Why can't school holidays be shorter

stripysocks85

billybudd wrote: »

He listed four or five points that in his opinion are beneficial. i presume those points answer in a small way how it would be better to use resources at hand.

Yeah, maybe all parents should 'home school'. Let's see what generation is created in about 20 years time! Problem solved!

Oh and they should do it for free, seeing as it's part of their job as a parent anyway - the primary educator! Money could be saved all around! Wahoo!

token101

dillo2k10 wrote: »

Why should someone with 5 years of third level education be paid the same (or less) than someone who left school at 12 and now drives a bus?

It's called supply and demand. It's why electricians got 1000's per week in the boom. We've a surplus of teachers, so yeah they should be.

dillo2k10 wrote: »

If the pay is too low then high quality teachers would not be attracted to the profession (myself included, I want to be a secondary school teacher, but if the pay falls any further I wont be able to afford being a teacher)

You're including yourself as a high quality teacher even though you haven't even graduated? Studying the history of art or geography for four years doesn't make you 'high quality' or in demand.

dillo2k10 wrote: »

Generally teachers will agree that they should be paid based on performance, however, how do you measure their performance?

Student test scores based on class size ratios and you could consider deis schools aswell. Not very difficult really.

dillo2k10 wrote: »

I take it you have a ****ty, low paying job?

It would take a teacher to make an unbelievable arrogant and ill informed statement. No such thing as a sh*tty job, just lower paid jobs. Low paid is not equalled to sh*tty, you should probably correct yourself there. As you you said yourself, you may be forced to be driving the bus one day when teachers are given a long awaited wake up call. Are you actually arrogant enough to believe that society needs everyone to have a college education? Where do you think society would be without binmen, shopkeepers, street sweepers, bus drivers, taxi drivers? You be sat at a bus stop waiting for the bus that isn't coming surrounded by gobsh*te, pontificating graduates talking sh*te and you'd be surrounded by rubbish. Be great craic wouldn't it? F***ing hell, I wonder where people get the idea that teachers are arrogant, self entitled clowns eh? :rolleyes:

I Heart Internet

Cherryfizz wrote: »

During the boom years noone really cared about the length of School Holidays or Teachers because most people were on the pigs back creaming bonuses! Now because everything has gone belly up there seems to be a real sense of begrudgery against Teachers. Teachers did not cause this economic mess and are trying like everyone else to ride this awful storm out. Teachers don't want to see their family and friends emigrating or certain students infront of them stressed because of their parents finances. There is an assumption that all teachers have secure jobs which in itself is not true or that every teacher gets paid holidays or the hours are just 9 -4. Back in the Boom Years some looked down on Teaching because there wasnt enough money in it. But thats the thing, people don't teach to make their fortune but in the belief to make a difference in a young persons life and impart knowledge. Like every profession there are people who are better at the job than others and the crackdown on those not performing is welcomed. When I was a child I loved the holidays to play more sport or get a job for myself. An education is not just what is learnt in the classroom as we all know but what goes on in everyday life!

This is all overly emotive and straying from the point. Of course teachers didn't cause the recession!! FFS

What's wrong with looking for value for money everywhere???

I think having shorter summer holidays and giving children more face time with teachers will lead to better educated students. Perhaps a "summer curriculum" focused more on outdoor issues could be an aspect of it.

Someone mentioned that it was pointless because once you have the curriculum finished there's nothing else to teach!! WTF? That's a desperately narrow view of education.

If teachers are doing such a great job (and many of them are) kids would benefit from more hours being thought by them.

I Heart Internet

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Yeah, maybe all parents should 'home school'. Let's see what generation is created in about 20 years time! Problem solved!

Oh and they should do it for free, seeing as it's part of their job as a parent anyway - the primary educator! Money could be saved all around! Wahoo!

Who mentioned anything about home-schooling?

Then what would all our teachers do?

seamus

billybudd wrote: »

He listed four or five points that in his opinion are beneficial. i presume those points answer in a small way how it would be better to use resources at hand.

In his opinion =\= "worthwhile answers"

If you're going to make a statement that shorter holidays would be beneficial, then, "That's my opinion" isn't enough of a justification.

Again, nobody has given any worthwhile answer as to why it would be beneficial. "I believe it would be" is not an answer.

Our entire teaching system needs reform. It's been crumbling for years; costs are going up and standards are going down. We need to make massive changes, but across the entire system.

