Seeing past the image

Terry Deary, author and actor, was a guest on the radio this morning. Deary is author of children’s history books such as “Terrible Tudors”.

The following are my observations about the interview.

Most of the conversation centred around Deary’s opinions and personal experience of school education.

Firstly, Deary criticised teachers for teaching him things that he was never going to use as an adult (he gave trigonometry as an example). This is a common, if absurd, criticism of the school curriculum. However, the main thing that struck me about this was where Deary focussed the blame: on teachers. It is not, in fact, teachers who decide what is to be taught in schools. The body that decides what is taught in schools is business.

It is business that has, for example, caused changes in the school computing curriculum so that pupils are no longer taught how a computer works. What pupils are taught instead is how to look up and interpret the information about different computer systems given in sales catalogues.

By blaming teachers for the ills of the education system, Deary is doing business a great favour: it directs attention away from business and what it is up to, as well as providing a convenient scapegoat.

Secondly: as I have said before, people have no idea what they give away about themselves in such interviews.

During Deary’s interview I experienced an unpleasant sensation of déjà vu. I felt the way I used to in the classroom when the pupils were particularloy unsettled and mayhem might break out at any minute. Deary showed himself to be very much a type: he is what teachers would call an “attention seeker”. As a former teacher of many years experience, I can spot these types a mile off. For the less experienced, for the less savvy, the clues were all there………

………….one way of attracting attention is to make trouble. Deary did this by accusing one of the presenters of making “a face” when he mentioned he went to Wales to learn acting. The presenter had, of course, to deny his accusation that she was prejudiced against Wales. Also, Deary criticised those of his teachers who did not make him the centre of their attention during lessons as bad teachers. Further, Deary recalled the first time he became aware that he enjoyed attention — his first time on stage at primary school.

Therefore when Deary criticised his teachers for bullying him into doing what he didn’t want to do, for example, it is wise not to take such criticisms at face value. In fact, as soon as one hears accusations such as bullying, one should know that they often reflect the behaviour of the accuser rather than the accused.

In fact, what Deary reminded me off was the sort of pupil who, after having left school, when he spots his former teacher in the street, goes up to him/her and, with a great show of pride, self-satisfaction and apparent “friendship” remarks: “I must have been the most badly behaved pupil in your class. Bet you were glad when I left school, then, eh?”

The last laugh is on the former pupil, however. For their behaviour damages themselves far more than it does the teacher.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: bad behaviour is the source of all our physical and mental ills.

I Think you are right that it is not the teachers, but remember, if the teachers do not agree with, say, the teaching of trig., they are complicit while in the position of authority figures over Children. They could be out lobbying for subjects that would be more relevent. My sense is they are aligned with the ideas that govern curriculum, say somethign like police with drug laws.

I encountered quite a bit of disrespect and bullying by teachers. It wasn’t aimed particularly at me, and hell it is a very tough situation for the teachers, but still there seemed to be a rather dim view of students coupled with a very odd idea of the best ways to learn - sitting still in rows, looking forward, nearly all ‘discussion’ from teacher to one student, usually with a single phrase (answer) or sentence being the student’s part of the ‘discussion’. IOW nothing at all like PBL Group based Learning, for example. This is hysterically poor pedagogy in pretty much any subject, and laughable with things like second language acquisition. I never got the sense most of the teachers felt controlled by archaic educational norms, yearning to break out and treat us with respect. IOW I am saying is that there was and still is systematic disrespect and bullying. Beyond this of course there were the more tempermentally bully-like teachers, and not just a tiny percentage.

I do not intend to argue whether teachers can be bullies etc. The point I wanted to make was that one cannot take what people say at face value. You have to judge them in light of your own experience and then judge the value of what they say. So, in a nutshell: Terry Deary said that he had been mistreated at school. From my own experience I was easily able to identify Deary as an attention seeker. Also from my own experience, I know perfectly well that attention seekers always portray themselves as victims of neglect and no matter how much attention they get, that portrayal of themselves persists. Therefore I conclude that what Terry Deary describes cannot be believed: it is the perception of an attention seeker, NOT detached observation.