn well teach an outstanding lesson where everyone, even the nits in the kids hair, makes progress!!
    Or my campaign to get all OFSTED inspectors to use a dictionary to look up and really understand the use of the word 'satisfactory' (that is 'fulfilling all demands or requirements')!
    If a child in my class tried to explain 'satisfactory' as 'not being good enough' I'd tell them off for giving me an incorrect definition!!!
  16. Anonymous

    Anonymous New commenter

    Well if satisfactory now means requires improvement, what does unsatisfactory now mean? Beyond hope?
  17. Wouldn't it be great to see an OFSTED inspector teach a lesson for once and let us judge just how 'outstanding' it is?

Share This Page