A funny little anecdote - I think!!

54and56

So today my 14 year old Junior Cert son who is in the local public (but "Catholic") school was in religion class. The teacher asked the class what the correct thing to do was when a family member is seriously ill or injured and (regrettably) asked my son for the answer.

My son said "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor" which (unbelievably) resulted in my son being ejected from the class and whilst outside being given a stern dressing down by the teacher for being a smart ar$e.

Apparently the correct answer is to take a moment to pray to god for his (or her?) intervention and then call for medical help.

I honestly thought my son was winding me up as he knows I'm an Athiest and have little time for compulsory religious indoctrination but he was laughing so much at the episode and related it several times in such detail that I actually think it's true!! My son wasn't punished or made feel bad in any way, in fact he completely sees how ridiculous the teachers reaction was, so I'm not at all trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill here but I really can't believe this sort of $h1t still goes on. If I was lying on the street dying and someone paused to pray before calling emergency medical assistance killing them would probably go to the top of my to do list assuming the delay in calling assistance didn't result in my own death first!!

Hotblack Desiato

What a fruit loop (the teacher)

Being ejected from the class is a punishment. I'd be asking the principal for an explanation.

Cabaal

Pretty messed up message for the teacher to be passing onto students,

Taking time to pray before ensuring somebody gets medical attention makes you negligent in your duty's as a human being,

looksee

It is difficult to see how any reasonable person, especially a teacher, could ask that question and not accept the answer given, even if they chose to add the rider, and of course a prayer would be appropriate. But to evict the student from the class and remonstrate with them for being 'smart' is just a sign of a very poor teacher.

This is indoctrination style teaching, the teacher had an excellent opportunity for class discussion and blew it in preference to inflicting opinion on the students.

silverharp

Ive explicitly told my kids to get a rise out of their teachers in this kind of situation, but the school is so fcken liberal its impossible. fair play to him for not knuckling under and for standing behind him

robindch

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

I'd be asking the principal for an explanation.

Likewise.

Must have been about 3/4 years back - I was visiting Popette's home and the catholic fundamentalist channel EWTN was turned on and blaring away in the background. On it, a woman was explaining about the power of prayer by way of personal example - when she was a kid, she said, she and her younger sister had been playing in their garden, she on the grass and her younger sister up a tree. The younger sister slipped and fell so that she was suspended in the air by her neck amongst the branches. So the elder sister assessed the situation and immediately fell to her knees, closed her eyes and prayed as hard as she could. A very short while later, just as she was turning blue, the younger sister managed to free herself and she dropped safely to the ground. The older sister knew that her prayers were answered, so she ran in immediately to tell her mother the miraculous news - her mother's reaction wasn't mentioned.

Wish I'd been able to record the segment - the descriptions the woman gave were quite graphic and she seemed to revel in the child-like horror of it, not to mention her ability to deal with an emergency.

FishOnABike

I remember in secondary school days, we had a religion teacher who could politely be described as a committed christian, less politely as just should have been committed.

Our class had its fair number of sceptics and others who just saw religion class as a bit of a timeout and a chance to relax between real exam subjects.

If someone could 'innocently', while still staying just on the right side if the school's code of conduct to avoid punishment, cause the teacher to storm out of the classroom having ranted, in some graphic detail, how we were all damned for eternity it was considerd a result. We could then quietly get on with some of our homework for other subjects uninterrupted for the rest of the religion period.

looksee

silverharp wrote: »

Ive explicitly told my kids to get a rise out of their teachers in this kind of situation, but the school is so fcken liberal its impossible. fair play to him for not knuckling under and for standing behind him

Would it not be more productive to encourage rational argument rather than just 'getting a rise' out of a teacher, even if you do think the teacher's ideas are rubbish? Are you in turn not teaching them that the way to deal with other people's ideas that you disagree with, is to mock them?

silverharp

looksee wrote: »

Would it not be more productive to encourage rational argument rather than just 'getting a rise' out of a teacher, even if you do think the teacher's ideas are rubbish? Are you in turn not teaching them that the way to deal with other people's ideas that you disagree with, is to mock them?

mine are only in primary school but when they get get told bible stories they are not told from the outset that they are reading myths. so for example when my son was doing Noah , my son asked about whether this actually happened the teacher gave a vague answer but I had shown my son all the Non Stamp Collector videos and similar so he basically followed up by saying it was impossible and gave Kangaroos as an example . The teacher accepted his answer but followed it up to look for the spiritual truth yada yada.

So from his own education perspective I've shown him how he can counter something with facts. Another time the teacher had put Atheism on a list of world religions, again junior was able to challenge this using the non stamp collecting being a hobby analogy.

looksee

silverharp wrote: »

mine are only in primary school ... analogy.

Well that's fair enough and a very reasonable response, I took up the 'get a rise' remark a bit at face value, but I get what you mean.

