|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Diagnosing 'learning difficulties' -or worse- in children
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
True... from a practical matter (which seems to be oldandrew's primary concern) if a placebo works, why not use it?
Honesty.
Not necessarily. The examples I gave did not require deception.
Then it could be asked if they are actually placebos.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rugasaw:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
What is it that you imagine I claimed about good teaching?
I read quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
All I said was that for students who are poor readers there was one single treatment.
I imagined that your one single treatment was good teaching(some phonics system if I remember another thread correctly). I do not nor do I intend to say good teaching(phonics or otherwise) is not needed to treat students who are poor readers. But, I do think that more than one thing can help the teaching. In other words I disagree with the one single part in favor of in tandem treatments when they could help.
Well go ahead, what other than good teaching can help?
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
amber.
Ship's Aspiedestra
# 11142
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
...It is not a good sign that having made a claim about the testimony of teachers and none are mentioned, and instead you end up quoting the department for education.
You simply said "Feel free to elaborate".
You got some elaboration by way of three random examples. There's plenty more. I quoted the DfE only as an additional thing of interest, since it outlines major studies where behavioural interventions were found to work, and gives people the detail you are now asking for.
Did you mean to say "Amber, I need complete case histories of the individuals in question with extensive detail on the interventions used and teacher reports detailing from them exactly their views"
Posts: 5102 | From: Central South of England | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
OK, so from your last answer to me, oldandrew, do I understand you are only challenging students with behavioural problems?
Of the students we've taught over the past few years, some have stopped attending school, some the school have asked to stop attending. A good 50-70% of those students struggle to read and write and are reading at low primary levels; many do not have the basics in arithmetic - number bonds to 10, times tables, an ability to decompose to subtract. These are year 10 and 11 students, who have been through 8 or 9 years of mainstream education. I would call that having learning difficulties if they haven't mastered the basics at age 14 or 15. Those the school have asked to stop attending are usually students with behaviour issues.
I am not saying that the SEN system is perfect and works brilliantly, but I think that a school system and national curriculum that pushes kids ever onwards to the next stage when they haven't mastered the basics is failing those students. I have said this in earlier posts - that an entitlement curriculum and a chronological moving on of students means we have a SEN system papering over the cracks - either by providing additional booster classes and by sitting in support in a class to hopefully differentiate the work to a point the student can learn something.
Actually, I am not taking this personally, as in a personal attack, I hear what you are saying and feel for the students who are facing an attitude that says they should not be in mainstream when they can't behave. However, following students around to observe them it's interesting seeing where they do behave, and what works to help them behave. Some classes and teachers struggle with behaviour, others do not and some students do not behave, whoever the teacher is. You cannot making sweeping generalisations for all students in this way.
I think the entire system needs looking at, not the SEN system, which is a symptom of a deeper malaise.
My comment about special schools, and I've made this earlier too, with parental choice in the mix, the fewer able-bodied students in the local special school, the more reluctant any parent was to send a child to that school if their child looked 'normal', whatever their level of ability or chance to thrive in a mainstream school. The local special school (it was close enough to have very good links) only taught up to National Curriculum level 2 - so the expected achievement for a 7 year old. If a child was expected to achieve that or more, they were placed in mainstream.
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I think the entire system needs looking at, not the SEN system, which is a symptom of a deeper malaise.
I agree with this entirely. Having been a class teacher in the system for many years, always in 'challenging' schools, I can certainly see the difficulties fro the inside.
But what I have seen is that SEN children are the ones who suffer the most from the testing, targets and tables system we have.
The worst thing we can do, as teachers, is to blame the children and their parents. We need the parents on our side - not to be classed as 'over fussy' if they push for help for their child, or 'uncaring' if they don't.
Parents, in my experience, do the best they can - and when they know you are rooting for their child they will work with you above and beyond expectations.
[ 26. September 2010, 08:38: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
rugasaw
Shipmate
# 7315
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by rugasaw:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
What is it that you imagine I claimed about good teaching?
I read quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
All I said was that for students who are poor readers there was one single treatment.
