Re: Inaccuracy

I don't know when it was that you were referring to, but I was obliged to teach in the 'hippy' system right up to my retirement in 2012.

I never liked it, really for the reason you mention. Kids sitting facing each other is going to, and often did, result in misbehaviour.

Actually, I was a 'strict' teacher and demanded good behaviour, but I'm sure there were many others who must have been banging their heads against the blackboard (oops! can I say that?).

When I went to school, we all sat at desks in regimented rows facing the front, the teacher and the blackboard (oh dear, there I go again).

That was, without doubt, what I would have preferred as a teacher, but it was considered old fashioned and not de rigueur in these days. It was all about children 'interacting' and working together (read pissing about!).

I wonder whether that had any effect on the drop in educational standards around the same time!

Re: Inaccuracy

There was a strange dynamic in the classroom, some crafty buggers pretended to be anti establishment trailblazers, but, their Blazers were always immaculate.
Should have questioned that at the time.

Re: Inaccuracy

JBR this was in the mid 70s at primary school. At secondary school in the 80s we all sat in pairs at neat rows of desk facing the teacher. Art was the only class with the hippy arrangement. At uni aside from the lecture theatre, they had single desks all facing the teacher. The hippy thing was definitely a distraction because of all the messing about. I remember my best friend copying my answers in the maths test! Unbelievable that they still use this arrangement. I think my secondary school had the best approach by analysing classes where interaction is important to learning.

I think the idea behind it is that you become more creative working that way, you help each other and you develop good socialisation skills. However, with some kids around the table it felt like when you are at a wedding stuck with guests you don't know and have nothing in common with!

Re: Inaccuracy

Then there were the rebels who ended up as prefects.... very suspect.

Re: Inaccuracy

Yes, the answer lies on a piece of land in your home town, although the birds have flown.

Re: Inaccuracy

In what way and why?

Re: Inaccuracy

Yep, the hippy system rarely worked. It did allow for greater ease (due to increased spacing between the groupwork desks) to make my way to larger number of pupils who were, shall we say "less focused" though. This number was invariably larger than when desks arranged in rows.

Tried an experiment once in which the tables were set up in straight lines facing the front (nothing new there), but I put my teacher's desk at the back so pupils couldn't actually see what I was doing/where I was looking while I sat there when they were on task.

Worked an absolute treat.

Was told my a deputy head that she thought that it was too oppressive and draconian, and was told to move my desk to the front. Did so, and standards of pupil behaviour and work output dropped accordingly.

Re: Inaccuracy

Yes, the higher they go, the more politically-led they become. Rather like OFSTED inspectors.

I once, having received accusations of being too strict from parents, suggested to my head teacher that it might be a good idea to have CCTV cover of every classroom. Not for the protection of the kids, but for OUR protection.

Re: Inaccuracy

I am not hung up on grammatical accuracy in a report but really want the truth reported. I once worked for an educational establishment in Oxford and much time was wasted by the college boffins requesting changes to the grammar. Each boffin having a different view.

Re: Inaccuracy

It seems that the arrangement, and order of 26 letters (and various bits and pieces of certain Marks) define something, when typed, not spoken, pity the folks who judge on this basis, ain't as sharp when it comes to numbers, there are more than 26 of them.