CORPORAL PUNISHMENT

From time to time I get up on stage and try my hand at a bit of stand-up comedy. My opening joke goes something like: “Hello, my name’s Steve… I used to be a teacher but I was fired – apparently happy slapping the little f***ers is not an appropriate form of punishment.” I’m no Jimmy Carr I admit, but it’s a nice line to start my routine and it usually gets a laugh.

Of course it’s not true – I did used to be a teacher but I wasn’t fired and I certainly didn’t “happy slap” any of my pupils – I gave them a good caning…

But last week, two teachers were suspended after mobile phone footage appeared to show one teacher taunting a boy who had been tied up using electiracal tape. It was, according to the school, a “prank” which went wrong. Very wrong.

It is not clear how much of a part – if any – either teacher played in the incident. But if one of the teachers did taunt the boy (he supposedly said, “Give us a shout when you’re ready to start grovelling”) then this was clearly too much.

Incidentally, the Guardian reported a “school source” as saying: “It was like something you would expect in Guantánamo Bay or an al-Qaida video.” It’s good to know that the school equates the treatment of al-Qaida hostages with that of US terrorist suspects.

But no matter how unpleasant a pupil might be, any kind of maltreatment of children by teachers should be confined strictly to the realms of fantasy. The staffroom is a place of dark, dark humour. Teaching is one of those unbearable jobs – like nursing (or any job in the medical profession), policing and to some extent, journalism – where a sense of humour is absolutely vital.

We deal with situations that are so surreal (and often so unpleasant) that without joking about them, the job really would be unbearable.

Some of the conversations that regualarly happen in staffrooms across the land, if broadcast to a wider audience, would cause a great deal of controversy. But what is said by teachers behind closed doors is said strictly because they are behind closed doors.

Teachers make cruel jokes about school children’s physical appearance and their lack of intelligence. And they frequently pour scorn on parents’ parenting skills and fantasise about how they would really like to punish some of their worst pupils.

But while a lot of what is said is inappropriate, does it do any harm? I would argue not. This “dressing room banter” is a highly effective coping mechanism. It is a release from the daily grind. If teachers were not able to vent their frustrations in the staffroom then where else would they have to let off steam?

A healthy, happy staffroom where teachers can talk openly about which particular little critter has been “doing their head in” that morning makes for a healthy, happy school. If teachers can rant and rave over a cup of coffee with their colleagues then they are less likely to blow their top in front of the kids.

BONJOUR MES ENFANTS

The government has announced it will inject £53m into schools to improve the teaching of modern foreign languages (MFL) in schools.

Apparently this is to counteract a drop in the take-up of language GCSEs since they were made non-compulsory.

Pardonnez-moi? Wouldn’t a £53m cheaper way of solving the problem be to make French and German compulsory again? Er… no, according to schools minister, Jim Knight.

Jim tells the Guardian: “Compulsory French or German GCSE study simply does not motivate pupils. We will generate enthusiasm and confidence for studying languages in secondary school and beyond – far more effective than simple compulsion.”

Ah sod it – lets make Maths and English optional too – it won’t be a problem because we’ll just generate some enthusiasm with a few more millions.

I sort of see where he’s coming from though. Making kids do something is a sure fire way of putting them off – but you’ve got to draw the line somewhere. There’s no reason why we can’t “generate enthusiasm” as well as making French and/or German compulsory.

One of the ways the government want to boost MFL take-up is by introducing it to kids in primary schools. In fact, the one thing they are making compulsory is the teaching of an MFL in primary schools.

I feel obliged to say they shouldn’t make the teaching of languages compulsory – they should just “generate enthusiasm” for the teaching of languages.

I did briefly try teaching a bit of French to my year fives – it went down a treat (see here) – but that’s because I know a some French already and I do a mean impression of Thierry Henry. But I think asking a primary teacher with no specific language knowledge to teach a language is a step too far.

If the government seriously wants to go ahead with this plan then it needs to think very carefully about how it is going to deliver effective MFL lessons to primary school kids. Otherwise, children who would previously have arrived at secondary school with no preconceptions about French or German, will turn up less enthusiastic than ever before.

THE NATIVITY

I recently wrote a story about how two schools in Preston were ditching the traditional nativity in favour of Shakespeare and the Wizard of Oz. It was pretty similar to a lot of the stuff that has been popping up in the media over the last three weeks.

I tried to give a balanced view, but I think a lot of papers have gone overboard with the whole issue. “Who killed the nativity play?” asks the Daily Mail… “is this a politically correct step too far?”

I really, really, REALLY hate that phrase. If anyone ever says to you “it’s political correctness gone mad” and they’re being serious, then they are most likely a racist (or a taxi driver).

“School nativity plays under threat” warned the Telegraph. It claimed that just one in five schools were planning to hold a traditional nativity this year.

But what is a traditional nativity? Mary, Joseph, three shepherds, three kings/wise men, a donkey etc etc… How very dull. I don’t think parents should be forced to sit through the same old tripe year on year.

If schools want to add Ralph the Reindeer, a hapless camel or the Whoops-a-Daisy Angel into the mix then I think they should. These modern nativities aren’t written to secularise Christmas – they’re written to add a bit of fun to an all too familiar story.

Of all the schools I contacted in Preston (about 25 before I got bored of asking what they were having for their Christmas dinner) all were holding some kind of nativity or Christmas service. Even the Wizard of Oz school and the Shakespeare school were holding separate Christmas celebrations.

In the brief time I was in school, I presided over Eid, Divali and Christmas. All the kids joined in with all the celebrations. The meaning of all of these different festivals mustn’t be lost admidst the chaos of musical chairs and pass the parcel, but if we don’t make Christmas fun the what chance do we have of getting the message across?