I imagined that your one single treatment was good teaching(some phonics system if I remember another thread correctly). I do not nor do I intend to say good teaching(phonics or otherwise) is not needed to treat students who are poor readers. But, I do think that more than one thing can help the teaching. In other words I disagree with the one single part in favor of in tandem treatments when they could help.
Well go ahead, what other than good teaching can help?
Blue tinted overlays or blue tinted glasses in some students. If they have a strong placebo effect then it helps whether or not it actually corrects any problems.
--------------------
Treat the earth well, It was not given to you by your parents. It was loaned to you by your children. -Unknown
Posts: 2716 | From: Houston | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
WhyNotSmile
Shipmate
# 14126
|
Posted
I've been following this thread for a while now, but haven't commented yet. This is mainly addressed to OldAndrew, as he has been one of the most vocal people, but I don't want to limit it.
From what I've read, it seems that the current SEN system can be very helpful for some children, but can also be abused so that children who have no actual 'condition' are given lots of resources, to no effect.
I still haven't quite got to grips with some of OldAndrew's comments; am I right in thinking that your main objection to SEN is that children can be wrongly diagnosed and that this can be used as an excuse for bad behaviour?
Here's my question: if the current system is not working, what should be happening? I understand that the educational system itself has problems (eg insisting that students are taught in year groups no matter what their ability). But, given that that's not about to chance, what should be put in place?
To give a concrete example, let's say there's a child with an undiagnosed condition. He is intelligent, but doesn't like changes in his routine. Generally he behaves well and learns well, but when something changes (e.g. a new teacher, a field trip etc), he gets extremely stressed and anxious. Being 7 years old, he doesn't know how to tell anyone about this, so he cries and hits out at anyone who comes near him. This leads to him getting in trouble, and therefore he feels more anxious, and also confused about why he was punished.
It seems to me (and I admit no expertise in teaching) that intervention like SEN will at least give this child the chance to have needs identified. It may be that no action is generally needed, but when there is a trip coming up, someone needs to sit with him and explain what's going to happen; likewise, if there is a substitute teacher, it may be helpful for this child to be allowed to keep some distance from the teacher for a while, if he doesn't feel confortable talking to a new person. Beyond this, no special action is required.
Without such guidance, the child gets no real help. He may learn to deal with the anxiety in time, but still feels 'different'; he may be teased by other pupils for not fitting in.
So my question is, if SEN is so bad, what intervention should take place in this case?
Let's not, for the moment, get into the possibility of the system being abused and used to excuse bad behaviour etc. Once we figure out what would work, then we are in a better position to talk about how to prevent problems in it.
--------------------
Come visit:
http://why-not-smile.blogspot.com
- you're always glad you came
Posts: 528 | From: Belfast | Registered: Sep 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
wild haggis
Shipmate
# 15555
|
Posted
I have been scanning down the comments in this thread. Some are excellent and some................!!!!!!! I do wish people would actually find out what they are critising before they open their computers. I am writing this from a British/English perspective. The situation in the States is different.
I speak as someone who has a specific learning difficulty (dyslexia) in spelling. I am also a primary teacher with 38 years experience of teaching in State schools in Scotland and England, schools abroad and Independent schools, including on specialising in teaching Dyslexic children. I have a Masters from Kings London. I think I know a wee bit about what I'm spouting.
I was thumped every night at home as I never got more than 0/10 (usually -10) for dictation. I know children who are still thumped for not doing well today!My Higher(A level in Scotland) English was marked down from an A to a B because of my spelling. I was branded stupid because I couldn't spell. I would never wish this on a child!! I wasn't diagnosed until I was 30. I wish someone had helped me earlier to see why I appeared to be failing and that I wasn't stupid.
The funny thing is my so-called brilliant sister who could spell beautifully is not so well academically qualified as me now! So is spelling that important? English isn't a phonetic language and is jolly difficult to learn to spell, ask any foreigner learning the language.
So yes SEN does exist. My son has inherited my difficulties but at 26 his spelling age is only 8.9 years.He didn't receive much help because he was in classes of 30 children and there was no money for extra help to engage in different learning styles with him at school.But I did work with him at home.
There are real SEN conditions (do I need to enumerate - maybe I do as some contruibuters seems to think it is only ADHA that is an SEN category), about that there is no arguement. However there are some, particularly middle class parents, but also others, who seek to excuse their bad parenting by giving their child a title of ADHD. The real condition is awful and can can drive very good parents to distraction.
