The Trouble With Teachers

Coed Morgannwg Way - Small

In fairness to teachers, they mean well. Most of them got into teaching because they want to make a difference in children’s lives. Yet it is amazing how parochial they can be when it comes to parental input.

For example, raising children with attachment issues is difficult enough. Yet you would expect teaching staff to at least be on your side. Do they not understand that you live with the problem, all day, every day; that you have done your research; and that you might, possibly know more about this issue than they do. After all, they get a few hours of seminar and consider themselves to be experts, despite the fact that they can walk away from the issue every afternoon. You, the carer, only have to put up with the resultant behaviour overnight and at weekends. Yeah! Right!

So it was refreshing to read Braveheart Education‘s blog post Social Experiment.

The trouble with teachers is that they did their training years ago. Yes, they have to do regular Continual Professional Development courses. But those courses are only effective if they are currently faced with the issues covered.

You, however, as a carer for a child with attachment issues, are constantly researching the issue and looking for all the latest techniques. Why? Because you know that raising a child with attachment issues requires you to keep ahead of the game; that techniques which work today may not work tomorrow, and you need to keep your toolkit sharp if you are going to succeed.

I urge you to read the article, Social Experiment, and share it with everyone. Let’s try to give these kids a fair chance.

6 thoughts on “The Trouble With Teachers

  1. Interesting. I read your link too. We’ve certainly been through some interesting situations with teachers and schools over the years; we have 5 kids aged 6 to 18…you see a lot. Do you think if classes were divided according to children with similar traits it might be a better environment for the students? I know there are many determining factors, and difficult to do when the children are 5 or 6, but by the time they are about 7 you can see the groups of children that meld best together. Do a field trip or two with a class and any parent can see groups of children that work together and groups of children that don’t. When you have classes where background, behavior, abilities differ vastly, it creates a situation of unfair comparisons both from the teachers and the students. At high school (here at least) some of this situation is solved with the varying levels of classes plus choices between academic and trades; unfortunately a lot of damage is done in the first 9-10 years of schooling. Even creating a different mix of core vs. option classes at a lower level could assist with the situation, generally kids who are doing something they enjoy and are interested in are better behaved. To make this a success educators need to talk (and listen) to parents AND the student. Sometimes teachers and parents make assumptions as to the needs or interests of a student (with both strong students and weak…I’m now talking from personal experience when I was in school….my parents refused to accept that even though I was naturally highly academic I had ZERO interest in pursuing academic pursuits, it made me miserable). Perhaps this would create a more level playing field, less divisions, creating less stress for the student and create a genuine interest in learning. If there is less stress for the student they have more energy to invest in actual learning as stress is paralyzing. I have so many thoughts on this, I grew up surrounded by teachers (mother sister, 8 aunts and uncles) and the things I have heard have left me shaking my head. So much could be improved, the question is, will they ever be bothered to actually improve it.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Excellent personal insight, Deb. And, yes, you are absolutely right.

      I once read of a psychology experiment where a group of people were asked to mill around a room without saying anything to each other. When they analyzed the groups that formed naturally they realized that there were distinct similarities in their backgrounds which seemed to have attracted them to each other without a word being spoken.

      I think the problem is the idea of inclusion. We want to include everyone, regardless of race, colour, creed, ability, or background, without highlighting differences. But when a child who is in foster care goes into school, he instinctively knows he is different. So why not treat him differently if that’s what he needs.

      For example, one child at our school has issues with crowds. The cloakroom is used by two classes. So, every morning, 60 kids and most of their parents try to crush through a single door into a bathroom-sized space. This child then decides she doesn’t want to go to school. So the foster carers asked if she could go through the reception office entrance. They were told that it would make her feel more different than she already is. But they did it, anyway, and it solved the problem. Why didn’t the teacher listen?

      I think inclusion is not about creating clones; it;s about celebrating differences. And if we treat each child as an individual, we will not expect them to meet some random standard on a reward chart that only applies to so-called “normal” children. After all, I think the points in the article are right: If we asked adults to act the way we ask children to act, we would then accuse them of acting like children!!!

      Liked by 1 person

Please Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s