The Insanity of Modern Educational Thinking

July 27, 2011

Below is an article that exemplified the absolute lack of balance and common sense in our Education system.  To have three separate school uniforms in the one school grounds, with each uniform representing a different learning ability, is just plain insane!  It is demeaning, offensive, inexcusable and achieves the exact opposite of what a school is supposed to achieve.

A school isn’t just a place where information is disseminated.  Schools serve as  a microcosm for society as a whole.  They prepare students for the challenges faced in the real world.  They are supposed to help children realise the importance of responsibility, empathy, teamwork, leadership, perseverance and acceptance.

But do they really?

Children from aged 11 are being segregated, taught in colour-coordinated buildings, playing in separate fenced-off areas and eat lunch at different times.

The move has caused concern that it is stigmatising children who are placed in lower quality sets.

Pupils are ranked as they leave primary school and placed into one of three mini schools at Crown Woods College, Greenwich.

The brightest go to Delamere and wear purple ties and purple badges. The rest go to Ashwood, which wears blue, or Sherwood, which wears red.

The two latter schools are made up of pupils with mixed abilities but are still streamed into three tiers.

Critics have warned that the move is demoralising for pupils and encourages resentment and animosity amongst those in different sets.

Michael Murphy, the head teacher at the comprehensive, said: “I felt if we made explicit the provision for high-ability children we would be able to attract those children and their parents who would rather not put them in to a grammar.”

“Mrs Thatcher said you can’t ignore the market, you have to respond to it.”

Kevin Courtney, deputy secretary of the National Union of Teachers has condemned the practice.

He said: ‘The idea of taking a large school and turning it into three mini schools is likely to be good for [the school’s] relationships, but streaming is a step backwards. It leads to competition for children rather than improvement in teaching.”

Labelling a student based on their current learning level is extremely damaging.  Schools should be doing all they can to eliminating labels and focussing not on what makes us different, but rather, on the things which unite us.  We all want to feel respected and cared about.  We want to be appreciated for the skills we have and supported in obtaining skills that don’t come easy to us.

Instead of drawing attention to discrepancies in ability, we should be drawing attention to the fact that each and every child has unique qualities which make them important.  Just like a vibrant society requires people from all walks of life, political perspectives and skills, a schoolyard does too.

How would teachers like it if they were colour coded according to their teaching ability?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Child Development, Child Welfare, Education Policy | 1 Comment »

7 Strategies for Dealing With Office Politics

July 26, 2011

The school staff room, like any other office environment, can pose challenges when it comes to dealing with colleagues.  Lawrence Cheok gives 7 fantastic strategies for overcoming  office politics and managing a hostile or competitive work environment.

HABIT #1 – BE AWARE YOU HAVE A CHOICE

The most common reactions to politics at work are either fight or flight. It’s normal human reaction for survival in the wild, back in the prehistoric days when we were still hunter-gatherers. Sure, the office is a modern jungle, but it takes more than just instinctive reactions to win in office politics. Instinctive fight reactions will only cause more resistance to whatever you are trying to achieve; while instinctive flight reactions only label you as a pushover that people can easily take for granted. Neither options are appealing for healthy career growth.

Winning requires you to consciously choose your reactions to the situation. Recognize that no matter how bad the circumstances, you have a choice in choosing how you feel and react. So how do you choose? This bring us to the next point…

HABIT #2 – KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO ACHIEVE

When conflicts happens, it’s very easy to be sucked into tunnel-vision and focus on immediate differences. That’s a self-defeating approach. Chances are you’ll only invite more resistance by focusing on differences in people’s positions or opinions.

The way to mitigate this without looking like you’re fighting to emerge as a winner in this conflict is to focus on the business objectives. In the light of what’s best for the business, discuss the pros and cons of each option. Eventually, everyone wants the business to be successful; if the business don’t win, then nobody in the organization wins. It’s much easier for one to eat the humble pie and back off when they realize the chosen approach is best for the business.