The probelm in State schools in England is that you often have to wait 18 months for a physcholigist's report before you can get any real targetted help. And even then it is a lottery. As stated already, the individual or group help often given in primary schools is by an unqualified TA who has no idea how to do staged developmental teaching or kinistic teaching. It's really too late by the time the child has got to Secondary stage and by then has been branded as stupid and often developed self esteem problems,and may even be even compensating by behaving badly or opting out. By the way in England schools do not refuse to teach children and just throw them out wiley niley. They may be excluded for a named time but then there is usually a referal to a centre. The problem is that sucessive governments have not put enough money into these so they are few and far between.And because there are not enough Educational Welfare Officers (funding) when a child doesn't attend, often in collusion with parents, nothing can be doen for some time as there is no man/women power to follow up the case.
Most problems could be solved by smaller classes of 12 - 20 at primary school. After all that is why Independent schools succeed. It's not necessarily "good teaching" Some of the worst teachers I have seen are in the Idependent sector (I've taught there!!) but because the school is selective and there are small classes they get away with it.
A good teacher with 30 Receptions and a TA only in the mornings, parents who do not practice reading at home with their children and who blame the school for everything, don't stand a chance. As to the constant pressure to meet so called tagets! (Who has deemed that this level is what is acceptable for a child for this age? When I started teaching in Scotland - then considered the best education in Europe - we didn't teach science in primary school an half the maths and English now taught was not done until secondary. Humph!) The curriculum is so overcrowed childen never have time to spend practicing the skills that you teach. No wonder most teachers only stay for 5 years in the profession
I have been regularly kicked and punched by many a Reception child, who doesn't like to be told what to do, in the last 20 years. Is this the fault of school? I think not - not at this stage. When I started teaching this was rare if not impossible to find, and I taught in a very run down Clydeside area with real deprevation.
Working with children is complex. There are those who learn in different ways, those with genuine SEN problems and those who come to school with no social skills, poor language accquisition and even in nappies today. We have politicians, pushy parents and know-alls who never come into schools to see what happens and believe myths perpetuated by the Red Tops who have a political axe to grind, or business people who forget what they were like at that age, presurizing teachers and stopping them doing what they do well. Let them try to run a class of 30, 5 year olds in a deprived estate, with a TA each morning who because of her paid hours, only comes in the moment the children do, fill in over 120 targets for each child,and have to write up every single thing they do during the day, almost, down to how many scissors they need for an activity - cast the first stone!
Please support teachers in the job they do. They work hard and no one seems to appreciate them.They get blamed for all the ills of society while no one dares critise parents or what politicians tell teachers to do.
We need small classes where teaching can be targetted to the needs of the children at the very beginning of their learning.Not smart alecs who never work with children telling us what to do with SEN or anything else.
Excuse spelling! I am a bear of litle brain!!!!!
--------------------
wild haggis
Posts: 166 | From: Cardiff | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by amber.:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
...It is not a good sign that having made a claim about the testimony of teachers and none are mentioned, and instead you end up quoting the department for education.
You simply said "Feel free to elaborate".
The implication was that you might elaborate about the thing we were talking about, i.e. mainstream classroom teachers seeing SEN behaviour interventions work on their pupils.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
OK, so from your last answer to me, oldandrew, do I understand you are only challenging students with behavioural problems?
I don't even know what exactly you mean by that, let alone where it came from.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Of the students we've taught over the past few years, some have stopped attending school, some the school have asked to stop attending. A good 50-70% of those students struggle to read and write and are reading at low primary levels; many do not have the basics in arithmetic - number bonds to 10, times tables, an ability to decompose to subtract. These are year 10 and 11 students, who have been through 8 or 9 years of mainstream education. I would call that having learning difficulties if they haven't mastered the basics at age 14 or 15. Those the school have asked to stop attending are usually students with behaviour issues.
The question is over cause and effect. I have no doubt that very badly behaved children don't learn. It does not mean they have "underlying learning difficulties". Bad behaviour prevents learning.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I am not saying that the SEN system is perfect and works brilliantly, but I think that a school system and national curriculum that pushes kids ever onwards to the next stage when they haven't mastered the basics is failing those students.
