Jade O’Brien was a stock broker (equity sales) for over 7 years. She then retrained as a teacher and has taught in both the state sector and the private sector in the UK.
Jade used to pitch me stock ideas and speak about the investment world. I was very curious on why she decided to change careers to become a teacher.
We chat about what drove Jade to the world of finance. What she viewed as the pros and cons, and what it is like as a woman in a male dominated world and advice she has.
Jade outlines her experience of finance which has many positives as well as challenges, and what might have changed over the decade.
(Ben) So what would you say to women wanting to make it in the city or in financial services?
Do it. Give it a go. I mean, I'm speaking for myself here and I have read that the imposter syndrome feeling is very common within women in finance. But then again, I think, well maybe that imposter syndrome is for everyone in finance but men can hide it better. So I would say do it. Everybody feels insecure and doesn't really know what's going on at times. To have the confidence to go for it and also to not necessarily feel like you need to follow my path of giving up finance and becoming a teacher. I don't think that's something you need to do if you are genuinely interested in finance and you want to get to the top. I think it's definitely possible.
We discuss the factors that made Jade change her jobs. How we might think about death and how she found teacher training.
We chat on how we might “value” teaching and why it’s hard to rate teachers. Why some people ask for more homework, and others ask for less homework and how both views can have merit.
We address:
The importance of mentors
the funding situation in UK state supported schools
A glimpse of teacher training
Differences between state and private schools in the UK
Why she thinks teacher quality in both state and private settings are similar
Why teaching class can feel private
Views on SEN (special education) policy
Streaming (where it might work, where it might fail and why she changed her mind)
What Jade’s perfect class size is, and why
Her views on uniforms
School start times
School food
Exercise
The importance of gratitude
This was an amazing long form conversation addressing many of the debates within education today.
Listen below (or wherever you listen to pods) or on video (above or on YouTube) and the transcript is below.
PODCAST INFO
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/3gJTSuo
Spotify: https://sptfy.com/benyeoh
Anchor: https://anchor.fm/benjamin-yeoh
Transcript, Ben Yeoh and Jade O’Brien in conversation
(Note only lightly edited)
Ben
Hey everyone. I'm super excited to be speaking to Jade O'Brien. Jade was in Asian equity sales or stockbroking for many years before retraining as a teacher. Jade, welcome.
Jade Thank you.
Ben (00:17):
So you worked for over seven years in equity sales for investment banks where you pitched and discussed investment ideas for Asian companies to asset managers like myself. You then retrained as a teacher and have been teaching at London Primary Schools. I'd love to know what influenced your decision, perhaps first of all, to go into financial services and then the pivot into retraining as a teacher.
Jade (00:44):
Yeah, sure. I think originally to go into financial services, essentially it was money driven. It wasn't any particular interest in finance or the financial markets. I'm sure that is an interest for a lot of people but it did not drive me. It was more, “What job can I get that I can get paid very well for as quick as I can for?” which I don't mind putting in a lot of effort. I didn't mind back then putting in a lot of hours. I had been at Oxford where I think everyone was hugely driven and I felt like I needed to prove myself and I was judging myself on how much I was able to earn as quickly as I could. So I think that was the main reason why I went into it. Also, I really liked the structure. I was I am still quite institutionalized that I'd been at school and you kind of got those A grades at school and you were doing the tests, and then you went up a year and then you went to university, and then it suddenly felt like there was just this. The whole world was open to you which a lot of people embrace and love. For me, that was terrifying. I wanted to stay on a path and I wanted to be on that path and go as quickly down that path as I could and to the best of my ability.
Ben (02:28):
So it wasn't so much a treadmill, or it was a sort of a treadmill but one which felt very comfortable?
Jade (02:33):
Yeah. So even though it seemed like it was a hard route being an analyst in an investment bank, to me, it was actually an easy route because I had all the credentials to get there. There was this really well-trodden path of you're an analyst, then you become an associate, then you become a vice president, then you become an MD. I felt like it was a set structure for me to follow which made me feel quite comfortable and I didn't mind working hard for that. I knew it would be hard work, but that wasn't something I was scared of. What I was scared of was actually not having structure, not having a path, and not feeling like every day was moving me forward.
Ben (03:27):
So that's 12 to 14 hour days and I guess it was an easy decision for you to make then and you didn't feel any qualms about it. It was like, "Oh, this is a next comfortable step. Can work really hard, then I work really hard and I should get rewarded."
Jade (03:41):
Yeah. I felt like I was monetarily rewarded for working hard. I'd be waking up at about 5:00 AM every morning and I would leave the office around 6:00 PM, but then after that I would frequently have client dinners and various other things I'd have to be doing afterwards on the client side. Or if I was on a business trip as I frequently would, I'd be traveling in the evenings or flying, so...
Ben (04:18):
And traveling on weekends and all of that. I always say that they think traveling for an investment bank seems really glamorous, but it really isn't. You either see a conference room, hotels-- I was in Barcelona recently. I saw nothing of Barcelona except the conference. So it feels doubly bad. But what then changed in your thinking around financial services for seven/ eight years and then wanting to retrain? Did something change or what happened?
Jade (04:48):
I never really enjoyed the finance side of my job because ultimately as I mentioned before, I didn't have a deep interest in the markets. I always felt really jealous of my colleagues that were obsessed with the stock market. They really wanted to talk about the next big thing whereas for me, it was more around the sales side and the client acquisition side that actually interested me more. I realized I got to a point in my career-- got to vice president, and I realized that actually to progress further in my career and get to MD and then even further than that head of a region, I felt like it would take an exponential amount of effort to get there when I didn't have a fundamental drive and interest in financial markets because up until then, I was able to just do the background reading and put in so much effort around everything else that it didn't really matter as long as I knew what was going on. Whereas I needed to really have an interest and really put the extra hours in.
I wasn't really willing to do that. So it was a few things. I think that was a sort of slow burn for me over the course of seven years until the eventual realization. Another catalyst was also my mom died and the company I was working for was actually-- they were very good. They allowed me to work from the Hong Kong office so I could be closer to my mom in her last few weeks in Hong Kong. I really appreciated that. But it also made me realize-- She was always really proud of me and proud of how much she felt I'd achieved in my career and whatever. But I knew ultimately she really wanted me to be happy. I think I was to a certain extent, but I think I just realized I didn't want to wake up every day and not enjoy what I was doing and it got to a point where the job wasn't exciting to me anymore. All the points that I really enjoyed like meeting new clients, calling people up, going to new places no longer had the same appeal to me. I'd been there and I'd done that. I realized I wanted to wake up every morning and be really interested in what I was doing and feel like I was making a difference as well.
