Jamie's Dream School

[Tim Hall]

Robert Winstone and Rolf Harris were very well prepared.

I didn't see the programme, but in my mind confused Ray Winstone with Robert.  I can see his lesson:

Bangs a sock filled with snooker balls hard on a desk and asks "who's the Daddy now?"

[Kathy]

Robert Winstone and Rolf Harris were very well prepared.

I didn't see the programme, but in my mind confused Ray Winstone with Robert.  I can see his lesson:

Bangs a sock filled with snooker balls hard on a desk and asks "who's the Daddy now?"

I'm so glad it wasn't just me who had thet problem on reading this thread. 

[Wowbagger]

I had to google to find out who Ray Winstone is. I'm none the wiser.

[Kathy]

I had to google to find out who Ray Winstone is. I'm none the wiser.

I tend to think of him as Beowulf in the recent(ish) movie.

[JohnP]

I had to google to find out who Ray Winstone is. I'm none the wiser.

Just googling isn't enough - you have to follow some of the links and read the articles.

Ray Winstone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[JohnP]

Missed Dream School until we watched a recording yesterday.  When I saw Starkey on Question Time this week I thought him an insufferable bore and too bumptious to keep my interest.  He was added to the small list of people who persuaded me to switch off.  Even worse in DS.  I don't think he should have been selected for the programme but I guess it follows the trend for reality TV to use shock to gain attention.

Of course, week 2 of DS has now become essential viewing (or at least recording).

[Wowbagger]

I had to google to find out who Ray Winstone is. I'm none the wiser.

Reading can widen even the most closed mind.  

Ray Winstone - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Already read it.

If you bothered to read a few of my posts you might learn something about me before offering an opinion.

[Rig of Jarkness]

Agreed. I'd like to think that a programme like this would actually improve the viewing public's attitude towards teachers and the bloody difficult job that many of them do.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that these kids are the end result of a full schooling's worth of efforts from professional teachers.  They are hardly a glowing recommendation.

[jane]

Agreed. I'd like to think that a programme like this would actually improve the viewing public's attitude towards teachers and the bloody difficult job that many of them do.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that these kids are the end result of a full schooling's worth of efforts from professional teachers.  They are hardly a glowing recommendation.

Children are much more than a product of their school education- in one of my past classes (I won't discuss my present due to confidentiality issues)  31 children, 24 receiving free school meals which means money is very short in the family home, 4 of them had a parent currently in prison, (several others had experienced periods of time when one or other parent had been in prison) two were looked after children, whose early life experience had been one of abuse and deprivation, seven were refugee new arrivals to the country, learning English as a foreign language, one was an unaccompanied minor (refugee arriving alone in this country).  A significant number of the rest of the class had experienced disruption to their schooling- by year 4 many of them had been to more than one other school.  All the refugee children had had disrupted schooling and had experienced some kind of significant trauma.  I'm not saying all teachers are wonderful, and all teaching is perfect.  But there are far more factors that affect the emotional and academic development of a child, not just their school experience.

[Wowbagger]

Agreed. I'd like to think that a programme like this would actually improve the viewing public's attitude towards teachers and the bloody difficult job that many of them do.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that these kids are the end result of a full schooling's worth of efforts from professional teachers.  They are hardly a glowing recommendation.

A fairly small sample. Would you like your daily efforts to be judged by the general public's current view of bankers? 

[Rig of Jarkness]

Agreed. I'd like to think that a programme like this would actually improve the viewing public's attitude towards teachers and the bloody difficult job that many of them do.

Let's not lose sight of the fact that these kids are the end result of a full schooling's worth of efforts from professional teachers.  They are hardly a glowing recommendation.

A fairly small sample. Would you like your daily efforts to be judged by the general public's current view of bankers? 

I believe that it was your post that was aiming to extrapolate from this small sample across to teachers in general.  My point is that the professional teaching community have had 11 years to turn this particular sample around and have manifestly failed to do so.  It therefore does not behove members of that community to deride the efforts of the guest teachers.  In their 1 hour slot they are not only having to tackle the challenge of doing something new but they are also having to overcome the resistance to education engendered by that previous 11 years.

[Wowbagger]

It depends on what they've done. Starkey made fundamental - fundamental - errors right at the start. They are the sort of errors I made in my first term's teaching, realised they were errors and did my best not to make them again. He is touted as one of this country's top historians and teachers at universities.

No matter what the level you're teaching at, if you antagonise your students in the first 10 minutes of meeting them, they are not going to respect you. At Cambridge, where all the students are in the top 1%, they will achieve in spite of him. At the level we are dealing with, these kids will only succeed where the teacher manages to earn that trust and respect and maintain it. That's what really impressed me about Rolf Harris. I'm pretty certain that there are much better qualified artists around, but probably very few household names who are as well qualified as he is. He combines that with a sympathetic approach and a deep knowledge of human nature.

