Alunh
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Oh and I neglected to say……Option 1 in my last post is the recommended route for Mixed ability. Mixed ability is premised on a child centred approach with the student working at his/her own pace.
If you ever want to see the actual consequence of this over a year, don’t. Students working in a classroom at their own pace on different bits of work……it doesn’t happen. Except for the very very most gifted teachers or where there are small classes, the whole thing descends into……lack of tempo, lack of learning, lack of dynamic…….
@thewayneinspain 7088 wrote:
I’m always open to reading something where is some form of evidence. Have you a link.
I think there is a big difference between setting in comprehensive and grammar schools. At least in setting kids are not consigned to an almost certain path in life.
The problem with setting is that in my opinion it cuts feedback, evaluation and teaching instruction to a minimum, but i would agree that the current system in place in some wrexham schools is even less adequate on those fronts.
Read the Ofsted Report. Have a look at the Gove findings. Read any number of Estyn Reports. Use your intelligence.
Also what has setting got to do with feedback?
What has setting got to do with evaluation and teaching instruction? Indeed what do you mean by these?You seem to have drawn a conclusion about the Grammar schools in that they selected children at 11 to go into them, stigmatised those who did not and cast people’s destiny in stone. You have concluded that this is wrong, unfair, immoral. I applaud your instincts though, whilst agreeing with the sentiment, I do think that you need to look at this more in the round than you do.
Placing children into a Comprehensive isn’t the problem. Children from all social backgrounds can mix in the corridors, the playground and there is no stigmatisation.
Organising the classes into Mixed ability IS the problem. Imagine 30-40 Year 7 children being taught my subject, History, in a classroom all together. In that class there are children whose reading ages will run from 7 or 8 to 15 or 16. How do you propose that the teacher teaches a lesson.
Option 1……..the teacher decides to forget teaching from the front and prepares tailored worksheets for each student. Teacher moves around checking the different students are completing tasks.
Option 2……..the teacher attempts to talk to the class and decides to try and use a language that all can follow….the so called notional middle. The students then do some work based on the lesson presented.
Option 3…….the teacher decides to teach to parts of the class on a rota basis giving different work presentations to different abilities in different lessons.
Option 4…. a mixture of the above
This is chaos. Read Ofsted. Teachers are completely bemused by this situation. Many pursue Option 2 because they think that they ought to be ‘teaching’ (talking with knowledge to the class). This has been identified as the problem of teaching to the notional middle. The weaker students are lost, the top 5-10% are insulted by the level of presentation. The Ofsted report actually argued that bright students are as betrayed as not so bright and that there was evidence that teachers did not even know who was bright.
Mixed ability classes don’t work and the Ofsted report explains why.
SADLY…..it is this crap that is being served up in Wrexham Schools and when Estyn comes back with Report after Report, most of the points made relate to problems that are explained by the Ofsted Report. What our dogmatic council then do is throw out another Senior management team (or they move on) and try to make the same failed approach work yet again. It doesn’t, can’t and is holding this town back.
@thewayneinspain 7073 wrote:
should be sacked for misuse of public money.
If the full council were given the right to scrutinise every quote & invoice over 1k..
Both of you are quite right in identifying these type of endemic types of waste. It wouldn’t happen in the private sector
@thewayneinspain 7059 wrote:
I completely agree that there is a lack of a political vision from the top down. But I don’t think the principle of a comprehensive system is the problem, but that of the lack of regular evaluation of pupils and acting upon it.
The pupils, the teachers and the quality of lessons are the important factors not spending millions on new pretty buildings and then spend millions more of the teaching budget just to pay the annual PFI fees & interest. I’d say core new labour values are bringing the standards of teaching down.
Lower pupil numbers in classrooms, more teachers and more classroom assistants are needed not brand new capital assets and ‘streamlining’ the actual curriculum content.
I’m not sure why you’ve brought the ‘principle of a comprehensive system’ into this discussion because I haven’t challenged this ‘principle’ (whatever that might be). Across the UK there are Comprehensives that are non-selective but choose to set by ability in the different subjects. There are others who employ the Mixed ability approach. Ofsted are not criticising Comprehensives in this report merely the non setting approach. They criticise the habit of teaching to a notional middle in a large Mixed ability group and the failure to actually advantage either the weaker or stronger students. You appear to have a mindset on this question but read the report. It’s fascinating
@thewayneinspain 7030 wrote:
Agreed. The only think i could add is that there is a lack of responsibility.
the top management and councillors get away with making irresponsible decisions.
Eagles meadow was sold to help finance the ‘super schools’ neither have helped the town.
Here we come back to the crux of this however. You say (quite rightly) that “councillors get away with making irresponsible decisions” and then link the decisions made to the Eagles Meadow scheme (which I have no knowledge of how the finances pan out).
Yesterday, the head of Ofsted came out with some pretty clear comments on Secondary schools across Britain. With reference to the non selective (Public and Grammar) schools sector, an attack was launched on the way that children were not reaching their potential because of the unwillingness to set. The Head of Ofsted argued that children should go into sets from perhaps Year 7 onwards so that youngsters can all be in classroom situations that challenge their abilities.