Ben (07:43):
So a combination of slow burn or not fully enjoying financial markets and a kind of pivot with the family death; having to reassess. I think that's one of the things that I do really interested in markets. I’m really fascinated by companies as well as so many other things like theater and all of that which keeps me in the job. I understand also the client relationship part is actually remarkably important that particularly on the investment banking side, servicing clients, giving them the research they want and things, even if you don't deeply understand markets or whatever. As long as you're giving clients what they need, they can take you so far. In fact, probably the first 10 years of a career can easily be built on really good client service. We met at an investment conference. I think it was a really busy one and you sat at a table where there was one spare seat and there were virtually no other spare seats. So it was one of those serendipitous moments.
I judged that conference like most others I go to was 70% male which seems typical to me. I was wondering, did you feel the world of finance was welcoming to you as a woman? Obviously you're not as much of an outsider as in a lot of Oxbridge elites things there and you understood the system and the process. I guess I hear stories on both sides. Some women don't feel that there's much of a difference. It's a kind of work hard, play hard type of thing where some women do find it as unfriendly and embarrassed aspects. I'd be interested which side of that fence you fall on?
Jade (09:24):
I would say it's a mix for me. You're definitely outnumbered working in finance and I would consider myself quite a girl’s girl; most of my friends are female. I think I would have a lot more in common with a lot of people there if there were more females which obviously makes your job and your daily life more enjoyable if you're surrounded by people you have things in common with. I would say as a junior, I was welcomed into finance. I think also predominantly because I worked in sales and to be a young female in sales that's willing to work hard, I don't think it was that difficult actually being a woman on the trading floor. Actually, specifically within stockbroking, if I looked around the trading floor there were lots of younger females or more junior females I should say. But I think as my time went, the ranks do thin very quickly. When women have families, I think the retention is very difficult within investment banks because of the hours and relative inflexibility within that role. So I think I felt less welcome as I became more senior because I felt there also the path ended for me. There were fewer role models for me within the financial world.
Ben (11:05):
Yeah. And I guess that's reflected in legal accounting, private equity. A lot of the structured-- I guess they're hierarchical, but it's really difficult for them to retain even though the messaging, I think from all of those industries is that they would like to. The structure doesn't make it easy. It always helps, I think, when you have mentors or people who've done it and the generation of women who've done it. The stories I hear often that they had to make some sort of sacrifices to do that. That's not necessarily the message you want to hear; that you will have to sacrifice X, Y, and Z which you might not want to, to reach those MD and above levels as opposed to men who I think in general, at least in those industries, don't seem to have had to sacrifice as much or at least in the same type of way.
Jade (11:55):
Yeah. I mean, I would also say that this was 10 years ago when I first joined finance. I do following the news and watching the Me Too movement unroll. Since then, we've had a global pandemic. I hope that females within finance feel differently. I get the impression that I think it is quite a different world now and I definitely felt while I was there that the world of finance was changing. There were so many parts of it that were changing. For example, the client relationships I had and how we were expected to be with our clients, how much we were allowed to spend on our clients, how much our clients were allowed to accept from us in terms of dinners and lunches. And that changes how you do sales. But also, I think the world in how women were viewed was also changing quite quickly while I was working there.
Ben (13:04):
Do you think hybrid or work from home is going to be more female friendly? At first, I thought it really was because you could balance family commitments and things. Then I noted that over pandemic a lot of domestic duties still seem to fall on women's shoulders more than men, even when both were at home for various reasons; structural or others. But it's only anecdotal and it does seem to have helped, but maybe not as much as perhaps people had wished for. Also, I don't think we've settled down into how that balance is going to be. A lot of companies are still trying to say, "Oh, are we back to the office? Are we remote? Are we hybrid?" for that. Do you have an impression it's going to help? Do you think it would?
Jade (13:52):
I'm not sure because I feel-- I mean, as you sort of touched on that actually the domestic expectation on women was still the same. So it just means that women are expected to do two jobs rather than one. Rather than actually try and juggle one job, they're expected to juggle two. I'm not sure because I haven't really been in that situation so I couldn't really comment. When I was working in finance I was largely living on my own.
Ben (14:32):
Fair enough. So what would you say to women wanting to make it in the city or in financial services? Any parting thoughts for them?
Jade (14:41):
Do it. Give it a go. I mean, I'm speaking for myself here and I have read that the imposter syndrome feeling is very common within women in finance. But then again, I think, well maybe that imposter syndrome is for everyone in finance but men can hide it better. So I would say do it. Everybody feels insecure and doesn't really know what's going on at times. To have the confidence to go for it and also to not necessarily feel like you need to follow my path of giving up finance and becoming a teacher. I don't think that's something you need to do if you are genuinely interested in finance and you want to get to the top. I think it's definitely possible.
Ben (15:39):
Yeah, for sure. It's funny, I don't feel any imposter syndrome around markets or investment. But as you know, I perform and do theater stuff and I often feel like-- For instance, I always say that I'm not a performer yet later on this month, if this is January, 2023, I'm going to be getting up and performing and that definitely doesn't feel right. So I think you are correct that everyone has insecurities around something. I guess you mentioned that if financial services are really for you, you should go for it. Do you think there's anything really underrated or people misunderstand around what stock breaking or equity sales might be like that you would sort of say, "Oh, this was really good or misunderstood?"
Jade (16:19):
It's nothing like The Wolf of Wall Street, I will say that, or in fact I read Liar's Poker before I became a stockbroker and it's nothing like Liar's Poker either. It's not the eighties anymore.
Ben (16:35):
Things have moved on.
Jade (16:36):
Things have definitely moved on since then. I think that is probably a huge misconception. As soon as I tell anyone I was a stockbroker, Wolf of Wall Street will always be the first question they ask me of, "Is it the same or is it similar or what was similar about it?"
Ben (16:56):
That's fair enough. I find it's the same. Actually in both my hats, I can't describe to non-theater people what really working on a play is or backstage or how it is. For my theater friends, they can never really understand the city or say, "Well, I help invest people's pensions." And people are like, "Well, what does that really mean? How does that work?" It is one of those mysterious things until you try it out.
Jade (17:19):
I think-- although going back to your original question of what I think is underrated within finance, I would say that it is a very diverse mix of people. It's very culturally diverse and I think having a job in finance-- specifically within the stock market is actually... Finance is sort of that common language that you could travel to the big financial centers and you could get a job there and you could work there and you can experience life. A lot of people that worked in finance have worked in lots of different large cities which is a huge perk of that job. I don't think you could say the same for many other roles. Even if you think about law, you are still quite specific to a region. Even teaching or medicine, I would still have to retrain to a certain point. I think that's quite underrated within finance; to be able to have that opportunity.