How I taught Latin at Jamie's Dream School | Television & radio | The Guardian is a very interesting piece about Mary Beard's experience. I'll quote a couple of bits because I think they back up what I've said (and I only just read this article).

I was also afraid that the programme would end up as a scarcely veiled attack on the teaching profession. Was the message going to be: regular teachers had failed these kids, but a load of entirely untrained celebrities and academics could set them right again?

In fact, that fear proved groundless. Unless something very odd has happened in the editing process, I am pretty confident that the series will be a great advertisement for the teaching profession and its skills. The first thing that almost all the untrained celebs said to me when we met at the school was: "Doing this really makes you admire proper school teachers."

So what was my verdict? In general policy terms, I thought that quite a lot could be solved with a bit more money going into state education. Despite what some press reports have said, Jamie's kids were not "troubled youngsters" (even Channel 4 wouldn't let a group of untrained celebs loose on troubled youngsters). They were ordinary kids who for a variety of different reasons had not managed to get the bottom line of decent GCSEs. And what would have helped them most? Not, I suspect, a raft of new educational initiatives, nor any major structural reform. Just a bit more money in the system would probably do the trick – to give teachers and kids a bit of space, to fund a little more individual attention, and to pick up those who risk falling through the net.

Also, this piece by Mary Beard in the Times:

I have to say, though, that in the "staff room" Starkey was the only one who didn't fess up to any nervousness or uncertainty about his ability to wow the kids -- unlike all the other celebs I met. So there is a certain satisfaction in seeing him in a bit of trouble.

[Rig of Jarkness]

Just a bit more money in the system would probably do the trick

Yes the usual answer from a member of the teaching community when challenged on the failures of the community

[Wowbagger]

Just a bit more money in the system would probably do the trick

Yes the usual answer from a member of the teaching community when challenged on the failures of the community

Not very different from bankers then - apart from the small matter of scale.

[pcolbeck]

Mrs Pcolbeck has just been discussing her lesson preparation for next week. The topic is Shakespeare and the pupils must learn things such as things such as the difference between his comedies, tragedies and histories as well as be able to describe his impact on British culture. This is the mandated curriculum not something the schools has made up. It's for 7 year olds. This to me says an awful lot about what's wrong with teaching, too many academics setting a curriculum that's too proscribed and academic for the pupils. 

[Chris S]

Gutter TV.

Some broken kids + some non-empathetic adults = Trash TV.

What's new? Anything to get brain dead telly watchers in front of ad breaks, eh?.

[Jaded]

Just a bit more money in the system would probably do the trick

Yes the usual answer from a member of the teaching community when challenged on the failures of the community

Yes, the usual sneering fabrications from one of the forum's least personable bigots.

I quite liked Wow when i met him  

[LEE]

It depends on what they've done. Starkey made fundamental - fundamental - errors right at the start. They are the sort of errors I made in my first term's teaching, realised they were errors and did my best not to make them again. He is touted as one of this country's top historians and teachers at universities.

No matter what the level you're teaching at, if you antagonise your students in the first 10 minutes of meeting them, they are not going to respect you, At Cambridge, where all the students are in the top 1%, they will achieve in spite of him. At the level we are dealing with, these kids will only succeed where the teacher manages to earn that trust and respect and maintain it. That's what really impressed me about Rolf Harris. I'm pretty certain that there are much better qualified artists around, but probably very few household names who are as well qualified as he is. He combines that with a sympathetic approach and a deep knowledge of human nature.

How I taught Latin at Jamie's Dream School | Television & radio | The Guardian is a very interesting piece about Mary Beard's experience. I'll quote a couple of bits because I think they back up what I've said (and I only just read this article).

I was also afraid that the programme would end up as a scarcely veiled attack on the teaching profession. Was the message going to be: regular teachers had failed these kids, but a load of entirely untrained celebrities and academics could set them right again?

In fact, that fear proved groundless. Unless something very odd has happened in the editing process, I am pretty confident that the series will be a great advertisement for the teaching profession and its skills. The first thing that almost all the untrained celebs said to me when we met at the school was: "Doing this really makes you admire proper school teachers."

So what was my verdict? In general policy terms, I thought that quite a lot could be solved with a bit more money going into state education. Despite what some press reports have said, Jamie's kids were not "troubled youngsters" (even Channel 4 wouldn't let a group of untrained celebs loose on troubled youngsters). They were ordinary kids who for a variety of different reasons had not managed to get the bottom line of decent GCSEs. And what would have helped them most? Not, I suspect, a raft of new educational initiatives, nor any major structural reform. Just a bit more money in the system would probably do the trick – to give teachers and kids a bit of space, to fund a little more individual attention, and to pick up those who risk falling through the net.

