Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
I think that's rather simplistic. Given that the behaviour exhibited by this boy is unlikely to have been a sudden development, but more likely part of a pattern well known to the teachers over many years, I would have thought the teachers had already spent a long time watching taxpayers' money going down the drain on his account, and had already failed to derive job satisfaction out of him. In fact, I expect only sheer professionalism helped them continue to give him his education, when by all other measures there was little point.
As I don't know the lad this is somewhat speculative on my part, you understand, but it is a contrary view to your own, no less speculative scenario.  |
You have to speculate to obfuscate as the old saying goes.
OK, we're both speculating - you more than me though
- given you believe, because this lad breaks da rules with his modest trainers he's got a long history of deviant behaviour and that the teachers, of whom we know nothing, have persevered through sheer professionalism etc. That's more speculating than George Soros does!
But do you take my point that to stop (or at least discourage) a child who you've been teaching for years from taking an exam is to remove any semblance of job satisfaction that could have been had. I'd be gutted to ditch a project at the last hurdle and I would have thought - and hoped - teachers shared that point of view. Unless they only do the job for those long summer holidays (Coggy, FYI, just my little wind up!
).