Ben (18:27):
Yeah. I never thought about that and I think that's really good observation. I think of myself whether on the asset management side or on the stockbroking side and in any of the major cities, even maybe Tokyo, although there'd be a language issue. But certainly Hong Kong, India, Paris, New York, San Francisco, Boston, London, you could do all of those. English is probably the lingua franca and then numbers, the stock market, and that type of thing. So it is very transferrable. That makes me think of another thing which is although I guess all industries have a level of social politics because we are human and social creatures, there is a reasonable correlation between working really hard and doing really well in the sense of that it is probably more meritocratic than some other industries I've looked at where obviously connections and network are always the thing and I think they're thing in all human walks in life. But I see people who haven't come into the city with connection who work really hard and do well. I think that's attractive to some people as well.
Jade (19:37):
Yeah, I think it's quite performance based which is nice. I mean, if I'm comparing it to my job in teaching, if I really wanted to excel as a teacher, I would be hard pressed to really find good performance indicators to show somebody that I was an excellent teacher versus a good teacher. Whereas I think working as a stockbroker, I could very easily find those KPIs to show to my boss or to show to anyone.
Ben (20:09):
Can you even tell the difference between a good teacher and an average teacher looking in on the outside? So your class could probably tell and maybe parents of your class might be able to tell. Excellent to good is also quite an interesting comparison, but good versus average; is that hard?
Jade (20:30):
Hard to tell for a teacher. It depends because it depends on what you class as a good teacher.
Ben (20:41):
Yeah, what do you value?
Jade (20:42):
Yeah, like what do you value in a teacher? Is it the connection they have with their class? Is it how much their class loves them? Is it the Maths results you're getting? Is it how creative their English work is? Is it how happy they are? Is it how well you cater for the diverse needs of the class? Maybe you are really good at supporting the students that need more support and maybe have dyslexia and that, but maybe you are not excelling the highest 2% or 10% of your class. Yeah, it really depends then, what about your relationship with the parents? How do the parents then see you? I don't think it necessarily correlates to how much the class likes you or the results you're getting as a teacher. That could just be your sales pitch to the parents and your outward interactions.
Ben (21:47):
There's lots of things there that you could do city speak almost optimized for. So grades, pupil happiness, those who need extra support, those who are in the top 2%. I got the impression though that you're saying that you can't quite optimize for everything; that there was a trade off with the resources that teachers have.
Jade (22:08):
Absolutely. I mean, even to the point where-- Also, I think sometimes I'm asked contradicting things. So for example, people have different parents and teachers in schools have different views on homework. So on one side a parent asking me for more homework for their child, and on the other end another parent saying, "You give them too much homework, I want them to be able to play." Both are really quite reasonable views. To be an excellent teacher I guess it would be managing that conversation with the parents. But ultimately, there's not one view or one thing that I could do that would make both parents a hundred percent happy
Ben (22:58):
They maybe end up both a hundred percent unhappy; probably in the middle. I flip-flop actually. So I used to think homework was okay or I never had a problem with it. I now think on average-- although there's a lot of exceptions that it's probably overrated for most people. Or at least homework how it's done in this country for things as opposed to long-term projects or something like that which would be a form of homework. But I would prefer something like rather than a little bit of rote something every night, I would say, “Well, over half term compose a long poem like Beowulf or something;” some ongoing project I would prefer but that's something more recent.
So you retrained as a teacher-- so a year training, although this was over the pandemic so it was a little bit unusual and probably really tricky. But in general do you think teacher training is good? How is the provision? What's it like? Or I guess this is a special circumstance so you can only speak from your point of view. I guess this because there's a couple of schools that thought of this. You always hear like, "Oh, there isn't enough investment in teachers or the training isn't that adequate for that type of thing" which is probably the predominant story that I hear. But I hear some other things so I'd be interested. What was it like for you and then going into the state system after that?
Jade (24:28):
I would say-- because I did my PGC during Covid so I actually only got about half of it done before Covid hit. Then it was mainly online learning. But even then, I have to say the university that I was at didn't really give a proper provision for that book learning side. Essentially they gave us a reading list which is just not the same as being in class and watching teachers have to juggle the class and try and create their lesson plans and things like that. So the teacher training, a lot of it is of a practical element. I would say at least half of it is actually sitting in a classroom observing, and then over the course of-- You'll be assigned a school or you'll be assigned a few different schools over the course of your PGC. But I was actually only assigned two schools because we only managed to get through half of it. The structure is that you would observe your class teacher and then towards the end of your six week placement, by the final week, you are essentially teaching 90% of the lessons. The teacher is basically your mentor and would be giving you feedback and so you can sort of watch best practice. So it really depends on the class teacher that you get, that you are learning from because a huge amount of your time and your learning is coming from that one teacher.
Ben (26:08):
So it's like a mentor apprenticeship type of model?
Jade (26:11):
Yeah, correct. In my instance anyway, the teacher that I was with was really organized. She was great. I'm really appreciative of her allowing me to be in her class. It's a really personal experience to let somebody into your classroom actually because you give a lot of yourself as a teacher. Every day you need to deal with a lot of tricky circumstances and it is just very personal. You have a very personal relationship with your students and you are sometimes teaching on the fly, answering questions on the fly, and learning yourself as you're teaching new topics. That it is quite personal having someone in the classroom with you all the time. But I did only really see one teacher teaching so I would've loved to-- I think I would be a much more rounded teacher if I was able to observe more classes. I did try and make the effort when I became a class teacher after that to try and observe other teachers teaching, but it's really difficult to find that time.
Ben (27:24):
And I guess it's not the same. It's like being able to apprentice with other mentors or not even mentors; it's the same within now. I mean, I'm very experienced and done various things, but I still learn from other really experienced people different ways of doing things, different ways of handling things which just all add to it. But when you are full-time teaching, the opportunity to do that I guess is much more limited.
Jade (27:45):
Yeah. It's also quite a lot of pressure to ask a teacher to observe their lesson because they feel like they need to perform a perfect lesson and to have really prepped and made sure that everything has been organized beforehand rather than realizing halfway through the lesson, "Oh no, I forgot this. Can you go and get it from the resource room?" Or something like that. Just really little things like that I think they'd be a bit self-conscious that they'd forgotten which is really common as a teacher because you're teaching all day every day. Your prep time is not very long at all. A lot of the classes you suddenly realize actually, "Oh that would be a really good resource to use. Or actually, you know what? The class isn't really following this line of lesson. I'm going to change tact and try and teach in a slightly different way because the class is just not really gelling with this method." So you do change lesson plans quite a bit even on the fly. Not because you're disorganized, just because that is the nature of being a teacher. You need to respond to your class.
