I had a moment of pride the other day. My husband is a keen photographer and attends a local club for fellow enthusiasts. Well, a few weeks ago, at one of these meetings, he noticed a young woman sitting alone and looking rather lost. So he went over to chat to her and found that she was with her grandfather and that she was a keen photographer herself. While revealing this information she also told my husband that she was a student at the school at which I teach. So naturally, he asked her who her English teacher was. When she told him it was Mrs S (Me!) he asked her what she thought of her teacher.( A bit dangerous I thought!)
She told him that she really liked my lessons and that all the students wanted to be in them. When he asked her why this was, she told him that Mrs S "talks to us." (He then told her who he was, which probably embarrassed her a bit and made her glad that she hadn't said anything horrible about me!)
When he told me this story, I was actually moved. It was lovely to hear such comments about my teaching style direct 'from the horse's mouth' so to speak. But it also puzzled me. Why is it so strange for teachers to 'talk' to their students? Surely teachers haven't lost sight of the fact that students are people too?
To answer my own question, yes, many teachers have. I've had horrified comments about my relaxed style of teaching and that I'm encouraging disrespect and misbehaviour. This is rubbish. I've found that students respond better if treated with respect. After all, how are we to earn our students' respect if we don't show them any? I've also found that if any student is rude to me, in most classes, they are chastised by their own classmates and told that they 'can't talk to Miss like that!'
Generally speaking, I've found that the majority of students respond well if treated like people...after all, that's what most of them are!
There's a fine line between being friendly and being a friend. A teacher should be one and definitely not the other, after all, no sane adult wants to 'hang out' with kids... I've found that being friendly with the students and talking to them pleasantly, encourages them to behave in the same manner to me, thus making discipline simple and my life easier.
With my Yr 11 class (the girl in the photography club is in that group) I talk to them, (actually, its more accurate to say that we talk) not only about the texts we are studying, but also about current affairs, new ideas about writers, films, psychology, morality...in fact, anything that will a) set the mood for my lesson, or b) make what I'm teaching more accessible and relevant to the students.
After all, this isn't rocket science. It's education.
Sunday, 10 January 2010
Decisions. decisions!
It's been snowing heavily so school's closed as no one can actually get on to the site, or even anywhere near the place. so I've been catching up on 'stuff.'
The exam syllabuses (syllabi?) are changing, so we have decisions to make - as to what new GCSE syllabus to choose. So today I've been reading the different ones. We have to choose between either our current one or going on to the Welsh board.
The syllabuses are pretty similar, except in the finer detail. I actually like the Welsh board and there's more to this preference than the fact of my being Welsh (even though I admit that this could be a factor!) I think the Welsh one is more interesting and I feel that our students would benefit from it. But it's actually quite hard.
Now why is this a problem?
Well, a while ago, the time to choose a new A level syllabus arrived. On examining the various choices, I found that I liked the Welsh board syllabus. I thought it required the students to be independent learners and the breadth of the syllabus, I felt, would help equip them for University. When I gave my opinion to the department, I was overruled as it was decided that the Welsh syllabus was too hard. I questioned this and gave my argument about preparing the students for higher education and that surely we should stretch the students?
I was told that some students struggled with A levels and we should not make it too hard for them or they wouldn't choose to do Lit...I then said that perhaps the answer lay in being more strict with who we allowed to take the subject as students who chose EnglishLit as a 'fourth' subject because they couldn't think of anything else to do...I was told that my view was elitist! Apparently the argument that A levels should in the main, prepare students for University, and not just provide them with something to do while they decided what to do with themselves, is unacceptable. I've always felt that A levels is the ideal time to prepare students for the independent learning of Uni and not a time to continue with 'spoon feeding.' Apparently, I'm wrong. Perhaps they're right and this is an elitist view after all...
So, you can imagine what I think about choosing a new GCSE syllabus. I can see the same argument arising, because the Welsh syllabus again is harder. The thing is, I don't see this as a bad thing. We should be stretching our able students and any teacher worth his or her salt should be capable of making something potentially difficult, accessible to the others.
But with the emphasis that is placed on results and league tables, I can see the problem with this view. I and my colleagues want the best for our students, but as a department it is also important to get the best possible results, as schools are judged on them. So whatI see happening is the same as what happened when we chose the A level syllabus, we will go with the one that we feel will get us the best results. There is nothing intrinsically wrong in this, as after all, the results are what will allow the students to get to jobs or A levels, or whatever. It just seems rather strange that the results are now what matter not whether or not the students get a full and rounded education, one that will equip them not just for A levels or University, but for life. And in the long run, surely the result of a full and rounded education is students who can take exams in their stride...and get good results?
