The CBB :: View topic - School: Academics and Coursework

through

[^/[^Print]\]

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

#1: School: Academics and Coursework Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 3:15 am
—
Actual descriptions of class work are not the focus of the Chalet series, but we see glimpses of teaching styles and school organization throughout the series, and a few actual classes. The Chalet School seems to focus on languages, a well balanced curriculum and 'learning to reason cause from effect'.

What do you think of the academic subjects and teaching styles at the Chalet School? How do they change over the course of the series, from the small school in Tyrol, to the large one in Switzerland. Were the classes aimed more at producing career/university girls or 'accomplished' young women?

What can you surmise about EBD's theories on education and teaching/learning styles?

#2: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:11 am
—
I think that there is a big change over the years in the way that academic work's viewed, reflecting the social changes for women in the socio-economic classes from which the CS girls came. In the early years, most of the girls just "go home" when they leave school, whereas by the end of the series pretty much everyone plans to go on to some form of further education/training. In the early years we're even told that the school isn't overly academic, although that's mainly done by comparing British schools in general with French, German and Austrian schools.

However, even later on there isn't that much emphasis put on academic work: lessons are constantly being interrupted so that the girls can go boating/ski-ing/whatever, and Miss Bubb is criticised for daring to think that exam results are important Rolling Eyes

. The beginning of Highland Twins is about the only time we're actually told about people's exam results, and we see very little of people actually taking exams or preparing for exams - compare this with, for example, the School Cert preparations in Malory Towers.

Despite this everyone just walks into the higher education establishment of their choice Laughing

. Did EBD just have no idea about the university application system - application forms, offers conditional upon A-level results in the case of most universities, Oxford entrance exams etc?! Jack tells Roger that he needs to put his name down if he wants to go to uni, Len tells Ted at the age of 14 that she's going to Oxford as if it's a fait accompli, and there are various references to people going to St Mildred's/going travelling with their parents because the uni they're going to "won't have a place for her until ..." as if it's just a case of waiting for a vacancy. It's one of the things I dislike about the later books: I do find it odd that EBD was so out of touch on that particular issue.

Also, there's no mention in the later books, by which time the O-level and A-level system would have been well-established, of people choosing which subjects they wish to take: it all seems to be rather vague.

As far as teaching methods go, there's a lot of criticism of "old-fashioned methods" - EBD seems to've had very definite ideas on the best ways of teaching, but theories about teaching methods always seem to be changing. BTW I've got a degree in history and no-one has ever tried to teach me to reason from cause to effect Wink

.

Sorry if that sounds overly critical: it wasn't meant to be Embarassed

. I will stop waffling now.

#3: Author: Lolly, Location: Back in London

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:03 am
—

Alison H wrote:

Despite this everyone just walks into the higher education establishment of their choice Laughing

I think in the 20s and 30s at least University entrance was entirely dependent on being able to pay the fees.....and that things like exam results only really came into play for people who couldn't afford it and needed scholarships. So when EBD began writing it really WOULD have been just a case of waiting for a vacancy if the girl was considered bright enough and her parents could afford it. I think as a teacher EBD probably did have her finger on the pulse when she began writing at least...

#4: Author: Travellers Joy, Location: Middle of Nowhere

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 10:48 am
—

Lolly wrote:

That's certainly the impression I got from the Geoffrey Trease Bannderdale book set at Oxford. (Gates of Bannerdale? Sorry, not sure of the title.)

#5: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 11:01 am
—
I can understand that with people like Juliet etc, but EBD doesn't seem to've realised that by the time people like Roger and Len were applying it had changed!

#6: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 2:12 pm
—
By then of course it had been some time since she'd taught, which may have been the main problem. I know that if you wanted Oxbridge in the 60s you had to take Uni entrance papers, as a friend of mine stayed on for a third year in the 6th to do that. But unless a girl was doing a specialist course, they still went to Oxford, with no mention of any other uni at all!

#7: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 4:56 pm
—
Alison H said:

Quote:

BTW I've got a degree in history and no-one has ever tried to teach me to reason from cause to effect.

