Parents role in Education ?


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Parents role in Education ?

Previous · 1 . . . 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 . . . 27 · Next
Author Message
Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 7081
Credit: 27,511,365
RAC: 36,129
United Kingdom
Message 1385060 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 8:11:21 UTC
Last modified: 27 Jun 2013, 8:11:56 UTC

I suspect you are going to like this.

A close friend has 3 daughters her eldest 2 both have good jobs and have turned out well. Her youngest (14) has had a few problems at school and to cut a long story short, Social Services have become involved, despite providing a stable home and having 2 daughters with no problems my friend is seen as at fault.

One thing the social worker said was that she must allow her daughter to use "street speak" otherwise she will feel isolated. My friend is furious and hates hearing her daughter "sound so uneducated"!

Hopefully her daughter will realise not to use it when she eventually applies for a job!!
____________


Today is life, the only life we're sure of. Make the most of today.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1385067 - Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 10:52:10 UTC
Last modified: 27 Jun 2013, 11:02:35 UTC

Yes I do like it! Isn't it nice to hear about a responsible parent for a change? But I would like to comment further, and I'll be very careful as I do. You don't say whether your friend is a single parent family or not, if she is, then she deserves even more credit for bringing up 2 girls that have turned out well, and being concerned about the younger one. I do have some knowledge of Social Services from my time as an FE teacher, as it is not unusual to have colleagues whose wives are also primary or secondary school teachers. Schools don't usually get the SS involved unless they have exhausted their own disciplinary procedures first, so it does sound as if she has been a real concern.

When SS got involved they would have had a school report on the problems, and if a single parent, it would likely have ticked a box on a form. Yes I agree that is unfair discrimination, of course it is, but the majority of cases they deal with do come from that background that is a fact, and they tend to approach things with pre-conceived views. I would have thought that further investigation in this case, would have quite clearly shown that the girl does have a stable background, has two role models in the case of her sisters, and a sensible mother trying to behave responsibly.

But, it has to be said, that Social Services in the UK seems to be a job that people drift into rather than through choice, and I think it is not particularly well paid at the lower levels. Although we hear regularly in the media of local SS managers on inflated salaries making stupid decisions that cost childrens lives. I personally don't have very much confidence in them to recognise a true case of neglect against one that just needs a clip around the ear. I don't think your friend should feel "at fault" and if that is how they have made her feel then that is wrong. Yes, she is legally responsible for the childs behaviour until the age of 16, that is a slightly different matter.

This business of "street speak" would have angered me as well I have to say, and my first reaction would probably have been to tell the Social worker to go take a running jump. But, in their defence, were they being offhand or just being realistic? If all her social circle do speak like that and she gets encouraged to speak "better" will that ostracise her from her friends, "oooh little Miss la-di-dah!", you know what kids can be like. I would urge your friend to encourage her daughter to gradually change her group of friends, perhaps her sisters could invite her out with their friends who don't feel the need to maintain "street cred". And yes, going for a job interview with that level of response, isn't going to achieve very much is it. But at her age it's probably "am I bovvered?". When she's stacking shelves in supermarkets at age 18, it's a bit late to wake up to the reality. Your friend seems a really nice person and I genuinely wish her well.

bobby
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 1962
Credit: 14,896,868
RAC: 2,772
United States
Message 1385262 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 0:35:06 UTC - in response to Message 1385067.

Yes I do like it! Isn't it nice to hear about a responsible parent for a change? But I would like to comment further, and I'll be very careful as I do. You don't say whether your friend is a single parent family or not, if she is, then she deserves even more credit for bringing up 2 girls that have turned out well, and being concerned about the younger one. I do have some knowledge of Social Services from my time as an FE teacher, as it is not unusual to have colleagues whose wives are also primary or secondary school teachers. Schools don't usually get the SS involved unless they have exhausted their own disciplinary procedures first, so it does sound as if she has been a real concern.

When SS got involved they would have had a school report on the problems, and if a single parent, it would likely have ticked a box on a form. Yes I agree that is unfair discrimination, of course it is, but the majority of cases they deal with do come from that background that is a fact, and they tend to approach things with pre-conceived views. I would have thought that further investigation in this case, would have quite clearly shown that the girl does have a stable background, has two role models in the case of her sisters, and a sensible mother trying to behave responsibly.