54and56

Thanks for the answers all, its been a good sanity check. I wasn't sure whether I should make an issue of it or not with the school principal but given my son totally sees how ridiculous the teacher behaved I'll let it pass as my intervention would probably only backfire on my son in some other way.

Fleawuss

I'm actually flabbergasted that stupidity like this still goes on. Never mind the principsal write to the board of management demanding a formal investigation. Tell them nothing else interest you. ****ing eejits of a teacher.

54and56

Fleawuss wrote: »

I'm actually flabbergasted that stupidity like this still goes on. Never mind the principsal write to the board of management demanding a formal investigation. Tell them nothing else interest you. ****ing eejits of a teacher.

I probably should on a point of principal but my son needs support from his teachers to maximise his potential so I want to retain their goodwill not pi$$ them off. My experience is teachers circle the wagons when one of them is challenged so I don't need that grief for my son.

I'm probably being a bit cowardly but I do believe you have to pick your fights and this isn't worth fighting over. I spent 5 years in a catholic boarding school going to mass at 7am 5 mornings a week and I saw my fair share of serious crap being dished out by teachers/priests to students for all kinds of trivial stuff and this doesn't even rank a one on a scale of one to ten!!

evolving_doors

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

So today my 14 year old Junior Cert son who is in the local public (but "Catholic") school was in religion class. The teacher asked the class what the correct thing to do was when a family member is seriously ill or injured and (regrettably) asked my son for the answer.

My son said "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor" which (unbelievably) resulted in my son being ejected from the class and whilst outside being given a stern dressing down by the teacher for being a smart ar$e.

Apparently the correct answer is to take a moment to pray to god for his (or her?) intervention and then call for medical help.

I honestly thought my son was winding me up as he knows I'm an Athiest and have little time for compulsory religious indoctrination but he was laughing so much at the episode and related it several times in such detail that I actually think it's true!! My son wasn't punished or made feel bad in any way, in fact he completely sees how ridiculous the teachers reaction was, so I'm not at all trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill here but I really can't believe this sort of $h1t still goes on.

Yes kids being smart arsses to get a laugh in class still goes on. Although I'm not too sure if it's common for parents to pat them on the back for it at home.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

If I was lying on the street dying and someone paused to pray before calling emergency medical assistance killing them would probably go to the top of my to do list assuming the delay in calling assistance didn't result in my own death first!!

I believe that you incorrectly misinterpreted what the teacher was saying. I.e. the person is already sick and injured and it is assumed that people in your son's class were removed from the situation (so therefore not in a position to bring them to the hospital). Like the bishop calling for people to 'pray' for the injured in Paris today.

Or do you think that the teacher was actively encouraging people to pray instead of offering medical attention if possible?

So in my view, yes, your son was punished justly for being a smart ar5e, same as he would be in any other subject.

If he wanted to be proper 'smart' about it he could engage in debate about how prayer has an effect on something somewhere else.

Tasden

silverharp wrote: »

mine are only in primary school but when they get get told bible stories they are not told from the outset that they are reading myths. so for example when my son was doing Noah , my son asked about whether this actually happened the teacher gave a vague answer but I had shown my son all the Non Stamp Collector videos and similar so he basically followed up by saying it was impossible and gave Kangaroos as an example . The teacher accepted his answer but followed it up to look for the spiritual truth yada yada.

So from his own education perspective I've shown him how he can counter something with facts. Another time the teacher had put Atheism on a list of world religions, again junior was able to challenge this using the non stamp collecting being a hobby analogy.

Do they take part in religion? Like do they not sit out for religion lessons?

Fleawuss

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Yes kids being smart arsses to get a laugh in class still goes on. Although I'm not too sure if it's common for parents to pat them on the back for it at home.



I believe that you incorrectly misinterpreted what the teacher was saying. I.e. the person is already sick and injured and it is assumed that people in your son's class were removed from the situation (so therefore not in a position to bring them to the hospital). Like the bishop calling for people to 'pray' for the injured in Paris today.

Or do you think that the teacher was actively encouraging people to pray instead of offering medical attention if possible?

So in my view, yes, your son was punished justly for being a smart ar5e, same as he would be in any other subject.

If he wanted to be proper 'smart' about it he could engage in debate about how prayer has an effect on something somewhere else.

He was asked for the correct answer on what to if some one was injured. He gave the correct answer. Not in my opinion but the correct answer for any reasonable human being. Your post is very revealing as that of the mod of teaching and lecturing: the ego of the teacher is the lens through which all must be assessed apparently. How deplorably insecure of any adult not to be able to recognize that they got the correct answer when the problem was that they didn't phrase the question correctly to elicit the information they required (I presume bs about last rites) and then to inject their own insecurity into punishing a student. All the more reason to get religion out of Irish schools.

silverharp

Tasden wrote: »

Do they take part in religion? Like do they not sit out for religion lessons?

they split the class into catholic and "other" but it doesnt stop the teacher being religious themselves and going a bit further than teaching about religion which is their job. Its not a big deal but im happy if junior is able to have a bit of fun with it.