They probably did, they just didn't call it that. If you've ever written an essay on why Britain was the first industrial nation, or the causes of the French Revolution or the First World War, or the consequences of the Black Death, you've reasoned from cause to effect.

I think the school did develop a stronger work ethic over time. Joey was allowed to coast through her schooldays only working at subjects she was interested in, and not terribly hard at those. In two subjects she was so disruptive that she had to be removed, and that was when she was a senior and should have known better. Even Yseult never behaved that badly in the later books!

The triplets, in contrast, really had to knuckle down, and were expected to work even at subjects they weren't good at and disliked - Con and maths, for example.

I think teaching methods, what we see of them, would generally be quite acceptable today. The girls participated through questions and discussion, and they learned by practical methods - working examples of maths problems, working with maps in geography, speaking the languages.

The main thing I'd question is the long periods of prep - up to two hours, five nights a week, without a break. I doubt if many adults can maintain their concentration that long, never mind schoolgirls. I wonder just how good their work was towards the end of prep, when they'd been up for around twelve hours, it was a long time since Kaffee und Kuchen, and they were getting tired and hungry.

#8: Author: Joan the Dwarf, Location: Er, where am I?

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 5:45 pm
—

JayB wrote:

The main thing I'd question is the long periods of prep - up to two hours, five nights a week, without a break. I doubt if many adults can maintain their concentration that long, never mind schoolgirls. I wonder just how good their work was towards the end of prep, when they'd been up for around twelve hours, it was a long time since Kaffee und Kuchen, and they were getting tired and hungry.

At my school, first prep was 4.30-5.30, tea at 5.30 then second prep from 6.30-7.30. I know how people behaved towards the end of second prep - very very badly! As a prefect taking the prep, I often had a great urge to tip the lot out of the window...

#9: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:07 pm
—
When i was a boarding school we had an hour/hours & a half's prep each evening. Although I left in the third year I don't remember anyone messing around at all, we just got on with it. We had Prefects in charge too. And the time span's no worse than between breaks during the day. How often do people need to eat anyway? We've commented before about the amount of food on offer at the CS and the wonder that they weren't all dreadfully overweight! And they still had Abendessen to come.

#10: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:19 pm
—

Pat wrote:

And the time span's no worse than between breaks during the day.

But you get a break between lessons (unless it's a double period), even if it's only a couple of minutes, when you can stand up, have a stretch, talk to your friends. You might even have to change rooms, so that's even more of a break.

And you won't normally be doing the same thing for a whole lesson. The teacher will talk a bit, you might have some discussion or question-and-answer, then you might make some notes or work some examples. It's not quite the same as sitting at a desk with your head down, not moving or speaking, for up to two hours.

#11: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:24 pm
—
But they didn't sit absolutely still did they? How often do you read about them fidgeting, tipping, signalling for the loan of a rubber or something. No one can sit absolutely still like that. Also they weren't doing the same subject for the whole time, so when they changed they'd be bending down to the pile of books on the floor. I think an hour is barely long enough to get anything done anyway. If they had a break after that before doing more, it would eat into their free time a lot too.

#12: Author: Sugar, Location: second star to the right!

Posted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 9:30 pm
—
Don't think 2hrs prep is a long time. I'm sure lots of us did 3hr long A level exams in VIth form. And they wouldn't have been sitting still without moving they were doing prep!

#13: Author: Tara, Location: Malvern, Worcestershire

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:10 am
—
As in so many other areas, I think EBD was very progressive for her time. I wish I had been made to do a history charts showing parallel developments in historical events, literature and the arts - I might then have some idea of what was happening in the world while the authors I studied in glorious isolation were writing, too!

