High school student gives his teacher a lesson in education

IzzyWizzy

fishy fishy wrote: »

right, you obviously thought he was brilliant - other students probably blamed him for failing because of the bits I have in bold above.

as I say - its up to the student to be interested - remember the teacher does this year in, year out. They teach what they have to for the student to pass exams - its up to the student to be interested in his own future, not the teacher to make him interested. Its the typically "spoon feed me" attitude that is forming over the last few years here - everything is everybody else's fault. The best lesson that students can learn that is not in a book is to "take responsibility for yourself".

Everyone liked that guy and everyone got an A in German. I don't think it's about spoonfeeding. It's about creating an environment where people actually WANT to learn. That is the teacher's responsibility. I got so tired of my secondary teachers telling us how lazy we were. We weren't. We'd all passed exams to get into the school, we were all bright and motivated and somehow most of the teachers managed to squeeze every last bit of fun and excitement out of the classes.

I underperformed in secondary school because it felt like prison camp, the teachers didn't give a crap and when I was struggling, they weren't interested in explaining it another way. I just got 'read that page'. Oh, cheers for that. Could have done that at home. I actually did take 4 weeks off school before my exams, with my parents' permission, to just learn the bloody stuff myself.

The last thing any student needs is a bored teacher who doesn't want to be there. I'd rather have an academically weaker teacher who makes the effort than a genius who just drones on for an hour.

armaghbhoy

My best teacher unfortunatley was a music teacher. He was also my form teacher, but he connected with people on a personal level. He was a bit of a comedian, he also told us that if we ever have a problem don't hesitate to come see him, Even if it was about another teacher. He called people by their nicknames. I remember he made someone bring in an Eminem cd so he could see what it was about and he played it in the class..So atleast he tried to understand us

Some of the things I've stated are not really that important and theres more to it than that, but some of them would help alot if other teachers were more like that.

Ruudi_Mentari

I'm sorry what was the subject?

fishy fishy

IzzyWizzy wrote: »

Everyone liked that guy and everyone got an A in German. I don't think it's about spoonfeeding. It's about creating an environment where people actually WANT to learn. That is the teacher's responsibility. I got so tired of my secondary teachers telling us how lazy we were. We weren't. We'd all passed exams to get into the school, we were all bright and motivated and somehow most of the teachers managed to squeeze every last bit of fun and excitement out of the classes.

I underperformed in secondary school because it felt like prison camp, the teachers didn't give a crap and when I was struggling, they weren't interested in explaining it another way. I just got 'read that page'. Oh, cheers for that. Could have done that at home. I actually did take 4 weeks off school before my exams, with my parents' permission, to just learn the bloody stuff myself.

The last thing any student needs is a bored teacher who doesn't want to be there. I'd rather have an academically weaker teacher who makes the effort than a genius who just drones on for an hour.

school isn't there for fun and entertainment - its there for you to learn. Fun and entertainment only happens for kids who don't have sense enough to learn yet i.e. babies, high babies, and classes for very young children where they play learn. When you get into secondary it is probably assumed that you understand school is for learning. I can't understand your point that you were struggling to learn at school but then had to take weeks off before exams to learn it yourself. If you could learn it yourself why where you struggling in the first place - was it a case of not paying attention and then cramming at the end?

IzzyWizzy

fishy fishy wrote: »

school isn't there for fun and entertainment - its there for you to learn. Fun and entertainment only happens for kids who don't have sense enough to learn yet i.e. babies, high babies, and classes for very young children where they play learn. When you get into secondary it is probably assumed that you understand school is for learning. I can't understand your point that you were struggling to learn at school but then had to take weeks off before exams to learn it yourself. If you could learn it yourself why where you struggling in the first place - was it a case of not paying attention and then cramming at the end?

We'll have to agree to disagree, but IMO that's the wrong attitude. I know plenty of teachers who have failed observations for failing to make sure the students were engaged and motivated. I've taught loads of spoiled rich kids. I've walked into classes where the students all had their heads on the desks and were wrecked from being out all night. It's still my responsibility to try to motivate them and make the class as interactive as possible, not stand at the board droning on and complain that they're crap students. What are they paying for? They could read a grammar book themselves.

