whelkstall

"Bold Roger was a teacher who lived in Lowestoft,
Next door his friend, let's call him Dave,
Worked in a shop which sold those tools
Which people buy do do odd jobs
That don't get done and so the tools,
Are stored up in the loft.

Young Dave he thought he'd like a change, to have an easier day,
“Work in a school,” the advert said,
“You need no stifficates to be
A person in the classroom who
Does everything a teacher does,
For only half the pay.”

For Roger it was quite a shock to face the lack of work,
“This agreement,” the union said.
Will make your week much easier
With time to plan and meet and mark
And keep your paperwork quite neat,”
He fell for it, the Berk.

So Roger had an easy week and then an easy term,
Quite soon it was an easy year,
For once a fortnight all he did
Was sign his name upon a form
To say that he had done no work,
His status to confirm.

And so upon that fateful day an advert did appear,
For that same shop where Dave once worked,
Now had a need for someone who
Could sell the tools for DIY
And bedding plants and garden gnomes,
He took it with a tear.

Dave was an (almost) teacher who lived in Lowestoft,
Roger, his friend, who lived next door,
Worked in a shop which sold those tools,
Which people buy do do odd jobs,
That don't get done and so the tools,
Are stored up in the loft."

I am a Member of Parliament,
And down to London I was once sent;
I buy not from shops that are basic or cheap,--
A thousand pound TV the profit I reap;
My party line I merrily chant;
Where’er I walk no money I want;
And why I’m so flush the reason I tell, --
Who claims his expenses  is sure to live well.
    What tinker or tailor,
    Or honest taxpayer?
    Lives half so well as an expenses player.

My re-election is my main concern,
Without those expenses less money I’ll earn;
Myself, by denial, I mortify –
With plenty of food that I never buy;
I’m clothed in the very best for my sin,--
Paid for by the people who voted me in;
“I’ve done nothing wrong,” is my favourite song,
And the division bell my excuse, ding dong.
    What tinker or tailor,
    Or honest taxpayer?
    Lives half so well as an expenses player.

Ross Willmott has expressed his delight that the Labour Council's policy of always pursuing parking penalties, even when the person has proved they have paid, has been vindicated. One has to ask how someone so stupid has managed to become leader of a Council.

"Councils have absolute discretion to cancel a PCN at any stage in the enforcement process - even at a hearing or after an Adjudicator has decided the matter. Councils also have a duty to consider representations, even if those representations are directed to mitigating circumstances rather than the statutory grounds of appeal. Many councils give proper consideration to the exercise of discretion as a matter of course; others need to be reminded. Discretion is a fundamental part of the enforcement process and, if ignored, is likely to raise a genuine sense of grievance on the part of a vehicle owner."

For Mr. Willmott, grievances are not an issue. Parking penalties are for raising revenue and nothing more. His council will pursue every offender to the limit regardless of the circumstances.

I've asked Mr. Willmott to attend when the bailliffs call to remove my property at his behest. He has not responded to my request.

I hope the voters have the sense to vote Mr. Willmot out at the next election. I hope that menbers of the Council will vote him out of leadership at he Council's AGM.

Mr. Willmott. Are you prepared to accept that I paid to park as the Tribunal accepted or do you defend your officers' accusation that I could have found my ticket in the street - sepite your warden photographing it in my car?

The telly is marvellous, the telly is good,
The telly makes everyone act as they should.
There’s a man with long hair who bullies and rants,
I’ll behave just like that when I get half a chance.
If it wasn’t for telly then I wouldn’t know,
That some liquids mend hair and some creams make you glow.
I squeal with delight as one man thumps another,
Just wait until I try that out on my brother.
A big yellow M tells me what’s the best food,
We’ll go there tomorrow if only I’m good.
There are cats that can talk and fish that can hum,
And a dog that says “use this when you wipe your bum.”
There are lots of new words telly learns me to say,
When I use them I’m told, “you must not talk that way,”
I sit and watch telly and soak it all up,
It’s as easy as drinking a shake from a cup.
The telly’s my friend, it’s my mum and my dad,
It keeps me from mischief and stops me being sad.
I’m saying all this although I’m only three,
Oh what wonderful things telly’s doing for me.

I was refused adjudication on my parking penalty appeal. The gist of their reasoning is that if a ticket is misdisplayed then the task of cancelling the penalty would be too costly, time consuming and complex to administer, so the law assumes that if the ticket is misdisplayed then no payment was made. It appears that they believe that the public much prefer this approach.