Agreed. However, this is partly a result of the policy of inclusion that keeps kids in classes they can't learn from.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I have said this in earlier posts - that an entitlement curriculum and a chronological moving on of students means we have a SEN system papering over the cracks - either by providing additional booster classes and by sitting in support in a class to hopefully differentiate the work to a point the student can learn something.
I agree that this is part of the reason the SEN system exists and part of the reason it doesn't work.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
However, following students around to observe them it's interesting seeing where they do behave, and what works to help them behave. Some classes and teachers struggle with behaviour, others do not and some students do not behave, whoever the teacher is. You cannot making sweeping generalisations for all students in this way.
Not quite sure what generalisation you have in mind.
However, I do not accept that if a student behaves badly only for some teachers it makes it more acceptable. In fact that just makes it clear that it's a matter of choice, not a special need.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I think the entire system needs looking at, not the SEN system, which is a symptom of a deeper malaise.
I agree that the whole system needs looking at, but the SEN racket is a major problem.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
I think the entire system needs looking at, not the SEN system, which is a symptom of a deeper malaise.
I agree with this entirely. Having been a class teacher in the system for many years, always in 'challenging' schools, I can certainly see the difficulties fro the inside.
But what I have seen is that SEN children are the ones who suffer the most from the testing, targets and tables system we have.
Those are something politicians put in because they thought the system wasn't working and have kept in pretty much for the same reason.
I would consider them a symptom of the problem not a cause. Personally I am happy when my students are tested, it shows that my teaching methods work.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
From what I've read, it seems that the current SEN system can be very helpful for some children
Do we have good evidence for this?
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
, but can also be abused so that children who have no actual 'condition' are given lots of resources, to no effect.
I still haven't quite got to grips with some of OldAndrew's comments; am I right in thinking that your main objection to SEN is that children can be wrongly diagnosed and that this can be used as an excuse for bad behaviour?
If I had to simplify my complaint, it would be that it is mainly an exercise in creating activity rather than achieving anything.
Within that, the medicalisation of poor behaviour is a major problem, but so is the medicalisation of underachievement, the use of amateur diagnoses, the promotion of pseudo-science, the undermining of the professionalism of teachers, and the useless or harmful interventions.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
Here's my question: if the current system is not working, what should be happening?
Resources should be allocated within the usual managerial systems without this bureaucracy, according to what would help kids be educated rather than through labelling.
Inclusion needs to end, particularly of badly behaved kids. Education, not social engineering, needs to be the point of the education system.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
I understand that the educational system itself has problems (eg insisting that students are taught in year groups no matter what their ability). But, given that that's not about to chance, what should be put in place?
Why shouldn't it change?
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
To give a concrete example, let's say there's a child with an undiagnosed condition. He is intelligent, but doesn't like changes in his routine. Generally he behaves well and learns well, but when something changes (e.g. a new teacher, a field trip etc), he gets extremely stressed and anxious. Being 7 years old, he doesn't know how to tell anyone about this, so he cries and hits out at anyone who comes near him.
Oh for pity's sake.
Why does it always have to be really young kids who are upset that are used as examples of SEN intervention? This is not who the system normally deals with. That said, I think hitting people is unacceptable no matter how upset you are.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
This leads to him getting in trouble, and therefore he feels more anxious, and also confused about why he was punished.
If he is unable to understand that hitting people is wrong then he should not be allowed near other children.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
It seems to me (and I admit no expertise in teaching) that intervention like SEN will at least give this child the chance to have needs identified.
The point is that this has been tried and it doesn't work. The fact is that violent kids don't usually have any more "needs" than anyone else and setting up a bureaucracy to identify these needs just makes an excuse for the violence, and wastes resources that could be used to help kids with more obvious needs.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
It may be that no action is generally needed, but when there is a trip coming up, someone needs to sit with him and explain what's going to happen; likewise, if there is a substitute teacher, it may be helpful for this child to be allowed to keep some distance from the teacher for a while, if he doesn't feel confortable talking to a new person. Beyond this, no special action is required.
