It seems to be more fashionable than ever to knock teachers. Teachers are being dubbed as lazy and inept.
In truth it is easy to criticise teachers but very hard to be one.
We need more articles like this one by Patricia McGuire to defend teachers and set the record straight.
Yes, teachers should certainly be held accountable for excellence in teaching and for measurable results in the progress their students make each day. Teachers are on the front line of student learning assessment, since they really do know better than anyone else what makes a child successful or lackadaisical, engaged or detached in class. Standardized tests rarely measure the real progress that teachers make with some of the most challenging pupils whose learning styles are far off the normed curves.
The current fashion in education reform treats teachers as lazy slugs who care little about whether their students are learning anything. The assumption behind using standardized testing for teacher evaluation is that the only way to make teachers care about learning is to embarrass them publicly when their students do not perform according to someone else’s idea of norms. This assumption is what is truly preposterous!
For teachers who choose to devote their life’s work to some of the most difficult classrooms in America, such as here in the District of Columbia, the testing imperative becomes a monumental disincentive to stay in the classroom for any length of time, since the opportunities for sustained superior results on standardized tests are rare, while the risks of frequent subpar results are very high. It’s no secret that the widely-hailed Teach for America program has ingrained two-year turnover in its teaching corps. TFA teachers rarely stay to wrestle through the down years, which are frequent among students in marginalized communities.
Governments are so busy trying to find a negatively geared incentive for teachers and a scale that compares their effectiveness that they have lost sight of the most important pieces of the Education reform puzzle:
1. Revolutionise teacher training programs to focus on the practical instead of the theoretical.
2. Have measures in place that allow all teachers (especially new teachers) the support they need.
3. Spend more time critiquing schools with questionable cultures of bullying and harrasment. Give these school’s the support they need to better handle their affairs.
How sick and utterly selfish do you have to be to name your beautiful children “Adolph Hitler” and “Aryan Nation”? What an absolute disgrace! These parents can’t understand why their children were taken away from them. It’s a shame that they haven’t as yet worked out that by naming their children after despicable tyrants and murderous regimes they are in fact scarring their children for life.
A COUPLE who named one of their children after Adolf Hitler should not regain custody of their three children, an appeals court has ruled.
Heath and Deborah Campbell’s three small children were removed from their home in Phillipsburg, New Jersey, by the state in January 2009, myFOXphilly.com reported.
The family drew world-wide attention after a store refused to decorate a birthday cake for their son, Adolf Hitler Campbell.
Adolf and siblings JoyceLynn Aryan Nation and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie have been in foster care since then.
The appeals court ruled last week that sufficient evidence of abuse or neglect existed because of domestic violence in the home. The court sent the case back to family court for further reconsideration.
A gag order remains in place and the parties refused to discuss the decision.
In January 2009, the Campbells told myFOXphilly.com that Adolf Hitler Campbell was just like any other three-year-old boy.
“It’s not like he’s growing up to be a killer or nothing like that,” said mother Deborah Campbell.
How dare they do this to their beautiful children! Sure, it is claimed that the children have been taken out of their parents’ custody because of domestic abuse and not because of their names, but what if there was no other reasons? Should the names be enough to warrant a claim of child abuse.
If these people want to continue rearing their precious children they better smarten their act. This includes thinking of more appropriate names for their kids … quick smart!
We all love our internet connections and mobile phones and would find it extremely difficult to live without them. However, addictions are still addictions, and there is no doubt that our children have grown a deep addiction to the internet. So bad is the problem, that children have become more addicted to the internet than to TV:
Just 18% of children would miss TV most, compared to mobile (28%) and Internet (25%), finds Ofcom research
A new research by communications watchdog Ofcom has revealed that more young British teenagers can do without TV but not without mobile and the Internet.
Ofcom research found that just 18% of children aged 12 to 15 would miss TV most, compared to mobile (28%) and the Internet (25%). However, the research suggests that the teenagers are also watching more TV than ever before, with viewing figures increasing by 2 hours since 2007.
In 2010, children aged 4-15 watched an average of 17 hours and 34 minutes of TV per week, compared with 15 hours and 37 minutes in 2007. Nearly one third (31%) of children aged 5-15 who use the Internet are watching TV via an online catch-up service such as the BBC iPlayer or ITV Player, said Ofcom.
Ofcom’s research said that 95% of 12-15 year olds now have Internet access at home through a PC or laptop, up from 89% in 2010 and 77% in 2007.
Social networking is still one of the most popular uses of the Internet amongst 12-15s. Ofcom said that children are visiting social network sites more often on their mobiles. Half (50%) of 12-15s with a smartphone visit them weekly compared with 33% in 2010.