I can’t help wondering how much time and money is wasted in contesting appeals. Nearly 200 items of paper, countless letters, hearings. Realistically, it must cost thousands of pounds and tens of hours for each case and would appear to be a lot more costly, time consuming and complex to administer than simply having a file for cancelled penalties.

I have discovered that the Council does cancel some penalties when tickets are misdisplayed. There is no specific policy, but the officer can make that decision, if he feels it is appropriate. What is appropriate? They refuse to say.

Whatever happened to open Government?

I now have to apply to the High Court for a Judicial Review to try to remove the branding of being a cheat. There is a County Court hearing scheduled so I will certainly receive a County Court judgement and a visit from baillifs to remove my property.

All this despite my having paid the fee and all the authorities accepting that I did.

"I don't do love and stuff," she said.

I rarely write about love, but stuff is what I do best,
I have sweet stuff and wet stuff and soft stuff,
And some white stuff made into a vest.
Please don't underestimate stuff,
It is, after all, you'll agree,
The stuff that all the world's made of,
And that includes both you and me.

Eight months on and it has been decided at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal that having a valid parking ticket is not grounds for appeal. Proof that you have paid is no defence. It was never in dispute that I had paid the parking fee. I have the ticket that the parking attendant photographed. The ticket was not properly displayed and that’s enough.

You would have thought that there were some rules that Councils have to operate by. In fact they have ’Absolute Discretion’. Absolute Discetion means that, provided the parking system is propely in place with proper notices, road markings and the like, then the Councils can do whatever they like with regard to infringements. There is not even a requirement for them to be consistent.

A couple of people in the Tribunal queue with tickets wrongly displayed, dropped of the windscreen or otherwise obscured and I would imagine that they would all have lost their appeals - assuming the Tribunal is consistent.

The reality is that parking provides a considerable income to Councils - and to the private contractors who operate it it for them. They even have targets for income from penalties. Penalties in other areas of the law are designed to act as a deterrent to illegal behaviour so that a sensible target would be to see them reduced. If penalties are seen as a source of income then deterring behaviour that is a source of income is counter productive. It also explains why Councils pursue every infringement to the limit.

In reality, it makes sense to just pay up and accept that you’ve been skinned. Even if you were fortunate enough to win, you lose pay from time off to attend the hearing and preparing your case is not an inconsiderable task. Councils probably depend on people resigning themselves to the injustice of it.

Among the largest number of complaints to Members of Parliament are those about parking penalties. It was even raised by the Liberal Democrat spokesman in Parliament. I contacted my MP and he suggested that I mention "common sense, fairness and justice". I discovered that common sense, fairness and justice have no place in the Tribunal. They have a set of grounds for appeal. If you meet the criteria you win, if you don’t you lose. It’s a rubber stamping exercise and therefore a waste of time appealing if your grounds for appeal is not on the list.

What do you pay your parking fee for? I assumed that it was to park. It is, in fact to purchase the ticket to prove that you have paid.

I parked in Wellington Street again so that I could buy my wife a birthday present. I paid for an hour, put the ticket in the car and, having brought the present, returned within half an hour. There was a parking ticket on my car. My ticket was improperly displayed. In fact, it was upside down.

It was a mistake, but I assumed that it was one that was easily resolved. A call to the Parking Enforcement Team revealed that having a ticket proved nothing. I could have picked it up in the street. The idea that people would scrabble around in the gutter looking for a parking ticket with their car’s registration number on says a lot about the mentality of the people who manage parking.

What makes the attitude even more ridiculous is the fact that the Traffic Wardens photograph the tickets in the cars and these photographs are placed on a website.On the photograph of mine the number is clearly readable and matches the one I have. I can therefore prove that I paid the fee. No compromise from the Enforcement Team. The offence is, "parking without clearly displaying a valid pay & display ticket or voucher."

I could pay £70 and accept the idiocy of the Council’s policy, but I will let it go to court. The court will doubtless support the council, but there is just a chance that the idiotic waste of time and the injustice of it may make someone think.

I paid to park. I can prove it. Is £70 a just penalty for a lapse of attention that left my ticket upside down?

