Comments on: Charlene

By: Tigg

Tigg — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:48:11 +0000

“Yet she is seen as a perfectly suitable candidate to learn a subject she has actively resisted learning for several years, in an institution she has continually harmed.”
Oh, but sixth form students bring in more money than those lower down the school!
/cynicism

By: Pat

Pat — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 10:33:25 +0000

It seems like we aren’t making students accept responsibility for their actions. We had a student assault a new teacher and the school didn’t do anything except suspend him for a couple of days because he was special ed. He had other fights as well as other behavior incidents. Then he decided to assault me because I wanted to take away his cell phone that he was using against the school rules. I did press charges and we went to court. Because he was still underage, he got 90 days in juvie and was right back at our school. Hopefully he learned his lesson but I’m not sure he did. If the school had pressed charges at the beginning, maybe he wouldn’t have assaulted me. They weren’t happy whe I pressed charges because it makes the school look “unsafe.” It’s time for teachers to stand up for their rights and not let students get away with unlawful behavior if the school won’t push it.

By: Welcome to the 188th Carnival of Education! at The Core Knowledge Blog

Welcome to the 188th Carnival of Education! at The Core Knowledge Blog — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 10:48:20 +0000

[...] committed what would be considered to be criminal offences in the adult world, writes Old Andrew at Scenes From the Battleground. Yet she is seen as a perfectly suitable candidate to learn a subject she has actively resisted [...]

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (74.50.11.50) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP () and so is spam.

By: Lilyofthefield

Lilyofthefield — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:38:53 +0000

If you take the trouble to follow these incidents up and ask the person responsible for behaviour or inclusion, chances are you’ll get a hissed “Issues!” and that’ll be that. I can think of ten kids a year at our school whom your blog article could be describing. When they do come in they wear what they want and attend only those lessons they fancy, and for only as long as they wish.
And why not.

By: Mr Teacher

Mr Teacher — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 15:33:26 +0000

Yes! Yes! Yes! In my six years of UK teaching to date, I have experienced literally dozens of very similar examples. And of course I expect several more to be added to the list before the end of this academic year. The reasons for this are as simple as they are ridiculous: People in fancy suits who could not cope with even the most tame of students, yet have a powerful say in education policies, bang on incessantly about two things: Inclusion and Students’ Rights.

By: Snuffy

Snuffy — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 10:41:44 +0000

Yes dear Andrew. I have just written something similar on my blog. It is just extraordinary. The answer is so simple but we won’t do it.

By: Mr G

Mr G — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:54:02 +0000

We have a similar – if not so drastic – problem in Australian schools. I presume the problem is universal throughout “western” schools. The problem is so-called “social advancement” where graduation (and thus access to advanced grades) is based not on achievement, but attendance (or in the case you describe, age). A student who has failed in any core subject should not be considered for promotion until the deficiency is remedied; to do otherwise is harmful to the student, other students and the institution as a whole.

Far too many students find themselves unable to partake of or even comprehend the curriculum content at their current academic level because they have not mastered prior levels. This results in “disengagement” and frequently students conceal their lack of ability by disruptive shenanigans which deny other students the opportunity to take full advantage of the education provided.

I do not place the full blame for this phenomenon on the student however; it is the institution (the local school and the relevant government authorities) who have allowed this to come to pass by failure to support teachers’ assessments of student preparedness for future study. In Australian state-run (government funded or “public”) schools, the school has no authority to “hold a student back” and it is frequently alleged (without any valid evidence or research in my experience) that failure to promote a student to the next year level is socially and emotionally damaging. The school may recommend that a student not advance to the following year level, but it is parental choice as to whether or not this advice is followed, and student protestations of “I’ll work harder next year” as frequently heeded, rather than dismissed.

This is not to say that the students in this situation are blameless victims; they have frequently made the choice not to work, seeing no consequence of significance for this choice. But this failure to see consequence is not the fault of the student; it is not that the consequences are invisible – it is that no one (teachers, curriculum coordinators, parents, principals or government authorities) actually enforces them. So when there is no (apparent) consequence of significance to the child, why should they not act in the way that returns the most “benefits”?

As a teacher and a professional, I can see the consequences, but it is apparent that other individuals of importance in the child’s life and education do not make them apparent. I sympathise with the predicament over “Charlene” – but it is not a story of just one child – it is a story of sick system that no-one wishes to acknowledge is failing.