Today has been a day of challenges on several fronts. Initially I met with Graham Rae from Telford College to discuss their involvement in the Alternative Curriculum project. We are hopeful that there will be a place for Telford College to deliver some of the outdoor education content, but the issue of funding was never far from either of our minds. We concluded with the agreement that the most likely way to have our youngsters involved, and funded, was having them matriculate as students. Graham seemed to think that this may limit the options that the college would be able to provide because the money made available for a student who is matriculated for a 40 hour input, for example, is much less than would be generated if the provision for a similar time period was bought by the school directly. If only the school had the hundreds or thousands of spare pounds it would take to do this. I wish Tom Farmer was an East Lothian boy!
I then had an interesting lunchtime, speaking to our probationer teachers about the pre-vocational and alternative curriculum provision in the school. I was delighted to be questioned on the principle of having “the bad kids” benefit from the input at the expense of those who cause no difficulties in mainstream classes and yet appear to receive no rewards like outdoor education visits. This is a view I hear a great deal, from all quarters, including staff, parents and (less often I have to say) students.
My reply is that the majority of young people(in my experience) who have real difficulty ‘holding it together’ in mainstream education have a complex set of factors affecting their ability to succeed in the average school day. I am not condoning or defending inappropriate behaviour in any way, but I do believe that when you peel away the outward layers of bravado, or ‘break the shell’ of faux disinterest in themselves or anyone else, there lurks a young person who is probably very insecure, frustrated or scared by their future prospects. The problem sometimes lies in the inability to articulate these feelings or ask for help in addressing their behaviours, or in their belief that they can break the cycle. That’s where I believe some alternative has to ‘kick in’.
I have yet to meet a young person who genuinely did not want to succeed at school and I passionately believe that we must find creative ways of allowing every young person, not just the ones who fit in to our current model of schooling, to find that success. I am not naive enough to believe that the school can be the universal elixir for every ill that society visits on our young people, but I am sure that we have enough expertise, vision and knowledge to open our view of ‘what school is’ a little wider than exists currently. I also believe that all youngsters need rewards as much as anyone else and therein lies another challenge for schools. It begs the question, Is the reward of learning not enough? Do we now, as a society, value material rewards above all else? Too big a question for this already monster blog.
I’ve now set myself another challenge. By spending so long ranting I’ve not prepared my work for my SQH tutorial tomorrow.
I’m sure I remember saying somewhere that blogs were a good thing…..
Powered by FireStats
8 responses so far ↓
Jenni Ewan // Nov 14th 2006 at 10:44 pm
Barry,
I have just got round to reading some blogs tonight and enjoyed your comments. Although I agree that there are good reasons for these alternatives, I have to say that my experience is that there are certainly a number of students who would and do comment on “the bad kids getting all the fun”. I do feel that for alternatives not to be viewed in this way by the students, it may eventually be necessary for them to be a choice of subject (like any other) where all pupils can opt in but in reality only a limited number of them are likely to do so.
Barry Smith // Nov 14th 2006 at 11:02 pm
I agree totally about how the alternatives need to be organised within the curriculum. What you have described is exactly the model we are hoping to work towards Jenni. The work that is done on the outdoor ed type provision is as much(I would say much more) about personal growth, teamwork, trust, self belief and ’safe’ risk-taking (if that’s not a oxymoron) as it is about having fun. I’m delighted that you’ve taken the time to read the blog.
Don // Nov 14th 2006 at 11:39 pm
No such thing as “bad” kids. There are kids who have never been taken anywhere by their parents, never been cuddled, never been praised, never provided with lessons, never had a role model - who come home to violence, drug taking, chaos. Do we really have to justify why we might try to make up for that deficit? - if we don’t who will? What we do have to do is to explain to people why it’s happening - in my experience other pupils do understand once it is explained. Last point let’s not confuse giving some kids opportunities with being soft on inappropriate behaviour - I for one have always preferred a zero tolerance approach.
Jenni Ewan // Nov 15th 2006 at 12:12 am
Barry, good to hear what the model is to be. I look forward to hearing more about the final arrangements. I agree completely that the reeason for the outdoor ed type pursuits is different, and that it can be very beneficial for some (unfortunately not all) of those involved.
As for explaining, I think that’s what we don’t do very well. That’s why staff will also make the sort of comments I put in quotes. I believe that we are working hard in East Lothian to ensure that opportunities are improved for all kids - particularly those who do behave appropriately (the vast majority of those in our schools). I also agree that there are no such thing as “bad” kids however, that perception is still out there amongst students and teachers. Although we do not need to justify ourselves, the perception will continue unless we explain our reasoning.
Jenni Ewan // Nov 15th 2006 at 12:35 am
Barry, just a further thought to perhaps change the direction here. I think if we are to help change the attitudes of the pupils you mention we should also (as individual teachers and schools) really embrace the notion of a Curriculum for Excellence. Many of the ideals behind that would lead to a completely different curriculum (not tinkering at the edges but radical changes). This would, I hope benefit all pupils including those with the difficulties you describe. However, to do this would require a rethink regarding the qualifications we provide (many of the current courses allow little time or opportunity for such change without running out of time to complete the work). Not an easy answer.
Barry // Nov 15th 2006 at 10:47 am
There definitely are no such things as good and bad kids. Maybe my language was a bit clumsy, but it captures the perceptions that still exist in some quarters and the language that is still used. On reflection maybe using ‘good kids’, in the second to last paragraph, gives credence to those views and perceptions.
Barry Smith // Nov 16th 2006 at 10:30 pm
Have modified the content of the blog a little, removing the clumsy language I think and dealing with my bout of ””’inverted-comma-itis””’.
Jackie Cameron // Nov 17th 2008 at 8:12 pm
Barry - I have read what I now realise is your “modified” version of this post as I have just discovered your blog. I wanted to say how encouraged I am to read your thoughts on young people wanting to succeed. In my experience they do - but some don’t have a clear sense of what success would look ( or feel) like for them.
Leave a Comment