EMA to go?

Racheya

Wicked_witch wrote: »

Okay, racheya, seeing your point better now and I apologise. I do actually think your idea of free lunches at college is a pretty good idea, apart from the stigma that would probably arise and I do think its wrong for students who are not lucky enough to live in London (thankfully we do) to have to pay bus fares.

Sounds like your college did need to toughen up, at my son's they get sent home for the least little thing (seriously, he was sent home in his third week for carrying a wrapped sandwich through a No Food area) and lose their money for the week, so discipline is pretty good.

ETA wanted to give you a thanks for your last post but your button has vanished :-/ Ahaha it has returned!

Well thanks

I would worry a bit about a stigma too, especially since a big part of (at least my) college life was going into town to get dinner from the chippy or Greggs so it might not be the 'best' idea but I think that with a bit more thinking out it would work.

And colleges would need to toughen up a bit, but my college was the sort that takes 'anyone' so it wasn't all that unsurprising. The problem with the discipline system in a lot of colleges, though, is that the EMA becomes just a method of discipline - but what about those that don't? I didn't get EMA and therefore had almost NO reason to go in every day, there was nothing other than 'you lose your EMA' or maybe a report card, that was punishment. I wonder how a lot of colleges will manage without it to manage students.

Oldernotwiser

Wicked_witch wrote: »

Sorry, was referring to why some families are so dependent on ema after such a short time. If my son had a job, I wouldn't even expect him to get ema, let alone be bothered about losing it.

Oh right - I see what you mean now.

Wicked_witch

@ racheya, I wonder how a lot of colleges and schools will manage when they become legally obliged to educate a bunch of 17 and 18 years olds who don't want to be there but can't be thrown out...

Oldernotwiser

Racheya wrote: »

And colleges would need to toughen up a bit, but my college was the sort that takes 'anyone' so it wasn't all that unsurprising. The problem with the discipline system in a lot of colleges, though, is that the EMA becomes just a method of discipline - but what about those that don't? I didn't get EMA and therefore had almost NO reason to go in every day, there was nothing other than 'you lose your EMA' or maybe a report card, that was punishment. I wonder how a lot of colleges will manage without it to manage students.

You're really twisting your argument here!

Firstly you said that students disrupted classes because they were only there for EMA, now you're saying that colleges won't be able to discipline disruptive students when EMA's removed. Again, you can't have it both ways!

And, of course, you could have been thrown off the course if you hadn't gone in at all. I did this to a couple of students over my teaching career.

Oldernotwiser

Wicked_witch wrote: »

@ racheya, I wonder how a lot of colleges and schools will manage when they become legally obliged to educate a bunch of 17 and 18 years olds who don't want to be there but can't be thrown out...

I am so glad I don't teach in FE any more - YTS students were bad enough!

poet123

Wicked_witch wrote: »

@ racheya, I wonder how a lot of colleges and schools will manage when they become legally obliged to educate a bunch of 17 and 18 years olds who don't want to be there but can't be thrown out...

I can't wait.....:(:(:(

Gleeful

poet123 wrote: »

I can't wait.....:(:(:(

Heee, this is why sometimes I'm grateful to only teach 11-16 year olds. They may be difficult, but at least they HAVE to be there!

poet123

I am not sure how the new rules will work though. Although they may be required to be in education or training, will we as a college be required to keep them if their behaviour/attendance is such that we feel it untenable? Will it be a case of once we accept them we are stuck with them, or is the onus on them and their parents to ensure they find and keep a place in education?

Oldernotwiser

Gleeful wrote: »

Heee, this is why sometimes I'm grateful to only teach 11-16 year olds. They may be difficult, but at least they HAVE to be there!

Unfortunately, that's the basis on which older FE lecturers made their career decisions, only to find the situation changed drastically in the 80s.

Oldernotwiser

poet123 wrote: »

I am not sure how the new rules will work though. Although they may be required to be in education or training, will we as a college be required to keep them if their behaviour/attendance is such that we feel it untenable? Will it be a case of once we accept them we are stuck with them, or is the onus on them and their parents to ensure they find and keep a place in education?

Do you think it will relate to the current situation where under 16s aren't in school?