An excellent database that give considerable clues, without naming names, as to where trans fat can be found in food.

http://napa.ntdt.udel.edu/trans/

There are various little rituals in educational recruitment which are designed to let losing candidates down gently. The problem is that everyone know what the rituals mean and as a result, they are an insult which make people feel worse than if they were told the truth.

When there is more than one candidate for a job, everyone is obliged to sit around waiting during all the interviews and for the period when the interview panel makes their decision. The successful candidate is called before the panel to be offered the job.The losers are then offered individual feedback which consists of some flannel about it having been a difficult choice and how they came second.

So you are either appointed or come second, regardless of the number of candidates.

If you are the only candidate, you are only told the outcome on the day if the school intends to appoint you. The words that tell you that you haven't got the job are, "We will write to you." Not only does that phrase tell you that you didn't get the job, it also says that they haven't the courage to tell you to your face.

I've had a few such letters and I've never bothered opening them.

I can live with not getting the job. What I really hate is the unprofessional way the losing candidates are dealt with.

Just how difficult is it to tell someone to their face that they don't fit the bill? In every other work environment I've been involved in there are better ways of telling people interview outcomes that don't involve playing games. There is no need to keep people hanging about. Telling all candidates you will write to them means that one person will get a 'success' letter.

Schools are probably too bound up in ritual to change, but farcical gameplay calls into question the validity of the recruitment process generally. If the way they deal with outcomes is a silly game, can you really be sure that the process is treated any more seriously?

A plan for cross curricular integration of ICT must be carefully thought out. The whole ideal of Educational Technology is still very much in an experimental stage despite the very wide changes that have taken place and continue to take place.

The changes in Technology and been rapid and evolutionary. Educational developments are not mirroring the societal changes that the technology is bringing about. In many respects, the whole concept of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in a retrenchment to allow incorporation of the technology into education without disturbing what is considered mainstream.

Most schools follow a very narrow, prescribed, formulaic and ultimately quite dull curriculum that is provided by Government. There is little pressure to challenge the status quo and as a result, ICT remains aloof and incongruous with the needs of society

The proper incorporation of ICT requires a model. While we teach the kids to labour with a model that requires identification and analysis of the issues, followed by design, testing and evaluation, there is little evidence that school do anything similar in their approach to forwarding the larger ICT project.

One of the major reasons is a lack of vision. On the one hand, there is a conservative profession defending itself against the implications of ICT. One the other there are a range of ICT teachers, with a very wide differentiation of skills, whose main priority is to serve results. Being able to show that you have helped raise the number of level 5s or 5 A to C grades will earn you brownie points and early promotion. Suggesting ways to take the subject forward is more likely to get you the sack.

If the incorporation of ICT across the curriculum is to be a congruous and coherent process then schools have to develop appropriate surroundings, resources and skills and these will, to a large extent, depend on the level of skills available. Almost all of the present ICT curriculum can easily be delivered by a keen and competent teacher of Art, PE or any other subject. Most of it is trivial. The real skill is the ability to see how ICT fits with the bigger picture. This skill is strategic and requires more than the ability to create a PowerPoint, a poster or a spreadsheet.

The necessary skills will enable the integration of ICT to promote successful leaning and teaching practices both in and for the Information society. It is therefore absolutely essential that this integration is cross curricular and presupposes a consideration of the skills required by teachers, the competitive aspects of a cross curricular approach and the use that will be made of ICT by students and teachers.

ICT hands powerful resources to the teacher which aid motivation and organisation but also challenges authority because access to knowledge is no longer so easily controlled. Because of this, integration must be carefully planned. An obvious example of where this is not working in practice is the ICT key stage 3 test. Ultimately, it is another layer of SaTs to teach too, where it most obviously should be an ongoing process integrated into the teaching and learning of ICT wherever and whenever it is used.

In today’s society, the ability to use ICT is as vital as being able to read, write and be numerate. It could probably be called the fourth ‘R’ if I could only think of a mnemonic. But the rigour is different. In most schools, kids go to ICT once a week to ‘play’ and really not much more than that. An hour or less per week is really not sufficient to become proficient or to even think about the broader implications of the subject.

ICT frequently becomes a domain of the ‘expert’, often very enthusiastic and competent, not always an expert but frequently regarded as the person responsible for ICT and therefore in control of doling out the resources once the hour a week of play is allocated.