For some perverse reason successive generations of what are (wrongly) called the ‘left’ in Britain have supported the FULL implementation of the comprehensive principle in Britain’s schools. This means Mixed ability and, as Ofsted noted, the practice of using Mixed ability across schools for dogmatic reasons has dragged Britain’s educational attainments backwards.
The position in Wales is worse than England because whilst New Labour in England have largely accepted the need for change Welsh Old Labour (and the Welsh Liberals) remain dinosaurs on this subject. Hence, whilst Michael Gove is desperately trying to turn the English schools around, in Wales we are stuck with what has been (and has failed).
This dogmatic attachment to failed thinking dressed up as acceptable dogma lies at the root of the Welsh (and therefore Wrexham) problem. Failed thinking, failed schools and underachievement.
So I agree with you Wayne but, at the same time I don’t just see this as some personal defects with dubious dealings at every turn. I see this as a political thing with a lack of political vision and political will.
@thewayneinspain 7030 wrote:
Agreed. The only think i could add is that there is a lack of responsibility.
the top management and councillors get away with making irresponsible decisions.
Eagles meadow was sold to help finance the ‘super schools’ neither have helped the town.
Here we come back to the crux of this however. You say (quite rightly) that “councillors get away with making irresponsible decisions” and then link the decisions made to the Eagles Meadow scheme (which I have no knowledge of how the finances pan out).
Yesterday, the head of Ofsted came out with some pretty clear comments on Secondary schools across Britain. With reference to the non selective (Public and Grammar) schools sector, an attack was launched on the way that children were not reaching their potential because of the unwillingness to set. The Head of Ofsted argued that children should go into sets from perhaps Year 7 onwards so that youngsters can all be in classroom situations that challenge their abilities.
For some perverse reason successive generations of what are (wrongly) called the ‘left; in Britain have supported the FULL implementation of the comprehensive principle in Britain’s schools. This means Mixed ability and, as Ofsted noted, the practice of using Mixed ability across schools for dogmatic reasons has dragged Britain’s educational attainments backwards.
The position in Wales is worse than England because whilst New Labour in England have largely accepted the need for change Welsh Old Labour (and the Welsh Liberals) remain dinosaurs on this subject. Hence, whilst Michael Gove is desperately trying to turn the English schools around, in Wales we are stuck with what has been (and has failed).
This dogmatic attachment to failed thinking dressed up as acceptable dogma lies at the root of the Welsh (and therefore Wrexham) problem. Failed thinking, failed schools and underachievement.
So I agree with you Wayne but, at the same time I don’t just see this as some personal defects with dubious dealings at every turn. I see this as a political thing with a lack of political vision and political will.
I have no opinion about the prison issue per se Liam but it is unfair to those who support the building not to factor in the large swathe of jobs that do come to these places over time. One area that is often neglected is the teaching profession because the emphasis on rehabilitation sees a large number of jobs crop up across the curriculum. One of my friends teaches English in one of the prisons but there is need for all sorts of subject advisors and tutors in a modern nick
I always expect individuals to act in their own interests. Sometimes those interests will coincide with a wider consensus and be in the interests of the whole community, sometimes they will be not. Each Councillor will do similarly. If the protests against something lead to Councillors stopping ‘progress’ in their tracks, so be it. Unfortunately, judging by the remarks about the Poll Tax and CND it is clear that Benjamin’s definition of ‘progress’ is itself subjective.
Just because there are those who oppose a prison doesn’t mean that they are against ‘progress’ it just means that they have a different opinion about what constitutes ‘progress’
I was brought up on the old adage of “use it or lose it”. The world is a changing place and both pubs and working men’s clubs are evaporating because of the changes. Even 21st birthdays are almost impossible to have in a Community Centre now because either people don’t go or they rush off to town by 9.
If the stats show that they aren’t worth keeping, close them.
@thewayneinspain 6903 wrote:
I agree,
I think it never be better organised until the level of transparency is almost a 100% and the public stop voting for the political parties rather the competency of the politicians.
the council and their politicians get away with being incompetent.
I agree. Whilst it is understandable that people have political predispositions, there are real problems with voting local election after local election for the same political party. Local Councillors may well share similar values to the national party but, ultimately, running a local authority is more about brass tacks efficiency, honesty and solid good sense than great ideas. One only has to hark back to the farce that was the Theatre project, look at the running of the various Markets, and evaluate where the authority is in its Secondary Education performance to see the limitations of the Council over several recent years.
My favourite joke policy decision was to allow the monstrosity that is the Wrexham Bus station to be developed in the way that it was. How anyone could have built a Bus station that left the buses in the street blocking each other and clogging the roads up when the previous one actually LOGICALLY allowed pickup on the island, is beyond me. Any 5 year old designer could have come up with a modification on the previous that refurbed, put a roof on the top, allowed pedestrianisation at the top of Trinity Street (and therefore safety) and avoided what we have today.