You seem to think that a child who hits people when he is upset has a special right to adults running round trying to stop him being upset.
No.
He needs to learn, through punishment, that hitting people is an unnacceptable way to react to being upset.
That's not to say his upset should be ignored, but it is no more important that similar feelings or problems on the part of non-violent kids.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
Without such guidance, the child gets no real help. He may learn to deal with the anxiety in time, but still feels 'different'; he may be teased by other pupils for not fitting in.
Labelling kids, giving them special helpers is going to make those problems worse, not better.
quote:
Originally posted by WhyNotSmile:
So my question is, if SEN is so bad, what intervention should take place in this case?
Hitting should be punished. Upset children should be comforted. If the upset is very unreasonable then appropriate professionals should be brought in, but this should be through the pastoral system not through a special bureaucracy.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
I didn't think teachers were allowed to comfort upset children any more.
--------------------
"I fart in your general direction."
M Barnier
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Curiosity killed ...
Ship's Mug
# 11770
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
The question is over cause and effect. I have no doubt that very badly behaved children don't learn. It does not mean they have "underlying learning difficulties". Bad behaviour prevents learning.
So you don't think that learning difficulties can cause behaviour issues? If you find that consistently the majority of students with behaviour issues in school have low reading ages and low CATs scores in at least some areas, you are assuming that the student has prevented their own learning? Have you ever observed or worked with children in primary school for more than the two weeks observations you're expected to do? Because I think if you had, you would have a different view on this one. I have observed eager 5 year olds who struggled and got behind develop into 7 or 8 year olds learning bad behaviour to avoid facing the reading or other things they can't do.
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew in response to this from me
quote:
I am not saying that the SEN system is perfect and works brilliantly, but I think that a school system and national curriculum that pushes kids ever onwards to the next stage when they haven't mastered the basics is failing those students.
Agreed. However, this is partly a result of the policy of inclusion that keeps kids in classes they can't learn from.
So how does that not agree with my point that it's not SEN that's the main issue, it's this underlying system that's the problem?
quote:
posted by oldandrew in response to this from me:
quote:
However, following students around to observe them it's interesting seeing where they do behave, and what works to help them behave. Some classes and teachers struggle with behaviour, others do not and some students do not behave, whoever the teacher is. You cannot making sweeping generalisations for all students in this way.
<snip>
However, I do not accept that if a student behaves badly only for some teachers it makes it more acceptable. In fact that just makes it clear that it's a matter of choice, not a special need.
So the student's behaviour is totally their responsibility? What the teacher does has absolutely no impact on how a student behaves in a lesson? The work the student is presented with makes no difference at all?
--------------------
Mugs - Keep the Ship afloat
Posts: 13794 | From: outiside the outer ring road | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
If you follow a child (or a class of children) round a high school you'll find they behave, and work, totally differently for different teachers. They respond to the prevailing ethos.
For some teachers they are engaged, interested, hard working and motivated - getting good results, for others they play up virtually from the start of the lesson.
This tells us far more about teaching styles than anything. Some teachers struggle to own up to the idea that the change needs to come from them, not the students.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
fat-tony
Shipmate
# 13769
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pottage:
quote:
Originally posted by fat-tony:
Pottage, the only thing that everyone in education seems to agree on is that the system doesn't work. Unfortunately when you suggest rebuiling it you get a whole host of contradictory plans. To answer your question on what would be a better system for SEND is linked to that.
fat-tony
I think I've gleaned enough from the thread (and perhaps more from the reading and asking around IRL that it has prompted me to do) to appreciate that the current system is a cause of considerable frustration and waste. It seems to address some needs that don't really exist, and to leave some who have genuine needs floundering without the help they need. Even when it is addressing a genuine issue it sometimes seems to provide ill considered and ineffective help.
But even in my limited investigations, and indeed even on this thread, I have seen evidence that it does also (however inefficiently) sometimes address the problems of children with undeniable learning needs and produce an outcome they are happy with. That alone tells me that there should be A system, just as clearly as what you have posted tells me that it shouldn't be THIS system.
