This article was originally published as a guest blog in Betty Ray’s edutopia.org blog.

* * * * *

(c) trix0r, Flickr

To put it bluntly, teachers have a major image problem. Seen from the outside, teachers have excellent job security, long holidays, they aren’t accountable for their performance and then to cap it all, they are constantly complaining about their pay and conditions.

It gets worse. Although teachers may be great at presenting information, they are not usually skilled at defending themselves against adversaries in the same way that politicians, journalists and business managers are. This means the teacher is holding a really bad hand when getting involved in emotive arguments like how to reform education.

Because reform is an emotive word. If you put it together with education, you have a heady mixture. At the same time reform is an elusive thing. It’s like quality. Everyone wants it, but no-one can agree what it is. So when the #edchat discussion last Tuesday took on the issue of education reform and the role of the teacher in it, I knew it would be a dynamic discussion. Six-hundred ninety-one posts in an hour from 83 different contributors around the world confirmed my expectations. Continue reading »

(c) Mags_cat, Flickr

It’s been a hard week.  Today was the deadline for the half-year reports so I’ve been tied up with checking the marks for the English Department for the last few days.  As always the deadline took a few of my colleagues by surprise (but they often get caught out by Christmas too, so I’m prepared for that now!)  We have a standardised grading system which is centrally administered.  The aim is to balance out individual differences between teachers as much as possible and to make the results for the kids as fair as we can.  Actually, this is less work than it sounds and results in the English teachers having rather less to do than some of their colleagues at this time.  The computer takes over the drudgery, and I pass out the result sheets.

And, as always, there has been a stream of kids coming to my office to explain to me why they should get a better mark.  “You’ve calculated it wrong,” is very popular.  As is, “I’ve worked really hard.“  Sometimes the explanations are truly impressive – “You’re ruining my life,” crops up once or twice a year.

This is all par for the course.  It’s part of the job, and once in a while you hear something so good that it makes the job worthwhile.  My favourite this week was, “I need at least a C or I’ll get Mr X again and I hate him.“  I had some sympathy with this, but sadly couldn’t do anything about it.  Of course, it’s a bit annoying when colleagues pass the buck when it comes to handing out bad news and refer the kids to me to give them their marks.  It’s even more annoying when fruitless appeals are passed on to me on the grounds that I, as the Department Co-ordinator, can change marks because of tears, demands, begging or flattery.

But this is all part of the job.  I expect kids to try it on.  I did it myself on occasions.  They’re growing up and pushing their limits.  That’s fine.

What’s not fine is when colleagues come to me and beg.  Continue reading »

(c) daveknapik, Flickr

This is a favourite subject of mine.  There are lots of slogans in this world that deal with change management – “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” is the mantra of the cautious.  ”if you aren’t moving forwards, you’re going backwards” is innovator’s cry.  If you get to the point where you start hearing “stop flogging a dead horse” then it’s probably time to stop wondering which slogan holds more truth and to start doing something about your situation.

The trouble is, that’s when the real work starts.  Of course, you can delay the moment by setting up a work group, or issuing a draft proposal and asking for comments , but the day is going to come when you have to make the change.  It’s at that point you realise that your opponents (and whatever you believe, you do have them!) are well-armed and thoroughly trained in putting a brake on your campaign to conquer the brave new world at your doorstep.

The first weapon of choice for such people is, “what if…” and believe me, this is a potent enemy of the innovator.  It’s supporters proclaim the need for a thorough understanding of the new concept, including any possible issues that just might crop up somewhere along the line.  The what if game is, of course, a variation on the four-year-olds’ favourite game – “Why?”  A well-practised kid can bring otherwise stable parent close to a nervous breakdown with seven repetitions of this simple question.  The problem is that the parent’s final sanction, “because I say so,” doesn’t usually work in the adult world and even more rarely in a teachers’ staff meeting.