Even worse, I suppose, is the room timetable which is filled in rapidly by those who use the ‘book first, plan later’ strategy and then fought over with those whose Scheme of Work tells them they have to search the Internet on Thursday period three. ICT isn’t allowed into the educational system. It stands in a room in the corner to be proudly shown as ‘progress’ and to be squabbled over or ignored in equal measure.

We need real policies and a real and determined way of integrating ICT across the curriculum. Ensuring that teachers are trained in an essential step, but training them to use a spreadsheet or turn their lessons into PowerPoint presentation is not the central issue.

Firstly we have to consider why and how we use ICT with the kids. We are not simply doing it because that’s what we are told to do – or are we. I’ve met teachers who “would rather not, but it’s in the plan.” For students, ICT is an increasingly important focus for developing their knowledge, to store and communicate what they have learned. They need much more unfettered access to the equipment of ICT with the idea that the learning for a particular is in a particular time and room become increasingly foreign. Even libraries never really saw the inculcation of the idea, “Can I go to the library to find out more? But ICT has the advantage of not needing to move. This is part and parcel of the need to encourage a creative and autonomous spirit and the ability to solve problems and to develop opinions independently.

Central to the above are the organisational needs. Students have to be able to search, select, analyse and organise information effectively. They need to be able to understand that breadth and depth is important. A Google search, for example, may throw up thousands or millions of hits. How many people step beyond the first 20 or so, or really know how to?

But the real need is for ICT to be used rationally. “We have to teach word processing, spreadsheets and databases because that’s what they use in business.” A pound for every time I’ve heard this b*ll*cks please. If we have to teach them, and I’m not saying we shouldn’t, then it has to be because they are useful and purposeful in the here and now. If they are useful in your job later then that’s a bonus. It is not, in itself, a rational reason for teaching them.

The last point suggests what teachers have to do. Cross curricular ICT assumes that there is a clear and purposeful plan for is use. It means that ICT isn’t in the Scheme of Work because it has to be, but because reflection and planning sees it as the most effective means of achieving the teaching and learning aims of the subject.

The competitive nature of ICT use is damaging. A proper cross curricular model is about far more than integrating ICT. It allows faculties to discover where their subjects overlap so that teachers find links and encourage that approach in the students. “We can’t teach that bit of physics because they haven’t done the maths yet.” Is another piece of nonsense that proper integration, including ICT, can help eliminate.

The motivational aspects of ICT are important. Phillipe Stegler’s idea about mobile phones is just one example:

http://www.feeds4all.com/Item.aspx?ItemID=12480024

It’s about enthusiasm and looking for ways to buck the trend.

I have a model for integration and considered publishing it, but there are people making a pig’s ear of it and earning maybe six times what I earn stacking shelves. My decision to reserve it reflects my feeling that while my opinions are free, my expertise is valuable. I’m happy to share lesson ideas. My organisation and implementation of my vision goes with a teaching job and ultimately will probably never blossom.

Having said that, a lot of what has to be achieved is obvious. The uses of ICT have to be spelled out; The cross curricular links have to be identified; Plans have to be drawn up and agreed; Resources and activities have to be incorporated into schemes; and, a cycle of evaluation and improvement has to be put in place. As I said at the start, teachers have to do what they are trying to teach the kids.

Teaching ICT as it is presently formulated may be relatively trivial but the integration of it across the curriculum and providing planning, organisation and a sense of direction requires a clear understanding of the technology. It requires an understanding of what it can do and the vision to ensure that it is integrated into the curriculum for the greatest benefit of the students and the larger society.

Demanding that education be creative is to be extremely radical. Many schools proclaim their radicalism but most are driven back by the need to meet the demand for results. As a result there seems to be a tightening circle that is best summed up in the phrase, “teaching to the test.”

Creativity generates change. It is about freedom and allows people to experiment, to innovate to show independence and initiative. It is also not without its risks. If you take chances you will sometimes fail, but the evidence suggests that many schools are failing without taking any chances at all. One is reminded, albeit in miniature of Stalinist five year plans which achieved, so it was claimed, their objectives while actually producing a vast imbalance in output. Schools plan for the maximum five A to Cs and the cost is a loss of maths and science ability.

Creativity is the flux that has allowed human progress and those times when it has been stifled has often been accompanied by some of the worst periods in human history. If it is encouraged in the educational process it can allow for better use of resources and a learning process that is centred on individuals rather than institutional outcomes.

Creativity is about intellectual and cognitive effort, but it is also emotions, relationships and interacting with society and the environment. It is what allows the creation of novel ideas and the striving to solve problems.