But, it has to be said, that Social Services in the UK seems to be a job that people drift into rather than through choice, and I think it is not particularly well paid at the lower levels. Although we hear regularly in the media of local SS managers on inflated salaries making stupid decisions that cost childrens lives. I personally don't have very much confidence in them to recognise a true case of neglect against one that just needs a clip around the ear. I don't think your friend should feel "at fault" and if that is how they have made her feel then that is wrong. Yes, she is legally responsible for the childs behaviour until the age of 16, that is a slightly different matter.

This business of "street speak" would have angered me as well I have to say, and my first reaction would probably have been to tell the Social worker to go take a running jump. But, in their defence, were they being offhand or just being realistic? If all her social circle do speak like that and she gets encouraged to speak "better" will that ostracise her from her friends, "oooh little Miss la-di-dah!", you know what kids can be like. I would urge your friend to encourage her daughter to gradually change her group of friends, perhaps her sisters could invite her out with their friends who don't feel the need to maintain "street cred". And yes, going for a job interview with that level of response, isn't going to achieve very much is it. But at her age it's probably "am I bovvered?". When she's stacking shelves in supermarkets at age 18, it's a bit late to wake up to the reality. Your friend seems a really nice person and I genuinely wish her well.


Alternatively there is a well established complaints system for decisions of Children's Services.

____________
I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Profile betregerProject donor
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 29 Jun 99
Posts: 2497
Credit: 5,232,256
RAC: 8,147
United States
Message 1385267 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 1:47:51 UTC - in response to Message 1187645.
Last modified: 28 Jun 2013, 1:50:59 UTC

Major, you folks in Texas have a handle on it with the increasing size of the public school classes.
____________

Profile Gary CharpentierProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12732
Credit: 7,267,150
RAC: 17,589
United States
Message 1385287 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 4:40:23 UTC - in response to Message 1385060.

One thing the social worker said was that she must allow her daughter to use "street speak" otherwise she will feel isolated. My friend is furious and hates hearing her daughter "sound so uneducated"!

Hopefully her daughter will realise not to use it when she eventually applies for a job!!

I didn't know your government was doing such a fine job of keeping the people shackled to a welfare system. Of course I expect that out of the American Union teacher system.

____________

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1385322 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 8:45:56 UTC
Last modified: 28 Jun 2013, 8:49:21 UTC

Hi Bobby, long time no speak!

Alternatively there is a well established complaints system for decisions of Children's Services.

Yes of course there is, but I would caution against it, unless it was considerably more serious than that. A complaint of that nature could put any request for further help at the bottom of the in-tray, and mark her out as "DTDW" much like the apocryphal doctors notes on patients records. I can see where the social worker was coming from, in that there is already some evidence of the child being anti-social, separating her culturally from her friends could make the social workers job even more difficult. Yes, I do think they are putting themselves first rather than the child. My advice to the mother would be to encourage the child to use less street speak within the home, whilst allowing some of it.

Hi Gary!

keeping the people shackled to a welfare system.

Yes you are right, we do have a whole generation of welfare dependent people. The reason is that years ago to be on the dole, was seen as socially embarrassing, it usually meant you couldn't get a job because you were no good at anything, it meant that you were socially inferior. These days there is no stigma in being on benefits at all, people just accept it as the normal way of life. many people have the view that "Why should I go to work for 40 hours a week just to earn £10 more than I can get for just sitting at home? And I can always get some cash in hand little earners to top up the pocket money." Very difficult to argue against that attitude.

The Governments view is that if you are out of work for a length of time then either you need to be re-trained, or you are lazy and just not trying. The problem is that if you cut the level of benefits to encourage them to become wage earners, then possibly children that rely on their parents income could suffer. No government of either political party has solved this one in the last 25 years!

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1391902 - Posted: 18 Jul 2013, 8:35:44 UTC

Almost two-fifths (39%) of recruits to the Army have the reading ability of an 11-year-old or lower, MPs have warned. A similar proportion (38%) can only do maths aimed at pupils in their last year of primary school, says a Commons Defence Select Committee report.