By learning to steer the discussion in this direction, you will learn to disengage from petty differences and position yourself as someone who is interested in getting things done. Your boss will also come to appreciate you as someone who is mature, strategic and can be entrusted with bigger responsibilities.

HABIT #3 – FOCUS ON YOUR CIRCLE OF INFLUENCE

At work, there are often issues which we have very little control over. It’s not uncommon to find corporate policies, client demands or boss mandates which affects your personal interests. Bitching and complaining are common responses to these events that we cannot control. But think about it, other than that short term emotional outlet, what tangible results do bitching really accomplish? In most instances, none.

Instead of feeling victimized and angry about the situation, focus on the things that you can do to influence the situation – your circle of influence. This is a very empowering technique to overcome the feeling of helplessness. It removes the victimized feeling and also allows others to see you as someone who knows how to operate within given constraints. You may not be able to change or decide on the eventual outcome, but you can walk away knowing that you have done the best within the given circumstances.

Constraints are all around in the workplace; with this approach, your boss will also come to appreciate you as someone who is understanding and positive.

HABIT #4 – DON’T TAKE SIDES

In office politics, it is possible to find yourself stuck in between two power figures who are at odds with each other. You find yourself being thrown around while they try to outwit each other and defend their own position. All at the expense of you getting the job done. You can’t get them to agree on a common decision for a project, and neither of them want to take ownership of issues; they’re too afraid they’ll get stabbed in the back for any mishaps.

In cases like this, focus on the business objectives and don’t take side with either of them – even if you like one better than the other. Place them on a common communication platform and ensure open communications among all parties so that no one can claim “I didn’t say that”.

By not taking sides, you’ll help to direct conflict resolution in an objective manner. You’ll also build trust with both parties. That’ll help to keep the engagements constructive and focus on business objectives.

HABIT #5 – DON’T GET PERSONAL

In office politics, you’ll get angry with people. It happens. There will be times when you feel the urge to give that person a piece of your mind and teach him a lesson. Don’t.

People tend to remember moments when they were humiliated or insulted. Even if you win this argument and get to feel really good about it for now, you’ll pay the price later when you need help from this person. What goes around comes around, especially at the work place.

To win in the office, you’ll want to build a network of allies which you can tap into. The last thing you want during a crisis or an opportunity is to have someone screw you up because they habour ill-intentions towards you – all because you’d enjoyed a brief moment of emotional outburst at their expense.

Another reason to hold back your temper is your career advancement. Increasingly, organizations are using 360 degree reviews to promote someone.

Even if you are a star performer, your boss will have to fight a political uphill battle if other managers or peers see you as someone who is difficult to work with. The last thing you’ll want is to make it difficult for your boss to champion you for a promotion.

HABIT #6 – SEEK TO UNDERSTAND, BEFORE BEING UNDERSTOOD

The reason people feel unjustified is because they felt misunderstood. Instinctively, we are more interested in getting the others to understand us than to understand them first. Top people managers and business leaders have learned to suppress this urge.

Surprisingly, seeking to understand is a very disarming technique. Once the other party feels that you understand where he/she is coming from, they will feel less defensive and be open to understand you in return. This sets the stage for open communications to arrive at a solution that both parties can accept. Trying to arrive at a solution without first having this understanding is very difficult – there’s little trust and too much second-guessing.

HABIT #7 – THINK WIN-WIN

As mentioned upfront, political conflicts happen because of conflicting interests. Perhaps due to our schooling, we are taught that to win, someone else needs to lose. Conversely, we are afraid to let someone else win, because it implies losing for us.

In business and work, that doesn’t have to be the case.

Learn to think in terms of “how can we both win out of this situation?” This requires that you first understand the other party’s perspective and what’s in it for him. Next, understand what’s in it for you. Strive to seek out a resolution that is acceptable and beneficial to both parties. Doing this will ensure that everyone truly commit to the agree resolution and not pay only lip-service to it.

