NationStates Jolt Archive

While Ontario has impressed me by considering the elimination of the "zero-responsibility" policies of the past, Britain continues to suffer from one of the biggest problems that face all schools. That is the idea that we should protect the self-esteem of stupid students. Here is another policy that could only be brought to you by government...

Teachers in Britain are being told (http://breitbart.com/print.php?id=paChildrenfri00pupilshands&show_article=1&catnum=0)to avoid asking for shows of hands in answering questions... All in the name of "fairness". They don't want to see stupid, slow, or lazy students "left behind" in the great self-esteem factories that have taken over institutions of learning.


Education Secretary Alan Johnson said: "We need to make sure that no-one is left behind at any point - from the most gifted and talented children at the top of the class, to the quiet child who is well-practised at hiding from the teacher's gaze at the back of the class."

Read the linked article for the inane recommended alternatives...

yeah I saw that on the telly...what a shower....

DfES in completely and utterly retarded and backwards approach to a problem shocker!

It's not much of a headline but I feel it conveys a message.

how does this benefit them in the real world?

that should be a question every educator should ask before implementing some idiotic policy.

the schools here won't give a child a grade below a "C" because it could "hurt their feelings"

how about lying to them about their progress? how does that help them?

I don't know about you but I would want to know if I wasn't meeting expectations.

You do realise that no teachers are going to actually do this.

While Ontario has impressed me by considering the elimination of the "zero-responsibility" policies of the past, Britain continues to suffer from one of the biggest problems that face all schools. That is the idea that we should protect the self-esteem of stupid students. Here is another policy that could only be brought to you by government...

Teachers in Britain are being told (http://breitbart.com/print.php?id=paChildrenfri00pupilshands&show_article=1&catnum=0)to avoid asking for shows of hands in answering questions... All in the name of "fairness". They don't want to see stupid, slow, or lazy students "left behind" in the great self-esteem factories that have taken over institutions of learning.


Read the linked article for the inane recommended alternatives...

Wow. That's pretty fucking stupid. Why do British school teachers need to preserve the self-esteem of students? If you can't answer the question, don't raise your fucking hand, and learn what you need to know to answer the next question.

Besides, I don't know how British students are, but a teacher in my old high school would be damn lucky if anyone raised their hand, anyway.

You do realise that no teachers are going to actually do this.

the fact that some idiot thinks it's a good idea bothers me.

Having the teacher choose a child to answer the question? That's what they do anyway if there aren't many hands shown.

Letting them discuss the answer for 30 seconds? Quite acceptable and applaudable in my opinion.

The problem, even at my university is that when a lecturer or teacher asks a question, 90% of people know the answer, but are just too shy. So the only relatively intelligent, but braver student gets to show off more, and become arrogant little sods.

I don't think these two alternatives are insane at all.

You do realise that no teachers are going to actually do this.
Yes, they will. Never underestimate the idiocy of brand new teachers.

Having the teacher choose a child to answer the question? That's what they do anyway if there aren't many hands shown.

Letting them discuss the answer for 30 seconds? Quite acceptable and applaudable in my opinion.

The problem, even at my university is that when a lecturer or teacher asks a question, 90% of people know the answer, but are just too shy. So the only relatively intelligent, but braver student gets to show off more, and become arrogant little sods.

I don't think these two alternatives are insane at all.

you think we should reward shy people? if you want to answer the question answer it, if you don't, don't.

how hard is that?

Its just like here int he states where kids dont get cut from sports teams(outside of school) and everybody gets trophy.

"Everyone's a Winner!!!"

NO.

Life is not fair. Yes you did your best. And yes, your best was not good enough.

They are the winners ...therefore you are the loser.

Yes, you are the only kid in class who didnt understand the question or the answer.

THE is not pronounced "Tuh-Hee".

There is whole lot of this kind of soft sell bullshit being passed on our kids.

Imagine...we are going to hand the world over to these kids one day...the wieght of society on their shoulders...and they wont know what to do when failure arrives...as it ALWAYS does.

"No sharp corners, and little billy isnt stupid he is special."

The idea, I think, is to find a new way of getting people to answer to that those who know the answer but are too shy to put their hand up will get asked anyway.

The idea, I think, is to find a new way of getting people to answer to that those who know the answer but are too shy to put their hand up will get asked anyway.