More importantly, despite all the ski-ing etc, the books do give more space to work than, I think, any others I know of. We quite often get whole lessons described and, while the point of them is to create incident (Joyce's garlic-flavoured apple pies) or focus on character conflict (Kathie's lesson on Australia with Mary-Lou and co), you actually know exactly how to make apple pies (and a good deal more about Australia) by the end of the incident, and a recounting of a fictional educative experience has actually become that experience.
EBD talks about the educational theories of Rousseau, Pestalozzi and Froebel and tackles thorny contemporary problems of subject setting, free learning, competitive incentives, comparative education and the advisability or otherwise of giving prizes; she gives minute details of the girls’ prep and the school uses standard textbooks. The CS wants the girls to develop depth of knowledge and active, thinking minds, ‘going deep’, by which EBD implies a thinking behind events and a connecting up of both events and subjects. Even the barrier between lessons and leisure is broken down when Miss A sets the girls an essay which they can only tackle by using information from a book she has recommended for their leisure reading.

I love the daft mistakes the girls make (forming the future of ‘pouvoir’ by using the Infinitive and happily beginning ‘je pouvoirai’ – it’s all too horribly true.
What I like best, though, is Miss A’s conversation with Ted in ‘Theodora’ when they talk about the enjoyment of work and the satisfaction of working out a difficult problem. I want to shout ‘Yay’! So different from most school stories, the attitude to work being summed up in the lovely line ‘lessons were mostly perfunctory’!

#14: Author: Lolly, Location: Back in London

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:23 am
—

Joan the Dwarf wrote:

I know how people behaved towards the end of second prep - very very badly! As a prefect taking the prep, I often had a great urge to tip the lot out of the window...

Funnily enough, when I took the first years for prep if I turned my back they all used to jump out of the window and run away!!!!

Our school day used to finish at 6 and prep was between 7-9 pm. The first years (aged 13) were considered too young to concentrate all that time and were supposed to have a 15 minute break for milk half way through.

#15: Author: Caroline, Location: Manchester

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 2:30 pm
—

Sugar wrote:

Don't think 2hrs prep is a long time. I'm sure lots of us did 3hr long A level exams in VIth form. And they wouldn't have been sitting still without moving they were doing prep!

And 2 hours is just for the Seniors at the CS isn't it? Aren't we told at various times that the Juniors have 1 hour and the middles 1.5 hours? Have to say, it doesn't seem unrealistically long to me - and much more efficient to get it all over with in one burst and then be free for the rest of the evening.

#16: Author: Róisín, Location: Ireland

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:12 pm
—
I’m always struck by the way she swings from one extreme to the other when describing in-class scenes. There can be an entire book that never shows us the inside of a class, and then there are other books when she has clearly read up on something recently and wants to show off in detail about it – like in Goes to It when she spends pages and pages having Miss Everett lecture about how to plant potatoes. It’s a bit similar to the tours they take in Switzerland – EBD has been reading other books again and we get the benefit of it. Laughing

I don’t think she was really interested in university girls, enough to actually tell us anything about their lives post-sixth-form. The only person she really does that with is Eustacia – we have pictures of her living on the Platz, carrying out her work from there, and returning occasionally for lectures. We also get an image of her life as pretty lonely, with just her housekeeper for company.
There is definitely an increase in CS girls attending uni as the series goes on, but EBD recognises and explains this as she goes along (eg the view that girls shouldn’t work if they didn’t have to, pre-WW2ish). She didn’t have lots of detailed info about uni application procedures, but she did have her finger on the *general* pulse.

She tries to give the CS a very modern and exciting style of teaching – I think she does accomplish this with the trilingualism, the history charts etc; this is the same as she does with every other aspect of the girls’ lives though, ie their health, their hobbies – she tries always to make the lifestyles of the CS girls interesting and different, and her teaching and learning methods are just an extension of that.

Would be interesting to see if the CBB teachers find any of her methods absolutely unusable Very Happy

#17: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:31 pm
—

Quote:

Would be interesting to see if the CBB teachers find any of her methods absolutely unusable

A lot depends on the pupils, doesn't it? For the discussion method to work, you have to have a class that's not too big, where the pupils are interested enough to participate, and know enough to make sensible contributions.

EBD does sometimes show things going wrong, for example when Kathie takes the Sixth and OOAML hi-jacks a question that isn't meant for her and thus interferes with Kathie's teaching. Kathie was justified in rebuking her, although she was perhaps a bit too severe.

