Humpty Dumpty said, `When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

When the word “rehabilitation” is used concerning people undergoing prison sentences it reminds me of Humpty in Through the Looking Glass. For me, education and training (or learning and development if you prefer) are keys to rehabilitation for offenders. I recall once watching a video of a facilitator at the Offenders Aid Rehabilitation Society here in Adelaide, South Australia, where I live. He was a former armed robber and made the very strong point that most offenders don’t need REhabilitation, they need HABilitation because they have never been properly socialised. In my experience he is absolutely correct.

Educators in prisons are doing more for crime prevention than a squadrons of theorists, politicians, police forces and what have you.

I’m now working with people who are in informal education and whose aim is to secure employment. I can fully concur with Monet2u’s description now. It’s an amazingly liberating feeling to be able to see people really learning and not merely trying to keep their eyes open as the Death by PowerPoint parade passes by.

Not just in the UK Ian. In Australia, despite some years of effort by governments (mainly Labor) to get people to realise the value of vocational education there is still an intellectual snobbishness about it. No matter that someone with a vocational qualification can be making much more money than a new (i.e. junior) professional, that Oxbridge hangover is still there. From the little I know of the total education system in Germany and I think Holland, there seems to be a more balanced view about both academic and vocational aspects of education. The Anglo-Saxon view is not favoured.

So while that snobbishness exists we’ll see references to “dead-end” courses.

I don’t know what to do with 26 points. Even if they are mapped on to the alphabet.

From a teaching point of view, short-term memory can supposedly hold seven items, + or – 2 (and that is stretching it– see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Magical_Number_Seven,_Plus_or_Minus_Two )

But of course, we can handle more if it is “chunked”. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chunking_%28psychology%29) That means grouping and organising, in a hierarchy or network. (http://recentreflection.blogspot.com/2010/12/on-making-learning-more-difficult-by.html)

Being firm and consistent with learners is definately the way to go if you want to retain respect and give yourself a chance of hitting your learning outcomes. In my experience humour cannot be underestimated as a tool for developing a rapport with learners in and out of the classroom. Much of teaching is based on the teacher’s ability to create and maintain good relationships with learners. In this context, good relationships are defined by mutual respect and understanding as well as good-natured humour. The use of this kind of humour can provide a common informal dialogue between teacher and student, which can help ease tensions and make the learning process enjoyable as well as productive for both parties.

A note of caution: When engaging with learners, humour should not be directed at individuals or be offensive in any way. Light-hearted and playful are the key words here.

Do you have any funny classroom stories?

@Sharon(PCET Boss) – thanks for responding

On several occasions, lately, when working with teachers and administrators at independent schools, I’ve been asked, “What is the purpose of education?” It’s not a question that comes out of public school conversations very often. We already know what education is for. The government told us.
Education is about:
■Covering all the standards
■Improving performance on government tests
■Meeting AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress)
■Producing a competitive workforce
We don’t even ask any more — and we’re still not asking that question.

Now I generalise when comparing different types of schools, and to be sure, independent schools are also governed by testing, as many of their students attend so that they can get into a good university. But, again, there is a palpable sense of confidence in the conversations I witness when away from public schools — a willingness to ask tough questions.

I’ve had a ready answer to the question.

“The purpose of education is to appropriately prepare our children for their future.”

There are some implied, but essential questions in that answer:
■What will their future hold? What will they need to know?
■What are appropriate method, materials, environment, activity?
■Who are these children? What is their frame of reference?

Today, I have a new answer. My old one is still good. I’ll continue to use it. But if you ask me, “What is the purpose of education?” today, I’ll say,

The purpose of education is to make the world a better place!“

Preparing students based on standards, so that they can pass government tests (to make politicians look successful), carries expectations. Students should listen, study, learn, and assure gain. If they do that, they’re doing what they are supposed to do. We’re happy about it. They’re happy about it. Let’s go home.

But, when there is a mission, where teachers and students are equal partners in achieving new learning — and they both realise that it is not simply about new knowledge, but more importantly it is about new potentials, then we’re not just producing cogs for an industrial and societal machine. We all becoming better and more inventive builders of the future.

Visit Jamie’s blog located at http://www.jamieportman.com

In response to the Wolf Report on Vocational Education in March 2011;

“Mr Gove said Prof Wolf’s report was “brilliant and ground-breaking”. He immediately accepted four recommendations: [of which the first was:]

To allow qualified further education lecturers to teach in school classrooms on the same basis as qualified school teachers.”

Go here for the full press release