Also, this piece by Mary Beard in the Times:

I have to say, though, that in the "staff room" Starkey was the only one who didn't fess up to any nervousness or uncertainty about his ability to wow the kids -- unlike all the other celebs I met. So there is a certain satisfaction in seeing him in a bit of trouble.

I think it's fundamentally the difference between a Teacher and a Lecturer. 

Teachers tend to get captive, and possibly reluctant, audiences and Lecturers tend to get audiences who made a conscious (and presumably nowadays, expensive) decision to be there.

I imagine Starkey is a Lecturer, used to decades of fawning audiences.  I can imagine him, now, being a bit of an intellectual bully at Cambridge as well.

If he'd been a lecturer at Manchester's Openshaw Technical College (where I had the misfortune to attend on day-release from BT in the '80s) he would have been dragged outside, by someone from the building/welding/mechanics...etc course, and asked to continue his observations about classroom obesity without the use of his teeth.

[Rig of Jarkness]

Just a bit more money in the system would probably do the trick

Yes the usual answer from a member of the teaching community when challenged on the failures of the community

Not very different from bankers then - apart from the small matter of scale.

Let me remind you that the subject in question is the failure of the professional teaching community to educate these students to an acceptable standard over the past 11 years.  To simply blame the funding decisions of government/councils is to avoid taking responsibility.  I would like to see the teaching community asking themselves what could they have done differently to have achieved a more successful result.  By contrast they seem more intent on congratulating themselves on a job well done and deluding themselves into thinking that the programme shows this.

[jane]

 I would like to see the teaching community asking themselves what could they have done differently to have achieved a more successful result.  By contrast they seem more intent on congratulating themselves on a job well done and deluding themselves into thinking that the programme shows this.

Whom do you mean by your phrase "the teaching community".  In my school we have just had a long staff meeting reviewing our performance, and identifying areas for improvement.  Every term, we look at every child who is achieving below their expected level and attempt to work out why.  This means we are constantly reviewing our own practice, modifying it if necessary.  In the schools I have taught in, the teaching community has been anything but self congratulatory.  Throughout my 20 year career I have met the odd individual teacher who is resistant to changing their outdated and ineffective practice in spite of it failing the children they teach- two in fact.  One left the profession.  The other is unfortunately still teaching and probably shouldn't be.  
I know for a fact that my best teaching has been done in the smaller classes I have had- one of 24, one of 22 and one blissful term I had 16 for one term (until the year 1 teacher had a breakdown due to stress and her class was split and I went back to 30). The reason we don't have classes of less than 30 is money.  Money doesn't make a bad teacher a good teacher.  But it enables a decent teacher to devote more time to his/her pupils.  And that would make a difference to children such as those in the programme.

[Jaded]

Let me remind you that the subject in question is the failure of the professional teaching community to educate these students to an acceptable standard over the past 11 years.  To simply blame the funding decisions of government/councils is to avoid taking responsibility.  I would like to see the teaching community asking themselves what could they have done differently to have achieved a more successful result.  By contrast they seem more intent on congratulating themselves on a job well done and deluding themselves into thinking that the programme shows this.

Sounds like it is time for non-teachers to step up to the mark with some serious involvement. What would you do?

[jane]

Mrs Pcolbeck has just been discussing her lesson preparation for next week. The topic is Shakespeare and the pupils must learn things such as things such as the difference between his comedies, tragedies and histories as well as be able to describe his impact on British culture. This is the mandated curriculum not something the schools has made up. It's for 7 year olds. This to me says an awful lot about what's wrong with teaching, too many academics setting a curriculum that's too proscribed and academic for the pupils.  

Which primary literacy curriculum for seven year olds (Year 3)?  I don't recognise it at all.  

[CrinklyLion]

Is it maybe from the QCA famous people stuff from the history side?  It doesn't ring any bells for me either - my boy's in Y4, and hasn't run into Shakespeare yet.

Part of my PGCE was a 4 week stint teaching in France.  No interactive whiteboards (which I loved teaching with), about 4 computers in the entire school (ICT was one of my strengths in training), not allowed to photocopy, a curriculum that I wasn't familiar with and in a foreign language.  Class of 21 kids - it was blissful.  And that was one of the bigger classes; one of the infant teachers there, who had a class of 16, said that for her 20 was the cut off where you started to spend too much time on crowd control to be able to really teach effectively.  With 30-odd kids there's just not enough of you to go around.

I've known more than one class with over 40 pupils in a primary school, in recent years.

[C-3PO]

As a protocol droid, I am hypersensitive to breaches of etiquette and I realise that you are all, after all, only human. However, I must remind you of the requirement that you be excellent to each other.

[Hot Flatus]

I would like to see the teaching community asking themselves what could they have done differently to have achieved a more successful result.  By contrast they seem more intent on congratulating themselves on a job well done and deluding themselves into thinking that the programme shows this.

Sorry, but where is your evidence for this?