Brave and courageous Head Teacher

[owenfeehan]

No it isn't. Apsirational parents send their kids to certain schools so they mix with the right kinds of people, and are protected from the disruptive influence and ideas of socially undesirables.

This is not the same of discipline. A classroom could have rigorously enforced discipline, but it isn't going to affect how kids interact with each other in the playground, and the aspirations of those around a child which contribute to defining his educational environment and his own aspirations.

The level of discipline is rarely a product of a school, and generally a product of an individual's teachers relationship with the class. In my experience a good teacher maintains discipline without needing to be frequently authoritarian but by winning over the respect of students. This is not necessarily easy or always possible, but it is ultimately always the best way.

This could be straight out of the UCD H.Dip lecturers maunal. It is a view where the evidence is interpreted to fit the ideological assumptions, rather than allowing one's "ideology" to be shaped by the evidence.

Firstly aspirational parents try to send their kids to schools where teachers aren't fully stretched by having to deal with crowd control. In disadvantaged schools crowd control comes first and learning is a desirable but secondary consideration.

It is much easier for students to learn in environments where there is not chaos. It is much easier to have a lighter approach to dealing with students in schools where students are motivated. Motivated students are self disciplined, they can have a laugh and then move on with the lesson.

The best teachers in disadvantaged schools are those who are the most authoritarian and who inspire fear. This does not mean that they are violent or cruel or totally po-faced, but they are stern and are able to project authority. They enforce school rules rigorously. In disadvantaged schools, students respect those teachers they fear.

In schools where the students are more motivated, students prefer teachers who are more easygoing, but who are fully in command of their subject. The more “liberal” teaching model only works in schools where the majority of students are motivated, or where the peer group influence reinforces aspiration rather than destroys it.

I don't think we're speaking entirely at cross-purposes. We both seem to agree that discipline is important. Where we seem to disagree is that I think it's just a factor, whereas you seem to discipline is the overarching criteria which defines how well a school functions.

You also seem to think that parents make their entire set of school-choices based upon maximising discipline. If this was true, then we'd just send the army to run all the schools.

All the discipline in the world doesn't take kids with low aspirations and transform them into paragons of ambition and success. That's why parents are so keen to send their kids to schools where they are surrounded by other ambitious and well-to-do kids. Hence the success of private schools and Gaeilscoils.

And let us not forget that in the past, not so very long ago when corporal punishment was present, the reaction for many students to authoritarian teachers (not the same as a disciplined environment at all at all) was to be turned off school and to drop out early - far from enhancing learning, the opposite occurred.

Rather than believing that the best teacher for socially-disadvantaged students is the authoritarian you describe, I believe the best teacher is one who can balance dual tasks of maintaining an orderly classroom with earning the respect of the children for him or herself, and by proxy, for what is being taught.

This is particularly challenging in socially-deprived areas, and it likely involves the teacher acting as an appropriate role model for a child in a way that empathises with a child's challenges and particular predicament.

This is just an opinion, mind you, I can't claim to have any experience teaching schoolkids, let alone disadvantaged ones.

You seem to think if you send in the Seargent Major to poor schools, suddenly great students will appear 5 years later. That's bollox.

[DSCH]

I don't think we're speaking entirely at cross-purposes. We both seem to agree that discipline is important. Where we seem to disagree is that I think it's just a factor, whereas you seem to discipline is the overarching criteria which defines how well a school functions.

You also seem to think that parents make their entire set of school-choices based upon maximising discipline. If this was true, then we'd just send the army to run all the schools.

All the discipline in the world doesn't take kids with low aspirations and transform them into paragons of ambition and success. That's why parents are so keen to send their kids to schools where they are surrounded by other ambitious and well-to-do kids. Hence the success of private schools and Gaeilscoils.

And let us not forget that in the past, not so very long ago when corporal punishment was present, the reaction for many students to authoritarian teachers (not the same as a disciplined environment at all at all) was to be turned off school and to drop out early - far from enhancing learning, the opposite occurred.

Rather than believing the best teacher in socially-deprived students is the authoritarian you describe, I believe the best teacher is one who can balance dual tasks of maintaining an orderly classroom with earning the respect of the children for him or herself, and by proxy, for what is being taught.

Particularly challenging in socially-deprived areas, this likely involves the teacher acting as an appropriate role model for a child in a way that empathises with his challenges and particular predicament.

This is just an opinion, mind you, I can't claim to have any experience teaching schoolkids, let alone disadvantaged ones.

You seem to think if you send in the Seargent Major to poor schools, suddenly great students will appear 5 years later. That's bollox.

Yes there is definitely an overlap in our view points. When I speak of discipline I mean order. Unfortunately there is so much chaos in so many schools. In countries such as Britain where social disintegration is more advanced than in Ireland the problems are even greater. The crap that teachers put up with every day from elements of those who are "our future" would simply not be tolerated in any other walk of life.

