Walking away...

[Just-Legal]

I'm five years out of UK high school, and I remember incidents like the ones Sche is talking about. The one by far the worst was when a sixteen year old pushed his pregnant teacher down a flight of stairs - she nearly *died* and he was allowed to return, albeit with a "helper".

It got so bad there was a police officer assigned to the school.

So Sche? *hugs* Lots of them, because you are leaving Hell behind. Maybe look into college teaching? Not sixth form attached to a school, but a college maybe? My college was wicked, a total change from the madness of school.

Lots of love hon

Helen

 

[oggbashan]

Supermarket?

My wife used to teach German and French.

After our daughters went to school, she went back to teaching.

Before the break she had been teaching streamed ability classes. She could teach German or French to those who had the capacity to learn it to A level and beyond.

She could teach a basic understanding of French to those of limited ability who might visit France.

She could pretend to teach French to those whose English was too limited to understand the concept of a foreign language. In practice those 'French' lessons became remedial English.

When she went back to teaching, separating pupils by ability had been abandoned.

She couldn't teach French while those who needed remedial English were wrecking the classroom. She couldn't teach French even to those who wanted to learn. She left the state system and taught French part-time in a private primary school.

She went to work in a supermarket to make up her income.

She found that 2 hours in the supermarket paid as much as one hour's teaching, but one hour's teaching had unpaid preparation time, unpaid marking time, unpaid parents' evenings, unpaid staff meetings - so that she was actually paid LESS per hour than in the supermarket.

She now works in the supermarket only.

When she walks out of the supermarket her time is her own. And she gets a staff discount card.

BUT - our eldest daughter went into teaching in a Inner London school. We told her not to. Her sisters told her not to. She did it anyway.

She is knocked to the ground by pupils at least once a week. She is sworn at by the pupils. She is hit by the pupils several times a week. She has to confiscate knives at least once a week. She has to accept abuse from the parents. She teaches children up to age 8.

I wish she was working in a supermarket.

Og

 

[Whisky7up]

Whatever you do, DON'T go and work at Job Centre plus. You'll get the behaviour you describe from adults...many of whom have been convicted of the violence implicit in their threats.
You'll get pressure from managers to hit impossible and meaningless targets.
It's shit.

 

[BlackShanglan]

When attempts at inclusion have failed, in my experience, it is most often due to the lack of this planning, absence of a working knowledge (at the administrative level) of best/promising practices, and the administrative support for same.

I agree that these are problems, but I really must add that in many cases parental support and discipline are a problem as well. Students who - to use examples drawn from life, and indeed from students not over the age of 13 - drag other children out of their seats in class and kick them as they lay curled on the floor, smash up teachers' cars, threaten to rape female faculty and lay in wait for them in the parking lot, and tell a pregnant teacher that they will "kick that damned baby right the fuck out of you" are not being failed on a school level alone. That sort of behavior does not manifest overnight in students raised in a stable home with appropriately enforced boundaries to behavior. Indeed, as one of Scheherazade's examples points out, often parents are actively at war with the school over basic matters of discipline and common decency, demanding that their children be exempted from even the most elementary requirements for civil behavior. Iin my mother's school at least, they've seen the next step: parents theatening the teachers directly, including one who deliberately used her car to push my mother to the side as she was directing traffic at the daily pick-up. It would be pointless to attempt to describe my feelings on that topic, other than to say that it is both a deep frustration to me and to some extent a relief that I was not in the state at the time. There is still a part of me, every time I think of it, that wants vengeance in a very simple and direct way.

The problem is that politically, no one is such a fool as to suggest that some people might not know how to raise their own children. Unlikely as it seems that everyone would know how, any more than that everyone would be born knowing how to raise a dog or a horse or a rhinoceros, it is one of society's fiercely defended fictions that every single person in the world is the best parent for his or her child, and that no possible improvement could be made. Given this, and given the fact that we do also need someone to prepare these children to function in society, we tend to take the simpler solution: send them to school and let the teachers sort them out.