Tasden

silverharp wrote: »

they split the class into catholic and "other" but it doesnt stop the teacher being religious themselves and going a bit further than teaching about religion which is their job. Its not a big deal but im happy if junior is able to have a bit of fun with it.

That's what I'm asking, is he part of the class that takes part in the religious curriculum or is he part that sits out?

54and56

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Yes kids being smart arsses to get a laugh in class still goes on. Although I'm not too sure if it's common for parents to pat them on the back for it at home.

Not sure what you are referring to but for the avoidance of doubt let me confirm that I actively encourage respect for teachers as it's not an easy job and even if they sometimes get it wrong e.g. incorrectly give detention to my son for something they thought he did but he didn't actually do I back them up and make sure the detention is done without complaint because there are bound to be times when he does actually do something wrong and gets away with. In parent teacher meetings I always offer support and even if I disagree with a teacher I'll never undermine them or allow them to be undermined.

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I believe that you incorrectly misinterpreted what the teacher was saying.

Don't you mean I incorrectly interpreted not that I incorrectly misinterpreted?

Either way

Gebgbegb wrote: »

the person is already sick and injured and it is assumed that people in your son's class were removed from the situation (so therefore not in a position to bring them to the hospital)

No. There was no assumption either expressed or implied that the person was already sick. It was a straightforward question about what action you should take if a family member becomes seriously ill or is injured. A boy of 14 years of age is more than capable of making good decisions about what to do in an emergency situation and to assume they are somehow unable to provide assistance is incorrect. As it happens my son is trained in first aid and has a number of sailing related qualifications which enable him to provide safety support to younger sailors in his club. If I was seriously injured I'd be very happy someone with my sons cool head , clear thinking and first aid training came upon me.

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Or do you think that the teacher was actively encouraging people to pray instead of offering medical attention if possible?

I don't think it at all, that's exactly what the teacher did say was the correct action to take i.e. first of all pray (to your preferred imaginary friend ) then seek medical help (presumably on the off chance that the hotline for divine intervention is engaged).

Gebgbegb wrote: »

So in my view, yes, your son was punished justly for being a smart ar5e, same as he would be in any other subject.

If he wanted to be proper 'smart' about it he could engage in debate about how prayer has an effect on something somewhere else.

Given the twisted logic you based your view on I don't think I need to comment on that :rolleyes:

evolving_doors

Fleawuss wrote: »

He was asked for the correct answer on what to if some one was injured.

Being the mod of T&L I know often enough that the exact words/phrases could be not exactly what is relayed back to the parent.... and then relayed to others online. Do we know exactly what the teacher asked (verbatim).

e.g. are you asserting that the teacher was actually implying that prayer is the first port of call for the sick or injured, and then instigate medical treatment after?

Similarly, are you saying that if someone is already in hospital or sick in a different location that you should "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor".
Is this the 'correct' answer?

That is my interpretation obviously of what the teacher meant (that you should pray after exhausting medical options), as I think the likelihood of any teacher advocating prayer over immediate medical attention is very very low. Advocating that position is on 'nut job' level, and I would also reason that any teacher (even the religious ones!) on that level of thinking has 'track record' in other nuttiness, which I think the OP would have also relayed to us.

Fleawuss wrote: »

He gave the correct answer. Not in my opinion but the correct answer for any reasonable human being. Your post is very revealing as that of the mod of teaching and lecturing: the ego of the teacher is the lens through which all must be assessed apparently.

Quite the opposite, actually I have taken the parent/pupils side of things in the T&L forum if I saw fit, or if it were a case of not getting the full story (Has the OP asked the teacher exactly what was said in class either? Did the teacher actually use the word "correct"?).

Fleawuss wrote: »

How deplorably insecure of any adult not to be able to recognize that they got the correct answer when the problem was that they didn't phrase the question correctly to elicit the information they required (I presume bs about last rites) and then to inject their own insecurity into punishing a student. All the more reason to get religion out of Irish schools.

Maybe the son didn't phrase the answer correctly either! Who knows what way the question was actually phrased (verbatim I mean), either way, I think the last paragraph shows that you do not genuinely believe that the teacher was advocating prayer over immediate medical attention... and thus it would be incorrect to suggest that anyone "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor" when it is being implied that they are already in hospital or have been to a doctor. If the son or the dad didn't pick up on this implication then fair enough.

As the OP said I probably should on a point of principal but my son needs support from his teachers to maximise his potential so I want to retain their goodwill not pi$$ them off. My experience is teachers circle the wagons when one of them is challenged so I don't need that grief for my son.

Equally fair to say that teachers can be 'challenged' with back chat and smart ar5ed answers too.

But yes, if i find a student giving a bit of lip to get a few laughs I do suss it out with other teachers (or form tutor) to see if they are acting out for a reason. Sometimes humour can be used as a mask for struggling with learning so call it 'circling the wagons' but also consider it could be called 'taking an interest'.
But who knows, yes I'll freely admit that teachers take exception to their colleagues being spoken to in certain ways and there can be unfair retribution.

