I’m sick of groups filling us up with propaganda to justify their cause. Whether it’s breastfeeding, natural birth or the education equivalent – sex-ed, hardly a day goes by without a study released pointing to the same old conclusions. Whilst these causes all have merit, there comes a time when one gets sick of being lectured to via an endless cycle of propaganda.
There is some validity behind the push to enforce sex ed on classrooms around the world. Like any other area, knowledge about safe sex in particular, makes a great deal of sense. But having witnessed various programs in action, I can’t help but think that sex-ed is extremely overrated.
Australian researchers Maree Crabbe and David Corlett said children were turning to adult films because schools were not handling the positive aspects of sex.
The researchers presented their findings at a conference at London University’s Institute of Education.
“Discussion of sex and intimacy is too often avoided in schools,” they said.
“Porn has become a cultural mediator in how young people are understanding and experience sex. Porn is our most prominent sex educator.”
Diane Abbott, Labour’s Shadow Health Minister, said: “The rising numbers of girls having under-age sex is alarming. It is not a cost-free phenomenon.
“It poses public health policy challenges and social challenges. The underlying cause must be the ‘pornification’ of British culture and the increasing sexualisation of preadolescent girls.
“Too many young girls are absorbing from the popular culture around them that they only have value as sex objects. Inevitably they act this notion out.
“Government needs to respond to spiralling under-age sex, not with pointless schemes to teach abstinence, but with better PSHE teaching in schools for both girls and boys.”
I find the conclusions of this study extremely difficult to believe for the following reasons:
1. It seems to be inferring that if provided with a sex-ed course children wouldn’t turn to porn. Yeah right!
2. That mandatory PSHE classes would radically minimise the number of under-age sex and boys would come to show more respect to girls having taken the course.
“Up until my sex-ed course, I was treating women like objects, but since my classes, I am a changed person.” Yeah right!
3. I have sat through these classes and an inordinate amount of time is spent on the differences between the male and female anatomy. Whilst this is obviously of some value, most porn stars themselves don’t know the difference between a vulva, clitoris or vagina (even the female porn stars!).
4. Is it really the teachers job to “handle the positive aspects of sex?” If so, I quit! I’ve got more important things to do than promote sex to under-age children. This assertion is downright irresponsible. Can you imagine the outcry if kids came home telling their parents that they want to lose their virginity because their teacher told them that sex is a wonderful thing?”
5. Parents, follow my advice on this one. Your child’s sex education is primarily YOUR responsibility.
I refuse to promote sex in my classroom! I would sooner quit my profession than get involved in such downright immoral and undignified behaviour! If you are worried about girls being treated poorly and kids engaging in under-age sex, don’t point at a lack of sex-ed classes or blame the proliferation of porn. Instead remind parents to do the job they were entrusted with when they decided to bring life into this world.
Let’s cut the propaganda and get back to what we signed up to do – let’s teach the curriculum!
Two weeks I wrote about one of the most underrated learning tools in modern education. I call YouTube underrated because not only is it not given enough credit for being a valuable resource but it is blocked in many schools.
I wrote:
YouTube is the modern-day instructive tool. It clearly and carefully teaches people practical skills in language they can understand. It plays the part of teacher.
At the moment I am teaching my 5th Graders about finding the lowest common denominator before adding and subtracting fractions. As a test, before writing this blog post, I typed some key words into a YouTube search and came up with many fine online tutorials on this very skill that kids can readily access. It shouldn’t replace the teacher, but it can certainly help a child pick up a concept.
In the space of 2 weeks YouTube has announced that it will introduce its YouTube for Schools, allowing students to access the site without being exposed to inappropriate material:
After making some changes on its home page UI, Youtube now plans to foray into education. To help the cause of spreading education, Youtube plans to unveil a new tool for teachers as well as students.
Youtube for schools is a new idea to introduce collaborative education as head of Youtube Angela Lin says,” This is a technical solution to allow schools that normally restrict access to YouTube to gain access to it.”
Youtube’s official blog post also suggested that teachers have been looking up to leveraging the Youtube platform to access a huge database of knowledge in form of educational videos. But the bone in the throat was those other videos related to entertainment would distract students. This was the main reason behind schools restricting Youtube videos. However, the educational value of Youtube videos in visually interactive learning was much wider in horizon. Thus, Youtube introduced a new platform for learning.
This is a great coup for students and teachers. Well done YouTube!