Unfortunately, the number and severity of problems that teachers are being expected to sort out is rising, and the means they having for sorting them are not. In some cases, they're being cut back. I think, honestly, that very few people really realize how violent even very young children are becoming; the student in my example above who was dragging other children out of their desks and kicking them on the floor was a young girl of seven, while the boy who threatened to beat his pregnant teacher until she miscarried was eleven or twelve. In the face of this, joined with intense pressure to achieve targets (not always realistic ones) and mountains of paperwork that must be seen to be believed - 35 pages per student for the end-of-year report for my mothers' special education classes - it really amazes me that anyone will take the job at this stage. It's hard work, long hours, low pay, and it's a workplace where you can't choose your lunch time, you can't even pee outside of a schedule, your subordinates may assault you without facing criminal charges, and you are legally responsible for the physical well-being of every one of the up to 35 young children you may be supervising, alone, at once.

Kudos for holding on as long as you have, Scheherazade.

Shanglan

 

[impressive]

I agree that these are problems, but I really must add that in many cases parental support and discipline are a problem as well. Students who - to use examples drawn from life, and indeed from students not over the age of 13 - drag other children out of their seats in class and kick them as they lay curled on the floor, smash up teachers' cars, threaten to rape female faculty and lay in wait for them in the parking lot, and tell a pregnant teacher that they will "kick that damned baby right the fuck out of you" are not being failed on a school level alone. That sort of behavior does not manifest overnight in students raised in a stable home with appropriately enforced boundaries to behavior. Indeed, as one of Scheherazade's examples points out, often parents are actively at war with the school over basic matters of discipline and common decency, demanding that their children be exempted from even the most elementary requirements for civil behavior. Iin my mother's school at least, they've seen the next step: parents theatening the teachers directly, including one who deliberately used her car to push my mother to the side as she was directing traffic at the daily pick-up.

The problem is that politically, no one is such a fool as to suggest that some people might not know how to raise their own children. Unlikely as it seems that everyone would know how, any more than that everyone would be born knowing how to raise a dog or a horse or a rhinoceros, it is one of society's fiercely defended fictions that every single person in the world is the best parent for his or her child, and that no possible improvement could be made. Given this, and given the fact that we do also need someone to prepare these children to function in society, we tend to take the simpler solution: send them to school and let the teachers sort them out.

Unfortunately, the number of severity of problems that teachers are being expected to sort out is rising, and the means they having for sorting them are not. In some cases, they're being cut back. I think, honestly, that very few people really realize how violent even very young children are becoming; the student in my example above who was dragging other children out of their desks and kicking them on the floor was a young girl of seven, while the boy who threatened to beat his pregnant teacher until she miscarried was eleven or twelve. In the face of this, joined with intense pressure to achieve targets (not always realistic ones) and mountains of paperwork that must be seen to be believed - 35 pages per student for the end-of-year report for my mothers' special education classes - it really amazes me that anyone will take the job at this stage. It's hard work, long hours, low pay, and it's a workplace where you can't choose your lunch time, you can't even pee outside of a schedule, your subordinates may assault you without facing criminal charges, and you are legally responsible for the physical well-being of ever one of the up to 35 young children you may be supervising, alone, at once.

Kudos for holding on as long as you did, Scheherazade.

Shanglan

Not disagreeing with you, Shang. There are undoubtedly parenting issues -- and they are probably magnified by the frustration in dealing with an unidentified or undiagnosed disability. Whereas a parent may not recognize (or even be aware of the existence of) such, our education professionals should be equipped to identify the possibility and make the necessary referrals for evaluation/assessment. There are a lot of kids falling through those cracks as well.

Not all parents are blameless, by a long shot, but many ARE ignorant. The sadder fact, in my eyes, is that many educators and administrators are also ignorant. I can excuse parental ignorance, but professional? Uh uh.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Not disagreeing with you, Shang. There are undoubtedly parenting issues -- and they are probably magnified by the frustration in dealing with an unidentified or undiagnosed disability. Whereas a parent may not recognize (or even be aware of the existence of) such, our education professionals should be equipped to identify the possibility and make the necessary referrals for evaluation/assessment. There are a lot of kids falling through those cracks as well.

Not all parents are blameless, by a long shot, but many ARE ignorant. The sadder fact, in my eyes, is that many educators and administrators are also ignorant. I can excuse parental ignorance, but professional? Uh uh.

I must disagree with you here, on several levels. The first is that I doubt that undiagnosed disorders are the chief source of problems. I agree that frustration and accompanying acting-out can spring from undiagnosed difficulties, but they can also come from many other problems. Humans are not born with quiet, attentive, civil behavior, any more than puppies are. They must be taught it, and they must be taught that rewards are attached to good behavior and consequences to undesirable behavior. Those not so taught will not so act. They do not require an underlying disability; they merely require a lack of clearly enforced rules governing their behavior. Poor behavior is not in itself a reliable indicator of an undiagnosed disability.

