airy

You don't think it's relevant that someone calling for greater reflection and evaluation has already decided which teachers are going to be good at it?

I've never said such a thing, but you state the implication as if it were a truth. I'm beginning to spot a pattern. Is this the Daily Mail Education supplement forum? lol To make it completely clear, no implication or otherwise: It is unfair to take one statement out of an article, make an implication (that the author may or may not have intended) and use that as a focus for knocking down the entire article. That is all. Read into that what you will, but I'm done with tabloid witch hunts for now.

Right, so I'm not supposed to look at the statements made in the article in order to make judgements about it..? Yes, it's one sentence but that one sentence which has quite profound impact on what is being said.

So what you're implying is that the other sentences had NO impact on what was being said then?

There's nothing like labouring a point!!

Having read and reread the statements I too took exception at the words used and the implication was that (some) older teachers are dinosaurs - inflexible and not up to date with things, on the way out.

 Yet younger teachers are always eager to learn and take on new challenges.(implied?)

This may be true for some but not for all. I know some younger teachers who are of 'dinosaur mindset' and are totally set in their ways. They are right and nothing will make them change their mind.

I also know some older teachers who have done nothing but take on board new ideas, go the extra mile for kids and change their working practice continually.

In any text certain words will have a greater impact on the reader than others. Nothing I read took away the impact those words had.

CheesyWotsits

So what you're implying is that the other sentences had NO impact on what was being said then?

I think that one changes the focus. The whole article is a summary of a collection of essays and the last few paragraphs are the ones which appear to state the views of the writer rather than just reviewing the book. The implication that only young teachers are interested in dialogue and self-evaluation is important because it suggests that to implement the steps towards continuous improvement we need not only get rid of the few teachers who don't reflect and develop but of all old teachers. To be honest, I also take issue with this idea that we can continually get better and better as it could encourage change merely for the sake of change - as with CfE where over enthusiastic implementation has, in some cases, led to the baby being thrown out with the bathwater.

airy

The implication that only young teachers are interested in dialogue and self-evaluation is important because it suggests that to implement the steps towards continuous improvement we need not only get rid of the few teachers who don't reflect and develop but of all old teachers.

What you got from the article was that the author wants to get rid of ALL old teachers? I'm beginning to think this may be paranoia rather than sensationalism.

coaltown1

There's nothing like labouring a point!!

So, you post the same thing as others have posted... lol.. Nothing like labouring a point eh?

CheesyWotsits

quote] So, you post the same thing as others have posted... lol.. Nothing like labouring a point eh?

I was merely trying to kickstart the stuck record!

airy

To be honest, I also take issue with this idea that we can continually get better .

The implication being that you are one of the teachers who does not continue to develop their skills?

See how easy it is to take one statement from a post and twist it to something that the writer did not intend?

[edited by: CheesyWotsits at 10:36 (GMT 0) on 10-4-2012]

Are you imagining I'm a sixty-something teacher approaching retiral? If anyone is sensationalising this, it's you and your comments about witch hunts and paranoia! Essentially, this is a book review but the last few paragraphs do seem to state the writer's own views on education. What I got from that is that the writer is a great believer in the Journey to Excellence and continuous self evaluation but thinks that these objectives can be best (only?) achieved by young teachers. This dismisses the vast majority of older teachers who genuinely engage in self evaluation and places a value on youth rather than the skills mentioned. As I said, it might be clumsy writing but this is after all a published article which was presumably considered and proof read.

CheesyWotsits

It is unfair to take one statement out of an article, make an implication (that the author may or may not have intended) and use that as a focus for knocking down the entire article.

Would you have written this if the author had commented, "This fits neatly with the mind-set of Scotland's primary teachers who are open to dialogue and self-evaluation”? Unlikely and there would have been uproar about that too.

In my opinion, he used "young" because he thinks it is self-evident that young teachers have these qualities in greater abundance than older teachers. Maybe TESS should invite him to clarify his view in its columns?

I am outraged by this thread and the implication that young teachers are trying to take jobs away from older teachers. ;)

I've been watching this thread at a distance since it started.

I would also take exception to an implication that young=better. This is a cultural value which (falsely) favours extraversion over introversion.

But I can't see that this is actually said or even implied...