But speaking as someone who came through the Irish system, simply throwing kids into school with the same teachers for a few more weeks is probably the last thing that should be done.

billybudd

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Yeah, maybe all parents should 'home school'. Let's see what generation is created in about 20 years time! Problem solved!

Oh and they should do it for free, seeing as it's part of their job as a parent anyway - the primary educator! Money could be saved all around! Wahoo!

Who said home school? honestly you are doing more damage than good to the reputation of teachers, may i suggest you take a time out and go back and read what you typed and see how you come across.

Debate is healthy.

stripysocks85

I Heart Internet wrote: »

.

Someone mentioned that it was pointless because once you have the curriculum finished there's nothing else to teach!! WTF? That's a desperately narrow view of education.

Who made this comment?

stripysocks85

billybudd wrote: »

Who said home school? honestly you are doing more damage than good to the reputation of teachers, may i suggest you take a time out and go back and read what you typed and see how you come across.

Debate is healthy.

I disagree

micropig

stripysocks85 wrote: »

When do teachers plan?



Is it? It's not factored into mine? Any plans I do is done outside of the school hours.

A teachers day in the school is not the same as the pupils. Just because your pupils go home at 3pm does not mean this is the end of your working day. You could fit in 2 hours of planning there and still be only working 9-5pm. So it might be outside school hours, but it is still within the teachers working day.


Secondary school teachers have it factored in to their day. Planning & preparation days. All school should have a scheme of work that the teachers follow and teachers swap lesson plans. Doesn't take too long to plan a lesson-If your a competent teacher

billybudd

seamus wrote: »

In his opinion =\= "worthwhile answers"

If you're going to make a statement that shorter holidays would be beneficial, then, "That's my opinion" isn't enough of a justification.

Again, nobody has given any worthwhile answer as to why it would be beneficial. "I believe it would be" is not an answer.

Our entire teaching system needs reform. It's been crumbling for years; costs are going up and standards are going down. We need to make massive changes, but across the entire system.

But speaking as someone who came through the Irish system, simply throwing kids into school with the same teachers for a few more weeks is probably the last thing that should be done.

I agree with you, what i meant was it was a opening opinion with some interesting points made, i wouldnt imagine AH is the place to cure the ills of the education system of Ireland.

But i would expect non-teachers looking in to have less answers than teachers and thus teachers should really have a better idea of why this is not a good idea or is manybe a good idea.

billybudd

stripysocks85 wrote: »

I disagree

Thankfully my children will not be attending school in the north east.

partyatmygaff

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I think having shorter summer holidays and giving children more face time with teachers will lead to better educated students. Perhaps a "summer curriculum" focused more on outdoor issues could be an aspect of it.

What precisely are "outdoor issues" and what gives you the idea that teachers themselves know let alone are competent to teach children about "outdoor issues"?

Teaching quality > Teaching time. Instead of giving teachers far more hours at the same pay to achieve essentially nothing they should scale teacher's pay to reflect the quality of their teaching. Now that's real value for money.

Someone mentioned that it was pointless because once you have the curriculum finished there's nothing else to teach!! WTF? That's a desperately narrow view of education.

There's more than enough time in the school year to teach above and beyond what the curriculum demands. In sixth class, we had two classes a week on Leonardo da Vinci's works which although very interesting and very beneficial I doubt was on the official curriculum. The only reason we had enough time to do any of that was because we had an excellent teacher.

seamus

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Someone mentioned that it was pointless because once you have the curriculum finished there's nothing else to teach!! WTF? That's a desperately narrow view of education.

That's probably my point, very poorly misrepresented by you.

I said that if you give more time, the teachers will still only cover the same curriculum. That's how it works. A teacher sees that he has X amount of material to cover. Whether he has 6 months or 9 months or 12 months to cover it, he will create class and teaching plans to cover the required material in the time allotted. Only very exceptional teachers will aim to cover the curriculum as fast as possible and then move onto advanced material after that. I can recall only two such teachers in my entire time in school.

Indeed, our curricula are part of the problem. They're focussed on learning specific knowledge, in time to be tested on that specific knowledge. That's a very narrow way of teaching, and a more open-ended approach would likely result in more hunger and respect for learning on the part of the students.

stripysocks85

Ah well I'm off to get my 4th cuppa tae. It's Thursday tomorrow isn't it? Oh woop PAY DAY! Oh but I haven't been in work since March 16th.... oh well, the joyyyyyys

Booyashaka.