It is the responsibility of parents and teachers to protect children and educate them on the dangers that exist in the ‘real world’. However, in attempting to prepare children for incidents and scenarios that are unlikely to happen we have seemingly created a fear and paranoia that has proven quite destructive to the same children we are trying to protect.
A surge in reports of men acting suspiciously near schoolchildren has triggered urgent talks between schools and police, who fear the ‘‘stranger danger’’ message has gone into overdrive.
Police say heightened fears of children being stalked on Gold Coast streets are unfounded, and the increase in reports is the result of people jumping at shadows after a rash of incorrect media stories.
Regional Crime Coordinator Dave Hutchinson says some incidents are made up, and others are cases of children taking fright for no good reason.
I am a bit concerened at how scared and anxious our children are becoming, and teachers are slightly to blame. Besides stranger danger and other programes that inhabit fear in students, many teachers in Australia have been scaring children with doom and gloom predictions about global warming. No matter what your position is on this issue, it is important that teachers instruct, educate and empower children, instead of frighten or demoralise them.
There is a huge difference between helping students become perceptive, instinctive and responsible and helping them to become fearful and paranoid.
At the end of the day, the importance of the message is lost when it inspires an irrational and overpowering fear.
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.
OECD figures released this year found about 8 per cent of Australian students were repeating grades at school, often with the intention of helping them catch up and get better educational outcomes.
But a University of Sydney study of more than 3,000 students in eight different New South Wales schools has found repeating a child could have the opposite effect.
Professor Andrew Martin says the research found the students who repeated did not only suffer academically, but they also struggled in other ways.
“We found that students who repeated a grade tended to be less likely to do their homework, they had more days absent from school, they tended to be a bit lower on the academic engagement and motivation scale, they were lower in academic confidence and they were lower in their general self-esteem,” he told ABC News Online.
“In many cases, it seems what educators and parents were hoping for does not quite happen.
“It seems that simply pressing the pause button does not get at the issues that might have led to the decision to repeat a child.”
WhilstI respect the findings of this study, the trend of promoting students for no other reason than to protect their self-esteem is quite challenging for teachers. It means that the child is often far behind, is often missing basic skills and therefore cannot understand advanced concepts and sometimes disrupts the other students. It means that there will be students that can’t read or write properly entering into high school.
How is that beneficial to the child? How does being set vastly different work to ones classmates make that child feel any less of a failure?
Teachers will generally do anything they can to accelerate the divide between struggling students and the rest of the class. The last thing they would ever want is for any of their students to suffer emotionally.
At the same time, the current closed mindedness of education experts when it comes to repeating year levels is a concern. Surely, at some point, the child has a better chance repeating a year than they do being promoted on the back of under developed skills?
I am in no way an advocate for making children repeat year levels. But I am also mindful that gaps can grow, and the result of a skills divide in the classroom can have a lasting effect on both class and struggling student.
I suppose it just goes to show the importance of good teaching in the early years, alertness in spotting any learning problems or difficulties and a well run and resourced Special Education/Remedial Education department.
I have been reading about the dramatic increases in suspensions as a response to schoolyard violence and unruly behaviour. A few months ago I wrote about the 900 British students reportedly suspended per day.
VIOLENT schoolyard attacks have marred the start of Term 4 as figures show more than 100 suspensions were handed out every school day last year for physical misconduct.
A 14-year-old girl was hospitalised at Tara, west of Dalby, on Wednesday after she was stabbed in the head allegedly by another student, 14, with a steak knife during a lunchtime scuffle.
Tara Shire State College went into lockdown shortly after 1.30pm and police were called.
A 14-year-old girl has been charged and will be dealt with under the Youth Justices Act. She has also been suspended. The injured student required stitches.
The question has to be asked: Are suspensions working?
In my day the threat of a suspension was extremely effective in moderating our behaviour. But with so many seemingly disregarding the inevitable consequences of violent or unruly behaviour, I am of the opinion that suspensions are not working. It seems an opportune time to consider an alternate form of action.
What has been your experience with suspensions? Do they work in your school?
In today’s age, knowing what we know about the risks of smoking, how is it possible that tobacco companies have access to schools? As important as it is to take into account cultural differences, China has no excuse in allowing tobacco companies to make their pitch to impressionable young children. The cost of a quality education is not worth it if it comes with lung cancer, heart disease and emphysema.
MORE than 100 primary schools in China are sponsored by tobacco companies in a move described by anti-smoking campaigners as hunting for the next generation of smokers.