Hence why I might suggest that the conversation between father and son might be a little bit less 'back slapping' and a bit more discussion around 'picking your battles' and 'how to pick them'. And sure there are 'a-hole' teachers (same as any other job with a-holes in it) so I'd be especially wary if the religion teacher also has a second subject and they cross paths again. But really, in the heel of the hunt the teacher only gave a stern dressing down outside the class away from his peers, there wasn't any detention or any other 'punishment' given.

BTW I agree, keep indoctrination out of schools.
and, it's great that a teenager is talking to their dad about stuff that happens in school.. and he knows his own mind.

Gebgbegb

Gebgbegb wrote: »

e.g. are you asserting that the teacher was actually implying that prayer is the first port of call for the sick or injured, and then instigate medical treatment after?

Similarly, are you saying that if someone is already in hospital or sick in a different location that you should "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor".
Is this the 'correct' answer?

That is my interpretation obviously of what the teacher meant (that you should pray after exhausting medical options),

The op does say otherwise

Apparently the correct answer is to take a moment to pray to god for his (or her?) intervention and then call for medical help.

Tasden

bluewolf wrote: »

The op does say otherwise

In fairness, the few times I've witnessed somebody in need of immediate medical attention I have said "oh god" before doing anything else, and I'm not even catholic!

Fleawuss

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Being the mod of T&L I know often enough that the exact words/phrases could be not exactly what is relayed back to the parent.... and then relayed to others online. Do we know exactly what the teacher asked (verbatim).

e.g. are you asserting that the teacher was actually implying that prayer is the first port of call for the sick or injured, and then instigate medical treatment after?

Similarly, are you saying that if someone is already in hospital or sick in a different location that you should "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor".
Is this the 'correct' answer?

That is my interpretation obviously of what the teacher meant (that you should pray after exhausting medical options), as I think the likelihood of any teacher advocating prayer over immediate medical attention is very very low. Advocating that position is on 'nut job' level, and I would also reason that any teacher (even the religious ones!) on that level of thinking has 'track record' in other nuttiness, which I think the OP would have also relayed to us.




Quite the opposite, actually I have taken the parent/pupils side of things in the T&L forum if I saw fit, or if it were a case of not getting the full story (Has the OP asked the teacher exactly what was said in class either? Did the teacher actually use the word "correct"?).



Maybe the son didn't phrase the answer correctly either! Who knows what way the question was actually phrased (verbatim I mean), either way, I think the last paragraph shows that you do not genuinely believe that the teacher was advocating prayer over immediate medical attention... and thus it would be incorrect to suggest that anyone "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor" when it is being implied that they are already in hospital or have been to a doctor. If the son or the dad didn't pick up on this implication then fair enough.

As the OP said I probably should on a point of principal but my son needs support from his teachers to maximise his potential so I want to retain their goodwill not pi$$ them off. My experience is teachers circle the wagons when one of them is challenged so I don't need that grief for my son.

Equally fair to say that teachers can be 'challenged' with back chat and smart ar5ed answers too.

But yes, if i find a student giving a bit of lip to get a few laughs I do suss it out with other teachers (or form tutor) to see if they are acting out for a reason. Sometimes humour can be used as a mask for struggling with learning so call it 'circling the wagons' but also consider it could be called 'taking an interest'.
But who knows, yes I'll freely admit that teachers take exception to their colleagues being spoken to in certain ways and there can be unfair retribution.

Hence why I might suggest that the conversation between father and son might be a little bit less 'back slapping' and a bit more discussion around 'picking your battles' and 'how to pick them'. And sure there are 'a-hole' teachers (same as any other job with a-holes in it) so I'd be especially wary if the religion teacher also has a second subject and they cross paths again. But really, in the heel of the hunt the teacher only gave a stern dressing down outside the class away from his peers, there wasn't any detention or any other 'punishment' given.

BTW I agree, keep indoctrination out of schools.
and, it's great that a teenager is talking to their dad about stuff that happens in school.. and he knows his own mind.

You seriously need to read the OP and his later response to you above.

evolving_doors

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Not sure what you are referring to but for the avoidance of doubt let me confirm that I actively encourage respect for teachers as it's not an easy job and even if they sometimes get it wrong e.g. incorrectly give detention to my son for something they thought he did but he didn't actually do I back them up and make sure the detention is done without complaint because there are bound to be times when he does actually do something wrong and gets away with. In parent teacher meetings I always offer support and even if I disagree with a teacher I'll never undermine them or allow them to be undermined.

Ok fair enough

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Don't you mean I incorrectly interpreted not that I incorrectly misinterpreted?

I mean you were incorrect in misinterpreting.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Either way No. There was no assumption either expressed or implied that the person was already sick. It was a straightforward question about what action you should take if a family member becomes seriously ill or is injured.