I was struggling to learn at school because the teacher's explanations were crap and left me even more confused. It was actually easier to just take my time to try to digest and figure out stuff on my own than to try to make sense of what the teacher was doing. It is your responsibility as a teacher to make sure everyone in the class is engaged and understands, not to parrot on for an hour. Perhaps you have amazing powers of concentration, but most of us don't. My mind certainly does wander when listening to a bored, unenthusiastic person speaking for an hour about something I don't really understand. That's normal. That's why good teachers don't teach like that.

fishy fishy

IzzyWizzy wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree, but IMO that's the wrong attitude. I know plenty of teachers who have failed observations for failing to make sure the students were engaged and motivated. I've taught loads of spoiled rich kids. I've walked into classes where the students all had their heads on the desks and were wrecked from being out all night. It's still my responsibility to try to motivate them and make the class as interactive as possible, not stand at the board droning on and complain that they're crap students. What are they paying for? They could read a grammar book themselves.

I was struggling to learn at school because the teacher's explanations were crap and left me even more confused. It was actually easier to just take my time to try to digest and figure out stuff on my own than to try to make sense of what the teacher was doing. It is your responsibility as a teacher to make sure everyone in the class is engaged and understands, not to parrot on for an hour. Perhaps you have amazing powers of concentration, but most of us don't. My mind certainly does wander when listening to a bored, unenthusiastic person speaking for an hour about something I don't really understand. That's normal. That's why good teachers don't teach like that.

seems to me that the "bold" teacher isn't so bad after all. If he made you get up off your ass and figure it out on your own - now that's real learning. You should congratulate your teacher for making you work.

Also why is it the responsibility of a teacher to engage a student that is wrecked for being out all night - surely thats the students fault - another case of "blame the teacher". Its not the teachers fault if the student is bored.

no offense but reading between the lines it sounds like there were a pack of messers in your class - dis-interested, out all night, bored, blaming the teacher and then cramming at the end to make up for the non-interest during the year. Sorry if I'm wrong but thats how it comes across.

Chorcai

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

Ken Robinson's TED talk is also worth a mention here. There is a huge problem within pedagogical system at the moment.

coffee_cake

Of course interaction and making things interesting is vital.
It's the same in my evening language class - we play "taboo", discuss interesting topics, play games, write funny dialogues, etc. There is zero comparison with someone droning about learning the verb tables or whatever, though thankfully I never had too much of that in school. It's still a different experience and the best way to learn

IzzyWizzy

fishy fishy wrote: »

seems to me that the "bold" teacher isn't so bad after all. If he made you get up off your ass and figure it out on your own - now that's real learning. You should congratulate your teacher for making you work.

Yeah, I guess it did do that. I appeared to be better at self study than most of my university friends. In my eyes though, that's not what school is supposed to be. I could have stayed at home for 7 years and learned far, far more. School basically killed off my natural love of learning for a very long time and I wish my parents had just taught me at home (they were thinking about it).

Also why is it the responsibility of a teacher to engage a student that is wrecked for being out all night - surely thats the students fault - another case of "blame the teacher". Its not the teachers fault if the student is bored.

It is the teacher's responsibility. You just try making excuses like 'the students were hungover' to an observer and see how long you keep your job. No, it's not always the teacher's fault. You do get lots of students who are lazy, spoiled, immature and just don't want to be there as well as students with real learning and behavioural difficulties. That doesn't mean you don't do your absolute best to try to engage them. If they still don't respond, fine, but you don't just give up and blame the students. Motivating students is part of the job. Full stop.

no offense but reading between the lines it sounds like there were a pack of messers in your class - dis-interested, out all night, bored, blaming the teacher and then cramming at the end to make up for the non-interest during the year. Sorry if I'm wrong but thats how it comes across.

What are you talking about? I'm talking about two separate things - the school I attended as a teenager and the private language school where I teach now. My classmates at school were most definitely not a bunch of messers. They were the keenest bunch of teenagers I've ever seen, which is what makes it particularly disgraceful that the teachers used to imply we were all lazy wasters. 6 students from my class went to Oxbridge and I'd say that was despite the teaching, not because of it.

fishy fishy

IzzyWizzy wrote: »

Yeah, I guess it did do that. I appeared to be better at self study than most of my university friends. In my eyes though, that's not what school is supposed to be. I could have stayed at home for 7 years and learned far, far more. School basically killed off my natural love of learning for a very long time and I wish my parents had just taught me at home (they were thinking about it).



It is the teacher's responsibility. You just try making excuses like 'the students were hungover' to an observer and see how long you keep your job. No, it's not always the teacher's fault. You do get lots of students who are lazy, spoiled, immature and just don't want to be there as well as students with real learning and behavioural difficulties. That doesn't mean you don't do your absolute best to try to engage them. If they still don't respond, fine, but you don't just give up and blame the students. Motivating students is part of the job. Full stop.