The schools often have the names of Chinese cigarette brands, such as Zhongnanhai or Liqun, over their gates and in some cases have promotional slogans in the playground.
”Talent comes from hard work – Tobacco helps you become talented,” says one slogan, in foot-high gilt letters, on the front of the Sichuan Tobacco Hope Primary School.
Tobacco helps you become talented? No China, tobacco helps you die well and truly before your time!
Unfortunately, the message is successfully getting through to China’s underage demographic:
There are 16 million smokers under the age of 15 in China, 6.3 per cent of the youth population, according to the Chinese government.
For a country that is reknown for its strict regulations, it is mistifying that there is no regulations prohibiting tobacco from parading their brands in schools.
Parents are right when they express a lack of confidence in the way bullying behaviour is being handled by schools. Schools just don’t seem to find dealing with the problem anywhere as near a priority as performing in standardised tests. Schools nowadays use simplistic and inept anti-bullying policies to point out to parents that they are proactive on the issue. In truth, all anti-bullying policies really does is protect a school from lawsuits. If policies worked the problem would’t be getting worse. But it is.
Detective Tim Toth, head of the youth services division of the City of Tonawanda Police Department is absolutely right:
“It’s great to tell the parents we have a bullying program in place, but until they take it serious and until the kids know there are consequences with what they do, the program is no good,” said Toth, who has also spent several years working at the high school as a resource officer.
I however disagree with Toth’s conclusions on cyberbullying:
“We don’t have the legal authority to intervene in a situation which exists between one child’s computer and another child’s computer when they are not being supervised when they are off school grounds,” noted Crawford. “But that doesn’t mean we don’t care…and it doesn’t mean we don’t make efforts to intervene when we can. But we need people, when we do attempt to intervene, to respond to us.”
That is a very poor response to an increasingly massive problem. Schools MUST intervene when it comes to cyberbullying. They MUST take more than a passing interest. Schools, police, parents and the wider school community must join forces to curb cyberbullying. It must be seen as a wider communal problem rather than something each and every stakeholder hides from.
Schools have got to ramp up their responses. Programs, procedures and policies is not enough. They will not work and never have. Appealing to kids to improve their communications wont work either.
Bullying hurts and sometimes kills. Surely schools have got that by now …
There is a 1983 film entitled Teachers, which while universally panned by critics and eventually bombed at the box office, stands as one of the most accurate portrayals of schools caught on celluloid. Starring Nick Nolte, the film is a satire of American Government High Schools. Those not familiar with the way a school runs found it over-the-top, unfunny and irritating. Whilst the film is badly made, it contains some insights and observations that are perceptive, extremely funny and just as relevant today.
There is no better example of this than the fact that the school in the film is being sued by a former student that was allowed to graduate without being able to read or write.
The UK is falling behind international rivals because one-in-five children “learn nothing” throughout their secondary education, according to the head of Britain’s top private schools’ group.
Figures show that almost one-in-five pupils left primary school this summer without reaching the standard expected of the average 11-year-old in reading. Some one-in-10 boys had the reading skills of a seven-year-old or worse.
Perhaps what worked most against the success of the movie Teachers was that it was too clever and too accurate for its own good.
I don’t understand why parents can’t be subject to the kinds of consequences their children are for bullying and harassment. Parents who set up internet groups and Facebook pages to spread untruths about their childs’ teacher should be punished for their actions. Anything from a warning to in the most serious offences expulsion of their child from school is appropriate.
Some may think this is a bit harsh and that children should not be penalised for the deeds of their parents, but bullying is a very serious offence and schools that take it seriously reap the rewards by maintaining a safe environment. Schools are too dismissive of parents who bully teachers. Teachers often feel marginalised and lacking of support. The statement that bullying of any kind will result in strong penalties is essential to delivering the best outcomes from an academic and social standpoint.
Teachers are the latest group found to be at risk of cyber-bullying, according to a recent report.
The study by Professor Andy Phippen found several instances where teachers had been targeted for abuse by social media users on websites such as Facebook and Twitter.
One head teacher interviewed for the study said she had a breakdown and was left feeling suicidal.
The headteacher suffered a year of abuse by a parent at her school who used a Google group to post libellous untruths about her and her school. “I eventually had a mini breakdown in the summer holiday, needing an emergency doctor to be called out as I had become suicidal,” she told researchers.
The message should ring loud and clear – Either play by our rules or find somewhere else to send your kids!
Topical Teaching 