I watched a very skilled headmaster blow the what if tactic out of the water.  Having allowed the discussion to continue for a while, he asked the meeting, “Is anyone here actually against implementing the new system?”  This is playing hard ball.  Few professional delayers want to openly show dissension, they prefer to use “concern” as their motive.  No-one was prepared to oppose the idea outright.  The headmaster wrapped up the discussion.  ”Good, then we’ll phase in the new system starting on the 1st of next month and deal with any issues as they arise.”

In the same way that expecting to get all the kids in your class up to the pass standard is usually counter-productive, continuing the negotiations until everyone in a department agrees is a recipe for never changing anything.

What it really comes down to is, how much do you want the change you are advocating?  If it’s important to you, then unanimity, consensus and diplomacy are your enemies.  Harmonious staff rooms exist only in Utopia and the sooner you accept that the better.  Smoothing out arguments and negotiating is playing into the hands of your adversaries.  Before you know it, your plans are so watered down, they are rendered almost useless.  Failure is pre-programmed.

It all comes down to what sort of institution you want to work in.  You can accept the status quo and let the professional objectors have their comfortable life, of you can rattle a few cages and maybe reduce your own personal frustration levels.  And maybe, just maybe, a few of your colleagues will thank you for your efforts somewhere down the line.

copyright ccarlstead (via Flickr)

I read a fascinating blog article the other day about failure in the classroom.  That in itself is an unusual subject for public discussion as the focus is almost always on success and how to succeed.  The article, written by Alan Sitomer looks at the question of when bad results become a symptom of a bad teacher.

I remember doing a mock O Level in English at school.  Our class got pretty bad marks and the English teacher laid into us big style.  At our school it was normal to get mock exams that were harder than the real thing, but in this case the teacher hadn’t taught us a major part of the material that was tested.  He ranted on about our approach to learning and I muttered that the results might have something to do with the teaching.  He carried on with his tirade.  I repeated my remark a touch louder, but he was in full flow.  I made the remark again – it still wasn’t much more than a whisper…  He turned to me.  “I heard you the first time – detention.”

I never found out if he had made a mistake, or whether it was all part of the plan.  Anyway, for the most part we did pretty well in our English O Level.

So now I’m a teacher responsible for a pilot system for teaching English and from time to time I’m confronted by a bad set of marks.  There are standard tests and standardised marking for the learning groups, so I know that a bad set of marks in a group comes from one of three things: Continue reading »

According to an article on the BBC Website, a pilot project in Denmark has allowed children to use the Internet as a resource during school exams.

That alone is pretty radical, and hats off to iAlja on Twitter for posting the link.  What is truly remarkable is that the pupils are allowed to use any sites they want (even Facebook).  The only stipulation is that they don’t communicate with anyone over the Net.  Now I’m sure there are quite a few IT managers out there who are trying to work out how they could ensure the email and chat embargo.  Don’t worry, the Danes have solved that problem too.

Continue reading »

They say you shouldn’t judge a book by its cover, but when I saw Tim Ferriss’s book about a year ago, I just had to buy it.  After all who really wants to work more than is necessary?  Yeah, I know, you love your job and all that, but be honest – a bit less work wouldn’t do you any harm, would it?

At the start you get the impression that this is one of those, “how I made a zillion dollars and how you can too” sort of book, but you pretty quickly get the impression that this book is a bit (a hell of a lot) different from the usual self-help selection.

What really hit me was when a customer of mine told me about a speed-reading course his company had sent him on.  Now speed reading is something I’ve never really got the hang of – it’s like snowboarding.  I understand the theory, but in practice it goes pretty badly wrong!

But what this customer told me appeared to be almost word for word what I’d read in a call-out box in Tim Ferriss’s book. I showed him the pages and asked him to tell me if there was anything more that he’d learned.  No, that was it.  So, I’d got a three-day speed reading course condensed into a couple of pages and included in the cost of the book.  The company could have saved a small fortune on course fees.

Having read the book, it was clear that the focus is on those people who have something to sell.  By that I mean a product.  Once you get into the area of selling a service, it becomes more problematic.  after all providing a service really means having to be there, doesn’t it?

Continue reading »