Ben (28:56):
Reminds me of the aphorism, "Expect the unexpected" or I guess there's something about going into battle or plans when they meet reality. So actually the so-called perfect lesson doesn't exist. The perfect lesson is the one where the unexpected happens and you can see how people deal and react to it because children haven't read the teaching textbooks at least about how to be taught. How did you feel about the resources within the state system? So I guess here in Britain or I guess particularly in England, the predominant narrative is that state systems are underfunded and teachers are somewhat overwhelmed. But when I look more broadly, there seem to be the case in quite a lot of educational systems that actually teachers are generally overwhelmed and underfunded although that might be the structural issue about education is costly and expensive and time resource and is broadly undervalued for various reasons. Perhaps one of the reasons being that people go into it for things other than money. So the system somewhat takes advantage of that which I think is true of nursing and actually other female led professions because it's the nurturing, caring element of it. But as you started in the state system and now have had a little bit in the private system, I'd be interested maybe on whether you feel the state system is under-resourced and your experience of it.
Jade (30:28):
Yeah. So I would caveat that I've only worked at one state school and I've observed another state school quite extensively as well. Again, I experienced the private system personally; that's how I was educated in the UK and I'm experiencing it also this one school. This is on what I have seen from quite a small number of schools. But I would say that the state system does seem quite underfunded and for everything I've read as well as what I've experienced, it does align. For example, just trying to get resources for lessons that I would consider more exciting to do that would really only be a few extra pounds to spend. The school's budget is so tight that...
We're learning about living things for example, and buying seeds and soil and plastic pots. I've done that and not been reimbursed by the school because it hadn't been okayed beforehand because the school didn't have resources and funding for that. So it really was only a few pounds and it was really, really difficult to get anything extra and above what we already had. But I would say that we did have quite a few resources within the school to use. You have to be quite creative on your lessons that you come up with and looking in the store cupboards seeing what you can use. There is a lot there, but I definitely would say the schools are underfunded. Also, in terms of cover. So teaching cover, if you are ill, your colleagues have to cover for you. They're very reticent to bring in extra support staff because it's so expensive. I would say those are probably the biggest issues around the funding in state schools.
Ben (32:46):
So the stories we hear of teachers having to buy pens and pencils or even notebooks for children in some schools is kind of unsurprising to you?
Jade (32:56):
That's not very surprising to me at all.
Ben (32:58):
Obviously you got seeds and soil; not quite the same, but of a similar sort of adjacent thing. I guess you can contrast that to financial services where if you don't okay something you might get a slap on the wrist and they'll okay and say, "Next time make sure you do." Or if you will go for something which isn't necessarily in budget or something which is not even outside the scope of thing, you just write a little investment case or an email to someone and they go, "Well that makes sense" and they'd authorize the money which obviously just does not seem possible within the state system. Do you think there's a deficit in-- Well, I guess the accountancy term is kind of human capital, human resources; so you say like people cover. But you mentioned it a little bit in the training. Do you think it would benefit from somehow more money spent on training or time for training or giving teachers more time, or is that just not practical because of the way it has to be taught and because of the whole-- I mean, I guess there's a huge supply deficit or over demand. I feel like if teachers had doubled the amount of time available, they would fill all of that time easily. Yet also you mentioned that more training, more apprenticeship and things would also help. So I don't know how much money solves that or whether you would have a thought.
Jade (34:22):
Money would certainly make everything easier. In terms of the training, I think actually recently-- So my cohort was the last cohort to do a one year PGC. When you do your one year PGC, you are then a NQT; so a newly qualified teacher for a year. Your school needs to sign up to that and agree to doing quite heavy observations of you and finding the time... Senior members of staff need to find the time to observe you and give you feedback on your teaching. That's for a year which has now been extended to two years which I'm sure also costs. I'm not sure who exactly is footing the bill, whether it's the school or the government. But that obviously does cost more because there's a lot more time needed from senior staff to be going in and doing that training and feedback and teaching.
I have to say after a year PGC-- I mean, bearing in mind I only got half of it because of Covid. But I didn't feel prepared to stand in front of a class of 30 kids and teach them everything from obviously English, Maths, Geography, History, Spanish-- I don't speak Spanish--, Music-- I hadn't played an instrument since I was about eight--, P.E, DT-- DT without resources which was interesting--, Science. I didn't feel prepared for that. And you have to come up with your own lesson plans. The UK system doesn't have-- It has a national curriculum but the national curriculum is so broad that you can essentially-- especially within the primary sector-- that you can really come up with your own lesson plans within... I mean, the national curriculum for science I think is only about a page long for each year group within primary school. So yeah, that was quite a daunting task when I first started and I was working until the school closed every day and then working at home to be researching and coming up with lesson plans and content and things.
Ben (36:55):
That feels more daunting and ongoing daunting than equity sales. It sounds like you're working similar hours, although hopefully, more contentedness. That strikes me as you could do research on, “Why one should invest in an Asian company?” to maybe even some experience fund managers easier than it was to teach everything that a seven year old or eight year old might want to know after a year. I'm very impressed.
Jade (37:27):
Well, at least most asset managers politely listen to you when you do your pitch. A class of 38 year olds do not listen politely if your pitch is not interesting.
Ben (37:38):
You know after three minutes or five minutes where the fund manager will just be like, "Nope, no votes this month." Well, I guess you get the direct feedback. I have an interest in special education needs or SEN although I really dislike the term actually now for various reasons. Those are the legal labels. It seems to me that schools particularly in the state system but actually overall or at least in the mainstream, seem pretty underfunded and that SEN in particular is underfunded. I now view looking at children or even the whole world that there's a spectrum or range so that you might be officially labeled SEN of some sort and that could be autism or some disability or dyslexia. Then there might be a whole other class of pupils who might not get a label, but a disadvantage in other ways like from a disrupted family or they've had a death in the family or they're just simply really poor.
So I know in the British system for instance, we look at whether you're on free school meals or not because it's known that if you're really poor you're going to come with all of these disadvantages and then there's other stuff in the middle and there could be all sorts of issues. I'd be interested-- I guess it riffs on what we were saying earlier. Do you think it's primarily or at least co primarily a money or funding issue? So money will definitely help, we can see that. But are there other ways that maybe we should be thinking around children who have disadvantage of needs or any sort or even because you can make the claim that if you're particularly in the top 1% or top 2% that their needs are not getting met sometimes depending on the teaching. I can see that in some children in this day. They just get really bored and they get disruptive, but it's because they're bored on the other side so these are kind of the tradeoff. I guess if there was a magic answer we would've heard it and it wouldn't have been such a debated question. But I'd be interested if you had a view or thought on that.
Jade (39:44):
Yeah. So there's quite a few things within that that I have opinions on. I think the whole SEN list and putting children on a list like that there's been a much greater move to make sure that list is dynamic because essentially SEN is Special Educational Needs. So children that have English as a second language would be on that list because it means they're not accessing the curriculum that the teacher can teach them in a class of... When I stand up and I teach 30 children, which children can access the curriculum of what I'm teaching and which children can't. Obviously if you can't speak English, it's difficult to access the curriculum. So they would have special education needs and things I would have to do for them to help them access those lessons.