What are you talking about? I'm talking about two separate things - the school I attended as a teenager and the private language school where I teach now. My classmates at school were most definitely not a bunch of messers. They were the keenest bunch of teenagers I've ever seen, which is what makes it particularly disgraceful that the teachers used to imply we were all lazy wasters. 6 students from my class went to Oxbridge and I'd say that was despite the teaching, not because of it.

I notice you said "teachers" implied you were all lazy wasters - - how many exactly thought you were lazy?

i guess we are going round in circles and don't agree. I would think that its the students responsibility to be mature enough to know that they need to learn stuff, whether taught in a boring way or exciting way, to pass their exams. Remember, the teachers have passed their exams already and are in a job - once they teach the curriculum they get, thats all they need to do - they don't have to jump through hoops to entertain and engage. Thats up to the student and what they want out of life.

Its very easy to just blame the teachers - yes some teachers are "nicer" than others - some can do no wrong (because of teenage crushes, or other reasons) some are devils (because they pulled you up on something). Either way, its up to the student to get off their ass and learn - it's their life - blaming a teacher for being "boring" is not an excuse for not learning.

and back to the original post - I still say that video is staged and he needs a good slap. He'd be better off if he zipped his little mouth, sat down and learned something instead of providing entertainment for his little friends.

coffee_cake

fishy fishy wrote: »

Remember, the teachers have passed their exams already and are in a job - once they teach the curriculum they get, thats all they need to do - they don't have to jump through hoops to entertain and engage.

lol

armaghbhoy

fishy fishy wrote: »

no offense but reading between the lines it sounds like there were a pack of messers in your class - dis-interested, out all night, bored, blaming the teacher and then cramming at the end to make up for the non-interest during the year. Sorry if I'm wrong but thats how it comes across.

There were alot of messers in my class, but they didn't mess when it came to music class for example because it was interesting. So its not like these people didn't want to learn and I think you're missing the point of all this.

The Irish language is something that I would have loved to have learned but unfortunatley I only know a few words because my teacher couldn't even keep the class under control nevermind teach them. I admit some of it was not her fault and people took advantage of her, but a teacher should be able to get things in order and thats the bottom line.

Take the sister act movie for example, its just a movie but it also shows the reality of how to turn a bad class into a good one and make them want to learn.

Anyway, I'm done with this topic lol

fishy fishy

armaghbhoy wrote: »

There were alot of messers in my class, but they didn't mess when it came to music class for example because it was interesting. So its not like these people didn't want to learn and I think you're missing the point of all this.

The Irish language is something that I would have loved to have learned but unfortunatley I only know a few words because my teacher couldn't even keep the class under control nevermind teach them. I admit some of it was not her fault and people took advantage of her, but a teacher should be able to get things in order and thats the bottom line.

Take the sister act movie for example, its just a movie but it also shows the reality of how to turn a bad class into a good one and make them want to learn.

Anyway, I'm done with this topic lol

LOL that's the funniest post of the thread - you do know sister act is a movie - it's staged.


To be honest there are messers in every class. The messers, and the ones that watch.

armaghbhoy

fishy fishy wrote: »

LOL that's the funniest post of the thread - you do know sister act is a movie - it's staged.


To be honest there are messers in every class. The messers, and the ones that watch.

I did say it was a movie, but it also shows how you could do it in reality. Its simple really, not hard to understand. Of course I needed something to quote because I don't know of any teacher that has been smart enough to do it in real life. Which is why kids still don't relate to school. Its not rocket science

IzzyWizzy

bluewolf wrote: »

Of course interaction and making things interesting is vital.
It's the same in my evening language class - we play "taboo", discuss interesting topics, play games, write funny dialogues, etc. There is zero comparison with someone droning about learning the verb tables or whatever, though thankfully I never had too much of that in school. It's still a different experience and the best way to learn

The thing is that it's not even difficult to make something interesting. I teach an intensive grammar class, which sounds like the most boring thing ever (I was so jealous of the teachers who got the conversation class), but the students really enjoy it and there's a waiting list to get in! I had to revise prepositions with them last week. I drew little pictures on the board of a little man standing ON the table, UNDER the bridge etc and had the students come up and write in the correct prepositions. Just making it visual and interactive instead of having a boring list on a page really helps. Then I put on a Mr Bean clip and the students had to do a running commentary in small groups, 'he's running around the car, he's getting into the car, he's just driven over the man' etc. Just 5 mins of extra prep on my part to make it fun and interesting instead of writing a massive list of prepositions on the board.

mathie

IzzyWizzy wrote: »

The thing is that it's not even difficult to make something interesting. I teach an intensive grammar class, which sounds like the most boring thing ever (I was so jealous of the teachers who got the conversation class), but the students really enjoy it and there's a waiting list to get in! I had to revise prepositions with them last week. I drew little pictures on the board of a little man standing ON the table, UNDER the bridge etc and had the students come up and write in the correct prepositions. Just making it visual and interactive instead of having a boring list on a page really helps. Then I put on a Mr Bean clip and the students had to do a running commentary in small groups, 'he's running around the car, he's getting into the car, he's just driven over the man' etc. Just 5 mins of extra prep on my part to make it fun and interesting instead of writing a massive list of prepositions on the board.