Well, to be honest, typically no one ever raises their hand, and the teacher ends up calling on someone anyway.

you think we should reward shy people? if you want to answer the question answer it, if you don't, don't.

how hard is that?

Point taken. I would like to add.

Most Unis make you take a Public Speaking class if havnt already had one because "Shy" is not a good thing.

I am "Shy" and i fully intend to take a Public speaking and a Debate Class ...at 32 years old so that i stop blushing when speaking publically.

Shy makes one appear stupid and or lazy. People need a voice.

Its just like here int he states where kids dont get cut from sports teams(outside of school) and everybody gets trophy.

"Everyone's a Winner!!!"

NO.

Life is not fair. Yes you did your best. And yes, your best was not good enough.

They are the winners ...therefore you are the loser.

Yes, you are the only kid in class who didnt understand the question or the answer.

THE is not pronounced "Tuh-Hee".

There is whole lot of this kind of soft sell bullshit being passed on our kids.

Imagine...we are going to hand the world over to these kids one day...the wieght of society on their shoulders...and they wont know what to do when failure arrives...as it ALWAYS does.

"No sharp corners, and little billy isnt stupid he is special."

Well...no, it isn't.

It's more like getting the kid who would get easily get onto the team, but is too shy to try out, to give it a go.

Point taken. I would like to add.

Most Unis make you take a Public Speaking class if havnt already had one because "Shy" is not a good thing.

I am "Shy" and i fully intend to take a Public speaking and a Debate Class ...at 32 years old so that i stop blushing when speaking publically.

Shy makes one appear stupid and or lazy. People need a voice.

I was shy. Forcing students to give presentations in front of the class and making them worth lots of points is a good way to get over it.

Well, maybe in whatever school you went to. Here, there were always the attention seekers sticking their hand up.

Or the easy method of jumping on an easy question early so you won't get asked the hard ones

Well, to be honest, typically no one ever raises their hand, and the teacher ends up calling on someone anyway.

Well, maybe in whatever school you went to. Here, there were always the attention seekers sticking their hand up.

Firstly, this strikes me as the action of a politician jockeying for the attention of a new PM with a terribly innovative policy, and the action of a politician retreating to Old Labour values that eschew competition.

Unsurprisingly, the whole notion is spurious. The stupid should not be protected, they should be made to feel inferior and hence compelled to work, whilst the quiet but intelligent will prosper anyway.

Firstly, this strikes me as the action of a politician jockeying for the attention of a new PM with a terribly innovative policy, and the action of a politician retreating to Old Labour values that eschew competition.

Unsurprisingly, the whole notion is spurious. The stupid should not be protected, they should be made to feel inferior and hence compelled to work, whilst the quiet but intelligent will prosper anyway.

You want to encourage people by lowering their self esteem. Interesting idea

Well, maybe in whatever school you went to. Here, there were always the attention seekers sticking their hand up.

I only ever do so when no one else is raising their hand and I just want to get on with it.

Like in the Humanities class I took over the spring session.

You want to encourage people by lowering their self esteem. Interesting idea

No. I want to compel them to work by humiliating them if they don't. Most children are able to at least make a passable attempt at presentations and essays, hence humiliate them if they don't.

No. I want to compel them to work by humiliating them if they don't. Most children are able to at least make a passable attempt at presentations and essays, hence humiliate them if they don't.

Or you could take a much more positive route and just encourage those who are hesitant and make them feel secure in speaking up.

People already don't answer questions because they fear they will look stupid. We should be continuing to tell people that everything they have to say will be treated with respect. If it's wrong tell them, but don't humiliate them along with that

Or the easy method of jumping on an easy question early so you won't get asked the hard ones

Well, I know that my teachers, if they had asked somebody an easy question, would come back to them later with the more difficult ones.

Well, I know that my teachers, if they had asked somebody an easy question, would come back to them later with the more difficult ones.

I had a few that used that method. Those were the classes I did best in. The ones where necessity made me learn :p

I only ever do so when no one else is raising their hand and I just want to get on with it.

Like in the Humanities class I took over the spring session.

Well, good for you.

Or you could take a much more positive route and just encourage those who are hesitant and make them feel secure in speaking up.