So whether that be a vocab list or when I prepare all my presentations, I need to make sure that everything with writing has pictures of what those things are; having a visual timetable so that child knows what's going on. But on the other hand because it is quite a dynamic list, when that child then masters English, they're taken off that list. I think it's really important that that list is dynamic because it means you can't be lazy about these types of things. You need to make sure you're constantly assessing and making sure that those special needs are met. I think a child needs to be assessed properly for that. As a teacher, like I said, there are so many topics, so many subjects that I'm teaching and I have up to 30 children in a class. My training has not been around special education needs. There are so many special education needs. You could be an EAL; an English as a Second Language specialist, you could be an autism specialist, you could be a speech and language specialist. I know the waiting lists for children to be-- Children need to be assessed to then be able to give them specialized things and to teach them in specific ways that will specifically help them.
Trying to get my class assessed within a state system was quite difficult because the waiting lists were so long for them to see a specialist. The system is once they've seen a specialist, then the specialist will give the teacher and the parents’ specific advice. Then potentially after a few more rounds-- I'm sure you've gone through this as well-- the school can then request extra funding. A lot of the time if their needs are very specialists, that funding would cover an extra member of staff or some hours of an extra member of staff to be able to sit with that child or with a small group of children as a teaching assistant or to be a teaching assistant within the class to make sure that… For example, to break down. If I give a multi-step instruction to be sitting there with that child and give the instructions one at a time; one instruction at a time or to be doing speaking for writing. If they have real trouble with writing they can say what they think the answer is or their story and then the TA will be able to scribe for them and then they will have that written down so it is still their work. Then they will have some extra time to then copy what the teaching system has written down into their books. But that's obviously not possible for me to do as a teacher being at the front of the class and trying to teach 30 children.
Ben (44:09):
Sure. And reflections on, I guess the private system versus the state system obviously is much better funded and so money as we've already said, obviously really helps. I guess there's some arguments that people say, "Oh, we should just all be comprehensive and better funded” which is maybe ideal, but doesn't seem likely, at least in Britain. And then others say, "Well, there's choice and the private system is funding itself. There might be a profit motive that doesn't necessarily need to be bad." I don't know if any reflections. Both of us obviously went through a private system and I've been around them both and they sort of have pros and cons or at least differences in each. But I'd be interested if you had any reflections.
Jade (44:59):
Yeah. I had a misconception before I started teaching in state schools that I thought the quality of teaching in private schools was better. Having taught in a state school and been really interacting with the staff and observing lessons and then working in the private system, I think the quality of teaching is the same actually. The quality of staff you get I think is the same because essentially, I think there's a misconception on private school teacher’s salary. It's basically the same as a state school salary. So I think that also means that you get a similar quality of staff body. It's not that the best teachers decide they want to teach in the private system because they earn tons more money. That's just not true within the state system in London that I know of. I'm sure people could come up with examples that completely disapprove that. But from my experience, I definitely didn't get much of a pay rise; maybe that's my negotiation skills. But no, having spoken to other people within the private system as well the salary is pretty similar which surprised me.
Things like resources-- The types of lessons that I want to do. If I want to have a really exciting lesson, I can speak to the school bursar and within reason he will say yes. And being able to kind of go on trips and things-- I think in my previous state school we had a five pound limit per year per student that we could ask the parents for. Anything over that the school also wasn't going to pay for. So anything we did, it had to be a hundred percent free to do. We're so lucky being in London. I was so lucky being in London that I could do these amazing trips because the museums are all free here and getting on public transport was also free for children. I think children under 11 or under 12 get free transport or I think school trips.
Ben (47:21):
Yeah and bus rides are free under 18.
Jade (47:25):
Yeah. So TFL is very good about that so doing school trips was easy. Well, it wasn't easy, but I was able to fund them which was great. We had loads of opportunity to go to museums and to do really wonderful school trips which I don't think would be possible in a lot of other schools that maybe you'd need to rent buses or transport for or maybe there weren't museums that were free within that. So we were really lucky in terms of where we were. So yeah, the school trips are the same, teaching is the same. I think what you get in a private school is much better access to your class teacher because the class sizes are smaller. I went from teaching a class of 30 to teaching a class of 12.
I think also the private system allows parents to have that contact with teachers and would give out a teacher's school email address. Whereas to manage the teacher's time in a state school, I don't think you'd be given a teacher's email address. All the contact would have to go through the front office and then you'd have to book in a time slot with that teacher and that time slot might not be that soon. Or they could try and grab the teacher during pickup in the playground. But again, that's only about a 15 minute window when he or she is releasing 30 children back to their parents and probably is a bit distracted.
Ben (49:12):
Yeah. We did have at our state primary teacher's email but you were really expected not to abuse it if you did have it, and we had special education needs so we might have been exceptional for that. That's really interesting. So if I were to summarize, there's quite a lot of variety in teacher skill or teacher experience. So given all of that, you would say that the teaching is just as good within state schools as private schools and actually the money is roughly the same what you're saying. But private schools are much better resourced for things like trips. You probably wouldn't have problems with buying soils and seeds and things like that and the class sizes are smaller. Do you think also that-- Are there more teachers-- Well, I guess that's class size so there are more teachers per student even if the quality of the teaching is roughly the same. The number of teachers per student is more in the private sector. You might have more teaching assistants or something in the room.
Jade (50:19):
It depends on how you define quality of teaching. I mean, a teacher's time is finite. So the contact and personalization to each individual student would be higher in a private school than in a state school just because the class sizes are smaller. So during a lesson, a teacher can get around 12 students and give each student much more individualized time than they can in a class of 30 that might not have any individualized time at all. But if your class doesn't have very specialized needs-- if it's a very diverse class of needs, I think it's definitely better to have a smaller class. But if it doesn't have a very diverse set of needs and they're all attainment levels and learning speeds are around the same and they're quite a well behaved class-- which is a lot of ifs, I don't think there'd be much difference in if you compare their results at the end of the year, for example.
Ben (51:35):
Sure. Qualified what the metric we're looking at and all of that. But like you say, that might only happen one out of three years, one out of two, one out of five years to get all of those ifs together. And to clarify, probably didn't express it very well. Broadly, if you put a state school teacher into a private school system they're performing the same from skills and experience. But like you say, in the state school because of the funding and the money and the structure, they might only have X amount of hours to spend on all of the things they want to spend on. You actually have more of those same amount of hours or minutes per student and resources in the private system. So it's not teacher quality per se, but the structural and time things which is what the money is buying you as opposed to teaching quality is buying you those other things.
Jade (52:28):
Yeah. I would say you are also buying specialist teachers for topics like languages, music and PE. So generally, private schools will have a specialist PE teacher. They'll have a specialist music teacher and Spanish teacher or modern language teacher which wasn't the case at some state schools. I know some state schools have specialist music teachers but that is an extra cost as opposed to just getting the teacher to do it. And obviously having a specialist coming in and teaching is of a higher quality than a generalist. So I'd say my job is a lot easier in a private school because I don't have as many subjects that I need to be teaching.