People simply don’t like to lose. You may get away with win-lose tactics once or twice, but very soon, you’ll find yourself without allies in the workplace. Thinking win-win is an enduring strategy that builds allies and help you win in the long term.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Teachers Stress | 1 Comment »

Should Violent Video Games Be Banned?

July 26, 2011

I am glad to see that the recent events in Norway isn’t prompting any knee-jerk reactions in banning violent video games.  Although I dislike violent video games and would not want them in my house, I am not an advocate for banning them from the public.  As much as I despise violence of any kind, I don’t believe that violent games causes violent outbursts.

Proper censorship classifications is a much better approach:

THE Australian government will not back away from new classifications for violent video games despite suggestions they might have played a part in the Norwegian horror, says Home Affairs Minister Brendan O’Connor.

State and federal attorneys-general last week ended years of debate and agreed to support an R18+ classification for video games, with the exception of NSW’s Greg Smith, who abstained.

Mr O’Connor has rejected calls for governments to reconsider their position after revelations that the man accused of carrying out the bomb and shooting attacks in Norway, Anders Breivik, was obsessed with violent video games.

“Because there’s a madman who has done just such atrocities in Norway, I don’t think means that we are going to close down film or the engagement with games,” he told ABC TV yesterday.

Mr O’Connor said that under the new R18+ classification, the 50 most popular adult games could no longer be played by 15-year-olds.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Child Welfare | 2 Comments »

One of the Saddest Stories of the Year

July 24, 2011

After reading an article about how students hijacked a website in memory of a girl who committed suicide, I felt angry and deflated.  What makes the story worse is she killed herself as a result of cyberbullying:

PRINCIPALS have condemned “heartless” school bullies who hijacked website pages set up in honour of a Sydney teen who committed suicide last week.

Dannii Sanders, from Castle Hill, took her life on Tuesday after she was allegedly tormented on Facebook.

But when Dannii’s devastated friends created a Facebook tribute page, the bullying continued as users flooded the page with derogatory remarks.

“Guys I can’t take all this internet bullying. I think I’ma kill myself,” mocked a user.

“Deserved it. I (laughed out loud) hard,” another wrote.

When Dannii’s friends spoke up against the bullies, posting “Let her be in peace”, one tormentor replied: “What is she gonna do though?

Read the comments and kill herself again?”

During the week at least three Facebook groups set up in Dannii’s honour were removed after pranksters posted abuse.

One group’s page called “Stop bullying NOW: In memory of Danni Sanders” was defaced with a disturbing image of the 14-year-old’s head in a noose containing the caption, “place head here”.

Sheree Vertigan, the Australian Secondary Principals Association Head, said the online onslaught was some of the most vicious she had encountered and “an example of 21st century bullying at its worst”.

She said those making inappropriate comments should face legal action as it was defamation.

Ms. Vertifan is absolutely right.  Those responsible should be charged for their defamatory words.  But we should demand that cyberbullies of all types are banned from all social media.  Cyberbullies should not have Facebook and Twitter accounts.

I’ve got a message for cyberbullies:

Look at the consequences of being bullied!  Don’t expect to get away without consequences of your own!

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Cyber Bullying, Social Media | 1 Comment »

Meeting Targets Over True Academic Progress

July 22, 2011

Well done Monty Neill!  The Executive director of FairTest, reaffirms what I have been saying all along about teachers caught cheating on standardised tests.  Below was my reaction last week to the Atlanta School teaching scandal:

There is no excuse for teachers or officials to cheat.  We are there to provide a moral example for our students, and cheating of any kind is clearly unacceptable.

But we must not leave the matter at that point.  There’s a reason why some teachers have cheated on standardised tests.  Those tests  are anti-education.  They measure success through pressurised outcomes rather than authentic teaching and learning.  They expose teachers to unfair stress and scrutiny and force them the teach to the test, rather than teach to enrich and engage.

Mr. Neill says it even more succinctly:

Focusing solely on punishing the Atlanta school employees who wrongly changed test answers ignores more fundamental problems.