People already don't answer questions because they fear they will look stupid. We should be continuing to tell people that everything they have to say will be treated with respect. If it's wrong tell them, but don't humiliate them along with that

Oh yes! The terribly patronising "Now Gavin, I'm sure the class want's to hear what you think about this" tactic, the resort of the terminally enthusiastic and new teacher!

If a student works diligently, knows their notes, and actually engages their brain prior to answering a question, they ought to feel more than capable of answering a question. In any case, the patronising, pi approach adopted by modern teachers achieves quite the opposite to what you suggest,
; it further embarresses the student, irrespective of whether they are correct or not.

Oh yes! The terribly patronising "Now Gavin, I'm sure the class want's to hear what you think about this" tactic, the resort of the terminally enthusiastic and new teacher!

If a student works diligently, knows their notes, and actually engages their brain prior to answering a question, they ought to feel more than capable of answering a question. In any case, the patronising, pi approach adopted by modern teachers achieves quite the opposite to what you suggest,
; it further embarresses the student, irrespective of whether they are correct or not.

I would disagree with that. I have met plenty of lecturers and tutors who can skillfully and easily encourage a whole group to venture forth answers. They may be unsure of themselves but they know that as long as they try to work out a solution they will be praised.

What is wrong with enthusiasm in a teacher. Thats one of the problems I found in some of my classes in school. Teachers gave up trying to change and improve themselves and resorted to their old fall backs. The traditional methods that allow some to become lazy and slip behind.

I had a few that used that method. Those were the classes I did best in. The ones where necessity made me learn :p

Yup, it always seemed like a good method to me.

I would disagree with that. I have met plenty of lecturers and tutors who can skillfully and easily encourage a whole group to venture forth answers. They may be unsure of themselves but they know that as long as they try to work out a solution they will be praised.

What is wrong with enthusiasm in a teacher. Thats one of the problems I found in some of my classes in school. Teachers gave up trying to change and improve themselves and resorted to their old fall backs. The traditional methods that allow some to become lazy and slip behind.

There is a difference between enthusiasm of the sort exemplified by Mr. Hector (in a strictly conventional sense, of course), and that of the teacher who attempts to simply be insufferably nice to their pupils. What end is served by maintaining the illusion that stupidity is either welcome or accepted within the classroom? Surely it is better to compel pupils to overcome their limitations through humiliation and fear of the results of failure?

There is a difference between enthusiasm of the sort exemplified by Mr. Hector (in a strictly conventional sense, of course), and that of the teacher who attempts to simply be insufferably nice to their pupils. What end is served by maintaining the illusion that stupidity is either welcome or accepted within the classroom? Surely it is better to compel pupils to overcome their limitations through humiliation and fear of the results of failure?

You don't encourage stupidity by allowing students to answer without fear. You accept that students may not always understand a principle or may not have fully learned some information, and then you try to help make things clear to them.

Punish misbehaviour, disrespect, etc but don't punish those who are trying but aren't succeeding as easily as others

Oh yeah, let's not forget that Johnson is currently running for Deputy Leadership of the Labour Party (and, therefore, Deputy Prime Minister, I presume).

So I'll bet that's the only reason for his comment.

yeah... I usually answer a few questions here and there, but I dont mean to step on anyone. A part of me wanted it over with, and I don't care. I'm not really seeking extra or special attention, nor do I desire to show anyone up. However, I still get labeled as attention seeking and know-it-all.

raising hands shouldnt be that big of a problem, wouldn't it be more embarrassing for a kid who didnt know the answer to be called, because I always thought that would scream "IDIOT!" to the class when he/she couldnt give an answer...

yeah... I usually answer a few questions here and there, but I dont mean to step on anyone. A part of me wanted it over with, and I don't care. I'm not really seeking extra or special attention, nor do I desire to show anyone up. However, I still get labeled as attention seeking and know-it-all.

raising hands shouldnt be that big of a problem, wouldn't it be more embarrassing for a kid who didnt know the answer to be called, because I always thought that would scream "IDIOT!" to the class when he/she couldnt give an answer...

But everyone would be at risk of being asked so it would be up to the students to learn more and not try to hide away from questions and become lazy as a result

This is stupid. why fix somthing that isnt broken?

This is stupid. why fix somthing that isnt broken?

Because it a lot of respects it is broken.

This is stupid. why fix somthing that isnt broken?

