One in five new teachers leaving.

butterandjam

Calendargirl

Children not toilet trained has been brought up many times on GN.

I can only add to what some others have said.

45 or so years ago, children had to be toilet trained or they couldn’t attend the council run nursery school.

This was at 3 years old, not school starting age.

Yes, there would be occasional ‘accidents’, but it worked fine.

There didn’t seem to be the issues (excuses?) back then why nappies should be needed.

I suspect one of the main reasons was fewer mums worked back then, and being a stay-at-home mum was more conducive to getting the child trained.

??? in my family experience children who go to fulltime all-day nursery 8 am to 6 pm, (because their parents are at work) are potty trained at nursery, by the staff, around the age of 2.

That's what happened with my children. The full-time nursery toilet-trained them, so they were out of nappies by age 3.

I loved teaching both in primary and special school situations, but sadly I took early retirement after nearly having a nervous breakdown. I would not recommend teaching as a career now.

I think we have been too forgiving of people for too long. It is in fact very patronising saying 'We understand because you work and/or are poor you cannot possibly be expected to reach the standards that most ordinary people attain,' one of those standards being potting training your children before they start school.

It would probably be much better for people in many apsects of life if we actually told them what was expected of them and facilitated it.

One sanction we could bring in is insist that any child starting school in nappies, with no good reason should have a parent with them on school days ready to change them when needed. Of course this will cause the parents problems if they work, but for the same reason it would also be an incentive for the parents to get the child potty trained before they start school.

Banning them from school would not be a good sanction as the child could be out of school for a long time because a parent will not engage with potty training and when the child starts school, may be a term after their contemporaries, they will then go back to school, well behind other children and needing extra teaching assistance to help them catch up.

Frogs

butterandjam

Calendargirl

Children not toilet trained has been brought up many times on GN.

I can only add to what some others have said.

45 or so years ago, children had to be toilet trained or they couldn’t attend the council run nursery school.

This was at 3 years old, not school starting age.

Yes, there would be occasional ‘accidents’, but it worked fine.

There didn’t seem to be the issues (excuses?) back then why nappies should be needed.

I suspect one of the main reasons was fewer mums worked back then, and being a stay-at-home mum was more conducive to getting the child trained.

??? in my family experience children who go to fulltime all-day nursery 8 am to 6 pm, (because their parents are at work) are potty trained at nursery, by the staff, around the age of 2.

Didn’t happen like that at my grandchildren’s nursery. The parents were told the nursery would support the parents when they decided the time was right for their child to be toilet trained but wouldn’t initiate it. They made no comment at all however long the child remained in nappies.
My DiL didn’t start toilet training our grandchild til he was three and a half. As he was a summer baby and would be starting school when he was only just four I was panicking he would be one of those starting school in nappies but in the event he was clean and dry within 2 to 3 weeks - phew

How many hours per day /week were the GC in nursery?

If they are only there morning's , 15 hours per week, , and parents are not yet potty training at home, it's pointless for staff to waste their time.

My daughter started a PGCE after her degree and gave up after 3 months. I so wanted her to go into teaching but she loathed it. Even the teachers she was working with tried to put her off. Sadly as a profession it’s just not valued anymore and it’s such an important one.

My grandson who is 4 was dry by 3. His sister who is 2 is just being trained to use the potty. Both go to daycare. My DD is a full time working mum. She still managed to get them used to using a potty.

M0nica

DGD is just off to university to study drama and education. She is just completing a gap year as a teaching assistant at the secondary school she attended. It does not seem to have put her off.

But once she becomes a teacher she will be on the receiving end of a mass of soul-destroying bureaucracy and rigidity.

As a school governor I interviewed several well qualified and experienced teachers who were applying for TA jobs because they wanted to be free to offer something concrete and positive to the pupils. They were prepared to take the financial hit.

My grandson has been sitting on the potty since the age of 10 months. He was too young to argue and loves being read a story. He is put on it every 2 hours and more often and not he waits to relieve himself on it. The only problem is at 12 months old, he still can’t talk, my daughter, who is going back to work, is worried that the nursery will not have time next month to carry the habit on.

My 3 had to be toilet trained to start playgroup, not even a nursery! Yes there will be children with bladder problems diagnosis and these should be accommodated. Nocturnal
enuresis very rarely encroaches on daytime toileting. I cannot fathom why any classroom environment should be expected to accommodate toilet training.

butterandjam

Calendargirl

Children not toilet trained has been brought up many times on GN.

