If the children aren't engaged, that's crap teaching. If that's the description you were given by the teacher, they maybe need to rethink how they're approaching their teaching.
At my school we do a mastery approach, so all children are exposed to the most challenging stuff, even the SEND and the lower ability kids. It's a bit like differentiation through outcome. So say there were three tasks in a maths lesson, the lower kids might only answer one question, but if they can and they can tell me why, that's their version of mastery. The middle children might do two and the rest will do three and a couple of challenges, create their own problems etc.
In a good or outstanding classroom, at no point should there be kids sat doing nothing and all children should be able to contribute to the lesson in their own way. That doesn't mean everything they say will be right, but it means that they are exposed to things they wouldn't be if they were in sets and we've found over the last three years that this has had a positive impact on our results.
I honestly have no idea what this means - but well done for giving the same education to all. Do the more gifted kids get held back by this approach??
(Not having a go, just don’t understand)
other than my education (**** school on a **** east Hull council estate!) the only experience I have of modern education is my kids going Pocklington School, they are superb. But, I don’t expect they get the challenged children you mention.
No, because there's no ceiling on what the more able kids can achieve. At the top end, you're looking at a more in depth mastery approach. So the concepts they tackle will be more catered to their learning ability. A child who is working towards expectations might not give you the answer to the same problem, but that doesn't mean they couldn't answer a problem tailored to their specific learning needs. So they can still demonstrate the skills of, say, problem solving, but in their own way. It wouldn't be fair on a child who cannot access the curriculum for a certain reason to expect them to be able to do the things greater depth children could, but it doesn't mean that they can't do something similar at a level they are more suited to. The cartoon below shows this perfectly.
You must log in or register to see images
I wouldn't place a ceiling on the higher ability children any more than I would the lower ability ones, each has their own strengths and weaknesses that they encounter in their learning. When considering pitching work to a class, I find it more helpful to think of it as depth of knowledge, rather than breadth of knowledge. Knowing all the times tables by rote up to 12 x 12 is great, but do they understand why 6 x 9 = 54? If they don't, what's the point in knowing it? Can they prove it? Can they show me a real life example where they might come across a problem? For lower ability children, it might that they show me how they know three goes into nine three times, using resources or drawings.
On the caning thing I saw, if you have to physically harm a child in order for them to follow you, you aren't very good at being an adult. Respect in children is born out of admiration, not out of fear. If you have to frighten a mind more underdeveloped than yours in order for it to follow instructions, ****ing quit whatever it is your doing, paint yourself silver and go and be a robot on the South Bank of the Thames. That applies to children and animals, by the way.
You can see why so many lefties who are against private education and think everyone else should be happy with a one size fits all system decide that when it comes to their own kids they are more important than their principles and send them to fee paying schools.
No, because there's no ceiling on what the more able kids can achieve. At the top end, you're looking at a more in depth mastery approach. So the concepts they tackle will be more catered to their learning ability. A child who is working towards expectations might not give you the answer to the same problem, but that doesn't mean they couldn't answer a problem tailored to their specific learning needs. So they can still demonstrate the skills of, say, problem solving, but in their own way. It wouldn't be fair on a child who cannot access the curriculum for a certain reason to expect them to be able to do the things greater depth children could, but it doesn't mean that they can't do something similar at a level they are more suited to. The cartoon below shows this perfectly.
You must log in or register to see images
I wouldn't place a ceiling on the higher ability children any more than I would the lower ability ones, each has their own strengths and weaknesses that they encounter in their learning. When considering pitching work to a class, I find it more helpful to think of it as depth of knowledge, rather than breadth of knowledge. Knowing all the times tables by rote up to 12 x 12 is great, but do they understand why 6 x 9 = 54? If they don't, what's the point in knowing it? Can they prove it? Can they show me a real life example where they might come across a problem? For lower ability children, it might that they show me how they know three goes into nine three times, using resources or drawings.
On the caning thing I saw, if you have to physically harm a child in order for them to follow you, you aren't very good at being an adult. Respect in children is born out of admiration, not out of fear. If you have to frighten a mind more underdeveloped than yours in order for it to follow instructions, ****ing quit whatever it is your doing, paint yourself silver and go and be a robot on the South Bank of the Thames. That applies to children and animals, by the way.
Obviously my education wasn't good enough, like SW3 i didn't really understand your first reply and now you're even further away form getting your point across to me.
Obviously my education wasn't good enough, like SW3 i didn't really understand your first reply and now you're even further away form getting your point across to me.
Basically, all children are exposed to the same material. The difference is in the expectation of what they produce. The support for lower ability children may come from a number of places, such as group work, simplified tasks or resources. But they're still getting the same learning and the lesson is designed in a way that will engage the lower children but then progress more in depth and allow higher ability children to be challenged.
You’ve done nothing, but some posts were getting rather too political and had to be deleted.
Still using lots of fluffy talk.
Lets make this simpler (for me) Maths class, you've spent 30 minutes explaining adding up numbers in their hundreds, ie 234+456+123.