Because the system at present is much too open to manipulation by students

But everyone would be at risk of being asked so it would be up to the students to learn more and not try to hide away from questions and become lazy as a result

yeah, but there will always be a time when we dont know the answer because of a sudden brain freeze or being put on the spot type situation. and we may know the answer, but cant spit it out. some kids really cant take a test, because of the pressure. they're a good student, but cant take tests... questions are similar....

without raising hands also leads to teachers developing an semi-conscious habit of calling on some students more than others... or would seem so

what happens then, favoritism?

and I still say it would cause a student to feel and be seen like an "idiot" when they can't answer...

Because the system at present is much too open to manipulation by students

to do what? to not answer a question? because students soooo try to manipulate that.

raising hands also allow the teacher to know what percentage of the classroom understand what is going on too...

to do what? to not answer a question? because students soooo try to manipulate that.

Yes. Yes they do

raising hands also allow the teacher to know what percentage of the classroom understand what is going on too...

No. It allows the teacher to see what percentage of the class want attention or are brave enough to answer. The teacher should be looking to see what percentage of the class don't understand.

But everyone would be at risk of being asked so it would be up to the students to learn more and not try to hide away from questions and become lazy as a result

yeah, but there will always be times when we cant answer a question because of being put on the spot, or because we cant recall it. pressure of answering needs to be accounted for seeing as some students are poor test takers, but good students due to stress.

yeah, but there will always be times when we cant answer a question because of being put on the spot, or because we cant recall it. pressure of answering needs to be accounted for seeing as some students are poor test takers, but good students due to stress.

But I am saying that no-one should be punished for a wrong answer so I don't see where the problem lies with your example.

yep, and they do that too... the people who don't raise there hands have a high chance of not understanding.

Or of understanding but not bothering, or being too afraid to answer

Yes. Yes they do



No. It allows the teacher to see what percentage of the class want attention or are brave enough to answer. The teacher should be looking to see what percentage of the class don't understand.

yep, and they do that too... the people who don't raise there hands have a high chance of not understanding.

the teacher obviously shouldnt call on the kid that doesnt raise there hand and only use that as a poll to see if the class understands. however, teachers also give out uhm...tests...and pop quizzes. so the lazy kids can be found

You do realise that no teachers are going to actually do this.
This isn't an isolated problem. I've had a few guys take off because they are going to their kids graduation.

Fine.

I ask what college the kid is going to.

I'm told that the kid hasn't decided yet because they're just graduating from kindergarten, 5th grade, 8th grade, etc.

These are what I call the "self-esteem" graduations.

Then there are the ubiquitous ceremonies where everyone with an average above 3.0 gets a certificate.

It never ends. There are plenty more examples of how schools try to create self-esteem instead of letting the students earn it through good work.

Having the teacher choose a child to answer the question? That's what they do anyway if there aren't many hands shown.

Letting them discuss the answer for 30 seconds? Quite acceptable and applaudable in my opinion.

The problem, even at my university is that when a lecturer or teacher asks a question, 90% of people know the answer, but are just too shy. So the only relatively intelligent, but braver student gets to show off more, and become arrogant little sods.

I don't think these two alternatives are insane at all.
I remember piping up in a lecture on aerodynamics one time. The prof asked about what a particular form of diff eq was called. I blurted out homogeneous, but pronounced it like homogenized. The prof looked at me and explained the difference between milk and diff eqs and went on. I got called on a lot after that.

You want to encourage people by lowering their self esteem. Interesting idea

Anyone with a shred of common sense knows that self-esteem cannot be conferred upon someone. You either earn it yourself or you don't.

Anyone with a shred of common sense knows that self-esteem cannot be conferred upon someone. You either earn it yourself or you don't.

It can be affected by others. Bullying is one example

I remember piping up in a lecture on aerodynamics one time. The prof asked about what a particular form of diff eq was called. I blurted out homogeneous, but pronounced it like homogenized. The prof looked at me and explained the difference between milk and diff eqs and went on. I got called on a lot after that.

Hehehe. That's a pretty funny mistake, but something I'm sure a few people have done.

The funniest exchange I ever had happen in a college level class was in Modern Physics, and completely unrelated to the material. Fellow asked me if I was French during a break in the class (twas a 3 hour night class). The prof overheard, brought it up, and we all had a good laugh over it.