#18: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:36 pm
—
Quite a lot of the punishments are pretty severe aren't they? Sometime way ver what was required. And after girls had been reduced to tears in the office, they then had to endure a telling off from older sisters/cousins!

#19: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 4:37 pm
—
I don't know a lot about teaching in the CS period ... just wondering if there would have been anything akin to the sort of "inset days"/staff training days that take place (in the UK) now? Kathie certainly seems to be thrown in at the deep end, without even her head of department (was it Rosalind Moore?) telling her what sort of text books were used or other basics.

#20: Author: patmac, Location: Yorkshire England

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:18 pm
—
One of the problems with writing for so long is that she would have to keep on repeating herself if she wrote in detail about lessons - just think how we moan about the repetition in the chapters about the Sales.

I, as a child, would have skipped a lot of it to get to the exciting bits! We're only interested in the detail now because we are reading from an adult perspective.

As far as the teaching goes, it does seem quite progressive and, given that most of the earlier girls came from families and cultures which would have held up their hands in horror at their daughters having a career, the school seems to have broadened their minds quite well.

Later, I guess she didn't actually know much about university life or the application process and, unless she was still in touch with teachers at Grammar Schools, would probably not have been able to research it very much.

#21: Author: Mrs Redboots, Location: London, UK

Posted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 7:57 pm
—

JayB wrote:

This was quite normal at the boarding-school I was at in the 1960s; prep "happened" between (something like) 5:00 and 7:00, or maybe a slightly shorter time, but certainly the best part of two hours. You had your tea at around 4:15 (later you had it at school, before going back to the boarding-house to change and do prep), and then supper (a main meal) was at 7:15, after prayers.

What is more, you were supervised in prep until you were in what is now year 11, and no talking or anything was allowed. The only respite was if it was your bath night (you had 3 a week, only one of which could be at bedtime, and possibly one before breakfast, so the others were at either 5:15, 5:45 or 6:15 on a weeknight), when you were required to excuse yourself to the prefect on duty on leaving and returning. If you had finished your work, you had to at least look busy - or read a book!

So the Chalet School's descriptions of prep seem quite normal to me, except we were never disruptive the way the younger girls can be there!

#22: Author: jennifer, Location: Taiwan

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:50 am
—
I think the school does change quite a bit - in the beginning academics are not a huge priority. A description of the summer schedule in Headgirl has all academic work, including prep, occurring between 8:30 and 12:45, with a break for a snack in the middle. The afternoons have a nap, singing, music lessons, sewing and handwork, and games in the late afternoon. Factoring in fifteen minutes for a snak and an hour for prep, that's only three hours of lectures a day.

Later, they have an exam centre, and many more teachers, so academics seem to have more importance, but they still rearrange classes at the drop of a hat, and it doesn't seem to be a bit deal if girls do really badly.

There are some things I think would be impractical in the real world - one is trilingualism. If they gets new girls in with only one language, or in some cases none of the three, and therefore they don't understand 2/3 of the lectures, I would expect this to have a serious impact on the student's classroom work. It's not just the conversation, which seems to be the focus of the new student's problems, but reading and writing technical material in an unfamiliar language. You can pick up basic conversational skills much faster than the ability to write an academic assignment, or understand a lecture on physics. ESL students have only one language to deal with and it's still a struggle for a few years, rather than the month or so that it seems to take for Chalet girls.

Another is the extreme promotion/holding back of girls, so that you have some girls who are 2-3 years ahead of their age group, and others who are 2-3 year behind, all in the same class. That give you a 4 or 5 year age spread in students. If the triplets hadn't had a new form invented for them, and an extra year tacked on the end, they would have entered Vb at age 12, and graduated at sixteen. There doesn't seem to be much concern when girls are held back 2 or more times, which as a parent sending a kid to a very expensive boarding school, I would be peeved about.

[/i]

#23: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:06 pm
—
Yes, the spread of ages in forms is something that bothers me. I've just been re-reading Lavender, and there you have Bride, who is 10-11, in the same form as Lavender who is 13-14. In New Mistress the triplets, at 12-13, are in the same form as Yseult, who is 16.