Ahhh hold on a second now Ted, you said in your first post:
"The teacher asked the class what the correct thing to do was when a family member is seriously ill or injured and (regrettably) asked my son for the answer."

but now you've changed what the teacher said to...
" if a family member becomes seriously ill or is injured. "

I believe the first one is what the teacher said (as you initially reported it), the second time you have changed to 'becomes' to imply that the action is just taking place there and then, and that the teacher is advocating prayer 'while' the person is "becoming" ill at that moment in time. There's a subtle difference which I think you've tried to amend a little.

But anyhow, maybe the teacher is advocating that prayer comes before medical attention. I just have my doubts that the relayed story from said son may not have things coloured a little.

clear thinking

I would think (ironically) there are serious good Samaritan issues here.

If you try to help a sick or injured person you can't be sued.

However if you pause to pray and the delay resulted in injury or death you could be sued by the person or the persons family for negligence.

I've only ever read a summary of one research paper that covered it, in it, sick people were prayed for, or not, and the prayers made no difference.

Swift first aid does make a difference.

You can pray after, maybe thank god you won't be getting sued for allowing someone to die.

silverharp

Tasden wrote: »

That's what I'm asking, is he part of the class that takes part in the religious curriculum or is he part that sits out?

sorry, I wasnt clear, there are 2 classes in the year, when they have religion they combine and split the classes into Catholic and other , so the "other" class is only ever supposed to be learning about religions. However if you get a teacher that is religious themselves there can be a bias if you have an evangelical type.
I dont know many schools that do this and Im cool with it, I want my kids to learn about religions because it feeds into other subjects in secondary.

looksee

Gebgbegb, no matter how it was interpreted, if it was not made clear that the teacher was talking about someone already sick and being cared for then the answer was correct and the teacher could have said 'ok, I am assuming that the person was already receiving medical care'. If it were clear that they were talking about that situation then the response would be something like, 'yes we have already established that'. Either way it was not worth making a production of.

Of course the child could be missing out a vital bit of information such as 'I was sitting there with a big cheeky grin on my face and had up till then been messing and talking to my friend' but we are never likely to know that. We can only discuss the information we have.

jimd2

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Thanks for the answers all, its been a good sanity check. I wasn't sure whether I should make an issue of it or not with the school principal but given my son totally sees how ridiculous the teacher behaved I'll let it pass as my intervention would probably only backfire on my son in some other way.

I think you should bring it up with the principal.

silverharp

jimd2 wrote: »

I think you should bring it up with the principal.

i dont think that its a good idea to have everyone on a hair trigger. We all have some instance where a teacher overreacted a little or made a mistake, I wouldnt advocate that everything needs to be reported up the line or every bad call demands an apology. If a pattern emerged or a student felt they had to bite their lip and knuckle under I'd take a different view.

54and56

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Ahhh hold on a second now Ted, you said in your first post:
"The teacher asked the class what the correct thing to do was when a family member is seriously ill or injured and (regrettably) asked my son for the answer."

but now you've changed what the teacher said to...
" if a family member becomes seriously ill or is injured. "

I believe the first one is what the teacher said (as you initially reported it), the second time you have changed to 'becomes' to imply that the action is just taking place there and then, and that the teacher is advocating prayer 'while' the person is "becoming" ill at that moment in time. There's a subtle difference which I think you've tried to amend a little.

But anyhow, maybe the teacher is advocating that prayer comes before medical attention. I just have my doubts that the relayed story from said son may not have things coloured a little.

OK , my bad. I wasn't expecting to be cross examined so I didn't take a written statement from my son on the matter

What I do know is the teacher didn't say the person was in hospital or otherwise already receiving medical care. Perhaps he intended to imply that the person was "already" seriously ill or injured as the context for his question but that's not the way his question was understood by my son who relayed it to me as being (to paraphrase) what should you do if you come across a seriously ill or injured person/someone you're with becomes seriously ill or injured. If the teacher meant to communicate that the hypothetically ill or injured person was already in receipt of medical attention whether in hospital or not he should have clarified that when setting the scene for the question but he definitely didn't. If he thought he implied the person was already in hospital I can see why he might think my son's answer was wrong/smart arse but I assure you my son didn't hear the question that way and was honestly giving what he thought was the correct answer i.e. if someone is seriously ill or injured the first thing you do is seek medical attention. You don't waste potentially valuable time having an imaginary chat with an imaginary friend.

It seems to me that one of three things could be happening:-

1. The Teacher asked a poorly constructed question which he thought implied the seriously ill person was already in hospital but as there was no mention of same my son answered the question as it was actually phrased and was incorrectly removed from the class and admonished for being a smart ar$e.

2. The Teacher didn't imply the seriously ill person was already in hospital and is actually advocating that before medical help is sought some time should be spent having a quick chat on the divine intervention hotline to God.

3. My son is a total liar.

I'm hoping (and expect) that #1 is the most likely!!

