A reply to a ‘lefty trad’ (part 3): What do socialists say about high expectations?

The final post in this series responds to the ‘lefty trad’ case for high expectations. The line of reasoning is straightforward: As socialists believe ordinary people are capable of great achievements, then we should expect working-class children to comply with strict discipline techniques, such as SLANT.

The simplicity of the argument fails to hide the sleight of hand. The conclusion does not follow from the premise. It is true that socialists have the highest expectations of the working class. Indeed, as the revolutionary class, it will be responsible for nothing less than the end of capitalism. However, that does not mean socialists expect children to comply with ‘no-excuses’ school cultures.

Continue reading “A reply to a ‘lefty trad’ (part 3): What do socialists say about high expectations?”

A reply to a ‘lefty trad’ (part 2): What do socialists say about work?

In part one of this series we analysed a quote about ‘order’ from a socialist politician in 1923. After establishing its context, we concluded that the quote did not support the ‘lefty trad’ case for the use of strict disciplinary techniques, such as SLANT, in state schools today.

Now we turn to a second quote used to justify those techniques. The argument is as follows: In a socialist society  everybody will be expected to work for mutual benefit. However, idleness is a natural part of human character and requires a sanction. Avoidance of work is “amplified a thousandfold” in schools. Teachers must impose strong discipline to ‘correct’ adolescents’ reluctance to engage in learning.

Continue reading “A reply to a ‘lefty trad’ (part 2): What do socialists say about work?”

A reply to a ‘lefty trad’ (part 1): What do socialists say about order?

The ‘lefty trad’ claim that socialists should promote traditional teaching methods has resurfaced in two posts. The posts advance four interlinked arguments:

1. Socialists support community order, promote a strong social work ethic, and have high expectations of the working class.

2. The same applies “a thousandfold” to children in schools.

3. Teachers achieve order, hard work, and high expectations in schools through traditional methods of behaviour management, such as SLANT. (Progressive methods lead to chaotic classrooms and cannot, therefore, realise socialists’ aims.)

4. Traditional methods allow working-class and disadvantaged students, including those with SEND and the neurodiverse, to thrive. A very small minority will not cope – but there is always another school for them!

Continue reading “A reply to a ‘lefty trad’ (part 1): What do socialists say about order?”

Do progressive teachers fight cuts?

State schools in England are facing cuts of £3billion. The consequences are already being felt with more classes of over 30 pupils, less resources and fewer teachers. Progressive education suffers disproportionately in these circumstances. In First Do No Harm, Steve Nelson contends that progressive schools should have classes of 16 pupils at most if the teacher is to provide a truly child-centred education. It’s no coincidence that traditionalists, whose blunt methods are more suited to larger classes (see this post), currently find favour with government ministers. In our time of austerity, should the priority of progressives be on promoting our teaching methods or fighting budget cuts?

Continue reading “Do progressive teachers fight cuts?”