They are at very diffferent stages of physical and emotional development. Forming friendships will be difficult for them. Games will be difficult; having a hefty fifteen year old playing hockey or netball against a slight twelve year old isn't a good idea, I'd have thought. And the educational needs of a bright twelve year old and a backward 16 year old will be so different, it must have been very difficult to teach them in the same form.

In Lavender, the school had about 200 pupils, up from the 52 on Guernsey two years before. I suppose in wartime it might have been difficult to get the staff to keep up with that level of growth and have more forms. (I think this might be the only time we see Miss Denny as a form mistress).

But by the Swiss years, I think they needed (a) to stop pushing the younger girls ahead quite so fast and (b) to divide each year - Lower IV, Upper IV, etc, into more than two forms - have c and even d divisions - to take account of the wide range of abilities throughout the school.

I think they might also have introduced a rule whereby they took no girl over, say, 12 or 13, who didn't have at least some knowledge of all three languages. That would have made life easier all round.

#24: Author: Travellers Joy, Location: Middle of Nowhere

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 12:26 pm
—

JayB wrote:

I think they might also have introduced a rule whereby they took no girl over, say, 12 or 13, who didn't have at least some knowledge of all three languages. That would have made life easier all round.

I suspect that might have been difficult to enforce when so many new girls were there because they had relatives in the San.

One of my children entered a French Immersion proramme when he was 12. All classes except, obviously, English, and specialist subjects such as music were done in French. Apart from the first couple of weeks being intensive coaching in the rudiments of French, their classes ran in the same way as the non-Immersion classes of the rest of the school. Within the first month they were doing all their lessons - spoken and written work - entirely in French, so I don't see tri-lingualism being all that hard to achieve - apart from the usual difficulties of children who have little or no aptitude for languages.

#25: Author: JayB, Location: SE England

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:40 pm
—

Travellers Joy wrote:

JayB wrote:

I suspect that might have been difficult to enforce when so many new girls were there because they had relatives in the San.

Yes, after Yseult they made a rule that they wouldn't accept any girl over fifteen - then broke it for Evelyn Ross.

Quote:

One of my children entered a French Immersion proramme when he was 12.... Within the first month they were doing all their lessons.... entirely in French, so I don't see tri-lingualism being all that hard to achieve - apart from the usual difficulties of children who have little or no aptitude for languages.

I think it would be more difficult to achieve when you're trying to teach three languages to that level (because there are girls who come to school with little or no knowledge of English). And I also think it's easier for the younger ones, who perhaps all start at about the same level, and who aren't working for major exams at the same time. The teacher can focus on getting the whole class to the desired level. When you have girls of fourteen or fifteen joining a class where everyone else has had two or three years of trilingualism, they, and the staff, are going to find it much harder. And at fifteen they've begun the GCE syllabus. By the time they've achieved fluency - half a term, say, if they're quick learners - they might have missed a crucial part of the syllabus in some other subject.

#26: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 3:54 pm
—
One of my daughters did a uni course that was based in Brighton & Turin. It was split into 2 semesters, and students had to be fluent enough by Feb to be able to function as a student in Italy. That meant being able to go to lectures and prioduce course work in Italian. Most hadn't done any before they started, and they all went to Italy in Feb and survived. They got intesive coaching obviously, (and actually started 2 weeks earlier in September), but only in the Italian classes. Other subjects in the first semester were in English. It can be done, though obviously adding in a second language complicates things.

#27: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:26 pm
—
I don't know how typical this was of the 1940s/1950s, but the obsession with form lists doesn't quite seem to fit in with the general ethos of life not being all about exam results. Given that every single piece of work done in a week seems to've been taken into account - at one point Len gets upset because she's done badly in one piece of work as her mind was on something else and she knows that one bad mark will affect her position for the week - it must've taken someone (probably poor Rosalie!) hours to work them all out.

It must have been quite demoralising for people who just weren't academic.