Princess Peach

The question is totally pointless because our government can't afford to fund schools for any extra time anyway!

stripysocks85

billybudd wrote: »

Thankfully my children will not be attending school in the north east.

Didn't say I taught in the North East!

billybudd

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Didn't say I taught in the North East!

Or thought:)

St.Spodo

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Everyone - primary and secondary get the full month of August off (perhaps 3rd level degrees could also be condensed?).

Teaching for most universities finishes for the term in April. The state's funding would have to be restructured and significantly increased to continue teaching into June, for example. Simply, the money isn't there and we don't pay fees so this is practically an impossibility.

token101

Cherryfizz wrote: »

But thats the thing, people don't teach to make their fortune but in the belief to make a difference in a young persons life and impart knowledge

dillo2k10 wrote: »

If the pay is too low then high quality teachers would not be attracted to the profession

So which is it?

stripysocks85

billybudd wrote: »

Or thought:)

You realise the word is 'taught' right? :P

I Heart Internet

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Who made this comment?

I can't find it at all now. I was sure someone said that. I didn't think it was you btw.

They must not have. I'm happy to withdraw my claim that they did.:)

stripysocks85

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I can't find it at all now. I was sure someone said that. I didn't think it was you btw.

They must not have. I'm happy to withdraw my claim that they did.:)

I did make a curriculum comment, so I thought you were referring to me!

Anyway. I'm not going to get all hotheaded about this. Doesn't do any good for the aul blood pressure & I'm only a young wan yet!

I Heart Internet

partyatmygaff wrote: »

What precisely are "outdoor issues" and what gives you the idea that teachers themselves know let alone are competent to teach children about "outdoor issues"?

I didn't explain myself. I was thinking science (biology) and physical education in particular. Heh, I'm just throwing out ideas here.

I Heart Internet

stripysocks85 wrote: »

Ah well I'm off to get my 4th cuppa tae. It's Thursday tomorrow isn't it? Oh woop PAY DAY! Oh but I haven't been in work since March 16th.... oh well, the joyyyyyys

Booyashaka.

I kinda don't know if you're kidding or not. Irish teachers are beyond parody I'm afraid :rolleyes:

Fear_an_tarbh

seamus wrote: »

When I say "pro-rate" I mean, "Compared to averages", I'm aware that the justification at the moment is that "we only get paid for our nine months"
Simple things such as benchmarking a teacher's salary against the national average - let's say a starting teacher get's pro-rated against the national average wage.

So if the national average is €30k, a starting teacher gets paid 75% of that (€22.5k) over 12 months. He then has the option of working his downtime to earn more.

Pay increases are then awarded on the basis of performance, but still benchmarked against the average, so the next year he gets a raise to 1.1 "averages" which will give him take-home of 24,750. If the national average wage drops, every teacher's salary drops in response.


In reality, all public sector/civil service/politician salaries should be linked to the national average so there's no faffing over whinging unions and greedy increments. If economic output drops, the entire public service wage bill drops automatically without strikes or arguments and other bull****. If it improves, the wage bill does too. It's just common bloody sense.

You want to increase teachers' pay?! Sounds great as I earn less than 22k. And after 10 or 15 years, ill still be getting less than 35k!
I'm not complaining; I love my job, but I just don't know who is getting these enormous salaries that people are so vexed about.

c_man

I've lived with a fair few teachers. Never witnessed the "correcting/planning til all hours, every single day" that is always peddled during these discussions. Must just be me.

As for less holidays, well how do we stack up when compared to other countries? I can speak for universities, most of the real work is done when all the undergrads are gone

Fear_an_tarbh

micropig wrote: »

A teachers day in the school is not the same as the pupils. Just because your pupils go home at 3pm does not mean this is the end of your working day. You could fit in 2 hours of planning there and still be only working 9-5pm. So it might be outside school hours, but it is still within the teachers working day.


