Why? Do doctors who have had another career in the "outside world" before taking up medicine become better doctors?
Soldiers?
What about all other professions/jobs?
What constitutes the "outside world"?
I didn't say better did I? I should hope that when I mention that one group has always been in education, you'd be able to at least guess that outside world means the world outside of education.
I simply posted my personal observation that of the teachers I know, there is a noticeable difference in mindset between those with the two types of career path.
I didn't say better did I? I should hope that when I mention that one group has always been in education, you'd be able to at least guess that outside world means the world outside of education.
I simply posted my personal observation that of the teachers I know, there is a noticeable difference in mindset between those with the two types of career path.
I know quite a few teachers, those that have always been in education (school, college, university then into teaching), generally have a mindset like you describe, but those that have gone into teaching after having a career in the outside world, a lot less so.
In my job I go into all sorts of organisations/companies/institutions...and you find different mind sets within them too...based on how long people have been there/what other jobs they have done.
Best example I could give you would be M&S...you can spot the managers came up through their system very easily...they speak a language called "St Michael"...and it's interesting that they went "outside" to appoint their latest CEO...replacing one had been there since he was a trainee on the knicker counter.
In my job I go into all sorts of organisations/companies/institutions...and you find different mind sets within them too...based on how long people have been there/what other jobs they have done.
Best example I could give you would be M&S...you can spot the managers came up through their system very easily...they speak a language called "St Michael"...and it's interesting that they went "outside" to appoint their latest CEO...replacing one had been there since he was a trainee on the knicker counter.
In my job I go into all sorts of organisations/companies/institutions...and you find different mind sets within them too...based on how long people have been there/what other jobs they have done.
Best example I could give you would be M&S...you can spot the managers came up through their system very easily...they speak a language called "St Michael"...and it's interesting that they went "outside" to appoint their latest CEO...replacing one had been there since he was a trainee on the knicker counter.
I agree, a lot organisations have their own mindsets and in some instances that's a very good thing, but not always, it can make them more resistant to adaptation when it is needed.
We were discussing to what extent there are different mind sets within organisations and to what extent those mind sets can be divided between "those been in the system a long time" and "those more recently came from outside it"
We could have said "does the mind set vary with age?" or "does the mind set vary with gender?"
M&S was merely an example of where I have seen a different mind set between those been in the organisation a long time and those who have not.
Because... it's not always the teacher's fault? Let me give you examples from my classes. I have worked my arse off with their coursework, but I have the following:
2 students were on drugs the whole time
1 student only needs 2 Es for college and has decided everything else is too much effort
1 student isn't there most of the time
1 student only needs 5 Es for college, but his target is an A
1 student is so aggressive that he's always thrown out
3 students are lazy and never turn up to detention or complete their work in class
2 students are trying really really hard but because of the higher expectations from ofsted now, they can't reach their target grades no matter how hard they try
3 students need 5 A*-C grades and because of early entry, they already have them and therefore see the rest of their exams as pointless and unnecessary.
I could go on, but I think you get the idea. I am responsible for none of those things but I will be judged on them.
/QUOTE]
And I'm sure that these issues are real, but neither recent or unique to you. And every profession has its share of issues beyond its control.
However, teachers seem to be very resistant to the idea of having their performance measured.
And I'm sure that these issues are real, but neither recent or unique to you. And every profession has its share of issues beyond its control.
However, teachers seem to be very resistant to the idea of having their performance measured.
WHy should teachers be different to anyone else?
They're not unique to me. These things have always happened. The difference is that my teachers wouldn't have had a pay cut if I decided to be lazy and disinterested, whereas I will! The only recent thing is that we are now going to get a pay cut based on these things.
Because we are not getting measured on OUR performance, we're getting measured on the performance of children who in many cases don't want to be there.
Imagine if a manager of, say, M&S had a bunch of employees on his command who were compelled to work there, a la slave labour. And because they didn't want to be there, they messed up and couldn't be bothered. Then, instead of the employees being penalised, the manager gets a pay cut. It sounds ludicrous, doesn't it?
They're not unique to me. These things have always happened. The difference is that my teachers wouldn't have had a pay cut if I decided to be lazy and disinterested, whereas I will! The only recent thing is that we are now going to get a pay cut based on these things.
Because we are not getting measured on OUR performance, we're getting measured on the performance of children who in many cases don't want to be there.
Imagine if a manager of, say, M&S had a bunch of employees on his command who were compelled to work there, a la slave labour. And because they didn't want to be there, they messed up and couldn't be bothered. Then, instead of the employees being penalised, the manager gets a pay cut. It sounds ludicrous, doesn't it?
I would imagine that M&S store managers would be paid on the performance of their store. If they have staff who are non-performing then they have to fix it.
I would imagine that M&S store managers would be paid on the performance of their store. If they have staff who are non-performing then they have to fix it.
Thats what they get paid to do.
And with this scenario you'll soon find schools making efforts to rid themselves of their worst-performing students in order to keep results up.
Perhaps all these underperforming children can go to a free school - oh, wait, those will probably have selective admissions and won't want them either.
Great idea, let's cast away all the underachievers and leave them to drift into lives of crime because nobody wanted to teach people who would bring their performance scores down.
I would imagine that M&S store managers would be paid on the performance of their store. If they have staff who are non-performing then they have to fix it.