Ben (53:24):
So quality adjusted pay has kind of increased since. Even if the money dollar amount isn't the same, your job is easier to do now.
Jade (53:31):
Yeah. The holidays are more as well for private school.
Ben (53:35):
Okay. That's also worth something. So maybe we can hit some topical things which are debated within schools and you can give a quick opinion or not. Kind of underrated, overrated or what it really means. We've touched on one but I think it might be worth going over again which is class size. My impression you are saying is that class size might not need to be different, say 30 versus 12 or 24, if speeds are the same, diversity is the same and there's no quirks. But in reality, often there will be quirks and then in which case teacher minutes per pupil does make a difference. So I guess underrated, overrated would depend, but generally maybe there is a reasonable amount of truth to saying that smaller class sizes are better.
Jade (54:29):
Yes, I think so within reason. I would say my perfect class size is between 12 to 15 students which is a really specific number. I think that because a lot of primary school teaching is about scaffolding, it's about Q&A. So you ask the class the questions and you lead them to the answer. You don't just present to them. You don't just stand up in front of a whiteboard and talk at them. You would have a very disruptive class if that was how you taught. So to have that Q&A, to have that sort of interactiveness you need to have enough students that are going to be bouncing ideas off of each other and enough students who are confident enough to put their hands up and put forward their ideas.
I would also say with very large classes you generally-- With the large number comes more diversity in terms of learning needs. The two ends of the spectrum of teaching I think take up the majority of my time. If everyone was in that middle of the bell curve as a teacher, that would probably-- I mean, that does make teaching the class a lot easier because you don't need to differentiate as heavily, come up with as many resources, you don't need to be teaching... Sometimes it feels like I'm teaching three lessons at the same time; the top, middle, and bottom. Sometimes to make sure that every child can access the curriculum, especially with Maths it is so diverse that it's essentially a different lesson especially when it comes to things like fractions.
Ben (56:33):
Okay. Interesting. It's funny you mentioned 12 to 15 because I've now seen classes below eight. Actually in some ways they're sometimes harder because of that Q&A although it can also work well. I'd probably prefer to be smaller than much larger. Strangely, there's two adjacent topics I think about which is good dinners or good dinner meetings and also other things. It's interesting if you have a dinner meeting over 15. They're harder because it's the one conversation. Obviously if you have a dinner for four, then it's just like chatting between your friends. You don't have that Q&A. So it's interesting you have that 12 to 15.
There's also something about innovation and team sizes. So the anecdote from Amazon is you want to all be able to sit around the pizza box. So they tend to have it as eight to twelve, but it's similar. It's that you have to be able to have one conversation, but that you can spark some other people. So it may be not so crazy to have a specific number in mind; 12 to 15. Actually, so that leads me to one other thing which I hadn't thought of, but you just said. So streaming-- I guess it tends to happen in secondary more than primary. My impression then is you think that might be useful, not so much for all of the other things that might be, but just so that you cannot have to teach three different ways. You can teach one lesson to one. It doesn't necessarily mean that the middle or the top go faster or at a more appropriate speed. It's that actually you can just have one lesson plan because you know everyone is roughly there or have I misinterpreted that? Is that what your view of streaming would be?
Jade (58:13):
No. That used to be my view actually before I became a teacher. I actually wrote my thesis on streaming and I changed my...
Ben (58:22):
PGC streaming?
Jade (58:23):
Yeah. Maybe thesis is the wrong-- I think they called it a thesis. It wasn't...
Ben (58:30):
Extended essay?
Jade (58:31):
My extended essay, yeah. I felt quite strongly about streaming for that reason; that I felt like teachers are very overworked especially for how much they get paid. There's a lot expected of them. They have a huge amount of responsibility and they're expected to do a lot just in terms of all the subjects they're teaching, all the parents that they're managing, all of the sort of pastoral side of things, and then all the paperwork that goes around it as well. One of the biggest things teachers have complained about is their hours and how hard they work. They're always going over their contracted hours. The contract hours you think, "Oh, okay, we're a teacher. You get so much holiday and your hours only are until sort of..." I don't know what your contract says, but it's generally eight until five. "Oh, that's not that long." But then you think, well actually for what you are paid and the hours that you do, you sort of expect to be working your contracted hours which is never ever the case as a teacher. So to be expecting to go over and above, I think is quite a big ask especially how much time you're expected to spend within full-time education to get to that qualification.
So streaming, I thought I would be really pro streaming because streaming reduces the amount of hours a teacher needs to spend on lesson planning which is a really big complaint that a lot of teachers have. It’s they spend so much time lesson planning and they need to tick so many of their school's internal boxes on their lesson plans and how their lesson plans are set out and all the different things that they cover off to show they've done differentiation, they've put vocabulary, they've done assessment for learning, they've done a conclusion at the end, that it's properly evidenced in the books, that there's the date written in the right way in their books, and all these things you need to jump through in a 30 minute lesson when a child might be throwing a chair in the corner and another child crying in the front. It is a lot of things to be getting through in 30 minutes. So I thought I was really pro streaming because it would just make everyone's life easier and every child would be able to get a much more personalized lesson because it would be better suited to them.
But actually in practice having been in classes, I believe that mixed classes are better for everyone to an extent assuming that all the children can access the curriculum. The higher attaining students add this spark of competition to the rest of the class as to what the other children want to get to or what the other children want to then understand. I found my highest students will be asking questions that all the class will sit up and think, "I don't even understand the question, let alone what the answer would be." It really makes a class-- I think it just sets the whole class's standards a lot higher for every single student because within a classroom there's so much competition. I think even if I'd been asking these questions, it wouldn't have the same effect as an actual student asking those questions or responding in a very eloquent way to a question or coming up with a really in depth answer. I think there's no substitute for that within a classroom and I think it just makes everyone want to do better within the class and aspire to have that understanding of what's going on. Kids really have a hard mentality. Most children don't want to stand out-- primary school children anyway. They don't want to stand out and they don't want to be different. They really, really want to conform and I think that is one part of it.
A lot of studies have been done. When I did my thesis I was looking at a lot of different studies. I had slightly different opinions, but generally they found that putting the higher attaining children all in one class will benefit the higher attaining children slightly more. But the lowest group of students it disadvantages hugely. So actually in terms of overall equity, it's much better to just have a mixed class if that is what you want is overall equity.
Ben (01:03:25):
Yes. So we mentioned it depends what KPI you want and there's all of these caveats. There's no golden rule for everything. But that's really interesting. So the deficit for high attainment students is not that much and maybe might be overcome if you are aware of it to compensate for that. But obviously if you're looking—Particularly, say you take a utilitarian value, expected value per student in a mixed class you're saying would be higher than the two separate given that you'll have to teach them all at any point.