Children aged between 8-11 are more likely to use Internet for gaming, with 51% saying they play games online on a weekly basis, up from 44% in 2010. 8-11s are also spending more time playing on games players/ consoles compared with 2010 (9 hours 48 minutes – an increase of nearly 2 hours), said Ofcom.
In my school days television addiction was a problem. Now we have another addiction which comes with the same side-effects. It creates tired students who have been up so late they can’t concentrate. It has compromised our children’s capacity to have healthy social interaction. Playing with a friend has now become messaging a friend. It’s just not the same.
As soon as people go from the moderate to the obsessive, they lose control of themselves. Children today are certainly showing the signs of a lack of control, to the point where they are smuggling mobiles in their bags so they can reply to Facebook messages as soon as they receive them.
Kids require rules for their internet usage. Rules that outline when, how and where they can use it.
Unfortunately, teachers and Facebook aren’t always a match made in heaven. Whilst the vast majority of teachers on Facebook are responsible and mature enough to stay out of trouble, there’s always a news story popping up about tasteless comments a teacher made against students or minority groups. This month it is Viki Knox, a Special Education teacher who was rightly condemned for her anti-gay comments on Facebook.
The media storm resulting from the Knox case and others like it serve as a timely reminder to teachers on Facebook that they must be extremely careful not to offend (something which shouldn’t be hard to do).
More than one in seven teachers has been the victim of cyberbullying by pupils or parents, and almost half know a colleague who has been targeted, according to a survey published today.
Students have set up “hate” groups on social networking sites calling for specific teachers to be sacked and have even created fake profiles in their names containing defamatory information.
Schools must make clear to pupils that such behaviour will lead to punishment, the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) said.
Schools seem to be increasingly soft on parents that bully teachers. Turning a blind-eye to Facebook campaigns and insulting comments against teachers is not acceptable. Teachers so often feel isolated and powerless against taunts from parents.
Who do they turn to for support?
When schools claim to have a “zero tolerance for bullying”, they ought to include bullying of teachers by parents. Any parent caught bullying a teacher online should be subjected to the same penalty as a teacher. They should be told to take their child and find another school.
If you think that’s harsh, try being a bullied teacher. I’m glad I’ve never been bullied, because I guarantee you, it’s not easy!
You have got to be kidding me! How can so-called intelligent adults pass a law so downright cruel? Sometimes I think adults take advantage of the resilience of children. They think they can impose great humiliation on poor, naive children, without any long-term cost.
Well I have news for you – children, like adults, don’t like being made to feel ugly, different or unworthy. So why on earth would you pass a law that mandates schools to weigh children so that their weight can be compared with others?
A state law requiring schools to measure a child’s height and weight to find out how they stack up against their peers has generated plenty of controversy, but not a lot of local participation.
School officials say the law’s aim to combat childhood obesity is a worthy cause, but its approach is questionable.
The law measures body mass index, which is calculated from height and weight and given as a percentile. It’s generally a snapshot of a person’s overall body fat, but many argue it doesn’t take into account individual body types or other health risks.
Schools are required to take those measurements for students in kindergarten, third, fifth and ninth grades, then report that data to the Ohio Department of Health and mail the results to parents.
State education officials say similar health screenings, such as hearing and vision tests, have been done for many years with the results kept private.
What if the law was to include Ohio politicians? What if they were forced to step on the scale in front of their peers and were measured for all to see?
Yes, privacy might be assured, but children aren’t stupid. They know why they are being measured, and the humiliation of the procedure will not be lost on the overweight.
This plan is doomed to failure.
My wish, as idealistic as it sounds, is to make our children comfortable with who they are, regardless of their weight. Whilst I strongly advocate educating children about healthy eating choices and encouraging active lifestyles, I am even more concerned about the inner wellbeing of the child. To me, the tragedy is not that there are obese children, but that there are children who feel unworthy, ugly and hopeless because of their weight.
It’s time to get rid of the scales and let our children know that their worth is not the sum total of what they weigh, but rather, who they are and how they treat others.
Notionally, I have no problem with being evaluated. I suppose it is a good way for me to get objective advice from an impartial other. This could then potentially have a positive effect on my future teaching.
But I have been evaluated before. All Australian student-teachers are put through a series of evaluations before qualifying for their teaching degrees. My evaluations proved a heart-rendering, confidence sapping, irritating, period of despair. The feedback I got was that “the students liked me too much”, that they “behaved for me rather than because of me”, that I “teach too much like a male teacher” (what does that even mean?) and that I “need to be more emotionally distant” ….