I gather from what you post that there is no shortage of proposals for systems of provision that would be better, although none that everyone, or even a substantial minority of interested parties seems comfortable to get behind. That's no surprise in the circumstances. For the uninitiated, or the newly initiated, can you draw out any principles that are features of these alternatives? If you were going to answer the call for submissions to the green paper (and maybe you are) what would you be recommending?
Sorry i've been away so long, but workload in education is ridiculous and I'm just grabbing a quick 20 minutes before Governors. I have submitted to the green paper, but i'll quickly explain my fear, as a slight lefty(very slight). When you look objectively at the whole education system and the policy of inclusion/SEN provision, what works and what doesn't you will sometimes find examples of good practice. However they are mainly in a primary environment when the Headtacher has shunned books, IT resources and other facilities(but has a huge building, a throwback to when teh school was bigger maybe) in favour of over staffing teachers so that classes are smaller, teachers get more release time, and then placing a non centrally directed TA or 2 in the class; and probably an inculsion unit and many learning mentors. The teacher then can really make a difference, use their professional judgement, skills and passion and you get these wonder stories of inclusion. That are not recognised by any secondary school teacher I know. We try and mimic them and end up in the mess we've got.
The case of good practice in secondary schools is much rarer. You get incidents like those I mentioned being tolerated and condoned by the system on a daily basis. Now someone suggested that we should make all classes smaller, a lovely idea that even if you could staff by cutting budgets elsewhere, you wouldn't be able to house them(wrap around schools with a moveable timetable would possibly work). If I were to try that at my school and put a maximum clas size of 20 I'd need to loose a third of my pupils. I also am not going to go down the route of blame the secondary school teachers for not being up to the standards of primary teachers. It's not the same job, ask even a primary school teacher whose just moved a few years up into year 6(top of primary) and they'd say teh job they have is different to any other year group. Secondary education, comprehensive schools are trying to do too much. They try to have many smaller schools all under one roof, with a homogenous staff. Inclusion is not just about pupils going to mainstream as opposed to special schools or not excluding the badly behaved, it's about having the right course for all pupils under one roof, yet with a tiny budget, and it effectively becomes a bandaid job. The expertise is spread too thinly around schools, as every school needs a teacher who can do this, or do that. The more you go down this route the more the idea of many smaller schools specialising, a concentration of expertise, and more choice seems the logical option. Which is where my political views jump up and down. Even though more choice for parents, more specialised smaller secondary schools seems to be the answer, I'm too aware that it will simply mean more social division. More avoidance of stigma and the poorest getting a rough deal.
Sorry it's rambling, I probably could have done with an hour or 2 to write that properly. But need to rush off.
fat-tony
Posts: 74 | From: Springfield( The South) | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
The question is over cause and effect. I have no doubt that very badly behaved children don't learn. It does not mean they have "underlying learning difficulties". Bad behaviour prevents learning.
So you don't think that learning difficulties can cause behaviour issues?
It depends what you mean by "cause", but certainly I do not think you can address behaviour by attempting to diagnose learning difficulties.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
If you find that consistently the majority of students with behaviour issues in school have low reading ages and low CATs scores in at least some areas, you are assuming that the student has prevented their own learning?
My experience is that although the majority of children who behave very badly are behind academically, the majority of children who are behind academically don't behave very badly.
So if I had to explain cause and effect then it is more likely that bad behaviour prevents learning than learning difficulties cause bad behaviour.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
Have you ever observed or worked with children in primary school for more than the two weeks observations you're expected to do? Because I think if you had, you would have a different view on this one. I have observed eager 5 year olds who struggled and got behind develop into 7 or 8 year olds learning bad behaviour to avoid facing the reading or other things they can't do.
I think that just highlights the absurdity of the claim. If a teenager has been misbehaving habitually since they were 7, then it seems absurd to suggest that their behaviour could be addressed by addressing the learning difficulty they had when they were 5. The bad behaviour habit needs to be broken first. The original learning difficulty is likely to be insignificant compared with the cumulative effects of years of not behaving.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew in response to this from me
quote:
I am not saying that the SEN system is perfect and works brilliantly, but I think that a school system and national curriculum that pushes kids ever onwards to the next stage when they haven't mastered the basics is failing those students.
Agreed. However, this is partly a result of the policy of inclusion that keeps kids in classes they can't learn from.