It is often thought that creativity is an ‘artistic’ idea. It certainly isn’t. Walpert’s “The unnatural nature of science” was an exciting read because it pointed out quite clearly that science often challenges ‘common sense’ and needs that creative edge to see the reality in something that would otherwise, wrongly, be taken for granted.

When I cover maths I often introduce as a starter the story of Gauss and the lazy teacher who set the “add the numbers 1 to 100 problem.” The creativity of the outcome still has a certain mischief to it that kids find entertaining.

To be creative is to be anti-conservative in a conservative profession. It requires an atmosphere of freedom and the humility to realise that there is likely to be far more creativity in the classroom than that which the teacher brings. It requires that sense of adventure that allows children to experiment and explore, to not fear failure but to se is as a tool for taking the next, more informed step.

I suppose some insight into my feelings might help. I am teaching year 7s, 11and 12 year olds, how to use PowerPoint. The prescribed method is to get them to enter the text, about themselves, then the graphics, then the background colour… and everyone ends up with something very similar and not very interesting. I have always felt that the subject has to be something ‘important’. By that I mean that you are trying to persuade an audience that something needs to be done.

By giving them the freedom to use their imagination you release enormous potential and a lot of hard work for yourself because structure is important. What you end up with is always far more differentiated and always contains significant work that is rarely achieved in a tell, tell, tell environment. This is an essential element of the constructivist model.

Given freedom, children are released to develop their own strategies and are enabled to develop their own attitudes rather than just accepting without question the ones imposed on them. We are not only removing the chains from the children but also from ourselves.

Creativity allows a school to respond more realistically to the needs of the children. Able children are allowed to exercise their abilities with fewer constrains, while the teacher can direct his or her efforts to the less able child who may be transformed by encouraging them to reflect and apply creative solutions to problems. The teachers own creative instincts are also released to allow a flexible and more personal approach to delivering the subject.

It is so important that we move away from a psychology of mere learning of techniques and methods to one that allows the incorporation of these methods to real and meaningful projects.

Ambiguity and uncertainty are a part of life and instead of trying to shield children from them by driving learning by the rigour of the test, we need to help them be tolerant of the uncertainty and accept that problems need to allow reflection as well as calculation, copying and rote. Not all answers are immediate. Sometimes ideas need to ‘incubate’. Obstacles require perseverance. They need to be seen as opportunities, not threats.

Knowledge is not static and unchanging, except in some classrooms. ICT give us and the children the opportunity to step outside of the classroom and to find new meaning, new knowledge and new interpretations. This does not reduce the teacher’s role but makes it more important and demanding as a filter, referee, validater and arbiter.

Creative thinking is probably more difficult that imagined. Looking at what is currently served up by the media under the name of entertainment it seems that our society is driven by the need for instant satisfaction rather than reflection. Writing a play or sit com takes time and thought. Sticking a group of idiots in a situation and watching the outcome takes none at all. There is nothing inherently wrong with ‘reality’ TV, other than the misnomer, reality. Circus lions need to be poked to perform and so do ‘reality’ performers.

Conventional schooling favours the ‘right’ answer with the teacher being the holder of the ‘truth’. Creativity hands much more responsibility to the learners. One of the delights of teaching ICT in a creative way is the ability of the kids to astound with their interpretations of the task and the significant additions that they can make by using the media to present their meaning, rather than regurgitating the meaning required by the teacher or the exam board. Some of the current crop of examinations are dreadful in this respect, being so prescriptive as to actually mark down students who show any originality beyond that prescribed.

Prescribed originality is not originality at all.

Classrooms need to become places that surprise, astonish, entertain, mystify and demystify and encourage children to investigate and find out why, where, how, when, what and who. Rudyard Kipling’s servants are still powerful tools. Creativity is for children to take pleasure in the unexpected, to squeal with delight when something happens that they haven’t seen before

Ultimately, when he or she leaves school, the students must carry their own personal backpack of learning, thinking, creativity and ability to communicate and not simply a bundle handed down to them by their teachers.

In France, mobile phones aren't confiscated by teachers, but used as an essential part of lessons. A Montpellier teacher, Phillipe Steger set up a range of educational activities after developing a means for students to access their lesson via mobile phones, with Internet access.