You hand out a paper with 10 sums to add up in the remaining 10 minutes of class time, the top 10 will finish it alone in a minute or two and now be bored, the middle 10 will by and large manage with some small teacher input, the bottom 10 can't do it each one is asking for help, the top 10 are now talking among themselfs disturbing some of the middle 10. Serious question how do you manage?
I taught Chemistry to Pharmacy students at University and we were told the maximum attention span of students is about 15 minutes. You need to break up your lecture/presentation at about this time and vary things or students lose focus.First, my input wouldn't be thirty minutes long. Kids can't sit still for that long, not six year olds anyway (the year group I teach). Even at Year 6 you want them working within ten minutes of the lesson starting.
Our lesson plans had:No, because there's no ceiling on what the more able kids can achieve. At the top end, you're looking at a more in depth mastery approach. So the concepts they tackle will be more catered to their learning ability. A child who is working towards expectations might not give you the answer to the same problem, but that doesn't mean they couldn't answer a problem tailored to their specific learning needs. So they can still demonstrate the skills of, say, problem solving, but in their own way. It wouldn't be fair on a child who cannot access the curriculum for a certain reason to expect them to be able to do the things greater depth children could, but it doesn't mean that they can't do something similar at a level they are more suited to. The cartoon below shows this perfectly.
You must log in or register to see images
I wouldn't place a ceiling on the higher ability children any more than I would the lower ability ones, each has their own strengths and weaknesses that they encounter in their learning. When considering pitching work to a class, I find it more helpful to think of it as depth of knowledge, rather than breadth of knowledge. Knowing all the times tables by rote up to 12 x 12 is great, but do they understand why 6 x 9 = 54? If they don't, what's the point in knowing it? Can they prove it? Can they show me a real life example where they might come across a problem? For lower ability children, it might that they show me how they know three goes into nine three times, using resources or drawings.
On the caning thing I saw, if you have to physically harm a child in order for them to follow you, you aren't very good at being an adult. Respect in children is born out of admiration, not out of fear. If you have to frighten a mind more underdeveloped than yours in order for it to follow instructions, ****ing quit whatever it is your doing, paint yourself silver and go and be a robot on the South Bank of the Thames. That applies to children and animals, by the way.
You are making the mistake of assuming that all of the kids do the same exercises. It was like that when I was at school but it isn't now.Still using lots of fluffy talk.
Lets make this simpler (for me) Maths class, you've spent 30 minutes explaining adding up numbers in their hundreds, ie 234+456+123.
You hand out a paper with 10 sums to add up in the remaining 10 minutes of class time, the top 10 will finish it alone in a minute or two and now be bored, the middle 10 will by and large manage with some small teacher input, the bottom 10 can't do it each one is asking for help, the top 10 are now talking among themselfs disturbing some of the middle 10. Serious question how do you manage?
Our lesson plans had:
All children will be able to ...
Most children will be able to ...
Some children will be able to ...
That showed how each child would be able to access the lesson and how each child's needs would be catered for.
I did not admire the headteacher who caned me. I regarded him as a complete fool. I admired the teachers who inspired me. I had a particular respect for an RE teacher who not only manged to make RE interesting and relevant but also ran the cross country team. It was the fact that he came out and ran with us that was most impressive. He challenged us to beat him without ever saying it. He pushed us further than we thought we could go. That was real teaching and what I aspired to achieve myself.
Oh yes, by the regime of the day I had to be caned or expelled. I thoroughly deserved punishment and accepted it without complaint. You only went to the head's office for punishment. He wasn't seen as a person. He was just a caricature in the style of Jimmy Edwards in Whacko. Now the name of that educational comedy tells you a lot.Were you punished wrongly or rightly? I was caned ,or in Scotland given the tawse, on a regular basis for unruly behaviour.It was a means of discipline which I deserved.I think the schools lost a lot of control when they withdrew corporal punishment?
Back in the day I/we got the cane on a regular basis. Even for spelling mistakes. If you failed to learn the ten or so words given to you for your homework you got a stroke of the cane across your hands for every one you got wrong.Were you punished wrongly or rightly? I was caned ,or in Scotland given the tawse, on a regular basis for unruly behaviour.It was a means of discipline which I deserved.I think the schools lost a lot of control when they withdrew corporal punishment?
The teachers up here were a bit more street wise....You were asked to accompany them to the stationary cupboard along the corridor and upon arrival and with the door closed,you were given a clip.That was wrong on so many levels and was clearly an abuse of position,however,I really did drive some teachers up the wall.Back in the day I/we got the cane on a regular basis. Even for spelling mistakes. If you failed to learn the ten or so words given to you for your homework you got a stroke of the cane across your hands for every one you got wrong.
Teachers used to go to the pub at dinner time and often came back in class clutching a pint glass of bitter.
i was once knocked unconscious in metal work when I was 15 by the teacher, thumped full in the face, for putting an old penny in the forge and leaving it next to the class thief to sneak in his pocket
Never did me any harm.
I've been a psychopath for years, on my mothers side.
Or how bad the teachers were.Sounds like a lot of you were repeat offenders. Which just goes to show how crap corporal punishment is as a deterrent.