The Georgia investigators found that a primary cause of cheating was “unreasonable” score targets coupled with “unreasonable pressure on teachers and principals.” They concluded that “meeting ‘targets’ by whatever means necessary became more important than true academic progress.”

Misusing standardized exams as the primary factor to make educational decisions encourages score manipulation. Campbell’s Law predicted this result decades ago. It states, “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures, and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”

That is precisely what happened in Atlanta. The nation’s students, schools and taxpayers deserve assessment systems that promote ethical behavior, better teaching and stronger learning outcomes.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Professional Conduct, Standardised Testing, Teachers Stress | 1 Comment »

It’s Not Career Advice that 10 Year-Olds Need

July 21, 2011

Whilst Simon Hughes’ call for Primary schools to offer career advice has some basic merit, it deviates from the most important needs of a primary student.

Youngsters will be urged to start thinking about their careers from the age of ten under plans unveiled today by the Coalition’s education access czar.

Simon Hughes, the Liberal Democrats’ deputy leader, wants primary schools to start giving career counselling to pupils.

Mr Hughes said: ‘It is never too early for people to start thinking about future careers and educational opportunities.

‘Children in their last year of primary school can be inspired, and can form their first clear impressions of the world of work and further study.’

Primary schools will have to host career advice sessions with industry experts  and parents to discuss what qualifications are needed.

He hopes the move will make youngsters start thinking about university before they even start secondary school. Mr Hughes said: ‘The message I have heard from young people around the country is clear.

‘We need better careers advice, starting early, and with parents as well as students given better information about going to university.

If you give students the encouragement and support to help them see where their qualities lie, what they are good at and how they can use those skills to contribute to a classroom, school and society you never need to worry about career advice.  The reason why so many students seem aimless and unsure of their future is because not enough time and energy has been put into their strengths and too much time tends to be focussed on their weaknesses.
By Grade 6 students seem to be aware of where they are academically, what they struggle to do well and how they are regarded by teachers and fellow students.  What they might not be aware of is that there is so much more than academics in the makeup of a person.  There is their personality, creativity, street smarts and leadership skills.  Teachers must understand the strengths of all their students and praise them accordingly.
A student who is aware of what they love to do, where their talents lie and how they can use those skills and traits to contribute to society never need worry about career advice.  Not at 10 years old anyway.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Education Policy | 1 Comment »

Bubble Wrapping Our Kids is Not a Solution

July 20, 2011

When we were young climbing was a great adrenaline rush.  I remember the enjoyment I had climbing trees with my friends.  Nowadays, climbing trees have been deemed too unsafe and even the basic play equipment has been watered down to avoid accidents, and in turn, fun.

Current safety standards veer public playgrounds towards the benign realm of soft and cushy: sharp edges are covered, jungle gyms and monkey bars are miniaturized to reduce the height children can climb and the whole things are placed on shock-absorbent wood chips or rubber mats to cushion the blow when children inevitably fall.

But are we really doing our children any favors by taking all the risk out of playtime? Some pediatric experts are saying no — in the pursuit of protection for our children, we have stunted their ability to fend for themselves.

In a recent paper published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology, Norwegian psychologists Ellen Sandseter of Queen Maud University in Norway and Leif Kennair of the Norwegian University for Science and Technology write that “risky play” among young children is a necessary experience that helps children learn to master their environments. Protecting children from any risks in their playtime could breed children that are more likely to be anxious and afraid of danger.

“An exaggerated safety focus of children’s play is problematic because while on the one hand children should avoid injuries, on the other hand they might need challenges and varied stimulation to develop normally, both physically and mentally,” the authors write. “Paradoxically, we posit that our fear of children being harmed by mostly harmless injuries may result in more fearful children and increased levels of psychopathology,” they add. “We might need to provide more stimulating environments for children, rather than hamper their development.”