I can only add to what some others have said.

45 or so years ago, children had to be toilet trained or they couldn’t attend the council run nursery school.

This was at 3 years old, not school starting age.

Yes, there would be occasional ‘accidents’, but it worked fine.

There didn’t seem to be the issues (excuses?) back then why nappies should be needed.

I suspect one of the main reasons was fewer mums worked back then, and being a stay-at-home mum was more conducive to getting the child trained.

??? in my family experience children who go to fulltime all-day nursery 8 am to 6 pm, (because their parents are at work) are potty trained at nursery, by the staff, around the age of 2.

Didn’t happen like that at my grandchildren’s nursery. The parents were told the nursery would support the parents when they decided the time was right for their child to be toilet trained but wouldn’t initiate it. They made no comment at all however long the child remained in nappies.
My DiL didn’t start toilet training our grandchild til he was three and a half. As he was a summer baby and would be starting school when he was only just four I was panicking he would be one of those starting school in nappies but in the event he was clean and dry within 2 to 3 weeks - phew

39 years in teaching. Loved it for many years but it become so stressful and demanding I retired on the verge of a nervous breakdown.

I did 36 years teaching in junior middle and secondary schools. I loved the students but I ran out of steam and energy at 58 so took early retirement. The politics, the changing curriculum,OFSTED, young teachers in roles of responsibility telling me how to reinvent the wheel all combined to making me give up. I studied at a designated teacher training college so knew what I was getting into.
Now I volunteer at a local primary school and hear children read. No preparation , no marking, no responsibility, free weekends but lots of fun.
I still think it is a great vocation but within each school you require strong leadership plus staff who sing from the same hymn sheet!

Calendargirl

Children not toilet trained has been brought up many times on GN.

I can only add to what some others have said.

45 or so years ago, children had to be toilet trained or they couldn’t attend the council run nursery school.

This was at 3 years old, not school starting age.

Yes, there would be occasional ‘accidents’, but it worked fine.

There didn’t seem to be the issues (excuses?) back then why nappies should be needed.

I suspect one of the main reasons was fewer mums worked back then, and being a stay-at-home mum was more conducive to getting the child trained.

??? in my family experience children who go to fulltime all-day nursery 8 am to 6 pm, (because their parents are at work) are potty trained at nursery, by the staff, around the age of 2.

When we read of classroom problems with unruly pupils, lack of parental support and teacher support it seems to be that a teacher's job in some schools is more about crowd control than teaching

Very many years ago a friend said exactly that.
He was a teacher in an inner city school and the particular class he mentioned were bottom set teenagers who had no interest in anything related to school.
He used to say, "At least while I've got them in the classroom, they're not out on the streets accosting old ladies or younger kids."

I would never go back and I advise anyone considering teaching never to go there.

I taught for many years in the secondary and primary sectors. I carried on until 67 taking phased retirement. The job changed over the years from a mostly enjoyable and worthwhile experience to one dominated by paperwork, political interference and nonsensical ideologies. I do not envy today's teachers as children are more entitled and have little respect for others or themselves in some cases. And as for their parents....I have family who teach and I often hear about the ineffective leadership which I also experienced. It is a difficult job with substantial rewards in working with children however, the essential opportunities for creativity have gone out of the window.

When i left school in 73, if you had a job in a bank, or school teacher. YOU HAD DONE WELL....wouldn't touch either job now with a barge pole.....how things have changed.. and not for the better unfortunately

I'm not a teacher but I think the teaching profession as a whole should be given more respect. I also think that teachers should only be asked to teach subjects they have knowledge of. I have 2 relatives who went into the profession and both were asked to take lessons in subjects in which they had no qualifications. How could that be good for them or especially for their pupils ? Both have now left the profession which is a waste of the time and money spent earning a qualification.
When we read of classroom problems with unruly pupils, lack of parental support and teacher support it seems to be that a teacher's job in some schools is more about crowd control than teaching and I think many new, young teachers who have never experienced the world outside of education are just unprepared and even unsuitable for the classroom.