"He's not being funny"
"He's not being funny"
"He's not being funny"
"He's not being funny"
"He's not being funny"

fishy fishy

IzzyWizzy wrote: »

The thing is that it's not even difficult to make something interesting. I teach an intensive grammar class, which sounds like the most boring thing ever (I was so jealous of the teachers who got the conversation class), but the students really enjoy it and there's a waiting list to get in! I had to revise prepositions with them last week. I drew little pictures on the board of a little man standing ON the table, UNDER the bridge etc and had the students come up and write in the correct prepositions. Just making it visual and interactive instead of having a boring list on a page really helps. Then I put on a Mr Bean clip and the students had to do a running commentary in small groups, 'he's running around the car, he's getting into the car, he's just driven over the man' etc. Just 5 mins of extra prep on my part to make it fun and interesting instead of writing a massive list of prepositions on the board.

what age are your students if you don't mind me asking?

IzzyWizzy

fishy fishy wrote: »

what age are your students if you don't mind me asking?

These ones were older teenagers, low level and mostly Middle Eastern, but it works with any age, nationality and level (obviously adapting the activities a bit depending on the students).

SCOOP 64

Always thought a teacher should not just tell you how to do it ,but teach how to do it.
Will always be good and bad teachers, all depends if you get a good one.

He's right though. I know so much history and have a passion for it, because the teacher I had in it actively engaged us. They were brilliant and anyone that was lucky enough to have this particular teacher was actually excited about going to the classes. Then I had the teachers that were there just to earn a wage and those are the subjects I suffered worst in.

Fair play to that guy making a stand.

Bipolar Joe

I've got two teachers for an example, here. Both taught pretty much the same thing (Media law and analysis), one last year and one this year. The first got us to discuss the topics, debate it as a class, do our own presentations, so on. It was easily the best class I've ever been in. She turned a tedious and clinically boring subject into something that made your mind work, gave us a better understanding of how media law works, and it was incredibly fun. Everyone passed the exams, with the lowest being a merit.

The second, this year, copy and pasted stuff from the Internet into Powerpoint and read it to us. She got paid for that. There could have just been a mass e-mail with the web pages instead. Everyone in the class could have done her job. That's not teaching. That's not even regurgitating what she's learned. She used Google. Test results are pending, but in the end, the class got into groups ourselves and studied with each other in the same fashion as we did last year (It's a different crowd, mostly).

A number of tutors at the college are going to be losing their jobs because of budgetary constraints. It's unfair that someone like that should be allowed to work when she's clearly inefficient and has no time for students. Don't understand the subject matter? She tells us to go to the website she got the information from. Didn't manage to take it all down before she went to the next slide? She tells us to go to the website she got the information from.

Teaching isn't just forcing people to learn. If the brain isn't engaged in the subject, it won't retain anything. It's up to the tutors to open up that pathway and make the students want to know the subject. You'll get messers and you'll get the ones who are too hungover to be bothered, but sitting down and clicking "Next" isn't the way to deal with it.

Ave Sodalis

fishy fishy, you seem to have the exact attitude that all my worst teachers (and lecturers) had. Yes, indeed, they only need to teach the curriculum but going in and just handing the kids the information is not learning. You need to teach them, you get them actively involved and the best way to do that is to get them engaged. One of the main reasons kids hate school is because they teachers seem like they don't give a damn. How do you expect kids to care if the teachers don't?
Yes, they have to learn for themselves and take responsibility. In fact, that's one of the best ways to learn but why would they when teachers walk in every day and just seem lazy and as though they don't care about the subject they teach. So yeah, they need to take responsibility for their own learning... but teachers need to take responsibility for their own teaching. If you walk into any school in the country, the best teachers are always going to be the ones that actually care.
Take, for example, a young boy I know well. He's in primary school and has a few behavioural problems. It's a struggle for the mother to get through to the teachers exactly what's going on. At home, he's relatively well behaved. The family have found a system that works for him. When the mother tried approaching the teacher however, she seemed disinterested and didn't want to take on this approach regarding the boy because "it was her job to teach the curriculum". As a result, the boy despises school and hates learning. That, to me, is tragic... a young child who doesn't enjoy learning is not right. If the teacher, however, had gone that little extra step to change her teaching methods regarding this boy, it would have been fine.