One of the main reasons that I decided to become a teacher was so that I could offer my students an alternative from the garbage I got dished up when I was a child. The sad thing is, if I get evaluated, there is a great chance it will be by the very type of educator I am trying not to be.
Bill and Melinda Gates touch on it in their brilliant piece in The Wall Street Journal:
It may surprise you—it was certainly surprising to us—but the field of education doesn’t know very much at all about effective teaching. We have all known terrific teachers. You watch them at work for 10 minutes and you can tell how thoroughly they’ve mastered the craft. But nobody has been able to identify what, precisely, makes them so outstanding.
This ignorance has serious ramifications. We can’t give teachers the right kind of support because there’s no way to distinguish the right kind from the wrong kind. We can’t evaluate teaching because we are not consistent in what we’re looking for. We can’t spread best practices because we can’t capture them in the first place.
Our Education System is so flawed at the moment that I am not sure effective teaching can be properly measured. There are plenty of teachers like me (most are far better) that want to buck the trend because we want something different for our students. We want to try new things, we want to engage our students, and against the advice of some we do not want to practice ’emotional distance’ from our students. If we were evaluated we may be judged poorly, but our students love our classes and their parents are satisfied with our performance and that should be all that matters.
And why just evaluate the teachers? Who is evaluating the Principals? What about the school culture?
It’s like evaluating the pasta in a pasta dish. Sure the pasta is the most important ingredient, but if the sauce and other ingredients tastes bad, no matter how good the quality of pasta is, the dish will be a failure.
Until we have a better measure for judging good teaching and until we evaluate all stakeholders and elements of education together, the results will be tainted and ‘unique’ teachers will be forced to follow the herd.
Critics of the way our generation of parents rear children tell us that we spoil kids senseless. They say that we go out of our way to protect our children from failure. They admonish us for not allowing children to deal with disappointment, a crucial life skill in the real world.
But as much as I agree with these critics, I can’t help but sympathise for children that are not ready for the battering that can come about from being singled out amongst their peers.
When I was studying to become a teacher, my Art lecturer made us do a sketch of a fellow classmate, who was made to pose leaning against a ladder. I can’t draw for my life. Even my stick figures look shabby! At the end of the activity, the students wandered from drawing to drawing, inspecting the works of art that our creative class had accomplished. Then there was mine. An absolutely horrendous, ghastly mess, that looked nothing like the poor subject. I wanted to crawl into the art supplies cupboard and remain there for at least thirty years!
When we were expecting our first child, we attended parenting classes. On one of our weekly lessons, the instructor got all the fathers up in front of the class to do a demonstration of how cloth nappies/diapers are applied to a newborn. We were each given a cloth nappy and a doll and were given quick instructions before being put to work. I have never been great with verbal instructions. I am a visual person, relying on generous amounts of time and clear descriptive pictures before I can follow even the simplest of instructions. Needless to say, my nappy ended up looking more like a paper airplane.
And I’m an adult with relatively good self-esteem. Imagine how kids feel?
Imagine how uncoordinated and unfit children feel during physical education classes. Imagine how traumatic it is for a child who finds maths difficult to demonstrate an answer on the board in front of the class.
I totally agree that these are problems children should be able to deal with, as they are problems that exist in the real world.
I’m just not sure I’m emotionally ready to teach it to them.
I read a brilliant article in The National about the lies we tell our children and when is the right time to confess that the Easter Bunny they are so fond of isn’t real.
Below is just an excerpt of the article. I strongly encourage you to read the entire piece by following this link.
The world is a confusing place for small children, particularly as they only learn to distinguish between reality and fantasy between the ages of three and five. Jacqueline Woolley, a psychology professor at the University of Texas in the US, found that by the age of four, children learn to use the context in which new information is presented to distinguish between fact and fiction. So, before long, your little one will be figuring out that the tooth fairy isn’t who you said she is. Which begs the question: at what age should we tell our children that their beloved magical characters aren’t real? Or, should we even claim that they’re real in the first place?
Last Christmas I witnessed the most heated debate I’d ever come across on Facebook. It didn’t involve politics, religion or money. No; it was Santa Claus who caused the divide. One friend posed the question: “Should I tell Sophie Father Christmas is real?” What followed was a polarised debate between those who wanted their children to enjoy a magical gift-giving time and those who believed that perpetuating the story of Santa was being dishonest with their offspring. “I was devastated when I found out it was my mum, not Santa, who hung the stocking on the end of my bed,” admitted one father. Whereas others regretted never having the chance to believe in Santa because older siblings had spoilt it for them.
“I make a point of always being honest with my daughter and now she has turned six I’m feeling increasingly uncomfortable with perpetuating the lie of Santa Claus,” admitted Rosie Cuffley, a mother of two.