The exam syllabuses (syllabi?) are changing, so we have decisions to make - as to what new GCSE syllabus to choose. So today I've been reading the different ones. We have to choose between either our current one or going on to the Welsh board.
The syllabuses are pretty similar, except in the finer detail. I actually like the Welsh board and there's more to this preference than the fact of my being Welsh (even though I admit that this could be a factor!) I think the Welsh one is more interesting and I feel that our students would benefit from it. But it's actually quite hard.
Now why is this a problem?
Well, a while ago, the time to choose a new A level syllabus arrived. On examining the various choices, I found that I liked the Welsh board syllabus. I thought it required the students to be independent learners and the breadth of the syllabus, I felt, would help equip them for University. When I gave my opinion to the department, I was overruled as it was decided that the Welsh syllabus was too hard. I questioned this and gave my argument about preparing the students for higher education and that surely we should stretch the students?
I was told that some students struggled with A levels and we should not make it too hard for them or they wouldn't choose to do Lit...I then said that perhaps the answer lay in being more strict with who we allowed to take the subject as students who chose EnglishLit as a 'fourth' subject because they couldn't think of anything else to do...I was told that my view was elitist! Apparently the argument that A levels should in the main, prepare students for University, and not just provide them with something to do while they decided what to do with themselves, is unacceptable. I've always felt that A levels is the ideal time to prepare students for the independent learning of Uni and not a time to continue with 'spoon feeding.' Apparently, I'm wrong. Perhaps they're right and this is an elitist view after all...
So, you can imagine what I think about choosing a new GCSE syllabus. I can see the same argument arising, because the Welsh syllabus again is harder. The thing is, I don't see this as a bad thing. We should be stretching our able students and any teacher worth his or her salt should be capable of making something potentially difficult, accessible to the others.
But with the emphasis that is placed on results and league tables, I can see the problem with this view. I and my colleagues want the best for our students, but as a department it is also important to get the best possible results, as schools are judged on them. So whatI see happening is the same as what happened when we chose the A level syllabus, we will go with the one that we feel will get us the best results. There is nothing intrinsically wrong in this, as after all, the results are what will allow the students to get to jobs or A levels, or whatever. It just seems rather strange that the results are now what matter not whether or not the students get a full and rounded education, one that will equip them not just for A levels or University, but for life. And in the long run, surely the result of a full and rounded education is students who can take exams in their stride...and get good results?
Friday, 24 July 2009
Romeo and Juliet and the reason why
Two days ago saw the end of term (big sigh of collective relief there.)So I was sitting in the English office contemplating the summer break on the last morning of term, when one of my Year Tens came in and handed me an essay. Come on! On the last hour of the last morning of the last day? But I gave her a bright smile, thanked her and bade her a good summer. And waited until the door had closed behind her to curse.
Actually, she was only doing what I had asked. I'd handed back the class' first draft of their Romeo and Juliet essays and had suggested in passing, that they should do the rewrite over the summer break, or, if they preferred, they could do it before and I would mark it for the beginning of next term. So, swallowing my unreasonable irritation, I read the first paragraph of her essay. And almost cheered. It was riveting. Enthralled, I read on.
By the time I had finished reading the six pages of closely typed A4 sheets, I had tears in my eyes. OK, I could say it was because I was very tired, or it was an allergic reaction to the accumulation of dust on the table. But these would be lies, because the reason for my reaction was simply the fact that the essay was superb. It was the best thing that I had read for a very long time. I had brilliant students in my last lovely year eleven and I've written loads about them, but this essay was something else. My best students from last year, achieved this quality of writing and understanding towards the end of their final year. This girl, has just turned fifteen. She has another year to go of her GCSE, and she's already writing like a very good A level student.
I've had a lot of fun with this girl while teaching R and J. She adores the play and won't hear a word against it. So needless to say, suggesting that Romeo was a bit of an idiot elicited an interesting response. When I suggested that the main theme of the play was not love, if she'd had a gun she'd have shot me! However, although she (very wisely) totally disagreed with me about a lot of what I said about the play, she's very, very bright and can hold her ground in an argument, something of which I thoroughly approve. And it was this originality that came out in her essay. The question had been about the methods that Shakespeare used to manipulate his audience's emotions in Act 3 Scene 5 (the scene when all Hell breaks loose with Juliet's father.) By the time I'd finished reading her essay, not only was it very clear that she completely understood what the Bard was saying, she'd also shown total engagement with the two lovers. Her work was polished, sophisticated and mature. I could give her nothing lower than full marks.
