I am sure by now that everyone is aware of the violence and chaos that engulfed the streets of England in the form of mass rioting throughout the past few weeks. However, I am not sure that we all agree with the various explanations and reasons regarding why the events took place. When trying to establish where I myself stand on this issue, it became apparent almost immediately that there is certainly no clear cut answer. The riots could be a result of excessive violence in the media, but what about a means of voicing disgust at the government’s new policies? Or maybe this is simply a facade for those opportunists to get that plasma TV they’ve always wanted, spurred on by our consumerist culture? The aforementioned reasons all have credibility; however my instinctive guess is that there is no definitive right answer, rather an amalgamation of factors that must be considered before reaching an opinion (stooped in subjectivity).

I can certainly see how it is plausible for one to assume that cuts in benefits, rising unemployment and further controversial decisions imposed by the Government could result in such behaviour. People are angry, and are perhaps displacing this anger towards police and other such authority figures when they feel that the degree of anonymity created by the masses of rioters will mean there are no serious repercussions, if any. This may provide us with
a prima facie explanation for the riots, but when we look at this problem logically, it appears we have missed one crucial element within the above reasoning – an adequate explanation of why people are in fact so angry. So maybe people are angry at various authorities for modifying health related benefits or reducing EMA etc… isn’t this answer sufficient? Not if we wish to unearth the root of the riots. To do this it seems essential that we ask where this anger comes from.

When conducting background information on the riots and reading various other accounts, one quote in particular seemed to necessitate that eureka moment which, for me, underpinned every explanation – “too many schools where it’s not cool to learn (Tony Parsons, Daily Mirror 13/08/2011).”

On first consideration it may feel as if this has no relation to consumerism, anger at government policies or excess violence in the media yet from the perspective of a student who has been brought up to value education (in the microcosm of Cambridge) and its long term benefits, the link is inseparable.

I believe that the majority of students are immersed in a society where education is seen as extremely ‘uncool’ and elitist. This majority is far more preoccupied with instant gratification and hedonistic behaviour such as constantly buying the latest clothes, drinking and playing Xbox or PS3 (a lot of these games are in fact filled with violent imagery and inferences). Although there is nothing wrong with this in essence, it does unquestionably result in a crash landing beyond a certain age where education is no longer provided and working is a requirement. These individuals are then categorised as low skilled members of the labour force and with the current excess supply of this type of labour, unemployment can sometimes become an inevitability. It is not surprising then, that when benefits are cut and designer clothes are no longer affordable, people get angry. So why not just riot like they do in the video games?

Although it is easy to appropriate blame to these individuals I think there is a more important message to be learnt here – this anger is a result of a poor ethos within communities and families with regard to education. I feel that it is subsequently down to the actions of alternative figures of guidance, namely teachers and parents, to ensure that everyone is truly aware of the importance behind fundamental notions such as working hard, attaining good grades and having ambition.

To conclude, this infinite regression of anger coupled with frustration seems unavoidable unless people begin to understand the value in education. Doing well academically equates to higher skills, increased employability and also a comprehensive understanding of moral values i.e. violence and chaos are not always the right means of action. I think that teachers could help make a huge difference in our society by simply explaining such issues to children and young adults during their school life, by using opportunities such as ‘personal development days’ to convey these messages in a way that is accessible to and inclusive of everyone. In brief, education is an instrumental good which enables us to achieve more opportunities and
increased prosperity in future life – it is in their long term interest! So I would argue that teachers should contribute to rebuilding society’s collapsed framework by using their position to work effectively with communities, families and individuals to scrap this notion that it’s not cool to learn and instil the notion that it’s not cool to allow blind apathy resulting in a cycle of future anger.

What do you think?  Tell us on twitter @StressSupportFE or search for Recourse on facebook.

By Elliot Cohen-Gold

After last week’s blog on how teachers are perceived from Year 12 student Nathaniel, teacher Ian sent us his response.

Whose Role Models?

I seem to have been writing a lot more about political issues than classroom practice recently – my apologies. This post is a quick response after I read this recent article from a Year 12 student, as published by the Teacher Support Network. One sentence in particular caught my eye:

“Teachers are role models and should act in a way where there is no room for criticism.”

Now, I have two major concerns about this attitude, separate but linked.

Role Models

Yes, we are role models. We demonstrate, hopefully, good attitudes and behaviour. We show our students what it means to be an adult. Of course, all adults do this, deliberately or accidentally. When we vote, and explain why it matters. When we attend a church for a faith we don’t have, to get our kids into a school we think is ‘better’. When we tap a stranger on the shoulder to return the coin we saw them drop. When we slow down for a safety camera, then speed up again. When we are wait politely in line, ignoring aggressive behaviour from others. Each of these actions, these moments, teaches something about the ‘right’ way to behave. In the classroom, this is part of what is referred to as the ‘invisible curriculum’.  I think of it as an extra subject area, one called ‘Civilisation’.