Jade (01:03:57):
Yeah. I think there are also different skills that the higher attaining students can get within a class. It's not that they're just sitting there bored and thinking, "I've done this Maths already." You have to be quite creative with that in terms of you would get that student to then explain to another student, "This student doesn't know how to do it. Can you teach them how to do it?" Then that's really getting that student to learn a whole new set of skills. Obviously it's not teaching them algebra in a fractions lesson, but it's teaching them leadership skills and empathy for other students.
Ben (01:04:33):
Yeah. Well, regardless of those which I think are really strong; empathy, leadership, how to teach. I actually always learn something when I try and teach something even if I do know it really well. Actually, when you try and teach it, it's kind of like, "Oh, well I understand it like this. But they obviously understand it like that in order to do that." That's really interesting. And so in general, would you say it's true? I think there's an expression, "Antelopes like running with the faster antelopes. You run faster with the herd." So you're kind of saying as long as there aren't huge differences in the herd that's probably true. That at least in primary, people like running with the herd and so if you run faster with that-- I guess it's true in running groups. You kind of have a pacemaker and you run with a group and it drags the middle and the less pacey people along.
Jade (01:05:25):
Yeah, I would agree with that.
Ben (01:05:28):
Okay. I guess two or three other things would be uniforms. Are we neutral, underrated, overrated? They don't really make a difference? Seems to be very heated. I don't know whether it makes as big a difference as it does, but maybe sometimes it does.
Jade (01:05:43):
Certainly in primary school I really agree with uniforms. In general I agree with uniforms actually. I think maybe less so in secondary schools because children are more keen to express their individuality. I have to say primary school kids aren't that keen to express their individuality. They are much more concerned about fitting in and looking the same and I think that's very natural. I think also children at that age have so much to worry about already. I mean, they're learning how to manage relationships for the first time, their teeth are falling out. Why give them a worry about what they look like and what clothes they have to wear every day? Teaching them how to judge other people on their socioeconomic status by what they're wearing? It just seems so irrelevant when they're that young. I think they have the rest of their lives to be judging people on what they wear and worrying about the clothes they wear. I don't think they need to be exposed to that on a daily basis at primary school.
Ben (01:06:57):
Interesting. I hadn't thought of that as clearly that there is. That they've got so many other things to worry about taking that. I do think that's one of the reasons that actually boys have it slightly easier in the city and financial services. At least until recently, you didn't really have to think about what you wore. You have a sort of uniform, right? Shirt/ tie, now, no tie, suits. Then regardless of any other things like makeup, you just don't have to think so much. So you just put that on, you can do enough and you're out. Whereas women obviously have a more complex uniform in general; call it uniform fashion. Do you think also then out of uniform…? So if you're not in uniform, even in primary, it seems to be that girls cue onto this a little bit sooner. Again, this is average, there's lots of exceptions. But then that gives them a higher burden because they're a little bit more worried about what they're wearing already at that stage, although I can see it definitely in some boys as well. But it would seem to me on equity grounds as well, it seems to remove one more thing on that line of argument.
Jade (01:08:00):
Yeah, definitely. I think it just makes it easier for all children to be able to fit in at school. I don't think primary school encourages children to be hugely individual.
Ben (01:08:28):
At least not through clothing.
Jade (01:08:30):
Oh yeah, definitely not through clothing. But they are expected to conform in so many ways. It's almost teaching them the rules first so then they can break them later. I don't think that primary school children should be expected to already be trying to break the rules. They're literally just learning the rules of the game.
Ben (01:08:52):
Sure, that makes sense. So maybe the arguments are a little bit weaker in secondary, but depending on the circumstances you'd maybe be pro that. On secondary, although there's a stronger argument maybe for individualism. It's interesting because you probably do get exceptional primary school children and then a little bit more in secondary where that urge to express that individualism is so strong that they're really great against those, but it does seem to be rarer. But you see them and actually, I see them. I'm close to what we might call some of the homeschool community and some have ended up there. But just because these rules or whatever they are, that institution as you said right at the beginning is just something which doesn't fit them. But that seems to be a structural fit issue when you do have children like that. That might be accommodating a minority as opposed to a majority.
Jade (01:09:48):
Yeah. Generally when I have come across students that want to express their individuality in primary school, it's generally not how they look. They generally don't want to express themselves through how they look. I see it more through behavior and more through the stories they write, the art they produce. The sort of creative academic outlets I see it much more. I sort of see these signs and I think, "Okay, that child is probably going to dress different in secondary school, but right now that hasn't expressed itself yet. I think the first things that they express is actually more in their writing and their behavior.
Ben (01:10:31):
Okay. That's really interesting. Great. So we've done that. Overrated, underrated then on Physical Exercise or PE?
Jade (01:10:44):
I think PE is hugely important. I think it's tough in the city London schools to find the space to do PE. I say that, but then there are so many things you can do that you don't need a lot of space for like dance or things like that. All the kids love playing football on the playground and things like that. But I think it's really, really important. I think just in general-- not just for PE but just in general-- I feel like one of the best things that primary school education gives you is hopefully to give you a love of education. For me, I obviously want my class to be able to read, write, and do basic Maths when they leave school. But one of my biggest things is I really want them to leave school enjoying learning and not thinking about school as a chore, or really wanting to learn and giving them that zest for education and asking questions.
Ben (01:11:50):
That seems fair. School start times? So there's an argument within secondary that they're too early; I think weaker argument within primary. But maybe a little bit more time for teachers to prepare and maybe go into later in the day. On the continent they tend to start earlier but then they finish much earlier. So any view on school start times?
Jade (01:12:12):
I agree definitely for secondary school start times are too early because the circadian rhythm of a teenager is they wake up much later. Their circadian rhythm is they wake up later and they go to bed later and I think we as an education system need to respond to that because it seems ridiculous that they're coming into school so tired yet still staying up really late at night. I think for primary school students, that's not really the case. Actually, the children are the most responsive in the mornings before lunch. As a primary school teacher you'll always put your Maths and English lessons in the morning and then your more fun, more creative things in the afternoon like DT, Art, PE in the afternoon when they have a bit less energy. So I would say primary school start times are fine as they are.
Ben (01:13:19):
That's really interesting. I had sort of heard that. It seems to be a real consensus on secondary school that basically post puberty you should be much later. It's really interesting when I hear that from teachers and academics and then obviously it's based on the biology when you've got such a strong consensus and the system can't move there. I mean, there's a handful of schools who have set their ability and you can do it. And where it's most studied, I think in the US, where because they can drive from late teen, they show that states or little districts which have moved later have many fewer accidents because the teenagers who drive to school aren't so tired and that. So when they drive they're having many fewer accidents as well as everything else. But it's very obvious that that's an effect and still seems very difficult to implement which I guess is the downside of old institutions. Although if you were to implement it, then you could get it better on the institutional bit. Okay, last one on the school things; school meals. Are they good, bad? Should they be better? Should we be investing in them more? Are they overrated, underrated?