#28: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:48 pm
—
It seems an awful lot of wiork for someone. We had end of term lists, and exam lists. You knew roughly where you'd expect to be for each subject & who your rivals were and tried to beat them - or at least see where you were in comparison. I don't think anyone ever tried to be top of the form for the sake of it though.

#29: Author: MaryR, Location: Cheshire

Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 3:11 pm
—

Alison H wrote:

I don't know a lot about teaching in the CS period ... just wondering if there would have been anything akin to the sort of "inset days"/staff training days that take place (in the UK) now? Kathie certainly seems to be thrown in at the deep end, without even her head of department (was it Rosalind Moore?) telling her what sort of text books were used or other basics.

No, Alison. Certainly in the seventies you were thrown in at the deep end and just got on with it. You sank or swam by your own efforts. Twisted Evil

I never had any in-school training or inset days nor anyone examining what I was doing in my classroom until the nineties. I went on courses but that was different. But you know what - I thoroughly enjoyed my teaching in those days - no paperwork! Laughing

#30: Author: Jennie, Location: Cambridgeshire

Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:13 pm
—
Well, there was some paperwork, but not the immense amount there is now.

As for inspections, the school where I was teaching had a mini-inspection. It was for three days. On the Friday afternoon, I was covering for a colleague in the History department. I walked into the room to find an inspector there.

"Mr. -------?'

'No,' I replied. 'He's helping with the House cross country competition. I'm covering his lesson.'

'Oh.' he replied, and proceeded to look for my colleague in the Staff workroom, and search all the cupboards in the room in case I'd stowed Fred in one of them, just so I could have his class!

As if, on Friday afternoon!

#31: Author: Róisín, Location: Ireland

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:37 am
—
Doesn't Miss Annersley go off on a tour at some point to see how other headmistresses/headmasters operate? Was that some kind of training trip?

#32: Author: Karry, Location: Stoke on Trent

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:42 am
—
I dont think it was a training trip - more of an inspection to determine 'best practice'!

#33: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:20 pm
—
It was seen as a huge compliment to her and the CS that she was invited to be on the team. They were going to report on what they'd found for the benefit of other schools I think.

#34: Author: Sugar, Location: second star to the right!

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:36 pm
—
The Ofsted of its day perhaps?

#35: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2008 9:42 pm
—
Possibly. Though I think they were looking for examples of best practice rather than inspecting the standard of the school.

#36: Author: Mrs Redboots, Location: London, UK

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 3:56 pm
—
Anybody fancy writing a drabble about that trip - she could visit all our favourite fictional schools: Whyteleaf, St Claire's, Mallory Towers, Kingscote, Trebizon...? Would need more re-reading of Enid Blyton than I think I could bear....

#37: Author: Alison H, Location: Manchester

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:09 pm
—

Mrs Redboots wrote:

Anybody fancy writing a drabble about that trip - she could visit all our favourite fictional schools: Whyteleaf, St Claire's, Mallory Towers, Kingscote, Trebizon...? Would need more re-reading of Enid Blyton than I think I could bear....

What a brilliant idea! I'd love to read this if anyone's got time to write it!

#38: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 4:25 pm
—
It could be done in parts by different people who have knowledge/have read the appropriate books. They'd have to coordinate about the others members of the inspection team and so on.

#39: Author: Luisa, Location: Warks

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:52 pm
—
No, please! Isn't Ofsted bad enough without fictionalising it (with apologies to any Inspectors out there).
Crying or Very sad

Though, come to think of it, there are perhaps a few schools that could do with it......
Twisted Evil

#40: Author: Pat, Location: Doncaster

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 8:57 pm
—
They weren't doing an Ofsted though. They were touring schools to see how they did things, and then would report on what they'd found as ideas for others to follow. there weren't any ofsted-like inspections back then, so it wouldn't occur to EBD that they'd be doing a critical inspection.

#41: Author: JackieP, Location: Kingston upon Hull

Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:10 pm
—

Alison H wrote:

Mrs Redboots wrote:

What a brilliant idea! I'd love to read this if anyone's got time to write it!

Didn't someone start a St.Clares drabble where Miss A was inspecting St Trinians....?

JackieP

The CBB -> Formal Discussions

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1