Secondary school teachers have it factored in to their day. Planning & preparation days. All school should have a scheme of work that the teachers follow and teachers swap lesson plans. Doesn't take too long to plan a lesson-If your a competent teacher

Yes, because all students are exactly the same, with similar learning needs and schemes of work, lesson plans, worksheets, practical sheets, assessments and reports don't need to be tailored to suit different groups or sometimes, individual students. :rolleyes:

ejmaztec

Cherryfizz wrote: »

During the boom years noone really cared about the length of School Holidays or Teachers because most people were on the pigs back creaming bonuses! Now because everything has gone belly up there seems to be a real sense of begrudgery against Teachers. Teachers did not cause this economic mess and are trying like everyone else to ride this awful storm out. Teachers don't want to see their family and friends emigrating or certain students infront of them stressed because of their parents finances. There is an assumption that all teachers have secure jobs which in itself is not true or that every teacher gets paid holidays or the hours are just 9 -4. Back in the Boom Years some looked down on Teaching because there wasnt enough money in it. But thats the thing, people don't teach to make their fortune but in the belief to make a difference in a young persons life and impart knowledge. Like every profession there are people who are better at the job than others and the crackdown on those not performing is welcomed. When I was a child I loved the holidays to play more sport or get a job for myself. An education is not just what is learnt in the classroom as we all know but what goes on in everyday life!

Teachers were fair game during the boom-years as well, and seemed to be belly-aching all the time about one thing or another, always looking for sympathy and always shocked because they never got any.:P

OldNotWIse

ejmaztec wrote: »

Teachers were fair game during the boom-years as well, and seemed to be belly-aching all the time about one thing or another, always looking for sympathy and always shocked because they never got any.:P

Does 2002 count as one of the boom years? I seem to remember not being allowed to attend school during my LC year at one stage bc teachers were striking...

Lawrence1895

micropig wrote: »

A teachers day in the school is not the same as the pupils. Just because your pupils go home at 3pm does not mean this is the end of your working day. You could fit in 2 hours of planning there and still be only working 9-5pm. So it might be outside school hours, but it is still within the teachers working day.


Secondary school teachers have it factored in to their day. Planning & preparation days. All school should have a scheme of work that the teachers follow and teachers swap lesson plans. Doesn't take too long to plan a lesson-If your a competent teacher

May I ask, what that is? Some kind of a staff meeting?

seamus

Fear_an_tarbh wrote: »

You want to increase teachers' pay?! Sounds great as I earn less than 22k. And after 10 or 15 years, ill still be getting less than 35k!
I'm not complaining; I love my job, but I just don't know who is getting these enormous salaries that people are so vexed about.

Sounds like you might be getting screwed.

http://www.into.ie/ROI/InformationforTeachers/Salaries/CommonBasicScale/

After ten years you'll be on €39k, not including allowances for qualifications and such.

There are some big salaries alright, but probably not enough to get worked up about. A principle in a big school with 35 year's service, an honours degree and a handful of other qualifications can be earning in excess of €100k.
Although when you consider that a principal with 25 years service in mid-sized school earns about €80k, many people would consider that a huge salary.

token101

Fear_an_tarbh wrote: »

Yes, because all students are exactly the same, with similar learning needs and schemes of work, lesson plans, worksheets, practical sheets, assessments and reports don't need to be tailored to suit different groups or sometimes, individual students. :rolleyes:

So what? You have to work until 5pm and sometimes work late? Welcome to the f***ing real world.

ejmaztec

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Does 2002 count as one of the boom years? I seem to remember not being allowed to attend school during my LC year at one stage bc teachers were striking...

I think so, teachers made an awful lot of enemies during that campaign, and some of them took it out on the kids of some parents who campaigned against them. One of our kids got the evil-eye from some militant teacher because she knew that my missus was quite vocal in disagreeing with the strike, and we ended up moving our one to another school to get away from her.

micropig

Fear_an_tarbh wrote: »

Yes, because all students are exactly the same, with similar learning needs and schemes of work, lesson plans, worksheets, practical sheets, assessments and reports don't need to be tailored to suit different groups or sometimes, individual students. :rolleyes:

Of course lessons should be tailored to suit individual pupils, no one said they shouldn't be. All pupils are following the same curriculum.

Competent teachers should be able to design lessons, differentiated enough to include all levels -That's why I said a competent teacher

It is the height of stupidity if each teacher in a department is planning entire lessons individually. The teachers in the department should get together and between them design the lessons. All the teacher has to do is tweak it slightly for their pupils (Properly planned, differentiated lessons will be already inclusive of all abilities). worksheets, practical sheets & assessment should be all included in the lesson plans and the scheme of work



Other teachers are teaching the same lesson, many have thought it last year;)

Lars1916 wrote: »

May I ask, what that is? Some kind of a staff meeting?