The method is relatively simple. The students log on using their mobile phones and select the material they need for the lesson. The students can take a test to review progress before moving to the main content

The system has enormous potential because more than threequarters of students have mobile phones in France. The percentage in the UK is certainly higher.

In France nearly 1000 didactic activities have been made available by different teachers and the evidence is that the students are enaged and productive.

The service is not completely free and there has been a lot of work to try to ensure that social differences and different Internet access doesn't prevent students engaging with the system. Conversations with mobile phone operators may enable the removal the 2 euros per month that each individual's access costs.

My immediate thought when I read about this was those kids who manage to type a line of text on paper or on the computer during a lesson, but can type dozens of words per minute on their mobiles.

If that skill can be transposed to doing their schoolwork we may be on to a winner.

What would be the attitude to these in school:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yd99gyE4jCk

One proposal for English using ICT is the Wikinovel. This is a collaborative literature idea from The University of Duesto (Bilbao).

The authors develop a text with plots and characters chosen collaboratively. It is a very open format and quite transparent, unlike those story games that involve writing knowing only a limited amount about the foregoing plot. Some of these collaborative ideas occur in newsgroups too but lack the ability to tie it all together in a systematic way.

In many respects it is like the oral tradition where stories are told and retold being added to and elaborated by the listeners and by future retellers of the story.

The Wikinovel has the ability to incorporate a range of mulimedia elements too. The completed wikinovel has a collective ownership.

Most of the works so far have been in Spanish and Euskara although there is one in English. The first project is now complete. Not every page has an English translation and the explanations are not very detailed, but there is enough information to enable an teacher to set such a project in motion.

http://www.wikinovela.org/index.php/Main_Page

Home Secretary John Reid held a press conference to talk about Muslim extremists and how they were brainwashing children into becoming suicide bombers.

How strange it is that the only 'muslim' to attend this private press conference by Press Association invite only was Trevor Moore, a complete fruitcake who chooses to call himself Abu Izzadeen.

It wasn't as if he was incognito. Dressed in arab garb, he must have been obvious to even the most simple policeman or security guard and without an invitation or press pass he would not have been allowed into the meeting, unless he was wanted there.

Was he searched? You would think that a person justifying suicide bombing would have been seen as a potential threat to the Home Secretary, but no, he just walked into the room and heckled on cue. It was almost as if the entire thing was scripted.

It seems extremely likely that he was invited for a purpose. Reid was railing against muslim extremists and sounded as demented as Dr. Goebbels ranting against the Jews, but how convenient, there was a 'muslim' extremist all dressed up and making all the right noises to justify Reid's reactionary nonsense.

The BBC's response was similary single minded. Did they interview a selection of muslims to get a rounded view of Reid's speech? No, they interviewed Trevor Moore, who continued his unintelligible rant in a way that appeared to justify Reid's policy.

Where I live and work means that I know a lot of muslims. I have yet to meet any who doesn't think that Trevor Moore is a fruitcake, and while many are appalled by Government foreign policy, most are equally appalled by the acts of terror that have been done in the name of Islam.

There are very real concerns about the Government's foreign policy and they are not 'muslim' concerns, they are very real human rights concerns. They are being surpressed by branding an entire community on the basis of the ravings of a few demented loonies.

Dr. Goebbels may be long dead, but his methods are alive and well.

Education is changing rapidly, but is it changing to reflect society's changing direction? I'm aware of quite significant changes in approach abroad, but the UK system seems still very conservative and resistant to change.

The difficulty of learning varies with the learner and the subject and that requires that both learners and teachers are required to make considerable effort. My feeling is that traditional educational methods and approaches are frequently dull and lacking in life and it is the duty of the teacher to engage, not simply deliver.

Suggesting that fun and games have a place in education is inviting a critical response, but what the hell. I'm not teaching, but I have an opinion that may, hopefully, stimulate a few people to reconsider, even if they don't ultimately agree. People disagree because they believe that education is a serious business that really shouldn't be devalued in this way. I've seen it claimed that looking for 'fun' is making teachers into entertainers, even clowns, instead of teachers. My view is that teaching is a multifaceted profession, and being an entertainer is just one of those facets. My notion shares that of Seymour Papert who talks about learning in terms of "hard fun". Fun doesn't have to be easy and it doesn't have to be trivial.

By introducing the notion of fun into learning is not to trivialise. It is part of the search for diverse ways to engage, to gain attention, to generate interest and to make learning rewarding in itself as well as for its outcomes. So I'll be looking at what I think are the advantages of this approach.