Tasden

Would you not think though that it being a religion lesson, it was sort of implied what the teacher was getting at. Context is everything and even if it wasn't said explicitly,i think it may have been plainly obvious what the context was and that is why the teacher was annoyed at his answer.

Maybe- I dunno I wasn't there :pac:

54and56

looksee wrote: »

Of course the child could be missing out a vital bit of information such as 'I was sitting there with a big cheeky grin on my face and had up till then been messing and talking to my friend' but we are never likely to know that. We can only discuss the information we have.

Which is absolutely entirely possible!! Teachers are human and make mistakes. They also have to be allowed to make some mistakes without having every single one made into a big drama. We all make mistakes in work and most of the time our employers/colleagues/customers understand and move on quickly. What really matters is we learn something from each mistake.

It's entirely possible my son was acting as you outlined i.e. chatting/messing with his friends which the teacher didn't punish but when he gave the answer he did it may have just been the straw (incorrectly or not) which triggered him to remove my son from the class. I don't think that's what happened as my son have been getting good reports from his form teacher and other teachers ref his behaviour but never say never.

I'm not at all worried about the admonishment. As I said earlier, even if he didn't actually deserve any punishment this time he probably got away with other stuff he should have been punished for in this or other classes so he has to just suck it up and he knows that.

My only real concern is that the teacher gave the class the impression (which perhaps he didn't mean to give) that the first thing you do if someone is seriously ill or injured is pray and then seek medical attention!! That's the bit that's actually concerning.

54and56

Tasden wrote: »

Would you not think though that it being a religion lesson, it was sort of implied what the teacher was getting at. Context is everything and even if it wasn't said explicitly,i think it may have been plainly obvious what the context was and that is why the teacher was annoyed at his answer.

Maybe- I dunno I wasn't there :pac:

Possibly but why leave something to inference or implication when it's so easy to clarify when asking the question? In a class of 34 junior cert student if you leave a question open to interpretation you can't expect all 34 to interpret it the way you assume it will be interpreted.

JamBur

It's at times like this that I wish the site had a dislike button...

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Being the mod of T&L I know often enough that the exact words/phrases could be not exactly what is relayed back to the parent.... and then relayed to others online. Do we know exactly what the teacher asked (verbatim).

e.g. are you asserting that the teacher was actually implying that prayer is the first port of call for the sick or injured, and then instigate medical treatment after?

Similarly, are you saying that if someone is already in hospital or sick in a different location that you should "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor".
Is this the 'correct' answer?

That is my interpretation obviously of what the teacher meant (that you should pray after exhausting medical options), as I think the likelihood of any teacher advocating prayer over immediate medical attention is very very low. Advocating that position is on 'nut job' level, and I would also reason that any teacher (even the religious ones!) on that level of thinking has 'track record' in other nuttiness, which I think the OP would have also relayed to us.




Quite the opposite, actually I have taken the parent/pupils side of things in the T&L forum if I saw fit, or if it were a case of not getting the full story (Has the OP asked the teacher exactly what was said in class either? Did the teacher actually use the word "correct"?).



Maybe the son didn't phrase the answer correctly either! Who knows what way the question was actually phrased (verbatim I mean), either way, I think the last paragraph shows that you do not genuinely believe that the teacher was advocating prayer over immediate medical attention... and thus it would be incorrect to suggest that anyone "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor" when it is being implied that they are already in hospital or have been to a doctor. If the son or the dad didn't pick up on this implication then fair enough.

As the OP said I probably should on a point of principal but my son needs support from his teachers to maximise his potential so I want to retain their goodwill not pi$$ them off. My experience is teachers circle the wagons when one of them is challenged so I don't need that grief for my son.

Equally fair to say that teachers can be 'challenged' with back chat and smart ar5ed answers too.

But yes, if i find a student giving a bit of lip to get a few laughs I do suss it out with other teachers (or form tutor) to see if they are acting out for a reason. Sometimes humour can be used as a mask for struggling with learning so call it 'circling the wagons' but also consider it could be called 'taking an interest'.
But who knows, yes I'll freely admit that teachers take exception to their colleagues being spoken to in certain ways and there can be unfair retribution.

Hence why I might suggest that the conversation between father and son might be a little bit less 'back slapping' and a bit more discussion around 'picking your battles' and 'how to pick them'. And sure there are 'a-hole' teachers (same as any other job with a-holes in it) so I'd be especially wary if the religion teacher also has a second subject and they cross paths again. But really, in the heel of the hunt the teacher only gave a stern dressing down outside the class away from his peers, there wasn't any detention or any other 'punishment' given.

BTW I agree, keep indoctrination out of schools.
and, it's great that a teenager is talking to their dad about stuff that happens in school.. and he knows his own mind.

Tasden

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Possibly but why leave something to inference or implication when it's so easy to clarify when asking the question? In a class of 34 junior cert student if you leave a question open to interpretation you can't expect all 34 to interpret it the way you assume it will be interpreted.