Sorry that should read, planning & preparation classes or "free" classes, during the school day..especially for planning;)

Mickey H

mikemac1 wrote: »

Back in my day I spent my summers helping the men for silage season and then doing it all again for hay

Stacking the square bales in the fields and there was a special way to do it, you had to have the knots facing down and on the outside though I never actually learned why.
Anyone know?

I suppose a while back the children was realy needed for farm work.
A bad summer means a bad year, a lot of pressure and stress involved.
God knows it's liable to start raining any minute :rolleyes:

Doesn't matter anymore but OP asked for reasons and that's mine

Yes, Mike. The top of the bale where the knot is is arguably more packed and will take in less water if they get wet.

Also, as it's tighter, the rain will run off more easily.

ash23

I don't really have an issue with the length of holidays for kids as I think their days are long enough.
But there are a few things I'd like to see changed.


1. Performance based payrises - not just automatic based on how long a teacher is there.
2. Nepotism is rife in teaching and should be halted.
3. School buildings should be used in the evenings and holidays for things like afterschool clubs and summer camps. People could rent space from the schools and that way they are making money rather than lying idle.
4. Teachers should be covering exams and marking as part of their job rather than the government spending a fortune on examiners and marking. I'd agree with travel expenses for the teachers sent to exam halls far away from them but other than that, no extra pay for it. Teachers would still get substantial holidays and it would save a fair bit of money.

Oh and continuous professional development. A number of hours every year for teachers to retrain and keep their skills up. If the bankers, insurance industry, medical profession etc have to do it, then it should also be compulsory for teachers.

OldNotWIse

ejmaztec wrote: »

I think so, teachers made an awful lot of enemies during that campaign, and some of them took it out on the kids of some parents who campaigned against them. One of our kids got the evil-eye from some militant teacher because she knew that my missus was quite vocal in disagreeing with the strike, and we ended up moving our one to another school to get away from her.

Gawd :eek:

Fear_an_tarbh

ash23 wrote: »

I don't really have an issue with the length of holidays for kids as I think their days are long enough.
But there are a few things I'd like to see changed.


1. Performance based payrises - not just automatic based on how long a teacher is there.

Yes, those teachers who spend their time meeting the learning needs of students with special needs should be penalised. Like we did in the 80s and 90s we should send those kids off to institutions and focus instead on 'performance'.
:rolleyes:

Lord Ned Stark

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Fair play. Welcome to the adult world. From the sounds of it you'll do great in the leaving.

My original point still reamins - Why can't summer holidays be shorter?

Sorry I think my point came across wrong I agree that yeah teachers have it way too cushy because of the summer but from a students point of view I need that break to relax take a break and earn some money for college and to have a life we don't get much of a chance to do that during the school year . Yes I agree that thats nothing compared to the pressure of the adult world I understand that but young people are a little less unprepared to deal with that amount of stress . That's just my opinion

c_man

ash23 wrote: »

4. Teachers should be covering exams and marking as part of their job rather than the government spending a fortune on examiners and marking. I'd agree with travel expenses for the teachers sent to exam halls far away from them but other than that, no extra pay for it. Teachers would still get substantial holidays and it would save a fair bit of money.

Great point. I'm not sure how they defend that handy number tbh.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Without having a dig at teachers or anyone else in the public sector, I'd like to suggest that we shorten the school holidays.

Everyone - primary and secondary get the full month of August off (perhaps 3rd level degrees could also be condensed?).

This would:

- Increase teaching time for students
- Increase the productivity of school buildings and other assets
- Increase the productivity of teachers themselves
- Increase productivity of a section of parents during the summer months (childcare, etc)

What are the downsides to this idea??

- More expensive holidays during the month of August?
- any more??

Two weeks should be added on to the school curriculum on one condition: those two weeks are spent OUTSIDE of the classroom. Do field trips, take them to museums, take them to the woods for a hike, something, anything, but get them out frmo under a desk and behind a book if you want to edcucate them.

ash23

Fear_an_tarbh wrote: »

Yes, those teachers who spend their time meeting the learning needs of students with special needs should be penalised. Like we did in the 80s and 90s we should send those kids off to institutions and focus instead on 'performance'.
:rolleyes:

Did I say performance as in "grades".
Defensive much?


There are ways to assess someones ability, suitability and dedication as a teacher without counting the number of points the kids get or the STEN scores.

There are loads of teachers out there who hate their jobs, hate kids, have no interest in their futures and who keep getting pay increases simply for staying there. What use is that? The highest paid are not necessarily the best teachers.