Dr. Gary Smith, director of the Center for Injury Research and Policy at Nationwide Children’s Hospital, says the slow disappearance of more traditional “risky” playground toys has more to do with litigation than with proven safety issues.

Let kids be kids.  Grazes and bruises use to be worth it for the sheer enjoyment of the great outdoors.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Child Welfare, Political Correctness | 1 Comment »

Blaming the Teacher for an Unruly Class

July 20, 2011

I read an unfortunate review of a BBC documentary entitled “Classroom Secrets” (yet to be televised in my country). The BBC website describes the documentary as a TV first:

In the first experiment of its kind on TV, parents in a primary school in Leicester are given a unique opportunity to see how their children really behave behind the classroom door.The film shows the challenges teachers face and the effect, on all pupils, of low-level disruption – estimated to cost schools across Britain three weeks of teaching every year. The usually secret life of a Year 4 class is filmed by fixed cameras over the course of one week, after which some of the parents are invited to see what their child has got up to. The film shows surprising – sometimes shocking – results for both teachers and parents and asks – who’s really responsible for how our children behave in class?

Sandra Parsons from the Daily Mail puts all the blame for this unruly class on the teacher.  First, there’s the crass and highly simplistic headline:

It’s teachers who need a lesson in discipline to control these unruly students

Her simplistic and naive statements continue with this observation:

When the teacher watched the footage of her class, she said what she’d learned was that ‘where she placed herself in the classroom’ was of vital importance. At which point, I practically wept.

Sadly, she was utterly oblivious to the fact that one of the fundamental causes of her pupils’ bad behaviour was not where she sat, but where her pupils sat.

Instead of having individual desks, they were grouped around tables scattered about the room. Most of the children faced each other, not the teacher. There was no structure and no discipline. Unsurprisingly, they were bored and disruptive.

Seating arrangements, whilst relevant to student participation and conduct is certainly not the most important ingredient in classroom management.  The poor teacher is likely to have used it as an excuse for her shortcomings, not because it would have solved the problem entirely.

Parsons goes on to write:

Witness, by way of contrast to the Leicester school, the traditional teaching methods that have been espoused by headmaster Sir Michael Wilshaw at Mossbourne Community Academy in Hackney, East London.

At Mossbourne, pupils are sent home even for wearing the wrong colour shoes. If they arrive late or without their school planner, they have to stay in at break or lunch.

Mobile phones are banned, substantial homework is set, and any pupils who disrupt a lesson or are rude to staff have to stay behind until 6pm.

Teachers work 15-hour days because they recognise that many pupils are unlikely to be returning to a home where they’re encouraged to do their homework, so stay after hours to help them do it at school.

And when the children do go home, teachers and a few ‘heavies’ line the route to the bus-stop so no one gets beaten up for wearing a smart uniform.

Why do people always point to these types of schools as the answer to all our education problems?  I would hate to teach in a school like this?  I would never want a child of mine to have to suffer a system that keeps them in to 6pm for the slightest infringement.

Why can’t schools impose boundaries and high expectations without being a dictatorial, prison-like institution?  Is the aim that students have some enjoyment of school so offensive?  Why can’t we trust that children can adhere to basic rules and display respect without beating it into them with a raft of unpleasant and highly suffocating regulations?

And Ms. Parsons is being unfair to teachers by accusing those who are not maintaining order in their class as lacking dedication.  Has she ever taught a class?  It’s not that easy.

Below are other reasons why teachers can’t be fully blamed for an unruly class:

– The standard of teacher training is very poor.  Often student-teachers are not given the tools to be able to overcome these challenges;

– An out-of-control class is often a symptom of poor leadership and an unhealthy school culture;

– Where is the support for a teacher when they need it?

– Some classes are just plain difficult to teach regardless of the experience, passion or dedication of the teacher.

It is not fait to be so simplistic and narrow-minded when judging a teacher’s performance.  There is often many factors and reasons for a teacher’s inability to maintain oder.  It’s not always solely the teacher’s fault.