He referred to me as Frenchie for the rest of the semester. I now work for him, and I still hear it periodically.

I'm brown, damnit :mad:

It can be affected by others. Bullying is one example
I believe bullying is frowned upon in class. It's certainly outside the scope of whether or not one should ask for volunteers to answer questions in class.

I believe bullying is frowned upon in class. It's certainly outside the scope of whether or not one should ask for volunteers to answer questions in class.

I'm confused. I'm for teachers picking students at random to ask questions however I am saying that if they give the wrong answer they shouldn't be humiliated as punishment

I may be wrong, too, but I don't think humiliation was ever the issue. If being unable to raise a hand when the teacher asks "... pupils to put their hands up if they can answer a question in class..." is humiliating, then we're really growing too thin-skinned.

I was responding to a different line of argument from another poster not to the OP itself

I'm confused. I'm for teachers picking students at random to ask questions however I am saying that if they give the wrong answer they shouldn't be humiliated as punishment
I may be wrong, too, but I don't think humiliation was ever the issue. If being unable to raise a hand when the teacher asks "... pupils to put their hands up if they can answer a question in class..." is humiliating, then we're really growing too thin-skinned.

This doesn't surprise me whatsoever. Having been through the first six months of a PGCE (a form of teacher training) here in the UK (I quit after that), I can assure you that "initiatives" like this are nothing new.

Here's another example of this kind of misguided woolly-bullshit thinking:

I was training to be a science teacher (I have a degree in chemistry). We were told not to correct spelling mistakes, because: A. Correct spelling isn't necessarily relevant to the subject. B. It lowers pupils self esteem. C. That pupils spelling words in different (read: wrong) ways showed diversity and that we should respect that.
What kind of utter bollocks is that, FFS?

The discipline strategies available are also simply laughable. I'm not arguing for the reintroduction of corporal punishment here (although in some cases it wouldn't be such a bad idea), but this is what we WERE allowed to do:

Strike 1: Send the miscreant out of the classroom for 5 minutes.
Not much of a punishment as most of them don't want to be in the classroom to start with.

Strike 2: Send them to see their Head of Department.
This can work, providing the HoD is a scary northern bastard.

Strike 3: Lunchtime detention.
Not amazingly effective, largely because they don't bother turning up.

Strike 4: After-school detention.
Again, not very effective, because either they don't turn up, or you end up having to tell their equally twattish parents (who are sitting in their 4x4 outside the school gates) that their idiot kid has to stay behind - and risk abuse by both the kid and the parents.

If they persistently fail to turn up to detentions for more than 3 days running, you can suspend them from school for up to a week. The logic of this absolutely astounds me - how exactly is suspension from school supposed to be a punishment when the kid clearly doesn't want to be there in the first place? It's not like the parents are going to give them a hard time about it - they don't give a shit either.

What's worst about the current system is the absolutely loony and totally unworkable (albeit highly politically correct, which is all that seems to matter) idea of putting kids from all abilities into the same class. Meaning that teachers have to "differentiate" their lessons to suit everyone. For a start, nobody really knows what this means, much less how to actually do it. Even our PGCE lecturers admitted to us that they didn't know how to do it. So teachers usually end up teaching to the lowest common denominator - meaning everyone else gets bored and won't sit still or keep quiet while you try and conduct the lesson.

Apart from the PC issue, I really don't see the problem with streaming (organising classes according to ability levels). It's the most efficient and effective way of teaching. All state comprehensive schools used to do it until about 20 years ago. All grammar schools still do it. All private schools do it. What the fuck are we thinking?

I fail to see how this is even remotely related to NCLB, aside from it being a law regarding education...

While Ontario has impressed me by considering the elimination of the "zero-responsibility" policies of the past, Britain continues to suffer from one of the biggest problems that face all schools. That is the idea that we should protect the self-esteem of stupid students. Here is another policy that could only be brought to you by government...

Teachers in Britain are being told (http://breitbart.com/print.php?id=paChildrenfri00pupilshands&show_article=1&catnum=0)to avoid asking for shows of hands in answering questions... All in the name of "fairness". They don't want to see stupid, slow, or lazy students "left behind" in the great self-esteem factories that have taken over institutions of learning.


Read the linked article for the inane recommended alternatives...To be fair, this would also eliminate one way of figuring out who the smart kids are, to pick on them.