Classroom teachers are also not, in most cases, the persons either best trained or most able to detect undiagnosed disorders. Their training is in education, which largely concerns itself with the transmission of specific knowledge. Yes, they do receive some training in special needs - in most cases, one or two classes worth. This is not substantially more than most adults, particularly when one considers that many teachers may not have children of their own, and thus lack the experience in observing children's behavior that other, untrained adults may have. Their expertise is very far from the level at which they could reasonably be expected to identify specific disorders, and they have the added disadvantage of seeing their pupils in groups of anywhere from 20 to 35, often for short periods of the day - typically less than two hours per day in middle school, and an hour per day in high school.

These are not conditions under which anyone might reasonably be expected to be able to diagnose specific disabilities. They are certainly conditions less favorable than those under which the parents - with large blocks of time to devote to their children individually, and with much stronger knowledge of the child's entire behavioral pattern and background - are operating. To blame classroom teachers for children falling through the cracks due to undiagnosed disorders is unreasonable and unfair. They do not have the time, the focus, or the expertise to make such a diagnosis, and in fact are not legally permitted to do so - for the excellent reason that they have no such training.

Yes, it is a good thing that most schools have a support staff who can test for disability. And it is very important that every effort is made to identify disabilities early and to work with them quickly. It is not, however, reasonable to blame teachers who fail, in an hour's time during which they are attempting to teach 35 students, to spot a problem that the child's own parents can't see in hours of one-on-one or small family unit interaction. It is also not reasonable to suggest that the largest problem in student behavior is undiagnosed disability. Poor behavior doesn't require a complicated physical or psychological cause; it occurs naturally in any social being that is not taught boundaries and guidelines for its behavior. People are not born knowing what appropriate behavior is, and if they are not taught it - indeed, if their parents actively resist the attempts of others to teach it to them - then they will not know how to engage in it.

But then, I suppose there's some irony here. I've recently begun taking medication for a disorder commonly diagnosed in childhood, but in my case only recently identified. Yes, I can see, in retrospect, how my behaviors strongly fit the pattern. And I had some disciplinary problems in school. I was also, however, given quite clear boundaries to my behavior. It wasn't always a joy learning them, but I managed to make it through without assaulting my instructors or urinating on their vehicles. Even in the case of undiagnosed disability - and I would argue especially in that case - parental involvement in the student's academic and social growth plays an enormous role in the outcome.

Shanglan

 

[elsol]

Perhaps some people can find a way to defend the concept of forcing every child, by law, to attend formal schooling. It has become a litmus test for societies all over the world to claim a certain level of education for every citizen....

It's called giving a child a chance, Amicus.

No matter how fucked up their parents might be... you gave the kid a chance.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[rgraham666]

I'm very sorry you had to leave a field you loved, Sche. I had to do it myself. Not a pleasant thing to do.

As for the theory that 'beating the little fucks into line' is the best method of making kids learn, well, you know my experience and opinion of that.

 

[TheEarl]

Although I believe in regulating the market so that every child has to have an education, I'm seriously starting to lean towards amicus's way of thinking on schooling.

In England, there is a big thing with 'my rights' at the moment. A lot of bolshy parents talk about 'my rights' (completely ignoring other people's of course) and seem to believe that they will always get something, to the same level, no matter what.

A lot of the problems stem from the parents and, if they are told, "No, we will not put up with that. You're going to have to find your child another school and inconvenience yourself. We do not have to stand for that behaviour," they may stop informing the children that the teacher has no right to tell them what to do.

I hate a lot of parents, mainly because mine were so bloody good. The standard response in my house to a screamed "I hate you!" was generally a very calm "Well, I don't like you very much when you're being like this." Which kinda takes the steam out of the main threat in a tantrum. I shudder when I see these documentaries about parents who give in to their child's slightest whim at the merest threat of not being liked. There should be a leaflet given to all people expecting children, entitled 'Your child will not like you all of the time. How to get over yourself and learn to deal with it.'

The Earl

 

[impressive]

I must disagree with you here, on several levels. The first is that I doubt that undiagnosed disorders are the chief source of problems. I agree that frustration and accompanying acting-out can spring from undiagnosed difficulties, but they can also come from many other problems. Humans are not born with quiet, attentive, civil behavior, any more than puppies are. They must be taught it, and they must be taught that rewards are attached to good behavior and consequences to undesirable behavior. Those not so taught will not so act. They do not require an underlying disability; they merely require a lack of clearly enforced rules governing their behavior. Poor behavior is not in itself a reliable indicator of an undiagnosed disability.