But you don't know the content that came before that question. They could have been talking about feeling helpless in situations and praying. Or whatever other example you can think of, where the context of the question would then be crystal clear without being explicit. In a situation like that you can expect 34 junior cert students to interpret it the correct way, unless one is being a bit of a smart arse/joker about it. (Not saying he was btw but it would explain his reaction)

py2006

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

My son said "bring him to hospital or call a Doctor" which (unbelievably) resulted in my son being ejected from the class and whilst outside being given a stern dressing down by the teacher for being a smart ar$e.

This was done because the teacher was embarrassed. Being removed and getting a dressing down by a teacher in the corridor can be quiet traumatic for a young child.

Shrap

jimd2 wrote: »

I think you should bring it up with the principal.

Bit too serious, given the laughter that ensued.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Thanks for the answers all, its been a good sanity check. I wasn't sure whether I should make an issue of it or not with the school principal but given my son totally sees how ridiculous the teacher behaved I'll let it pass as my intervention would probably only backfire on my son in some other way.

I think you should hop it off the teacher at the next P/T meetings, in the nicest possible way, ie. roar laughing at your son's description of what transpired and in a sympathetic kind of way, mention that your son's answer of "call the doctor" was right, wasn't it, but it wasn't quite what *teacher* was looking for eh? Give the teacher just enough rope to dangle him/herself on, just for the craic. I doubt it'll backfire on your son - more, it will indicate to said teacher that very little gets past you and you're no push-over.

Hotblack Desiato

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Yes kids being smart arsses to get a laugh in class still goes on. Although I'm not too sure if it's common for parents to pat them on the back for it at home.

Only a very insecure adult could interpret a correct answer to their question as "being a smart ass".

And only a damn fool would be asking such a question expecting the answer "prayers" in the first place.

54and56

Tasden wrote: »

But you don't know the content that came before that question. They could have been talking about feeling helpless in situations and praying. Or whatever other example you can think of, where the context of the question would then be crystal clear without being explicit. In a situation like that you can expect 34 junior cert students to interpret it the correct way, unless one is being a bit of a smart arse/joker about it. (Not saying he was btw but it would explain his reaction)

Good point. I don't think my young lad deliberately misunderstood the question but I guess its possible he missed (through his own fault i.e. not paying attention) some lead up context which would have made the actual question more obvious if that's what the teacher meant.

54and56

py2006 wrote: »

This was done because the teacher was embarrassed. Being removed and getting a dressing down by a teacher in the corridor can be quiet traumatic for a young child.

Thankfully it wasn't.

54and56

Shrap wrote: »

Bit too serious, given the laughter that ensued.


I think you should hop it off the teacher at the next P/T meetings, in the nicest possible way, ie. roar laughing at your son's description of what transpired and in a sympathetic kind of way, mention that your son's answer of "call the doctor" was right, wasn't it, but it wasn't quite what *teacher* was looking for eh? Give the teacher just enough rope to dangle him/herself on, just for the craic. I doubt it'll backfire on your son - more, it will indicate to said teacher that very little gets past you and you're no push-over.

Tempting but I wouldn't like to ambush a teacher like that. It's not a big deal. If it was I'd be tackling him myself tomorrow morning!!

py2006

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Thankfully it wasn't.

Smarter kid than I was at that age. I was taken out and addressed by teachers but at the time I was intimidated and scared. In hindsight I was right.

recedite

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Being the mod of T&L I know often enough that the exact words/phrases could be not exactly what is relayed back to the parent.... and then relayed to others online. Do we know exactly what the teacher asked (verbatim)....
Equally fair to say that teachers can be 'challenged' with back chat and smart ar5ed answers too.

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

It seems to me that one of three things could be happening:-

1. The Teacher asked a poorly constructed question which he thought implied the seriously ill person was already in hospital but as there was no mention of same my son answered the question as it was actually phrased and was incorrectly removed from the class and admonished for being a smart ar$e.

2. The Teacher didn't imply the seriously ill person was already in hospital and is actually advocating that before medical help is sought some time should be spent having a quick chat on the divine intervention hotline to God.

3. My son is a total liar.

I'm hoping (and expect) that #1 is the most likely!!

Something vaguely similar happened with my kid recently (of around the same age) which resulted in the teacher phoning OH. Then later on at home, hearing about it from his perspective, it seemed he'd done nothing wrong. So before going to the principal with a complaint we suggested he approach the teacher the next day and ask them why exactly she phoned the parents. Which he did, but unknown to either us or the teacher, he recorded the conversation with his iphone. As it happened, when we listened to it the teacher responded well and backtracked a little, as did he, and both finished up happy with the conversation. As parents we were glad to listen to this recording of the matter being resolved.
So, basically I would recommend this method; your son goes in and asks the teacher for a moment to discuss the incident, while recording it clandestinely. Obviously the teacher is at a slight disadvantage being unaware of the recording, but on the other hand they are also in a situation of unequal power. If they are not abusing their power, they have nothing to worry about. If the whole thing turns out to be a misunderstanding, they will resolve it between themselves. Either way, you get to hear whether it is a really just a smart-ass thing, or a genuine issue.