(Please note that my above comments were not refering to the Mossbourne Community Academy in Hackney.  I am not familiar with that school so I can’t comment on them directly).

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Classroom Management | 1 Comment »

Teachers Who Can’t Engage Should Give Up

July 19, 2011

I am bewildered by the lack of thought and emphasis on engaging lesson content in education.  A few months ago I wrote about the latest trend to hit Australian shores – “Direct Instruction”.  Teachers are given a script and instructed to stick to it at all times.  The script tells them when to pause, what to repeat and what to leave out.  Direct Instruction is being used for teaching maths and spelling in classroom across Australia.  It was designed, in my belief, to ensure that all teachers covered the curriculum regardless of their abilities.

Only trouble is … it is a boring way to teach and a boring way to learn.

Why can’t Maths, English, Science etc. be taught in an interesting and lively manner?  Why does it have to be reduced to a talkfest or an excuse for an endless cycle of worksheets?  If it’s so important to know, why can’t it be taught in a fun way?

Thank goodness for Professor John Hattie:

PROFESSOR John Hattie of Melbourne University drew the wrath of many when he told teachers to ”just shut up”.

In fact, Hattie is supported by a considerable body of research; for instance, North American writers Lorna M. Earl and Andy Hargreaves, who observed lessons no more interesting than watching a haircut in progress. Researchers talk of students drowning in a sea of teacher ”blah”.

The difficulty is that so many people consider themselves experts on schools because they once attended one.

Long-winded accounts of subject matter may have once worked for teachers but young people these days are different from those of the previous century. Their attention spans are shorter, a product, perhaps, of constantly changing multimedia stimuli. They expect – indeed, demand – to be entertained.

Their world is high-tech and their attention is rarely captured by drab or monotonous presentations, which makes engaging in learning one of the chief tasks and difficulties of the modern educator.

The emphasis in schools has changed from teaching to learning and, quite rightly, the critical issue for a teacher is not the quality of their own narrative teaching but rather what their students are learning.

For them to learn effectively, and particularly to master the skills of ongoing learning, of processing apparently limitless information and of developing discernment, they need to be active, not passive, learners.

They need to be ”doers” who can find and process information, rather than just listeners.

Hattie is right: if teachers talk their students into oblivion, the teachers’ knowledge on display might be impressive but what the students gain in terms of content, skills and wisdom will be limited.

Good teachers certainly explain work clearly and test their students’ understanding with strategic questioning. They are masters of content, passionate and excited about their subject, convey a deep interest in their students as people, set high expectations, imbue their students with the confidence to succeed and give students feedback so they know how to improve.

Depending upon their subject, they utilise a wide variety of teaching strategies, working with mind and hand, desk-based and experiential learning, books and screens and also sometimes make their own products.

To read the rest of this brilliantly conceived article, please follow this link.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Engaging Students | Leave a Comment »

Does Obesity Equate to Child Abuse?

July 17, 2011

Last week Harvard obesity specialist David Ludwig advocated putting children in temporary foster care when the child is found to be obese.   The obvious conclusion being, that in his opinion, allowing your child to get to the stage of obesity equates to a form of child abuse.

I don’t agree with this statement or the measures advocated by Mr. Ludwig.  And more importantly I think the debate will distract rather than positively influence what is a very important issue.  I appreciate the words of Dr. Arthur Caplan, the director of the Center for Bioethics at the University of Pennsylvania who wrote:

“I am not letting parents off the hook,” he wrote in response to the article, “but putting the blame for childhood obesity on the home and then arguing that moving kids out of homes where obesity reigns is the answer is short-sighted and doomed to fail. We need the nation to go on a diet together and the most important places to start are the grocery store, schools and media.”

My only query on the above quote is why he omitted “home”.  Surely “home” is the most important place to start a change of habits.  Not just in what is eaten, but how food is eaten.  It is sad to hear of the demise of family dinners.  Surely the television and computers can be switched off for half-an-hour every evening.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Nutrition, Parenting | 3 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »