Does Your Child Go To A Proper School Or An Academy?

ViolaLass

"Dont you have to have a qualification one higher than what you are teaching though?

So you couldnt teach A Level, only GCSE? Which seems like it would narrow your choices down if you can only apply to schools where they are willing to let you only teach up to yr 11?"

Nope, don't have to.

I'll be teaching from Year 7 to Year 12 next year and I'll follow those children through the year after. (That said, it wouldn't limit me that much on jobs as many schools where I am don't have sixth forms anyway.)

What I teach (what years etc) is entirely up to the school.

GobbledyGook

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

It's not about being lazy. Imagine you're a child who struggles with spelling, perhaps due to a SEN, perhaps not. In every lesson your book is covered in red pen picking up every error you've made in your spelling, punctuation and grammar. That child is eventually going to become down on themselves and the work. Constant criticism isn't good for anyone, especially if the criticism actually has nothing to do with the actual point of the work. That is why many subjects in many schools only mark 'important' spellings i.e. keywords.

I teach many children who struggle with spelling, some of them very bright when not judged by their standard of English. These children would likely be put off school if they had their poor spelling highlighted all the time.

I agree that spelling is not important to many subjects, but then it is not important to many jobs either. Those for which spelling is important often use computers now, and by proof reading and using a spellchecker most people who struggle with spelling can cope perfectly well.

I completely agree with spelling not being highlighted in subjects like geography, history, RE. SPAG is only 5% of the exam marks; the most important ability is to analyse and explain the information.

I understand the thought process behind it, but it is behind the decline in spelling and grammar in young people imo. I just think that basic spelling, grammar and punctuation is something that should be part of every day life. We can't complain constantly about kids using text speak constantly when we are continually reinforcing that spelling and the likes is not important.

What happened to getting the basics and then building on it? What kind of job is someone who can recite from memory the history of the Tudors, but cannot put together a letter or the likes going to get?

CV's are a prime example. Companies are constantly complaining at the moment that the standard of CV's and the literacy abilities of young job seekers is appalling.

I worked in learning support in primary schools. One of the reasons that I got so utterly fed up with my job was the thought processes behind what is seen as important. I had my time with one child drastically cut because of the modern languages curriculum. So I had less time with a child (who was near to leaving primary school age) who was struggling with basic maths for children at least 3 years (if not more) younger than her because she had to learn French. The fact that her time with her literacy helper was cut for the same reason infuriated both of us, but that was the rules. So she can ask for a loaf of bread in French, but she can't read so she'll not be able to book tickets and even if she could she can't count so she'll not know if she's got enough money so she'll not be going to France anytime soon!

The reliance on computers, and spell checkers, isn't a good thing. It's great that children are learning about computers, their workings and how important they are, but again they are having a negative impact in other areas.

Janepig

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

It's not about being lazy. Imagine you're a child who struggles with spelling, perhaps due to a SEN, perhaps not. In every lesson your book is covered in red pen picking up every error you've made in your spelling, punctuation and grammar. That child is eventually going to become down on themselves and the work. Constant criticism isn't good for anyone, especially if the criticism actually has nothing to do with the actual point of the work. That is why many subjects in many schools only mark 'important' spellings i.e. keywords.

I teach many children who struggle with spelling, some of them very bright when not judged by their standard of English. These children would likely be put off school if they had their poor spelling highlighted all the time.

I agree that spelling is not important to many subjects, but then it is not important to many jobs either. Those for which spelling is important often use computers now, and by proof reading and using a spellchecker most people who struggle with spelling can cope perfectly well.

I completely agree with spelling not being highlighted in subjects like geography, history, RE. SPAG is only 5% of the exam marks; the most important ability is to analyse and explain the information.

I couldn't disagree with you more. I would rather see my children have their work marked and spelling mistakes highlighted, so that they know where they are going wrong and can rectify it. For instance, my two have a tendency to use "of" instead of "have", a real bugbear of mine, but I tell them every time. Surely that's one of the points of learning, to have your errors pointed out so that you can rectify them. Why does teaching properly have to equal constant criticism. And it might only be worth 5% of an exam mark, but surely without correct spelling and grammar it's much more difficult to show the "most important ability is to analyse and explain the information" if nobody can understand what on earth you're going on about!

We all make spelling mistakes from time to time, and we all have words that we find more difficult than others to spell, but, SEN's aside, there's no reason imo not to correct children when they make errors. Because even though you think they shouldn't be "judged" at school, they'll be judged at some point and will probably wish they had a better command of the English Language than you were able to impart on them.

My English wasn't terribly good when I left school at 16, mainly due to the shocking teachers mentioned above, but I spent two years doing secretarial and clerical training and my spelling and grammar improved 100%. And things like there/their/they're to/two/too, should of, etc.... etc.... don't get picked up by spell checkers and they are the sort of things that are frowned on in the adult world whether you like it or not.

Jx

thegirlintheattic

claire16c wrote: »

Dont you have to have a qualification one higher than what you are teaching though?

So you couldnt teach A Level, only GCSE? Which seems like it would narrow your choices down if you can only apply to schools where they are willing to let you only teach up to yr 11?

Not legally but most schools will ensure that only those who have equal or higher qualifications teach exam classes, apart from some subjects like health and social care, business studies, where it is hard to find teachers trained in the subject to degree level. This is common sense to ensure the best possible results in the majority of cases. Obviously not counting if Bill Gates suddenly appeared to teach IT or you had an exceptional teacher with a relevant background.

For example, only one teacher in my school teaches a subject post-Year 9 they do not have a degree in. However the subject in question is semi-vocational, and so is hard to find qualified staff for. Luckily the teacher is absolutely fantastic and has done lots of extra training to take on the role. Timetabling is done with exam classes being given priority, so that in my department some of the younger students are taught by non-specialists, this enables those with degrees in the subject can teach Year 10-13.

suki1001

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

I agree that spelling is not important to many subjects, but then it is not important to many jobs either. Those for which spelling is important often use computers now, and by proof reading and using a spellchecker most people who struggle with spelling can cope perfectly well.

:eek::eek::eek:

Tell me a job where it isn't considered important to have good spelling? Imagine how unprofessional it would look if I sent an invoice full of spelling mistakes. Didn't check the correct spelling of a company, or sent reports full of errors where the client was paying a lot of money. Dismissing spelling as something that can be checked using a computer is a horrendous approach to getting a child ready for the real world.

For a start you've got to get the spelling in the right context even if you can spell one version of the word. I don't see a world of adults who are suffering because they were pulled up about their spelling. I was corrected. It didn't knock my confidence. Talk about setting children up for a fall - that's really going to knock their confidence if they spend their whole time at school thinking it's okay - then struggling to get a job because a potential employer sees a CV covered in spelling mistakes.

Incidentally if you think the only way to correct a child is by scribbling red pen through their work book, then I think there needs to be another way. Teaching a child that it's okay to make mistakes because that's how they learn is far more beneficial to the child. I used to tell my child it was great, because then she could learn how to do it the right way.

dizziblonde

I've sat and cringed at the spelling mistakes on display work in some classrooms (not talking about the children's work here either - but the labels and lettering) - especially the "shove an apostrophe in anything that ends in an s just in case it needs one" strategy the KIDS use (which has had me hopping up and down on the spot on a few occasions)... from the blooming teachers.

Now I'll admit that on forums in particular my written English slides somewhat - but I always double and triple checked anything going on the walls, or anything going out to parents or being photocopied into worksheets (because you bet the kids would gleefully find any errors!), and when the kids asked me for a spelling and I wasn't 100% sure (I'm very much someone who needs to see a word written down to "see" if it looks right) I'd scribble it in a corner of the whiteboard and double check it in a dictionary.

You just don't put crap like "Our Class Rule's" on the wall!

Mind you then I'm a crusty old fossil who never did politically correct pen colours either - stuff marking in green - I usually marked in a highly rebellious sparkly purple or orange (at the kids' request)!

thegirlintheattic

suki1001 wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek:

Tell me a job where it isn't considered important to have good spelling? Imagine how unprofessional it would look if I sent an invoice full of spelling mistakes. Didn't check the correct spelling of a company, or sent reports full of errors where the client was paying a lot of money. Dismissing spelling as something that can be checked using a computer is a horrendous approach to getting a child ready for the real world.

For a start you've got to get the spelling in the right context even if you can spell one version of the word. I don't see a world of adults who are suffering because they were pulled up about their spelling. I was corrected. It didn't knock my confidence. Talk about setting children up for a fall - that's really going to knock their confidence if they spend their whole time at school thinking it's okay - then struggling to get a job because a potential employer sees a CV covered in spelling mistakes.