Classroom teachers are also not, in most cases, the persons either best trained or most able to detect undiagnosed disorders. Their training is in education, which largely concerns itself with the transmission of specific knowledge. Yes, they do receive some training in special needs - in most cases, one or two classes worth. This is not substantially more than most adults, particularly when one considers that many teachers may not have children of their own, and thus lack the experience in observing children's behavior that other, untrained adults may have. Their expertise is very far from the level at which they could reasonably be expected to identify specific disorders, and they have the added disadvantage of seeing their pupils in groups of anywhere from 20 to 35, often for short periods of the day - typically less than two hours per day in middle school, and an hour per day in high school.

These are not conditions under which anyone might reasonably be expected to be able to diagnose specific disabilities. They are certainly conditions less favorable than those under which the parents - with large blocks of time to devote to their children individually, and with much stronger knowledge of the child's entire behavioral pattern and background - are operating. To blame classroom teachers for children falling through the cracks due to undiagnosed disorders is unreasonable and unfair. They do not have the time, the focus, or the expertise to make such a diagnosis, and in fact are not legally permitted to do so - for the excellent reason that they have no such training.

Yes, it is a good thing that most schools have a support staff who can test for disability. And it is very important that every effort is made to identify disabilities early and to work with them quickly. It is not, however, reasonable to blame teachers who fail, in an hour's time during which they are attempting to teach 35 students, to spot a problem that the child's own parents can't see in hours of one-on-one or small family unit interaction. It is also not reasonable to suggest that the largest problem in student behavior is undiagnosed disability. Poor behavior doesn't require a complicated physical or psychological cause; it occurs naturally in any social being that is not taught boundaries and guidelines for its behavior. People are not born knowing what appropriate behavior is, and if they are not taught it - indeed, if their parents actively resist the attempts of others to teach it to them - then they will not know how to engage in it.

But then, I suppose there's some irony here. I've recently begun taking medication for a disorder commonly diagnosed in childhood, but in my case only recently identified. Yes, I can see, in retrospect, how my behaviors strongly fit the pattern. And I had some disciplinary problems in school. I was also, however, given quite clear boundaries to my behavior. It wasn't always a joy learning them, but I managed to make it through without assaulting my instructors or urinating on their vehicles. Even in the case of undiagnosed disability - and I would argue especially in that case - parental involvement in the student's academic and social growth plays an enormous role in the outcome.

Shanglan

Ah, but Shang -- I never said educators should be able to diagnose. I said they should be AWARE (i.e., not ignorant) of the various disabilities and disorders that could explain student behavior and influence learning. They are also -- ESPECIALLY in congregate settings -- BETTER equipped than parents to identify abnormal behavior.

A child's behavior at home versus school could be highly variable for MANY reasons. A parent may never witness the child being taunted by a peer -- or being put in the spotlight by a teacher -- or attempting to read the blackboard from the last row. Conversely, an educator may never witness the child's behavior when told to take a bath or clean up his/her room.

And yes, I certainly agree that parental involvement is critical -- for all children.

 

[Kassiana]

"When I went to school, they used to bust my ass with a wooden paddle, but by God, I can read."

--Beatings don't correlate with learning. I taught myself to read by age 3. In first grade, I was reading the L. Frank Baum Oz books. I have been spanked a grand total of once when I was two years old. I don't know why, but I do remember the betrayal and anger I felt toward someone I loved who had deliberately hurt me.

Discipline does not equal hitting kids. Hitting kids, IMO, shows you've lost the battle already and are just lashing out to ease your feelings.

For what it's worth, Scheh, my dad was a teacher for twenty years and he quit because he hated it. He's now in X-ray, where people want him to do what he does for them, and he feels like he's making a difference and helping them. Thank goodness he and you get while the getting's good. Some teachers who've stayed past their limits are ... well, let's just say it's pretty darn obvious who they are.

 

[elsol]

This was also in a rural area, not inner city kids, which I would never have attempted.

Why not, Ami?

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[kendo1]

There's always the private sector to consider, Sche ,the pupils may not be all little angels but discipline is much, much stricter. ( My kids are in private education, mainly due to the fact that the school had the closest nursery to where we lived at the time).
From my experience teachers are respected in this environment, and the school has no problems with excluding problem children, permanently.