At last I've pasted the link and read the 'offending' article.

It is indeed offensive. Very. It is primarily offensive to good linguistic style. The author of the article (review) clearly likes to show how well-read they are, but commits the basic essay-writing error of failing to evaluate what he has read, and is supposed to be reviewing. The result is a badly-written article which seems to regurgitate the views it *should* be reviewing, and we, the readers, can't easily tell what (if anything) the author actually thinks, or indeed whether he has checked the 'facts' asserted by the various authors of the book.. A review should *engage with* the views in the book - this review patently fails to do that...

As for the 'young teachers' comment, it could as easily be a reflection of an assertion in the book that the demographics of the teaching population in Scotland is relatively young, compared to England. Without reading the book reviewed it's hard to know really what is really being said, because the review is so badly written.

As such - a BADLY-WRITTEN REVIEW - I really don't think we should be taking offence at anything which *might* have been said. It's all obfuscatory waffle!

If this review is typical of Alex Wood's style (and not a temporary aberration rushed off in a hurry, perhaps, for a deadline) I am glad that he is not MY headteacher - or indeed anybody's any more. Good leadership needs clear communication skills...

I'm 53, a CT6, and have spent lots of my own money on CPD. I also worked on essays for 4 years- on Christmas Days. I worked on my EdD essays as my mother lay dying. I've spent much of my own money and piled too much mileage on my car to help spread the word for CfE inmy region- oh and I have been an associate tutor for the PGDE programme in my region and with my alma mater. Dinosaur? Uh-uh.

 So what are my rewards?

My CT money will probably go

I'll probably get my old Senior Teacher remit back

I'll never get those Christmas days back

I'll never forgive myself for working so hard and not being kinder to my late mum

and now? I plan to do what I should have done- to quote Michael Portillo- 'get a life'

poor tom

I've been watching this thread at a distance since it started.

 

I would also take exception to an implication that young=better. This is a cultural value which (falsely) favours extraversion over introversion.

But I can't see that this is actually said or even implied...

At last I've pasted the link and read the 'offending' article.

 

It is indeed offensive. Very. It is primarily offensive to good linguistic style. The author of the article (review) clearly likes to show how well-read they are, but commits the basic essay-writing error of failing to evaluate what he has read, and is supposed to be reviewing. The result is a badly-written article which seems to regurgitate the views it *should* be reviewing, and we, the readers, can't easily tell what (if anything) the author actually thinks, or indeed whether he has checked the 'facts' asserted by the various authors of the book.. A review should *engage with* the views in the book - this review patently fails to do that...

As for the 'young teachers' comment, it could as easily be a reflection of an assertion in the book that the demographics of the teaching population in Scotland is relatively young, compared to England. Without reading the book reviewed it's hard to know really what is really being said, because the review is so badly written.

 

As such - a BADLY-WRITTEN REVIEW - I really don't think we should be taking offence at anything which *might* have been said. It's all obfuscatory waffle!

If this review is typical of Alex Wood's style (and not a temporary aberration rushed off in a hurry, perhaps, for a deadline) I am glad that he is not MY headteacher - or indeed anybody's any more. Good leadership needs clear communication skills...

 

You have got it in one!

There is nothing more nauseatingly humorous than an old educationalist telling other old educationalists that that they are past it while he and his old pals hang on to every post, sinecure and consultancy they possibly can. Why not move aside for someone younger , say in their early 50s? ps - Can we make Directors of Education younger as that seems to be the way of things or is experience something that only works outside of the classroom?

cochrane1964

There is nothing more nauseatingly humorous than an old educationalist telling other old educationalists that that they are past it while he and his old pals hang on to every post, sinecure and consultancy they possibly can. Why not move aside for someone younger , say in their early 50s? ps - Can we make Directors of Education younger as that seems to be the way of things or is experience something that only works outside of the classroom?

 Precisely the culture - which is now fast-tracking so that all the younger men and women on a career kick end up as "educational consultants" when 99% of their ideas were formed over coffee and the internet and hardly in a classroom or school.

 

Got it in one |Cochrane.

I have taught for over 30 years , and the best I have worked with were the LAST to tell you how to do the job.

Only mediocrity has ever been so bold.

Teach like you want to teach!