It's been a difficult term and for various reasons mentioned elsewhere, I was really wondering why on earth I was still doing this job. Then I read this girl's essay on Romeo and Juliet, and I rememered. And I ended the term with a smile.
Actually, she was only doing what I had asked. I'd handed back the class' first draft of their Romeo and Juliet essays and had suggested in passing, that they should do the rewrite over the summer break, or, if they preferred, they could do it before and I would mark it for the beginning of next term. So, swallowing my unreasonable irritation, I read the first paragraph of her essay. And almost cheered. It was riveting. Enthralled, I read on.
By the time I had finished reading the six pages of closely typed A4 sheets, I had tears in my eyes. OK, I could say it was because I was very tired, or it was an allergic reaction to the accumulation of dust on the table. But these would be lies, because the reason for my reaction was simply the fact that the essay was superb. It was the best thing that I had read for a very long time. I had brilliant students in my last lovely year eleven and I've written loads about them, but this essay was something else. My best students from last year, achieved this quality of writing and understanding towards the end of their final year. This girl, has just turned fifteen. She has another year to go of her GCSE, and she's already writing like a very good A level student.
I've had a lot of fun with this girl while teaching R and J. She adores the play and won't hear a word against it. So needless to say, suggesting that Romeo was a bit of an idiot elicited an interesting response. When I suggested that the main theme of the play was not love, if she'd had a gun she'd have shot me! However, although she (very wisely) totally disagreed with me about a lot of what I said about the play, she's very, very bright and can hold her ground in an argument, something of which I thoroughly approve. And it was this originality that came out in her essay. The question had been about the methods that Shakespeare used to manipulate his audience's emotions in Act 3 Scene 5 (the scene when all Hell breaks loose with Juliet's father.) By the time I'd finished reading her essay, not only was it very clear that she completely understood what the Bard was saying, she'd also shown total engagement with the two lovers. Her work was polished, sophisticated and mature. I could give her nothing lower than full marks.
It's been a difficult term and for various reasons mentioned elsewhere, I was really wondering why on earth I was still doing this job. Then I read this girl's essay on Romeo and Juliet, and I rememered. And I ended the term with a smile.
Tuesday, 14 July 2009
The 'Alan Shore technique'
My year tens have had their final lesson of the year. It consisted of the final few speeches from the class. One of my girls stood up and despite obvious nerves (which she conquered pretty quickly) delivered a riveting speech on tolerance and the monstrous (her word not mine) behaviour of racists who gain followers by pretending to be reasonable and patriotic. Her speech was technically brilliant. Any persuasive technique you could have wanted was there. Her passion and clear understanding of both her subject matter and the what I now call (and so do the kids) the 'Alan Shore technique' was evident in every line and every movement. She was wonderful.
And I wasn't the only one who thought so. The class listened in total silence, completely enthralled by her. When I asked for comments at the end, one of the students, who had mislaid her GCSE speaking and listening criteria said it was an A*. I asked her how she could be so sure if she didn't have the criteria in front of her and she said, "Everyone listened. You could have heard a pin drop. She used all the Alan Shore techniques, but more than that, we were all completely grabbed by what she said, and if that isn't total engagement of audience, I don't know what is."
I had to agree. She was correct. Of course she was.
But the thing was, it wasn't the fact that the student's speech was clearly an A* grade, it was the fact that the other students knew it and were happy for it to be an A*.
There was no jealousy or resentment, just genuine pleasure at the quality of work produced by one of their colleagues. They were, as a whole class, delighted by the work each and every one of them had produced.
During this entire exercise, they were supportive and generous with their praise and help. Not once did I sense envy at a good speech, or malicious glee at a less successful student's work.
When I tried to explain to a colleague that the first ten minutes of all my lessons are spent creating and developing an atmosphere where students feel relaxed, cooperative and part of a team, this is exactly what I was referring to. There is a feeling of friendship in the class. A feeling of everyone being in it together. It takes a while to create this, and sometimes it doesn't work. But it was nice to see in that last lesson, that in this class, it had.