So how does that not agree with my point that it's not SEN that's the main issue, it's this underlying system that's the problem?
I don't think you can separate the SEN racket and inclusion in this way. The SEN racket is the bureaucracy in charge of pretending inclusion is working.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
quote:
posted by oldandrew in response to this from me:
quote:
However, following students around to observe them it's interesting seeing where they do behave, and what works to help them behave. Some classes and teachers struggle with behaviour, others do not and some students do not behave, whoever the teacher is. You cannot making sweeping generalisations for all students in this way.
<snip>
However, I do not accept that if a student behaves badly only for some teachers it makes it more acceptable. In fact that just makes it clear that it's a matter of choice, not a special need.
So the student's behaviour is totally their responsibility?
Yes. Human beings are responsible for their behaviour. (Assuming they are sane and the actions are not involuntary, like a sneeze or a baby crying.)
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
What the teacher does has absolutely no impact on how a student behaves in a lesson?
That is not the same thing. Teachers have a responsibility to manage behaviour, but they are not responsibile for the choices of others.
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
The work the student is presented with makes no difference at all?
Of course it makes a difference. A child is more likely to misbehave if they are expected to work harder than they'd like.
So what? Are we going to appease the badly behaved students by expecting less effort? That would certainly ensure that they develop learning difficulties.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pottage
Shipmate
# 9529
|
Posted
Actually Tony that's interesting. I've looked back through the thread and I think it's true a majority of cases where positive outcomes for the SEN system have been described do relate to primary rather than secondary education.
I can imagine that there will be numerous reasons why that might be. Primary school education is more controlled, with classes remaining together and in the same place all day, rather than splintering and reforming in different permutations for each subject. Teachers and any available TAs have a year's consistent daily contact with the class. And primary schools are commonly on a more manageable scale too. My children went to a fairly large primary school because it was the product of a merger, but the year groups in their (average-sized) comprehensive school are four times larger.
So the chances are much greater in primary that teachers will be able to identify a child who is not learning at an expected pace or in a "usual" way. They won't just see the child's performance in one subject once or twice a week. So too are the chances of any strategy to address a child's particular learning difficulties being able to be applied consistently if it is the same handful of staff who will be doing that throughout the year.
I don't think it's feasible to have petite and homely high schools. The trend, if anything is apparently towards still larger schools. So do you think there are things that big high schools can do? Splitting the school into houses is an old fashioned practice, but does it help? My daughters' school preserves the four houses they had generations ago as a (smaller) grammar school, but also divide up the houses as well so there's no more than thirty to forty children from any year group in each sub-house. Based on these smaller sub-house groupings they also have 'vertical' tutor groups for all registration and pastoral purposes which contain just an average of three children from each year (7-13). From my perspective it's hard to judge whether it is effective (in the context of this thread anyway). Is that sort of thing a viable strategy?
Posts: 701 | From: middle England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
If you follow a child (or a class of children) round a high school you'll find they behave, and work, totally differently for different teachers. They respond to the prevailing ethos.
For some teachers they are engaged, interested, hard working and motivated - getting good results, for others they play up virtually from the start of the lesson.
This tells us far more about teaching styles than anything. Some teachers struggle to own up to the idea that the change needs to come from them, not the students.
This is inevitably how it goes when people start putting children on a pedestal.
Firstly, their bad behaviour, poor effort or low ability is the result of an undiagnosed disability. Then, when that argument strains credibility to breaking point (usually because most children's SEN varies between lessons and subjects) the finger of blame moves to their teachers. "He never acts up for me", they say, "it's because I have a good relationship with him".
Of course, children do behave differently in different lessons for different teachers. They will behave better where they are afraid. They will behave better where they enjoy the subject. They will behave better where their peers behave well. They will behave better where their low expectations are not challenged. They will behave badly where their teacher is new. They will behave badly where they know the school will not support the teacher. They will behave badly where their peers behave badly. They will behave badly where they don't get their own way.
Teachers dread managers who try and simplify these sorts of things so that they are all down to the classroom teacher, never the kids, never the school. It's called a culture of blame and it is all you need to know about why most qualified teachers don't stay in teaching.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