So yes, teachers are role models. But teachers are people too. I don’t spend my life planning to be a bad example. But equally, I’m not going to spend every waking hour wondering whether I’m being watched by a student. Why shouldn’t I have a life? Why shouldn’t I do the things I choose to do, out of school and off the premises?

Is a teacher being a bad role model if they smoke? What about when they have a few pints at a wedding reception and dance really badly? Or argue with their spouse in public? Should they be obliged to put money in every charity box they pass, simply to play the part of a good role model for any pupils who happen to see them do it? If I choose to hold my partner’s hand in public, or have kids before I marry, is this anything to do with my professional life?

Of course, the other things about role models is that they can inspire change. Sometimes the behaviour we model for pupils is something their parents don’t like – and this time I’m not talking about simple bad habits or minor errors. An openly gay teacher is a role model, but it’s one that some parents might see as unwanted. Homophobia means that lesbian, gay and bisexual teachers still often conceal their sexuality from kids, and sometimes even from colleagues. I would never criticize a colleague for doing this – but equally I feel that telling them to do so, so as not to ‘influence’ children, is ignorant bigotry at best.

I tweeted about this article yesterday and had several interesting responses. @alomshaha pointed out that in questions of faith, or the lack of it, defining a ‘good role model’ is also tricky. I’m sure that the religious parents of some of my students would think my atheism means I’m a bad example to their children. Does that mean I shouldn’t answer questions from kids about my beliefs? Or that I shouldn’t challenge children who tell me that the universe is 4,000 years old, that evolution never happened or that human beings are made out of clay? (No, I’m not making that last one up, and no, he wasn’t speaking metaphorically.)

No Room For Criticism.

“I’m not saying that teachers should not have a life outside of school, but just in case of meeting a pupil in a neutral area they should conduct themselves in an appropriate manner.”

Actually, that’s exactly what you’re saying. Who chooses what is appropriate? If you’re suggesting that there should be no room for criticism, you’re giving all the right to those who choose to complain. Whether it’s smoking, drinking or wearing a bikini, somebody somewhere will object. Who gets to choose the standards teachers are expected to live up to?

I totally accept that there are some actions which cannot be accepted. I happen to agree that teachers who don’t guard their Facebook accounts are being careless – I choose to blog and tweet discreetly for similar reasons. I don’t think many people would argue for criminal behaviour to be ignored, or actions that represent a risk to the children in their care during the working week. But like everyone else, teachers are entitled to a private life. Nobody cares if a group of shop assistants have a night out and wander into a strip club, or if a bus driver likes to gamble, or if a bank manager takes a life drawing class. So why should teachers be accused of unprofessional behaviour if they spend their own time doing their own thing? Their actions might incite comment, and people will have their own opinions – but that’s not the same thing as saying that criticism is okay.

I really don’t think many Year 12 students would really expect their teachers to be perfect role models, every hour of every day. (Those who have a teaching parent would probably have a particularly interesting viewpoint.) I’d love to see how students expect us to behave, what they would see as acceptable, for teachers as opposed to other careers. Maybe this is a discussion that needs to be had, but the questions should be; “Why do you expect teachers not to be human?” rather than “What would you allow teachers to do in their own time?”

A line needs to be drawn somewhere about what is acceptable and what isn’t. Fortunately, we already have that line. We don’t need every individual parent, or each newspaper editor greedy for sales, telling us what is and isn’t okay. I make my own choices, in my own life. I’m happy to commit to being a role model in the classroom and on the school site. But my private life is mine, and just because I’m a teacher doesn’t give anyone the right to tell me what I can and cannot do.

What do you think? tell us in our Teacher Image Forum here.

You can follow Ian on twitter@teachingofsci

A Level student Nathaniel Holland gives his perspective on how teachers and college tutors are perceived.

I think that becoming a teacher has a lot of drawbacks, but on the other hand a lot of positives. Training to become a teacher from a young age can be a problem as I think that the days of nights out have had to be sacrificed for a very rewarding job, which can be a lot for a young person to deal with. Teachers are role models and should act in a way where there is no room for criticism.

As I said above, being a teacher requires sacrifice and has some drawbacks. How a teacher acts outside of school can seriously affect how they earn respect in the class room. For example, if a pupil sees a male teacher at a football match drinking alcohol and shouting for their team (a normal activity for any average person), then the pupil is not going to take that teacher as seriously as others.