It says the minimum entry requirement for new recruits is "entry level 2", which is the equivalent to the standard expected of a seven- or eight-year-old in literacy and numeracy. It found all of those who joined the Royal Navy or the RAF in 2012 were above entry level 2. But 3.5% of army recruits had reading levels at this standard, while 1.7% had this level of ability in maths.

The report also raises concerns that 28% of army recruits are aged under 18.

Although I find these figures worrying, I don't think any of us should be surprised. If kids fall out of school with little or no education, they very soon find themselves not only unemployed but unemployable. Then it must be very tempting as a last resort to join the Army, where they think you won't need an A level to fire a rifle. Actually I would suggest that today's modern military equipment is miles apart from that used by troops in WWII, and does need different abilities to operate. It also needs to be realised that the minimum recruitment age from the Army website is

16 years - In Army phase 1 training before your 33rd birthday
(Parental consent needed for under 18s)

Therefore the figures are not really as shocking as they first appear. What is also slightly worrying is

The report says army personnel need skills for when they transfer to a civilian career

What about while they are still in the army? Soldiers with educational levels of 8-11 year olds operating laser guided weapons, even after specific training is a daunting prospect. It costs money to train professional soldiers today, we don't use them as expendable cannon fodder any more.

There are three entry levels of ability L1, L2, L3, and then four main levels L1, L2, L3, L4. Very roughly L1 is GCSE, L2 is O level, L3 is A level, L4 is HNC/HND. When I was in FE education we used to give all students for computer courses, ECDL ITQ/NVQ, T2G, a College test, and we had many students applying for L2 courses that only had entry L2 ability. We had to swop them over to a L1 course first. And it has to be said the the entry L2 students were almost all from Europe where English wasn't their first language.

It seems to me, albeit as someone without service experience, that the minimum recruitment age should be 18, and the ability required to be L1. Didn't we used to have the Army Cadet Corps for the 16-18's?



Forces education

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8685
Credit: 25,009,638
RAC: 29,945
United Kingdom
Message 1391948 - Posted: 18 Jul 2013, 11:19:07 UTC - in response to Message 1391902.

So nothing has changed. The recruit soon finds out that if they are to advance they have to get educated or remain as cannon fodder for as long as they remain in the Army, or on the reserve.

Army website Training and Education.

Regarding your last para, I would disagree, the Army Education system is not that bad. Probably better than schools, and the pupils must obey, no bad behaviour allowed, it is a punishable offence, loss of pay etc. By law they are not allowed to serve outside UK, so there is a period of up to 2 years to train and educate these people.

Then there are the Apprenticeships they run, when I joined it was done by education and IQ tests. To be an Electronics apprentice the min IQ level was 120.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1391978 - Posted: 18 Jul 2013, 13:42:29 UTC

Hi WK, I was hoping that someone with more knowledge would post! I am quite sure the army training is very very good, but like FE colleges, they are picking up the pieces from the failure of the mainstream education system to properly educate our people. The fact that they do it well doesn't negate the fact that they shouldn't have to.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1395094 - Posted: 26 Jul 2013, 7:49:24 UTC

And about time too. Those of us in the business always knew that some of these outstanding schools were not as good as the figures suggested.

Outstanding

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1396945 - Posted: 31 Jul 2013, 11:42:02 UTC

Just goes to prove what I have being saying for many years, that the average parent cannot control their own children, and simply want to offload them onto the state to do it for them. It's almost getting to the stage where we need a licence to have kids, and a parenting test.

School holidays

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8685
Credit: 25,009,638
RAC: 29,945
United Kingdom
Message 1397482 - Posted: 1 Aug 2013, 8:38:51 UTC
Last modified: 1 Aug 2013, 8:39:34 UTC

I see the schools are at it again, because the exams are too easy, a lot of students are taking the exams twice. The excuse being that at their second attempt it is to boost the students rating, but in actual fact it is to get more passes on the score sheet for the schools and therefore improve the schools rating.

Students should not be studying for the same exam twice they should be pushed into reaching the next level.

Schools ask pupils to sit maths exams twice to boost their league table scores

More pupils taking GCSEs earlier, says Ofqual

And a push from the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) to get back to traditional higher education.