FTA69

up for anything wrote: »

More Dead Poets Society teachers are needed.

What, fictional ones?

If we had to go for highly-exaggerated Hollywood examples I'd prefer your one off Dangerous Minds.

Zillah

Fishy fishy, you are profoundly failing to accept the reality of what teaching is and what makes a good teacher. You're already assuming failure and jumping to assigning blame. Simply declaring that students have to be responsible for their own motivation is entirely missing the point; they are students, they need guidance by definition. If they were responsible, wise and disciplined they wouldn't be students any more. A pragmatic teacher knows that successfully engaging their students in the subject matter is top priority for their success.

So sure, you can sit back and declare that that isn't a teachers job. Ok, fine, congratulation, your teacher gets much worse results from their class.

This isn't about obtuse moral declarations about duty, this is about what works best. You are advocating what works badly. You also sound like you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder.

fishy fishy

not at all. Im simply suggesting that you cannot blame a teacher for teaching a curriculum that is given to them under the guidelines of the system.

Their job is to teach that - it is not to mollycoddle, pamper, or play with the students. It is to teach that curriculum - Im sure if an interested student doesn't understand and asks a question they will be helped.

the problem is that when students get a bad mark they automatically blame the teacher for "teaching in a boring way". Easy way out.

Its all part of the pampering you see around nowadays. If a student fails it has to be the bad teachers fault.

School is not a new venture - people have been going to school for decades or more - wow some of these kids went on to be highly successful. This came from learning the curriculum no matter how boring it was and passing exams. Yes the curriculum can be boring and wouldn't it be lovely to be entertained every day at school However thats not how it works.

Secondary school kids should know how the system works.

quit the messing, learn what you need to get your exams and move on. Stop looking to be entertained. In college and work you certainly won't be entertained so its a good learning curve.

It would be lovely to be taught in a comical way but until that is introduced into the system students will have to buckle down and follow the rules if they want to get ahead. Yes, thats life and thats what you must do. So stop waiting to be entertained. Suck it up and get on with it.

fishy fishy

Zillah wrote: »

Fishy fishy, you are profoundly failing to accept the reality of what teaching is and what makes a good teacher. You're already assuming failure and jumping to assigning blame. Simply declaring that students have to be responsible for their own motivation is entirely missing the point; they are students, they need guidance by definition. If they were responsible, wise and disciplined they wouldn't be students any more. A pragmatic teacher knows that successfully engaging their students in the subject matter is top priority for their success.

So sure, you can sit back and declare that that isn't a teachers job. Ok, fine, congratulation, your teacher gets much worse results from their class.

This isn't about obtuse moral declarations about duty, this is about what works best. You are advocating what works badly. You also sound like you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder.

i love that oul nugget "I differ in opinion, therefore you have a chip on your shoulder".

coffee_cake

fishy fishy wrote: »

Im sure if an interested student doesn't understand and asks a question they will be helped. .

I'm sure you're not even bothering to read the posts tbh, if you did you'd know that wasn't true

Ziphius

fishy fishy wrote: »

not at all. Im simply suggesting that you cannot blame a teacher for teaching a curriculum that is given to them under the guidelines of the system.

And which part of the curriculum says that a teacher must bore their students to death?

Seems to be a problem with some (many?) Irish teachers. They really do not care about either their subjects or their students.

I suppose this my be related to the way teachers self select. Ie. those that have a passion for a subject will go on to pursue it through higher education, research or employment.

As the axiom goes:

"those you can do, those you can't teach".

fishy fishy

bluewolf wrote: »

I'm sure you're not even bothering to read the posts tbh, if you did you'd know that wasn't true

and the posts on here are always so accurate.

I give up - I will be sticking to my opinion -

stop blaming teachers for students dis-interest.

Its up to the student to decide how interested or disinterested he wants to be.

Ranting about how bad a teacher is only discloses the lack of interest of the student.

Its the student that will fail - not the teacher - so forget about being entertained and get on an learn your curriculum if you want to get ahead.
Stop waiting to be "entertained" thats what tv is for when you get home.

Ya, reality bites.

old hippy

Eathrin wrote: »

I'm sorry, regardless of the content, I can't take anything said in that accent seriously.

Southern? Texan? Texan urban? What's wrong with it? The kid spoke the truth.