One of my d’s left after two years as a TA , two year pgtc, eight years teaching. She still enjoyed the actual teaching but her during her second pregnancy, she and other pregnant teachers were told by the manager “we won’t be looking favourably at requests to job share”. Yes they knew their legal position but since the school became an academy, the good head was squeezed out and the culture changed.
My d set up a small business so her education experience and skills aren’t lost but she and many like her are a loss to teaching

Yes, I'm not surprised that around 10% leave after their first year, Chardy, because having employed such teachers myself, I've listened to their stories. I think conversations probably need to be had around the type of mentoring programmes offered to all new teachers, because if we could at least halve the figure of leavers after their first year, then that would be a start.

In my experience teachers who left after their first year told me,
- that they didn't feel supported in their first 12 months for whatever reason (mainly due to time constraints)
- that they found it difficult to prioritise their own well-being and weren't far off burning themselves out
- that there was no emotional support within the school's culture
- that they were not confident enough to ask for emotional support in order to address the challenging aspects of the job
- that they felt isolated being alone in the classroom after years of busy interactive learning at college
- that they were unclear about the direction they should take to make progress through the school

Basically that they weren't cut out to teach in such an environment, not that they weren't cut out for teaching per se. It often takes 12 months to come to that conclusion because many persevere during that time in order to complete their year.

Children not toilet trained has been brought up many times on GN.

I can only add to what some others have said.

45 or so years ago, children had to be toilet trained or they couldn’t attend the council run nursery school.

This was at 3 years old, not school starting age.

Yes, there would be occasional ‘accidents’, but it worked fine.

There didn’t seem to be the issues (excuses?) back then why nappies should be needed.

I suspect one of the main reasons was fewer mums worked back then, and being a stay-at-home mum was more conducive to getting the child trained.

MartavTaurus

^After 1 year: 10-11% leave^
Maybe because not everyone is cut out to be a teacher. They give it a go, but if it's not for them I don't think that figure is too shocking.

They've either done a PGCE at uni (many weeks of school practice and passed) and been a qualified teacher for a year in school, or they've trained in a school for a year as an unqualified trainee and then been a qualified teacher for a year in school.

Most people realise they're not cut out for teaching after a couple of months, not 2 years.

These are people with qualifications that are now wasted! But you're not surprised.

Rosie51
If you implemented that condition on them starting school what are you going to do with those who can't comply for whatever reason, whether that be lazy parenting or late development? Will the state not comply with its statutory duties of education, will it lose the right to prosecute parents for non attendance? Will the school be issuing authorised absence forms so parents can't be fined?

You raise some good points there. I’m not sure I see a way round it. I don’t think delaying the school start will solve the problem, so what can be done?

The (very few) children I taught years ago in EYFS who were not toilet trained came with apologies from parents.

The ones I could have attributed to lazy parenting were those children who, once required to go on a regular basis-e.g. playtime, lunch time etc. seemed to be trained after a couple of weeks in school.
I don’t recollect children starting school not trained, though there were often accidents in the first few weeks.

I’m not saying we never helped the children change, but there was the expectation that children could put in their own socks, pants and other replacement clothes. For children who soiled themselves, we used to call the parents.

More recently those who have reasons for not being toilet trained have documentation of that set up from pre-school, or nursery with what they have tried, or reasons from the parents themselves.
That now even includes the need for us to be trained to deal with stoma pouches.

Schools should be made aware of what the cause of the problem is. There have been some reasons mentioned on here already. Perhaps parents could say what has been tried, or what support has been sought to address the toilet training issue.

I don’t think delaying the school start will solve the problem, but what can be done?
If children need support to change, safeguarding requires 2 adults. How can schools finance that?

Quercus

Anyone who thinks the only children who start school wearing nappies are those with specific medical needs is sadly mistaken. There is a lot of lazy and inadequate parenting out there.

Do we have any figures for this sort of accusation? I do feel concerned for truth when we get "it's the other guy" accusations. Maybe that's true but unless we have some research how can we begin to find a way to turn it around.

Silvershadow

Most parents can’t wait for their kids to start school. If it was spelled out to them, as it used to be, a condition of them starting is that they are out of nappies I bet they’d soon all be toilet trained. No question.

I always preferred school holidays to term time, but then I prefer freedom and spontaneity to fixed routine although I recognise routine is needed.

If you implemented that condition on them starting school what are you going to do with those who can't comply for whatever reason, whether that be lazy parenting or late development? Will the state not comply with its statutory duties of education, will it lose the right to prosecute parents for non attendance? Will the school be issuing authorised absence forms so parents can't be fined?