Traditional degrees will not fill skills gap, says CBI

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1410990 - Posted: 3 Sep 2013, 8:15:59 UTC

Children from the poorest homes risk becoming an "educational underclass", starting school in nappies and behaving like toddlers, says research from the Centre for Social Justice. The think tank says there are four-year-olds so far behind that they do not know their own names and have the social skills of a two-year-old. The report says an "abysmal" start in life leaves pupils unready for school.

A head teacher told researchers of parents who "just can't be bothered".

The Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) study was produced by a panel of educationalists, chaired by Sir Robin Bosher of the Harris academy federation.
It warns of children who arrive at school already far behind their classmates and who are too immature to begin learning lessons.

I'm not sure poverty is the main reason for this, I still think it is that far too many parents "just can't be bothered" across the board. Hence the title of this thread.

Report

Profile The Simonator
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 Nov 04
Posts: 5191
Credit: 2,077,150
RAC: 2,395
United Kingdom
Message 1411003 - Posted: 3 Sep 2013, 9:36:33 UTC - in response to Message 1410990.

I'm not sure poverty is the main reason for this, I still think it is that far too many parents "just can't be bothered" across the board. Hence the title of this thread.
Report

God forbid parents should have to educate their own children!

Both myself and my sister could read, write, do basic maths, use full sentences etc long before starting school. That's because my mother took the time to teach us these vital skills.
I would say anything else is tantamount to child neglect, or even abuse.

This line also caught my eye as interesting:
An unnamed head teacher told researchers that the label of special educational needs might be "often used as an excuse for low expectations and under-preparation on the part of parents".

Definitely has a point. I have no doubt that dyslexia (and all the other dys...s) do exist, but they should be a rare exception, not a convenient tag.
Many teachers must find extremely irritating such parental excuses as 'oh it's not his fault, he's got ADD'. No he hasn't, he's just naughty because you never made him toe the line.

Deep breaths Simon!

This line also grabbed my attention.
It says, for example, that only 26% of white boys on free school meals achieve five good GCSEs compared with 40% of black boys on free school meals.

At my school 0% of white boys got free school meals, and i achieved 6 A*s and 4 As at GCSE, then three As and two Bs at A level. Free school meals, who needs 'em.
Also black boys only appeared on Oxfam posters, but that's northern country life for you.
____________
A man reading a thesaurus effects an ambulatory ingress of a tavern.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1411019 - Posted: 3 Sep 2013, 11:53:24 UTC

God forbid parents should have to educate their own children!

That does appear to be the view these days, It's not my job to educate my children, what do you think we have schools for? If he's not behaving in class then you aren't teaching him properly, nothing to do with me.

Both myself and my sister could read, write, do basic maths, use full sentences etc long before starting school. That's because my mother took the time to teach us these vital skills.

I can still remember aged 3 sitting on my mums knee trying to read books and do semi joined up writing. How many parents can be bothered to do that nowadays?

An unnamed head teacher told researchers that the label of special educational needs might be "often used as an excuse for low expectations and under-preparation on the part of parents".

Definitely has a point. I have no doubt that dyslexia (and all the other dys...s) do exist, but they should be a rare exception, not a convenient tag.
Many teachers must find extremely irritating such parental excuses as 'oh it's not his fault, he's got ADD'. No he hasn't, he's just naughty because you never made him toe the line.

I need to be careful here! ADD/AHD is a genuine condition that affects some children, that is a given ADD/AHD. But, I do agree with you that in the majority of cases, it is very convenient to label simply naughty kids as having special needs, when it was basically down to bad parenting in the first place. This issue is a minefield, and far too many well meaning social workers without proper training compound the problem, plus people saying its all down to poverty, when it isn't.

I remember school meals in the early 1950's aged 9, when every Monday morning we all queued up at the teachers desk to pay our half-crown for the week. There were always 1/2 a dozen out of a class of 48, that sat in their seats because they didn't have to pay. We all knew why, because their parents were too poor to be able to afford it. Those kids looked so miserable and embarrassed your heart just went out to them. That was handled very badly and should never have been like that.