Teaching should be rewarding for both the teacher and the pupil, it would be a shame for you to change direction, but if you must...

All the best for what you decide to do.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Ah, but Shang -- I never said educators should be able to diagnose. I said they should be AWARE (i.e., not ignorant) of the various disabilities and disorders that could explain student behavior and influence learning. They are also -- ESPECIALLY in congregate settings -- BETTER equipped than parents to identify abnormal behavior.

I still see no support for this latter assertion - that teachers are better able than parents to identify behavioral issues. They have less time and less attention per student and are not significantly better trained. Where would this superiority in perception come from?

Yes, it would be nice for teachers to be aware of disabilities that might affect students' behaviors. However, given the potentially near-infinite number of physical and psychological conditions that could be affecting behavior, the very brief training teachers are given about such conditions, and the extensive list of other issues that teachers must also monitor - everything from hygiene and signs of physical and sexual abuse to, at the rare moment, the lesson they're meant to be teaching - demanding that they be highly aware of a range of specific disabilities and their potential effects on the behavior of each individual student in each class they teach is not a reasonable request while staffing levels and salaries remain where they are.

A child's behavior at home versus school could be highly variable for MANY reasons. A parent may never witness the child being taunted by a peer -- or being put in the spotlight by a teacher -- or attempting to read the blackboard from the last row. Conversely, an educator may never witness the child's behavior when told to take a bath or clean up his/her room.

Yes, on this I agree. Hence the parent and teacher should be in close communication, and when disparities are identified, they should be carefully investigated. However, your example presupposes that there is a baseline standard for behavior at home that differs significantly from that shown in school. This is the case in some cases - and in those cases, parental support and discipline at home play an important role in establishing that baseline to begin with as well as in dealing with behavior in school. In many other cases, however, there is not a substantial difference between school and non-school behavior. Children who are violent to other children in school rarely limit expression of anger and violence to school, and children who habitually defy authority are very commonly unaccustomed to its exercise in any setting. I'd go back to Scheherazade's example as a key one; it is emblematic of many parents' responses to their children's behavior in school, from the ones who call up the teacher to scream about their children receiving detention to those who demand that their children be permitted to attend school in clothing emblazoned with profanity, nudity, or racist slogans. It is unreasonable to suggest that teachers must exhaust the annals of medicine and psychology seeking some other source for the problem when the parents cannot or will not institute any code of conduct for the child.

Shanglan

 

[impressive]

Where would this superiority in perception come from?

Professional training & experience. Most parents don't even get the 1-2 (woefully inadequate) courses on disability that teachers get in college -- or access to continuing education re same.

Yes, time to devote to individual students is limited. Never argued that point. However, it is in such settings that aberrant behavior is all the more noticeable -- stands out in the crowd, so to speak.

It is unreasonable to suggest that teachers must exhaust the annals of medicine and psychology seeking some other source for the problem when the parents cannot or will not institute any code of conduct for the child.

It is similarly unreasonable to first blame the parents for parenting failures when, if the problem truly is a behavioral disorder, common punitive discipline practices will be ineffective.

Without the communication you (and I) advocate, it is easy to see how the finger-pointing ensues ... and is perpetuated.

 

[amicus]

ElSol "...It's called giving a child a chance, Amicus.

No matter how fucked up their parents might be... you gave the kid a chance.

Sincerely,
ElSol..."
__________________

ElSol, et al...I know full well you will never reach understanding, but I keep on trying.

I cannot think of anything more inhumane towards young children than to take them, by force, from their parents and herd them, warehouse style into classrooms full of other children from all walks of life, categorized by age.

This 'conveyor belt' form of education functions at the lowest common denominator, both in curriculum and eduators.

The worst punishment for a child I could dream of would be to place that child in a place he did not want to be, hold him back if he is above average, embarrass him if he is below average, and cultivate the mediocre.

As the thread starter stated, some children should be taught a trade they can practice, at the parents choice and leave also to the parents, the obligation and resonsibility to provide the child with the basic skills of reading and writing.

Since when is it a moral, liberal thing to eat ones children? That is fundamentally what you do when you toss them into the stifling environment of public forced education.

It has never worked and never will.

The left mentality seems to treat individual children like natural resources, coal, gas & oil, to be exploited for the greater good.

To make myself very clear, I am in great support of formal education, private education, chosen by the parents, financed by the parents and enjoyed by the child.

