6 Comments

  1. teachwell
    February 11, 2016 @ 11:16 pm

    Reblogged this on The Echo Chamber.

    Reply

  2. Brian
    February 12, 2016 @ 10:15 am

    An interesting if perhaps a little sad blogpost.

    The child’s mother, who is herself a primary scholl teacher, sent this message as a result of some distress.

    You have taken the opportunity to criticise and vilify most of those involved in discussions in order to justify your own position while suggesting that Michael Rosen has wrongly used the post to support his position.

    You are very likely a nice and reasonable person and the information we have is limited but based upon this post and associated writings I would be concerned if my grandchildren joined your class. This concern might dissipate quickly, I am sure it might but I would be worried.

    I dont think I am a bleeding heart liberal. For instance I feel that students who disrupt the learning of others should be removed from classrooms and taught in purposely created environments or by their parents at home.

    I believe that stduents should develop the biggest body of knowledge possible and that this should be supported by thinking skills that they use to apply this knowledge to solving problems. This for me is the purpose of education. The more problems they can solve the better.

    I don’t regard myself as either progressive or traditional although I can adopt teaching strategies that might be associated with each by some when necessary.

    Your criticisms of the parent are for me wholly out of all proportion. You talk of “cheerleading” and “oversensitive” and “craziness”. They are probably descriptions I might apply to this post and update.

    Just because a parent does not debate the issue in the way that you would like, does not make them stupid or unthinking. Being sensitive to the needs of their own child when the education system is likely less so is for me to be applauded.

    “But what am I saying? Hush heretic!! We all know that when a child gets upset, the national curriculum should be changed this instant. We all know that we shouldn’t teach children anything that they may get wrong because occasionally children will get upset if they get things wrong. And that is the real reason there is illiteracy and innumeracy in our society.”

    I would have thought, some with your intellect would have realised the difference between…..

    1 An isolated issue has occured here and we need to change the system as a result
    2 There are lots of reasons whay we should change the system and this example illustrates one or two

    Maybe you illustrate well the need to focus on critical thinking skills.

    Reply

    • teachwell
      February 12, 2016 @ 1:17 pm

      “The child’s mother, who is herself a primary school teacher, sent this message as a result of some distress.”

      No proof of this whatsoever, what there is evidence of is a teacher who is against the changes in the national curriculum, using an incident which neither of us knows has actually happened or occurred in the way it has been outlined chose to go the Rosen with it and then chose to get involved without stating who she was. Or, for example, providing some context which was completely missing from the message itself.

      “You have taken the opportunity to criticise and vilify most of those involved in discussions in order to justify your own position while suggesting that Michael Rosen has wrongly used the post to support his position.”

      Criticise – yes, vilify – hardly – people choose to act the way they choose to act, there is a choice to be made between honesty and dishonesty. This was conducted in the most dishonest way possible. I don’t trust that one bit. Both the mother and grandmother chose to weigh in without saying who they were – if they wanted to remain anonymous fine but don’t get involved, attack me and then reveal who you are afterwards. What kind of game-playing is that? Don’t trust it, never have.

      “You are very likely a nice and reasonable person and the information we have is limited but based upon this post and associated writings I would be concerned if my grandchildren joined your class. This concern might dissipate quickly, I am sure it might but I would be worried.”

      It doesn’t really matter what you think of me or what you think I might be like – like all other teachers I have been trained, observed throughout my career and have had to pass a CRB. Equally I have been subject to the exact same standards as all other teachers. What one person considers a nice, reasonable person is different to another. As for the thing about being worried – I find that a highly manipulative statement. I am not going to change my mind or who I am because you or another human being may not like me personally.

      “Your criticisms of the parent are for me wholly out of all proportion. You talk of “cheerleading” and “oversensitive” and “craziness”. They are probably descriptions I might apply to this post and update.”
      You are welcome to do so – though one can only cheerlead other people not oneself by definition.

      “Just because a parent does not debate the issue in the way that you would like, does not make them stupid or unthinking. Being sensitive to the needs of their own child when the education system is likely less so is for me to be applauded.”
      Being sensitive to the needs of ones child doesn’t have to involve running to an author who is going to use the example to make a wider political point.

      “I would have thought, some with your intellect would have realised the difference between…..
      1 An isolated issue has occurred here and we need to change the system as a result
      2 There are lots of reasons why we should change the system and this example illustrates one or two”

      Except that it is not proof at all, you still do not know that anything happened. Any changes to the curriculum involve hundreds of thousands of children. It can not be centred around – a) a child being upset – I reiterate children get upset, our role as adults is to support them to learn to cope with their feelings, especially negative ones. b) I don’t think you can have it both ways here – it is narcissistic to think that one’s child is so important the curriculum should change because they were upset on one occasion.

      “Maybe you illustrate well the need to focus on critical thinking skills.”
      If you are going to criticise my post on the basis that you have – including this statement is hypocritical.

      The one question no one seems to have an answer for is why, if your child is upset, would you go to Rosen, not the teacher?

      Reply

  3. madeupteacher
    February 12, 2016 @ 6:35 pm

    Great post. The last sentence says it all. “……,why, if your child is upset, would you go to Rosen, not the teacher?” This reminds me of some who go on about the ‘pseudo’ word homework lists given out to children as if it’s the end of civilisation as we know it. Why do they not challenge the school to justify its position or explain its reasoning?It’s always good to hear both sides of the story. I don’t agree with pseudo word lists for homework by the way?

    Reply

    • teachwell
      February 12, 2016 @ 11:26 pm

      I don’t think anyone who supports SSP does!! It misses the point entirely which is that they should be words that the child has not encountered before and how well the have learnt the code. For example -if ‘y’ is last letter of a word whether real or pseudo – it should be pronounced as ‘ee’. In other cases – have they chosen what is phonetically possible/plausible? The whole idea of pseudo words for homework is due to the misguided idea that they need to be taught those words as whole words.

      Reply

  4. alexanderomahony
    February 13, 2016 @ 9:34 am

    Does this whole thing just highlight the difficulties attached to arguing point’s on Twitter? I find Twitter a great source of information but I avoid debating anything controversial on it. The restraints of x number of characters leads to an inability to provide a full picture of one’s position and often a decent , real or perceived, into rudeness.

    Reply

Comments

Send this to a friend