Incidentally if you think the only way to correct a child is by scribbling red pen through their work book, then I think there needs to be another way. Teaching a child that it's okay to make mistakes because that's how they learn is far more beneficial to the child. I used to tell my child it was great, because then she could learn how to do it the right way.

Can I prefix this by saying I am talking about secondary, I do feel that spelling itself should be addressed at primary.

I should clarify that I don't think spelling from your head is important in many jobs, as long as you can spot mistakes and use a strategy to correct them. I'm not for one minute suggesting it's acceptable for people to misspell invoices and the like. The majority of my students go onto be lorry drivers or labourers; no spelling isn't the be all and end all in those jobs. I also teach a lot of students with SEN who will always struggle with their spelling, and so are taught how to proof read, use dictionaries and spellcheckers in order to present accurate work, rather than being constantly put down for not being able to spell from their head - something many cannot learn to do.

There is also a lot of difference between different types of documents, students are generally aware of this. Students have their spelling checked when doing coursework or preparing CVs and personal statements. It is explained to them how important accuracy is in these documents. That is different to their math book in class where they are writing down instructions for themselves very quickly. There is a difference between knowing spelling is important and constantly marking the spelling regardless of context.

As for not teaching students that it's okay to make mistakes, the reality is completely the opposite. Our classrooms are filled with posters saying "Good you're stuck, now you can learn" and similar phrases.

The only other way of correcting students (aside from marking) would be spending many hours in class with them focused solely on spelling. This time would IMHO be better spent teaching subject knowledge and skills. For example, I teach a Year 7 who is gifted in my subject, his spelling is really poor but always readable. He is taken out of my lessons for literacy work (which is great), however this means he falls behind in the subject which has upset him. He has the potential to take this subject very far and can self correct spelling when he has access to a dictionary or spellcheck. Where do you draw the line? Does everyone have to be able to spell perfectly from memory (in which case most of the adult population is below par)?

I can appreciate that this is not the most popular view, and in a perfect world I'd love nothing more to spend thousands of hours producing perfect spellers but time is finite, as are resources. There are also students who, no matter how much time is spend, will not be able to learn the skill but will need to find ways of compensating. The way we mark spelling is common throughout secondary schools nowadays.

I should also make clear that I think teachers need good levels of spelling, punctuation and grammar, which was the original point of this discussion. I completely agree with dizzi that worksheets, letters, displays need to be thoroughly checked. My personal notebook - no I don't worry about the odd mistake. It's all about context - which is what, at my school, we teach the students. That is what it is like in the real world as well, you don't send work documents that are not proof-read but a personal e-mail is not as important.

Welshwoofs

Janepig wrote: »

Call me a grammar nazi if you will, but that would make me cry if that was from one of DD or DS's teachers. :eek:
Jx

My ex used to send back badly spelled letters from the school with the mistakes highlighted. He was very popular with the teachers there :rotfl:

Welshwoofs

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

I agree that spelling is not important to many subjects, but then it is not important to many jobs either. Those for which spelling is important often use computers now, and by proof reading and using a spellchecker most people who struggle with spelling can cope perfectly well.

You have to be joking! The only jobs where spelling is not important are those which are solely manual labour and those are getting fewer and fewer. Any other job that involves written communication requires good standards of English.

I'm sorry, but this is exactly why employers get so frustrated with the levels of English that they see from many school leavers and graduates! And just to scare you here, I'm know I'm not the only person in a recruiting position that tosses an application straight into the bin if it has errors in it, because my thinking is very simple - if they can't be bothered to pick up a dictionary, I can't be bothered to interview them.

I'll also add that spellcheckers are a total waste of time if one doesn't even know the difference between words like 'their' and 'there' or 'weather' and 'whether' and that Latin derived words with unstressed endings such as 'our' are American if they don't have a 'u' and that verb endings with 'ize' are also.

gregg1

ViolaLass wrote: »

Teachers don't currently have to have a degree in the subject they teach, they just have to have a degree.



I disagree completely. I have just completed a PGCE - it has taught me how to plan a lesson (not just the paperwork but what aspects need to be thought about and how to make the lesson as effective as possible), got me up to date on the latest thinking on how children learn best and given me many different approaches for dealing with discipline. The school I am with tell me they think I'm going to be a very good teacher but there is no way, IMO, that I would be where I am now without the knowledge and experience imparted by the PGCE.

It may be true that some can and some can't, but that doesn't mean that we don't still need to learn.

Those who can't, teach PE!;)