In short the gap between the romanticised view of education promoted by educationalists, politicians, journalists, commentators and unfortunately teachers unions (when seeking extra lucre!) is so at odds with the reality of teaching at the coal face, that public commentary on it cannot be taken seriously.

You are totally correct to reject the idea that a boot camp approach can improve education standards, that genie has been released from its bottle, but unfortunately the mass education model is not capable of achieving the goals that the champions of education believe it can achieve. I am, from my own experience, inclined to sympathise with school authorities when they clash with students. The best students (either academically or in terms of all round pleasantness) don't give much grief anyway.

[DSCH]

In disadvantaged schools crowd control comes first and learning is a desirable but secondary consideration.

Isn't that true in all schools?

Well it depends what angle you are coming from.

If it's a general acknowledgment that its a miracle the students can sit still for five minutes, never mind learn, then its true in the majority of cases.

If it means that schools set out to stifle the individual in the interests of imposing the conformity of the mediocre on the creative spirits of the gifted, then it is off the mark!

[stringjack]

In disadvantaged schools crowd control comes first and learning is a desirable but secondary consideration.

Isn't that true in all schools?

Well it depends what angle you are coming from.

If it's a general acknowledgment that its a miracle the students can sit still for five minutes, never mind learn, then its true in the majority of cases.

If it means that schools set out to stifle the individual in the interests of imposing the conformity of the mediocre on the creative spirits of the gifted, then it is off the mark!

Isn't it true that in all schools, the first priority is 'order', since it is thought that order is a prerequisite for learning? If so, isn't the word "disadvantaged" superfluous in your sentence?

[Bogwarrior]

Can't believe this is news. I was also suspended for having short hair, in the mid 80's. The teacher who suspended me, also claimed my trousers were too tight, and my tie too narrow.(Twas the Eighties). Why is this in the National News?

[Carrier]

leaving the teacher aside, does anyone think the parents are being stupid not letting their kid sit the exam elsewhere? i mean the kid dosent need to be involved in the arguement

Na. This way the kid gets an extra year to prepare for his exams and he gets a fat compo payout.

[Leathuru]

If the headmaster can come up with a good reason why short hair endangers the quality of education or standard of behaviour in the school, then let's hear it. Basically, it looks like he's arbitrarily allowing his own private prejudices to determine school policy. He's being paid by the taxpayer to educate the children; not to provide hair advice. No-one has advanced one tangible reason why short hair should be unacceptable. I've seen photos of the guys and they look neat and tidy. I'm utterly bewildered why the headmaster is taking this attitude.

[doheochai]

The principal is a clown

[DSCH]

In disadvantaged schools crowd control comes first and learning is a desirable but secondary consideration.

Isn't that true in all schools?

Well it depends what angle you are coming from.

If it's a general acknowledgment that its a miracle the students can sit still for five minutes, never mind learn, then its true in the majority of cases.

If it means that schools set out to stifle the individual in the interests of imposing the conformity of the mediocre on the creative spirits of the gifted, then it is off the mark!

Isn't it true that in all schools, the first priority is 'order', since it is thought that order is a prerequisite for learning? If so, isn't the word "disadvantaged" superfluous in your sentence?

In disadvantaged schools there is generally a much greater level of chaos. Academic achievement is generally not a priority. Parents generally do not complain that their precious ones are suffering academically as a result of the teachers and the schools.

Teaching in a disadvantaged school is virtually a completely different job to teaching in school where the median student is motivated and academically ambitious. In the case of the former the emphasis is very much on crowd control. In the case of the latter the emphasis is very much on completing the curriculum.

[emmet100]

UNION OF SECONDARY STUDENTS

The Union of Secondary Students has today (Monday) formally petitioned the Minister for Education Mary Hanafin T.D. to intervene in the escalating situation in Tullamore College. It has emerged over the weekend that such rules are widespread across the country.

The Union of Secondary Students is prepared to enter into national negotiations with School Management Bodies and the National Parents Council to remove these unreasonable rules from our schools and wishes the Department of Education to facilitate such talks to avoid this situation escalating any further.


Comments by the Minister for Education that this is a local matter are unfounded, the Union of Secondary Students has received numerous reports over the weekend of other schools, both primary and secondary, enforcing similar rules over the past scholastic year.


Today we have issued a directive to all members of the Union, some 57,000 students, that rules which attempt to curb students born right to freedom of expression are to be ignored effective immediately, the Union will take steps to ensure the protection of such rights and the protection of its members for implementing this policy and is fully prepared to fight this all the way.


These attacks on students rights only highlight the need for a nationally accepted 'Students Rights Charter' in Ireland, something which was recommended in a recent report on school discipline, the Union of Secondary Students is now calling on the dept. of Education to implement this section of the school matters report and to engage with us seriously in drafting and agreeing a students rights charter for Ireland to prevent such abuses of students rights in the future.



--
Nikolai Trigoub-Rotnem

President of The Union Of Secondary Students