Fun can be challenging. Games are fun and many games require considerable effort, physical or intellectual so that creating a challenge that is enjoyable to engage with is central to motivation. Differentiation is so obviously important too, because not being able to engage with a task is no fun at all. I do not suggest devaluing the skills and learning but the adaptation and differentiation of the learning and teaching activities. This process is likely to replace stress with a more relaxed attitude and the removal of negative attitudes may help to lesson disruptive behaviour.

The fun approach must have educational advantages and not be used for the sake of it. I think that's part of the objection is the assumption that the fun is the priority. The learning is the priority, fun is part of the approach that must enhance learning and not just burn up time or create diversions. You must know how and why you are using such an approach.

By introducing a fun approach to teaching and learning, the daily routine changes and motivation may increase. Using games, for example, allows the development of communication skills and this is a key factor in all learning. It is not just about learning, but about being able to communicate what you have learned. Some private schools employ chess teachers, for example, in recognition of the other skills that are gained from playing a game.

I suppose an example might help to illustrate. Teaching ICT, there is a Unit 7.1, "about me". My experience of this is that kids rapidly run out of steam and while there are always creditable efforts, they still depend on the varied experiences the kids bring with them.

My approach was to set a project that required that they present an argument about an important topic. That always seemed much more engaging because they had to 'find out', find resources and 'think' about the message. I've seen some remarkable work from 11 year olds, including the message unfolding and told by an animated character central to the presentation. I don't believe that would happen with 'about me'. Indeed, kids with other teachers in my faculty who stuck with 'about me' produced far less work and far less imaginative work. Introduce the notion of fun and you set the kids free. The credit is not with the teacher but with the freedom.

If you enjoy yourself you are less anxious and more fluid in the way that you work. Think of chores and how often you stop and start when the opportunity arises. If you get a run at them the chores are done, but you often have to force yourself.

Fun and games often require and are enhanced by co-operation and collaboration. The teacher facilitates in a true constructivist way and the kids engage in activities. By collaborating it is possible to exceed what individuals can achieve. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

So is this approach always appropriate? If you are going to use such an approach you must ensure that the modification of the tasks enhances them and is entirely consistent with the subject being learned. Some learning may already contain its own rewards or be rewarding for some learners so it has to be directed at the correct audience.

It never ceases to amaze me how activities that people do for pleasure in their leisure time become reduced to repetitive chores in education. This is not so much the fault of the teachers as of the curriculum requirements.

Shakespeare is our greatest dramatist, but who actually 'likes' Shakespeare. I've seen all the plays and read them at least once, because I wanted to, but I've heard so many kids say, "Shakespeare is boring." "This is cr*p". Somewhere, the magic is being lost, or not being conveyed in the first place. The reason the plays were written originally was because people would pay to see them. This is where cross-curricular links can be so helpful. There is fun to be found in the rhythmic structure. Everyone can repeat 'iambic pentameter', but who can explain it? I have a cover lesson in my supply bag that links the rhythmic patterns in flamenco with those in Shakespeare. Somehow you have to demonstrate that rhythm is linked to mood. It can be light or aggressive. It can be passionate or sullen. For an hour it comes to life. You have to be the sort of person prepared to dance around the room in these rhythms, I suppose, but once the kids get a hold of it, it becomes obvious to them and fun too.

There is no age limit to fun. There are few limits to the diversity that can be introduced into a lesson. It requires giving the freedom to explore, to share, to collaborate or to compete in a way that aids understanding. I've mentioned elsewhere the idea that computer games can aid learning and really I'm extending that notion here to learning activities in general.

In summary, then, what types of fun and games are useful to a classroom situation? They are those that give kids the ability to practice their skills in a relevant context. They are activities that allow for differentiation in a way that frees the learner to express themselves; They are activities that bring variety into the experience of learning. They can be collaborative or competitive. They can encourage reflection, dramatisation, categorisation and much more besides. The one thing the teacher must ensure is that they fit with our educational objectives. They must never trivialise nor be used to fill otherwise empty time. That would be boring.

Learning can be difficult and it requires effort. From a teacher's point of view this can be so much easier if you have learners who are motivated and animated to learn. I realise that it sounds like Mary Poppins, but finding what is enjoyable in what you are teaching not only makes it more fun for the kids, but also for the teacher.