I Heart Internet

Fear_an_tarbh wrote: »

Yes, those teachers who spend their time meeting the learning needs of students with special needs should be penalised. Like we did in the 80s and 90s we should send those kids off to institutions and focus instead on 'performance'.
:rolleyes:

You're confusing exam results with teacher performance. That's typical of teachers attitudes - you can't measure my performance because I work with special needs kids, underprivileged kids, kids who are **** at exams, etc.....nonsense.

Working in a challanging, important and worthwhile area (e.g. with kids from a severely disadvantaged background) is not a get out of jail free card for having your performance measured. In fact it's even more important.

micropig

Students with learnings need can not perform.....


Well blow me over with a sock....Is this what a lot of teacher think?:eek:

DEFTLEFTHAND

How about 6 weeks in the summer, October bank holiday will suffice no mid term. 10 days for Christmas and a week at Easter. Sounds fair no?

billybudd

stripysocks85 wrote: »

You realise the word is 'taught' right? :P

You would think, but oh no, oh.

Cool Mo D

I Heart Internet wrote: »

You're confusing exam results with performance. That's typical of teachers attitudes - you can't measure my performance because I work with special needs kids, underprivileged kids, kids who are **** at exams, etc.....nonsense.

Working in a challanging, important and worthwhile area (e.g. with kids from a severely disadvantaged background) is not a get out of jail free card for having your performance measured. In fact it's even more important.

If performance measurement is so important, how do you explain that the country with the best educational system in the world (Finland) has no performance measurement for teachers or standardised tests, apart from a University entrance exam?

Can you give any example of where performance measurement turned around a failing school system?

Fear_an_tarbh

micropig wrote: »

Students with learnings need can not perform.....


Well blow me over with a sock....Is this what a lot of teacher think?:eek:

Of course not, we don't view any students as being in school to 'perform'. I don't even know what that means, I presume the poster who originally used that term meant achieve high grades in state-run assessments.

They are not there to 'perform', they are there to have their learning needs met, if the special educational need is mild, then academic achievement might be the learning need, if the SEN is severe, then the learning need might be located within civic and social development, or perhaps personal and practical skills.

We need to move away from viewing our students as pawns who will 'perform' for us.

clappyhappy

mikemac1 wrote: »

Stacking the square bales in the fields and there was a special way to do it, you had to have the knots facing down and on the outside though I never actually learned why.
Anyone know?

Don't know either but remember stooking the hay and my uncle then going around all the hay stooks and checking them, any not out and down had to be turned right way. Was only thinking about that the other day and still can't figure out why. Also is hay "stooks" the common word for them, thats what we called them but doesn't make sense noe??? Blast from the past, cheers.

micropig

Fear_an_tarbh wrote: »

Of course not, we don't view any students as being in school to 'perform'. I don't even know what that means, I presume the poster who originally used that term meant achieve high grades in state-run assessments.

They are not there to 'perform', they are there to have their learning needs met, if the special educational need is mild, then academic achievement might be the learning need, if the SEN is severe, then the learning need might be located within civic and social development, or perhaps personal and practical skills.

We need to move away from viewing our students as pawns who will 'perform' for us.

In this context, I am using the word perform = childrens learning needs being met and the students are able to show their learning. The original quote was "performance based payrises" - This is not asking the children, but the teacher to show performance

For example
Child does not know much/ anything about the topic
Teacher facilitates lesson
Student knows more about the topic
Learning has taken place

The structure of state exams also needs to be revised. It does not take an individuals learning needs of each child in to account.


Although juggling & other circus skills are great to improve motor skills, stress relief, develops co-ordination ad balance, sharpens focus & concentration skills, exercise-strengthening and toning ...it is a great social after school club for children which could be provided in the school


After school club = A social activity run after school hours for the students, by the teachers

If SEN is severe, child should have an SNA who can help every class they are in (and I don't mean by just carrying their bag, helping them with their coat, I mean actually helping them with the lesson).


Also school holidays can't be shortened because the teachers would loose out on the lucrative side line of Home Tutoring SEN pupils -Why are schools not used to run sessions, teachers are being paid anyway? it'd be more sociable and beneficial for the students, but then teachers would loose their Primary school € 36.60 per hour. / Secondary € 40.10 per hour X 20 hours a week/student...on top of their wages, while the others are supervising/correcting exams


The teachers should not get extra payments for any of the above...and all should be run through the school