And I wasn't the only one who thought so. The class listened in total silence, completely enthralled by her. When I asked for comments at the end, one of the students, who had mislaid her GCSE speaking and listening criteria said it was an A*. I asked her how she could be so sure if she didn't have the criteria in front of her and she said, "Everyone listened. You could have heard a pin drop. She used all the Alan Shore techniques, but more than that, we were all completely grabbed by what she said, and if that isn't total engagement of audience, I don't know what is."
I had to agree. She was correct. Of course she was.
But the thing was, it wasn't the fact that the student's speech was clearly an A* grade, it was the fact that the other students knew it and were happy for it to be an A*.
There was no jealousy or resentment, just genuine pleasure at the quality of work produced by one of their colleagues. They were, as a whole class, delighted by the work each and every one of them had produced.
During this entire exercise, they were supportive and generous with their praise and help. Not once did I sense envy at a good speech, or malicious glee at a less successful student's work.
When I tried to explain to a colleague that the first ten minutes of all my lessons are spent creating and developing an atmosphere where students feel relaxed, cooperative and part of a team, this is exactly what I was referring to. There is a feeling of friendship in the class. A feeling of everyone being in it together. It takes a while to create this, and sometimes it doesn't work. But it was nice to see in that last lesson, that in this class, it had.
Saturday, 27 June 2009
A lesson in three parts
Yesterday, my yr 10s began their oral work based on the speeches they'd been watching. This was quite a hairy exercise as it turned out that this lesson was to be observed - officially. I'd already set up the lesson, so remembering too late that this would be a performance managed lesson (observed to see if I know what I'm doing!). I just hoped that my yr 10s would do the business.
I've been told by 'people in the know' that I should be doing three-part lessons, involving some 'starter' exercise to get the kids interested, a development and then a plenary, summing up what I'd done.
Well, I begin every lesson with conversation. I talk to my classes. I show interest in what they do. I let them know that they matter. The result of this is students that know their teacher doesn't just see them as receptacles for knowledge, that the teacher sees them as people. The effect of this is students who are in the mood to be cooperative. Who are in the mood to learn. This, is my 'starter'. And it works.
So this is what I did at the beginning of yesterday's lesson. I know that they don't particularly enjoy standing up and speaking formally, so it was my place to make them feel comfortable, so they could do the best that they could. I cracked a few very bad jokes (the groan-worthy ones are always the best!) then told them about assessment. I'd decided that they would peer assess the speeches and have to justify the grade using the GCSE criteria which I gave to them. I also told them that they should always look for the positive in their peers, to focus on that and not on what might not have worked so well. This comment (a bit sneakily I suppose) was also intented for the assessor sitting in the back of the class.
They then began their speeches. They were quite wonderful. They were articulate, clever and persuasive. They used the Alan Shore techniques (see previous blog) to perfection. I was so proud of them. The colleague observing my lesson may have been there to watch me, but I wanted her to see them. To see how good they have become. They are bright students who work well. They work well because they enjoy their lessons. And they learn. Surely this is what matters and not whether or not my lessons have these arbitary 3 parts.
I've been told by 'people in the know' that I should be doing three-part lessons, involving some 'starter' exercise to get the kids interested, a development and then a plenary, summing up what I'd done.
Well, I begin every lesson with conversation. I talk to my classes. I show interest in what they do. I let them know that they matter. The result of this is students that know their teacher doesn't just see them as receptacles for knowledge, that the teacher sees them as people. The effect of this is students who are in the mood to be cooperative. Who are in the mood to learn. This, is my 'starter'. And it works.
So this is what I did at the beginning of yesterday's lesson. I know that they don't particularly enjoy standing up and speaking formally, so it was my place to make them feel comfortable, so they could do the best that they could. I cracked a few very bad jokes (the groan-worthy ones are always the best!) then told them about assessment. I'd decided that they would peer assess the speeches and have to justify the grade using the GCSE criteria which I gave to them. I also told them that they should always look for the positive in their peers, to focus on that and not on what might not have worked so well. This comment (a bit sneakily I suppose) was also intented for the assessor sitting in the back of the class.
They then began their speeches. They were quite wonderful. They were articulate, clever and persuasive. They used the Alan Shore techniques (see previous blog) to perfection. I was so proud of them. The colleague observing my lesson may have been there to watch me, but I wanted her to see them. To see how good they have become. They are bright students who work well. They work well because they enjoy their lessons. And they learn. Surely this is what matters and not whether or not my lessons have these arbitary 3 parts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