How any rational person could advocate forcing parents to 'educate' their children along the lines proffered by public schooling, I simply cannot understand.

Who do the children belong to anyway? The State?

Bullshit.

amicus...

 

[CharleyH]

I'm going to be blunt - why are we trying to turn kids with limited mental resources into academics? Wouldn't it be a lot nicer for everyone if they were taken out of the school environment as soon as they started being a pain in the arse, and taught something like bricklaying, how to milk cows, or how to throw garbage bags onto the refuse lorry?

So there it goes. I've had enough and I'm fucking off out of the profession as soon as I'm able to. I don't care about the pay-cut, or the loss of the long holidays (which are usually spent either recouperating from illness or preparing lessons) - I'm quite happy to go and work in a supermarket until I find something better. At least cans of beans don't answer back, or scream "WHY!" whenever they're told to do something.

Hm, well not all kids with apparent limited resources are limited. 80% of the international population are followers ... what does that make the extra 20%?

Your choice is your choice. I know you'll do well in wahatever you do. Much luck and love, SheReckons.

 

[TheEarl]

ElSol "...It's called giving a child a chance, Amicus.

No matter how fucked up their parents might be... you gave the kid a chance.

Sincerely,
ElSol..."
__________________

ElSol, et al...I know full well you will never reach understanding, but I keep on trying.

I cannot think of anything more inhumane towards young children than to take them, by force, from their parents and herd them, warehouse style into classrooms full of other children from all walks of life, categorized by age.

This 'conveyor belt' form of education functions at the lowest common denominator, both in curriculum and eduators.

The worst punishment for a child I could dream of would be to place that child in a place he did not want to be, hold him back if he is above average, embarrass him if he is below average, and cultivate the mediocre.

As the thread starter stated, some children should be taught a trade they can practice, at the parents choice and leave also to the parents, the obligation and resonsibility to provide the child with the basic skills of reading and writing.

Since when is it a moral, liberal thing to eat ones children? That is fundamentally what you do when you toss them into the stifling environment of public forced education.

It has never worked and never will.

The left mentality seems to treat individual children like natural resources, coal, gas & oil, to be exploited for the greater good.

To make myself very clear, I am in great support of formal education, private education, chosen by the parents, financed by the parents and enjoyed by the child.

How any rational person could advocate forcing parents to 'educate' their children along the lines proffered by public schooling, I simply cannot understand.

Who do the children belong to anyway? The State?

Bullshit.

amicus...

Although in favour of a lot of private schools and grammar schools, an agreeing with you on streaming, I will remind oyu of the thing that skips all of your theories and thus renders them counter to accepted supply and demand free-market economics.

Externalities.

Without an understanding of them, your arguments are useless.

The Earl

 

[amicus]

Earl, 'externalities' would you define your meaning please?


amicus

 

[TheEarl]

Earl, 'externalities' would you define your meaning please?


amicus

Amicus: I'm starting a new thread as I have no wish to hijack this one.

The Earl

 

[CharleyH]

Although in favour of a lot of private schools and grammar schools, an agreeing with you on streaming, I will remind oyu of the thing that skips all of your theories and thus renders them counter to accepted supply and demand free-market economics.

Externalities.

Without an understanding of them, your arguments are useless.

The Earl

Good God! I think I agree with Amicus as you quoted him on education. Thanks for your other thread explaining, Earl. I will follow with great interest.

 

[BlackShanglan]

Professional training & experience. Most parents don't even get the 1-2 (woefully inadequate) courses on disability that teachers get in college -- or access to continuing education re same.

Yes, time to devote to individual students is limited. Never argued that point. However, it is in such settings that aberrant behavior is all the more noticeable -- stands out in the crowd, so to speak.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here. Whether 1 or 2 classes is more than most parents, and whether or not that is counterbalanced by the parents' familiarity with children in general and their own children in particular, I think the key issue is that "more" isn't "enough." It's not nearly enough to provide teachers with any useful information to apply in most cases. I would also politely differ with the theory that aberrant behavior stands out more in a group. It might to someone who had nothing to do but observe the specific child in question. It does not to someone attempting simultaneously to manage the behavior of a large number of people and to impart specific knowledge to them. Even a teacher who notices something odd about a student's behavior can't simply stop and watch. There are always multiple other things that require attention.

It is similarly unreasonable to first blame the parents for parenting failures when, if the problem truly is a behavioral disorder, common punitive discipline practices will be ineffective.