This is only going to work with older kids who can express themselves properly. And yes, I know teachers are going to say its a bad idea, but I disagree. Without being sexist about it, I think some of the younger female teachers can become a bit intimidated at times by the "slagging banter" of teenage boys amongst themselves, and may sometimes use their authority to randomly single out one of them and clamp down on them. Unfortunately this has the opposite effect to the desired effect; it lowers the kids respect for the teacher, instead of increasing it.
Sometimes lads are simply being lads; they can't help being what they are, but they mean no harm.

In our case comparing the teachers phone call to OH and the iphone recording, I'd say the very minor incident did not justify phoning the parents, and the teacher was just having a bad day.

looksee

recedite wrote: »

Something vaguely similar happened with my kid recently (of around the same age) which resulted in the teacher phoning OH. Then later on at home, hearing about it from his perspective, it seemed he'd done nothing wrong. So before going to the principal with a complaint we suggested he approach the teacher the next day and ask them why exactly she phoned the parents. Which he did, but unknown to either us or the teacher, he recorded the conversation with his iphone. As it happened, when we listened to it the teacher responded well and backtracked a little, as did he, and both finished up happy with the conversation. As parents we were glad to listen to this recording of the matter being resolved.
So, basically I would recommend this method; your son goes in and asks the teacher for a moment to discuss the incident, while recording it clandestinely. Obviously the teacher is at a slight disadvantage being unaware of the recording, but on the other hand they are also in a situation of unequal power. If they are not abusing their power, they have nothing to worry about. If the whole thing turns out to be a misunderstanding, they will resolve it between themselves. Either way, you get to hear whether it is a really just a smart-ass thing, or a genuine issue.
.

Nooooo...that really is not a good idea. Could get him (and possibly you) into all sorts of hot water.

py2006

recedite wrote: »

. Which he did, but unknown to either us or the teacher, he recorded the conversation with his iphone.

That sounds well dodgy to me.

Shrap

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Tempting but I wouldn't like to ambush a teacher like that. It's not a big deal. If it was I'd be tackling him myself tomorrow morning!!

Always good to have the "incident" in the back of your mind though. Eldest had a *ahem* disagreement with a teacher a few years back - he had apologised on reflection and told me all about it later (it had been a fine line between him standing up for himself and being "cheeky"). 6 months down the road, teacher hopped it off me at a P/T meeting by saying (not once, but three times!) "I don't want to go into it, but there was one incident...", waiting for me to take the bait. I didn't.

54and56

looksee wrote: »

Nooooo...that really is not a good idea. Could get him (and possibly you) into all sorts of hot water.

I totally agree. No good can come of such behaviour. There would have to be some extreme abuse going on before I'd ever condone such action.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

[...] recording it clandestinely [...]

While I'm not sure that the legality of recording a conversation has been specifically tested in an Irish court, I am fairly sure that nobody here would like to be the first person to find out whether or not it is legal either. I'd recommend strong caution, probably involving contact with a solicitor, before attempting anything as risky as that.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/oliver-connolly-is-wrong-sgt-mccabe-broke-no-laws-with-his-secret-recording-30073914.html

54and56

robindch wrote: »

While I'm not sure that the legality of recording a conversation has been specifically tested in an Irish court, I am fairly sure that nobody here would like to be the first person to find out whether or not it is legal either. I'd recommend strong caution, probably involving contact with a solicitor, before attempting anything as risky as that.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/oliver-connolly-is-wrong-sgt-mccabe-broke-no-laws-with-his-secret-recording-30073914.html

As I stated above I wouldn't advocate recording a conversation with a teacher, I don't think it is appropriate or necessary.

There isn't however any bar on such activity whether clandestine or not. The basic rule is you are allowed to record your own conversations regardless of whether the other party is aware of the recording or not. What you are not allowed to do is record conversations which you are not party to e.g. covertly record the teacher and principal discussing the issue privately in the principals office by secreting a phone or other recording device there.

recedite

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

As I stated above I wouldn't advocate recording a conversation with a teacher, I don't think it is appropriate or necessary.

I wouldn't have advocated it either, but being presented with the recording I found it enlightening. Don't knock it till you try it
Anyway it was a slightly different situation, in that if there is the possibility of some disciplinary action being imposed, either at school or at home, parents should access as much info as is available, in order to assess the situation as fairly as possible.

Fleawuss

Tasden wrote: »

Would you not think though that it being a religion lesson, it was sort of implied what the teacher was getting at. Context is everything and even if it wasn't said explicitly,i think it may have been plainly obvious what the context was and that is why the teacher was annoyed at his answer.

Maybe- I dunno I wasn't there :pac:

The context: that religion trumps common sense? That would be a religious matter, Ted.