A pupil seeing a teacher outside of school could be a awkward and embarrassing moment for anybody depending on the situation (which teacher, location etc). I’m not saying that teachers should not have a life outside of school, but just in case of meeting a pupil in a neutral area they should conduct themselves in an appropriate manner. Personally I believe that seeing a teacher outside of school is not too bad as there is ways to avoid contact or to engage in conversation if you please.

Social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter open up another world for teachers. Again they have to be careful about what information can be seen by anybody with an account with Facebook or Twitter, which is most of the population. Also teachers being friends on Facebook with current pupils or following each other on Twitter should be banned instantly. There is room then for the pupil or teacher to abuse this contact with each other. Teachers that maybe converse with former pupils who have left school is acceptable because usually the teachers are genuinely interested in what you do or have done since leaving school. This is a big debate in the eye of the young student and I believe that the teacher-student relationship should stay strictly in the classroom.

What do you think?  Find us on facebook or on twitter @bewellworkwell.

Recourse’s Chief Executive Julian Stanley responded to the issue in a recent column on behalf of our sister charity Teacher Support Network.  Click here to read the column in full.

“A couple of weeks ago I wrote about the inevitable impact of a consumer culture in Higher Education on teaching, and specifically about how this is likely to affect the number of people using service to help them with their increased workloads. The recommendations reported in the HE White paper, published today by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, does nothing to make me change my mind about this prediction.

The central tenet of the HE White Paper is choice. Choice for students is what the government is championing, and the freeing up of an extra 85,000 places of the top performers will facilitate a shift of power from the institution to the student. Furthermore, the new relaxed regulatory framework allowing more players to become a university and a simplification of the regime for obtaining and renewing of degree awarding powers is very likely to amplify this new culture of choice.

For us at Recourse, the big question is what difference this will make on staff wellbeing.

Just as most businesses, public sector bodies and charities up and down the country are trying to do more with less, so are universities. Yes, the changes to the cap on student numbers for institutions attracting students with AAB or better may relieve some of the pinch felt by the massive reduction in the HEFCE teaching grant, but on the whole, there still won’t be lots of spare cash floating around the HE sector.

This has implications on expectations for staff and their role within their institution.

The increased expectation on a university to provide a top-notch quality experience for its students is at an all time high. Redundancies, changes to pay and pensions and a new emphasis on providing a better quality teaching experience for students will increase workloads and undoubtedly stress levels too.

We will be stepping up our promotional activities over the coming months to ensure that any member of staff in the HE sector (as well as in FE) knows that they can speak to a trained professional if they are feeling worn down, stressed or anxious about meeting another seemingly impossible deadline.

The impact on students of the changes in HE is well documented. We feel it’s about time the impact on staff is too.

If you need to give us a call, or know of someone who might, please ring the Recourse Support Line on: 0808 802 03 04. Our services are free, confidential and available 24 hours a day, every day of the year.”

by Alex Smith

Recourse’s Development Manager Alex Smith ponders the emotional implications of higher tuition fees on HE staff:

There’s been a lot of talk and speculation about the impact of higher fees on the education choices of prospective students, the effect this will have on the number and nature of institutions and also the wider but nebulous phrase ‘the student experience’; morphing from what seems to infer quality of education, sports facilities and student union into some consumerist hiatus of demanding more value for money from every aspect of university life.

Whilst I take no sides on whether or not the changes are good, I am concerned by the unintended, but inevitable consequences of a consumer culture.

The jump from just over £3,000 to the industry average of over £8,500 will radically change the dynamic of what going to university means. A glossy prospective promising the earth will need to deliver to the last book on the shelf and the last seat in the library; universities complacent about this will be punished for contravening these market place rules.

Consumerism and education is an interesting mix which is unfamiliar territory for the English HE sector.

Over the last six months, there has been a huge increase in the number of people accessing our Factsheets online. Dealing with and understanding stress have been in the top five of all viewings and this could be down to the reshaping environment of higher education in the face of government savings and the increased demand on individual workloads.

I believe the biggest increase in service usage is yet to come, however. The inevitability of the consumer-led culture will increase the service-led expectation for every single person working in HE, many of whom already work flat out in demanding jobs juggling different priorities and demands from both students and colleagues.

At Recourse, we are trying to improve our own service so we meet this anticipated demand of people working in HE with problems caused by heightened work pressure, load and expectation.

For us, any increase in service usage will be a reflection of difficult times out there for people working in universities.

Tell us how we can improve our services here.