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8685
Credit: 25,009,638
RAC: 29,945
United Kingdom
Message 1411265 - Posted: 4 Sep 2013, 6:24:32 UTC

Science grades inflated.

Schools' tricks to inflate science grades revealed - BBC
or
Teachers ‘mark pupils higher’ to lift rankings

In one case, a teacher was asked: “Are you saying that .. assessments are being done in such a way to give the child a higher level or higher grade than the one they will achieve through an accurate assessment.” The reply was “Yes, basically.”

The teacher then told of one pupil given a grade C target who was functionally illiterate - who was given a teaching assistant for the assignment.

“When I have read the work that the TA has actually submitted or the child has submitted with the help of the TA, the quality of the writing is that of an adult. And it's clear to me that the child is not responsible for what has been written on the paper. The clarity of thought is far too deep,” said the teacher,

“I do suspect that perhaps the child hasn't achieved the standard in their science work that the piece of work in front of me suggests they have achieved.”

The teacher said he passed the work on to course supervisors and it was awarded a C grade. In the BTEC qualification under discussion there was no grade lower than a C - it was C or fail. The teacher said, in his judgement, the child should have failed.


Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1411274 - Posted: 4 Sep 2013, 6:45:46 UTC

This all happens for mainly two reasons that I can see. Firstly, because school exam pass rates affect the amount of funding they will receive in future, and therefore the amount of courses they can afford to offer. Days were when a school would be given whatever finance it needed to function as an educational establishment. Nowadays they they are being run like businesses and have to compete in the market place against private training companies. Secondly if pupils fail an exam then it is assumed that the teaching was at fault, and a school can be put down for extra measures and further inspections. Nowhere is it allowed for the fact, that some kids are just unteachable or will never have the ability at that academic level. Any failure is seen as a failure of the whole education system and politically that can't be seen to be happening.

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8685
Credit: 25,009,638
RAC: 29,945
United Kingdom
Message 1411297 - Posted: 4 Sep 2013, 7:45:10 UTC - in response to Message 1411274.

As the father of an autistic child, who is mentally about 11 years old, I know too well the problems of "unteachable". Unfortunately the education specialists, health professionals, social services and every Tom, Dick and Harry seems to think they know different, until they have had their go. Usually spending thousands in the process.

But I don't think the Teenagers have to keep studying English and maths policy is going to help. There should be some point, either at 11 or 14, or both, that the schools say no further progress towards GCSE etc. until you can write clearly and show a basic understanding in maths.

Profile Chris SProject donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 32092
Credit: 13,776,141
RAC: 25,333
United Kingdom
Message 1411315 - Posted: 4 Sep 2013, 8:50:46 UTC

As the father of an autistic child, who is mentally about 11 years old, I know too well the problems of "unteachable". Unfortunately the education specialists, health professionals, social services and every Tom, Dick and Harry seems to think they know different, until they have had their go. Usually spending thousands in the process.

Autism is a clinical condition, the causes of which are not fully known. And yes sadly those afflicted can often struggle to achieve what are considered usual standards of education. The unteachable that I referred to was due to bad parenting that left the child with an inbuilt resistance to any sort of disciplined education, which they just rebel against.

But I don't think the Teenagers have to keep studying English and maths policy is going to help. There should be some point, either at 11 or 14, or both, that the schools say no further progress towards GCSE etc. until you can write clearly and show a basic understanding in maths.

I would agree with you, but that is not the current policy being adopted. Politically, failure is not an option, points on graphs have to be attained. The 11+, 13+, & 15+ worked well, accepting that kids peaked at different tomes in their growing up. Flogging a dead horse is not the way forward.

WinterKnight
Volunteer tester
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 8685
Credit: 25,009,638
RAC: 29,945
United Kingdom
Message 1411318 - Posted: 4 Sep 2013, 9:12:36 UTC - in response to Message 1411315.

The problem is a lot of the institutions involved in teaching those who don't pass the required standard, put all those students in the same "special needs bucket".

So that you will get the true medically challenged and the others all in the same class. This doesn't help anybody, no matter how many specialist teachers and helpers are in there.

Previous · 1 . . . 19 · 20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 . . . 27 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Parents role in Education ?

Copyright © 2014 University of California