According to Carmen Benton, a parenting educator and educational consultant at LifeWorks, Dubai, Rosie shouldn’t worry. “Sharing the world of fantasy characters with our children is not a lie, but rather a playful way of storytelling and connecting as a family to fun events. Think about the joy and excitement that thoughts of characters such as Santa Claus can induce. You have the power to create a magical world of dreams, wishes and storytelling for your kids and I believe these are part of being a playful parent.”
It’s a different scenario when children ask directly whether Santa Claus, for example, is real. Most psychologists agree that children need to know they can trust their parents to tell them the truth, even about magical characters. “The majority of children will let go of a fantasy after the age of eight, and most would be happy for the years of the imaginary world they had been able to enjoy,” says Benton.
I feel terrible that my daughter still believes in the Tooth Fairy. I don’t like perpetuating a lie (especially one I know will be uncovered sometime soon). I have a feeling, irrational or otherwise, that when she does find out, her first thought will be, “What else is he lying to me about?”
I am glad that I teach both boys and girls in my Grade 5 classroom. I find it more challenging and the social dynamic can be quite fascinating. However, for a while now, there has been a groundswell of support for single-sex classrooms. People believe that they are more beneficial for students.
GIRLS can be “marginalised” and often take a back seat to boys in co-educational classrooms, the head of one of WA’s most elite all-girl schools says.
Methodist Ladies’ College principal Rebecca Cody has reignited the single-sex school debate, saying the “female voice is more likely to be marginalised” in mixed-sex classrooms.
Her comments come amid calls for the state’s public students to be given the choice of single-sex education.
All WA public schools are co-ed.
Writing for the next edition of Whichschool? Magazine Ms Cody said there were many “positive academic, attitudinal and social effects of a single-sex education.
“For example, higher levels of engagement, improved achievement and behaviour are just a few of the notable outcomes.
“Similarly, in this context girls are more likely to excel in non-traditional disciplines such as science, technology and mathematics and without the presence of boys feel more empowered to take responsible risks, for example in outdoor education.
“In a mixed-classroom environment, the female voice is more likely to be marginalised as girls tend to take a back seat, allowing boys to speak up. A girls’ school allows students to relax and interact more readily.”
It has not been my experienced that the boys marginalise the girls in a mixed-classroom. I do however think it is vital for teachers of such schools to do their utmost to ensure that the social dynamic in their classroom is healthy and that all students have the opportunity to express themselves as individuals.
I am not a doctor, so I do not have the expertise to comment on the ADHD diagnosis becoming a regular feature of classrooms across the globe. But I can’t help but get agitated as kids younger and younger are being given these drugs. The cynic in me suspects that this has more to do with pharmaceutical profits and less to do with responsible medicine.
The recommendations, the first in a decade, expand the age range of kids who may be prescribed the drugs from preschoolers through 18-year-olds. Earlier guidelines included children ages 6 to 12. ADHD affects about 8 percent of children and youth and is the most common neurobehavioral disorder in kids, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.
Expanding the age range will help ensure more children get the appropriate therapy, according to the guidelines. Treating preschoolers may increase their chances of succeeding in school and targeting teens recognizes that ADHD is a long-term condition that may even extend into adulthood.
“Because of greater awareness about ADHD and better ways of diagnosing and treating this disorder, more children are being helped,” said Mark Wolraich, lead author of the report and a professor of pediatrics at the University of Oklahoma College of Medicine in Oklahoma City, in a statement.
For preschoolers with the disorder, it’s recommended that parents and teachers first try to manage children with behavior therapy that uses a system of rewards and consequences. If that doesn’t work, then doctors can prescribe medications, according to the recommendations being presented today at the American Academy of Pediatrics National Conference and Exhibition in Boston.
I have three major issues with the last paragraph in particular.
1. I don’t believe you can determine such a disorder at such a young age with such confidence as to justify prescribing a Ritalin-like drug to them.
2. The idea that some “behaviour therapy” is all that is tried before a child gets a prescription is just shocking. There should be many steps before a child warrants a prescription. Prescribing drugs to a child should be the last resort. And who checks whether the behaviour therapy was properly administered? How many teachers say they have tried everything, when you know they haven’t even come close?
3. This leads me to my third point. Teachers should not have such a big say in the decision to prescribe drugs to a child. Teachers are often too easily motivated by the need to teach a civil and restrained class. Their need to see students calm and manageable often gets in the way of a more considered approach when it comes to the question of ADHD drugs.
Four year olds on ADHD drugs! Do we really want this to become the norm?
Topical Teaching 