Thats what they get paid to do.
Right... and if those staff refused to comply and would not respond at all, they'd be fired and new ones brought in, correct? I don't have that luxury. I can't get rid of the students who won't perform.
1) Are you suggesting that schools get rid of all the low performing students?
2) Do you believe we have the power to do that?
I know quite a few teachers, those that have always been in education (school, college, university then into teaching), generally have a mindset like you describe, but those that have gone into teaching after having a career in the outside world, a lot less so.
In the academy system the laissez faire model applies....and that's where teachers who don't' need internal experience or qualifications can get jobs.
Great idea, let's cast away all the underachievers and leave them to drift into lives of crime because nobody wanted to teach people who would bring their performance scores down.
It would be a remarkable day when a bunch of qualified and experienced professionals meeting as a professional body actually passed a vote of confidence in the ability/knowledge of a politician who knows nothing and has zero experience in their field.
Politicians - they think that just because they didn't win an election it gives them instant specialist knowledge in which ever sphere their cronies put them in charge of. Brilliant system, or what?
Heard some comment on radio this morning about there being too many secondary schools and places and not enough primary. A local academy to me has failed to fill all its places and is now facing funding cuts and teacher redundancies as a result. Perhaps more energy should go into sorting out primary schooling?.
Heard some comment on radio this morning about there being too many secondary schools and places and not enough primary. A local academy to me has failed to fill all its places and is now facing funding cuts and teacher redundancies as a result. Perhaps more energy should go into sorting out primary schooling?.
You have Gove opening Free Schools, three quarters of which are secondary phase when the demand is in primary phase - and some of the primary free schools he is approving are in areas which already have enough places.
It's a wanton waste of public money - Gove should be held to account for this ridiculous state of affairs.
Comments
I didn't say better did I? I should hope that when I mention that one group has always been in education, you'd be able to at least guess that outside world means the world outside of education.
I simply posted my personal observation that of the teachers I know, there is a noticeable difference in mindset between those with the two types of career path.
Sorry, so what did you mean?
What is the difference?
Read the post I quoted and replied to.
In my job I go into all sorts of organisations/companies/institutions...and you find different mind sets within them too...based on how long people have been there/what other jobs they have done.
Best example I could give you would be M&S...you can spot the managers came up through their system very easily...they speak a language called "St Michael"...and it's interesting that they went "outside" to appoint their latest CEO...replacing one had been there since he was a trainee on the knicker counter.
So M & S has a bad business model?
I agree, a lot organisations have their own mindsets and in some instances that's a very good thing, but not always, it can make them more resistant to adaptation when it is needed.
What's that to do with the price of fish?
We were discussing to what extent there are different mind sets within organisations and to what extent those mind sets can be divided between "those been in the system a long time" and "those more recently came from outside it"
We could have said "does the mind set vary with age?" or "does the mind set vary with gender?"
M&S was merely an example of where I have seen a different mind set between those been in the organisation a long time and those who have not.
And I think that you will find that the financial crisis was caused mainly by Gen-X people - the "greed" generation.
Actually I was wrong. Both Blair and Brown were born in the 1950's which makes them both Baby Boomers.
They're not unique to me. These things have always happened. The difference is that my teachers wouldn't have had a pay cut if I decided to be lazy and disinterested, whereas I will! The only recent thing is that we are now going to get a pay cut based on these things.
Because we are not getting measured on OUR performance, we're getting measured on the performance of children who in many cases don't want to be there.
Imagine if a manager of, say, M&S had a bunch of employees on his command who were compelled to work there, a la slave labour. And because they didn't want to be there, they messed up and couldn't be bothered. Then, instead of the employees being penalised, the manager gets a pay cut. It sounds ludicrous, doesn't it?
I would imagine that M&S store managers would be paid on the performance of their store. If they have staff who are non-performing then they have to fix it.
Thats what they get paid to do.
And with this scenario you'll soon find schools making efforts to rid themselves of their worst-performing students in order to keep results up.
Perhaps all these underperforming children can go to a free school - oh, wait, those will probably have selective admissions and won't want them either.
Great idea, let's cast away all the underachievers and leave them to drift into lives of crime because nobody wanted to teach people who would bring their performance scores down.
Right... and if those staff refused to comply and would not respond at all, they'd be fired and new ones brought in, correct? I don't have that luxury. I can't get rid of the students who won't perform.
1) Are you suggesting that schools get rid of all the low performing students?
2) Do you believe we have the power to do that?
I kid you not
In the academy system the laissez faire model applies....and that's where teachers who don't' need internal experience or qualifications can get jobs.
Bit of a circle that needs squarng there eh?
That's what happens in real life. Poor performers are dispensed with.
And shouldn't schools prepare students for real life?
Politicians - they think that just because they didn't win an election it gives them instant specialist knowledge in which ever sphere their cronies put them in charge of. Brilliant system, or what?
"Dispensed with" - how?
They are put on to performance improvement programs.
Exclusion rates in Academies significantly exceed those in maintained schools.
You have Gove opening Free Schools, three quarters of which are secondary phase when the demand is in primary phase - and some of the primary free schools he is approving are in areas which already have enough places.
It's a wanton waste of public money - Gove should be held to account for this ridiculous state of affairs.