My point is that behavior problems related to discipline are more common than problems related to undiagnosed disability. Given that one must start somewhere, treating an apparent discipline problem as a discipline problem seems a more logical route then embarking on a lengthy investigation of every possible related disability, especially when the person so embarking has little or no experience with them. Yes, it's wise to call in a consultant when the problem more obviously appears to be disability-related, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect a high level of recognition from someone with very limited training and resources.

I would also point out that having a disability does not automatically mean that punitive discipline practices are ineffective or inappropriate. Some students with ADD, for instance, have more difficulty than other students in controlling impulsive behavior. However, a clearly structured and very consistently enforced rules system is beneficial, not detrimental, to such students. It helps them recognize impulsive behavior more quickly and learn to identify and control it rather than having it build unmarked until heavy consequences are attached. This is also useful to them socially, as they may not otherwise recognize which of their actions are the ones driving away their playmates.

Without the communication you (and I) advocate, it is easy to see how the finger-pointing ensues ... and is perpetuated.

Yes, I agree. However, I think it's important to have reasonable expectations of educators. Much as it would be, in an ideal world, an excellent idea to have people highly trained in recognizing a wide range of disabilities in contact with students on a regular basis, we don't, and it's better to recognize that than to expect people to perform a task that they are neither trained for nor given the time and facilities to do.

Shanglan

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I home school.

I home school because I want my children to participate in the world with the knowledge of their own self-authority and with a sense of joy and beauty that public education and institutions I feel attempt to extinguish with the intention of forcing compliance with the system rather than cultivating individual thoughts, values and creativity.

And I see our public education system and school institutions as being just as damaging to teachers as they are to students. In my post-graduate work in the college of education within a major university, I was appalled at the quality of students who were learning to become teachers, the course content they were being taught, and the way in which it was being taught. Time after time, these student-teachers and their instructors were more concerned with "what was going to be on the exam" and what was "the most efficient way to complete lesson plans in only one period" than how a child's natural and inherent love of learning is cultivated and encouraged. To a person, these student-teachers stated "job security in the field, decent pay, and summers off" as their motivation for pursuing careers in teaching. Despite what you say about teachers being the "experts" in their fields, and being passionate about those subjects, what teachers are actually teaching the subjects they're interested in? What teachers are "allowed" to teach fully those subjects that passionately interest them? What teachers are NOT bound by the school's "curriculum," which is chosen not by educators, not by parents, and certainly not by children, but by big business-- by a corporate world whose objective is to create and sell the slickest and most expensive textbooks that will reinforce compliance with that worker bee mentality they need to breed more consumers?

I want my children to live in the world as it is, a far greater, deeper and more beautiful world than public schools can possibly reflect. I want them to see, experience and engage in that world without the clouded and scratched lenses slapped on their faces by public education, the very gray-colored glasses that seem to end up on most teachers eyes.

These are the teachers that I do not want, under any circumstances, attempting to fit my children into the boxes of a "diagnosis." There is a movement here in the states to start screening EVERY child for mental health disorders in schools.

I don't mind if public schools "fail." Frankly, I believe they are a dying institution, like most of our institutions. I believe they already HAVE failed. Miserably. At least in the TRUE sense of "education."

To me, true education is a mysterious click or a silent nod of the head. It is not organization or school, although sometimes education occurs in those settings as it does in others. Certainly, it is not something between teacher and student. To me, education is like a light revealing a space or something long ago known and forgotten and then suddenly retrieved more meaningfully. It is an unpredictable unmasking. Education is something that happens when we least expect it, and it only happens when we are ready. Funny, how we busily take our courses or design syllabi and lectures. We say, “I have to take this” or “We will cover this.” As though education is something we can measure up by the cup or swallow in doses like cough syrup til we are smart. But the truth in learning is not to be hooked and dragged in. It comes like the dawn, a pinpoint no one much notices. And then, not when we expect it.

Schools can't possibly contain the true nature of "education." They can only promote the current cultural values, beliefs and mores. They make great zombies.

But, hey, I'm an Aquarian free-thinker, I belief all systems need to die and be reborn...

 

[BlackShanglan]

But, hey, I'm an Aquarian free-thinker, I belief all systems need to die and be reborn...

Amen. And certain school systems more than most.

Shanglan

 

[amicus]

Well said, Selena...good luck home schooling...may your children blossom and bloom with knowledge....


amicus...