Jade (01:14:29):
Oh my gosh. All the state schools I have observed and visited the food has been so bad. Honestly, terrible. It was chips and beans. It was really, really bad. I really like eating vegetables and I just couldn't get any. It was all refined carbohydrates. Overall, the ones I've seen do make an effort to reduce the amount of salt they add to the food and reduce the amount of sugar. But that means that you're left with super tasteless food as well as it being very carb heavy. I think that's a response to children's pallets as well, that they like quite plain food as well. So obviously nothing spicy. I feel for state school caterers though because they have a really tight budget...
Ben (01:15:31):
Like 50 p or a pound or something?
Jade (01:15:34):
I'm not sure of the exact numbers, but I know their budget is so tight and they're trying to feed so many children with so many diverse eating requirements. So obviously if a child has an allergy to anything, they basically have to cut that food out of almost all of the food within the school. I mean, certainly every school I've been to have been a no nut school so nuts are completely out. Some students have a really severe allergy to quite a specific vegetable. They'll just cut that whole vegetable out of any school meal for the whole school just to reduce the risk. But also it just makes catering a lot easier for them as well. And if they're on such a tight budget as it is, you can't really blame them.
We do try and teach healthy eating and a balanced diet within schools, but I don't really see that quite so much in terms of the school meals that are offered. There's always a salad bar that'll be offered with little chunks of cucumber and a few lettuce leaves and things. But I have to say the students hardly ever help themselves to that part of the meal. So yeah, they're kind of catering to what the students will be helping themselves to and eating and also the options. But then comparing it to-- This is a big thing you would get with a private school, the food is much better. Just in the private school and the experience when I was at school, there'll be great salads, really interesting roasted vegetables. The food is a lot better. I think that's probably a big part of what you're paying for as a private school parent.
Ben (01:17:30):
That’s actually a recent change. I remember the early 1990s private school food wasn't that good and then that was a...
Jade (01:17:39):
Even in comparison to state school food?
Ben (01:17:41):
I don't know in comparison. It probably was a little bit, they were both really awful. But then food awareness really started kicking in a lot with it. You had celebrity chefs that started and there was a huge outcry. I remember in many private schools once parents found how much was being spent on the food-- and it was still a low amount. I remember it's kind of like one or two pounds. You couldn't even quite buy a sandwich regardless of inflation. So there's this outcry so food started to uniformly increase. At least these are from London private schools which is my experience from what I know. But then that's kept today there does seem to be a more-- I guess up to a certain level there's quite a direct correlation between how much you spend on food and what food you get although you can be very creative. When you're creative with cheaper foods you need to spend more time and also your time constraint within schools. Okay. So maybe last question on the school thing and then a couple to wrap up on. So on the school one is, have you been asked or what are the most awkward questions you've been asked? Maybe this is a segue and loop around with during pandemic or post pandemic. Do primary school children ever ask about death or around that or illness and things like that?
Jade (01:19:08):
Yeah, they do. I mean, certainly over Covid I knew of a few students whose parents passed away. I don't know whether it's Covid related. But obviously the staff body is made aware so we can keep an extra close eye on that student and check in on the family as well. I'm not sure how big of a topic it is discussed. I think it deeply scares primary school students that it's not really a topic that's discussed very much because it is quite a scary thought. I mean, depending on what age within primary school. Certainly my year four class were very aware of death and what that meant and were very sensitive to other students in class that were grieving.
But I don't think it's a topic that is discussed. I wanted to share with my class parts of my experience of when my mom passed away and how I felt because I knew there was a student in my class that had lost a parent. Actually, I knew there were multiple students in my class that had lost parents. It was a PSHE class so I wanted to make sure that they felt like I was sharing as well as asking them to share with us. I mean, obviously it wasn't asking individuals to share, but just in general we were in on that topic. I shared with them the experience of my mom dying and things like that and I have to say I just felt fear from them actually. There wasn't a huge curiosity. I think they were too scared to ask questions not necessarily because it would hurt-- Well, maybe because they were worried it would hurt my feelings. But I think they didn't even want to think about it.
Ben (01:21:40):
That's interesting. As you know, we've had some conversations around being the phrase, "Is death positive?" Children might be different. In general society, we don't talk about death or grief enough given its importance. Also, compared to 50 or a hundred years ago or else in different societies. But the studies I've seen have suggested now in western societies children understand the concept of death around the ages of seven-ish. So that's sort of towards primary. But actually in what we'd call these emerging market nations and not the western nations, it happens earlier because they're surrounded by it. There's some evidence that 50 or a hundred years ago it also happened earlier because the stats you have in like 1900, 50% of children under the age of five wouldn't survive. So it would be very common to see it. It was just much more talked about it around then. So I do think that is something that we don't fully appreciate and actually that children do just-- They know a lot, they ask a lot. Your point about fear, that there are certain things that maybe we need to help them not be as fearful about if there's no good reason to be fearful. Death is obviously a little bit of a complex topic. I don't know whether you'd want to have any final reflections on how your mum have influenced you into teaching or how it made you reflect or what death has meant in your own life.
Jade (01:23:26):
Yeah. I think it's about being present in so many senses of the word to really appreciate or try and appreciate every day that you have and be present in a sense. I try not to eat with my mobile phone; in that sense. If I'm having a meal with somebody, to really try and be present for them and appreciate that moment. I love being a teacher and I really enjoy working with children and it feels great to be doing a job that I wake up every day and I'm interested in. I'm thinking about afterwards, "How could I have made that better?" I think maybe to find that in your life, to find something that you want to get up every day and do is really important. I hadn't really experienced a career before recently that I enjoyed. I didn't even think that that was a possibility because everyone talks about, "A job is a job and ultimately you're going to be doing the same thing and a lot of it is repetition and you're kind of doing it to get paid," which I do agree to a certain extent. But there's a gradient of that and I guess really getting to know yourself and finding out what you want to do.
Ben (01:25:11):
So that's a little bit of-- The aphorism is, "Find a job you love and never work a day in your life." It's probably a little bit extreme, but towards that you can be content.
Jade (01:25:21):
Yeah, definitely. It's about finding contentment. I knew mom always wanted me to be happy more than anything else. So yeah, kind of finding ways to make myself happy.
Ben (01:25:40):
Great. Would you like to share any final life advice or that does seem to be pretty good which is find something to be content with?
Jade (01:25:51):
Yeah. I would say being present, appreciating... I think also being grateful for what you have. Really feeling and expressing gratitude is really, really important. I try to teach my class that.
Ben (01:26:06):
Do they keep gratitude journals? I'm always keen on data and the science has a quite strong science behind it that it makes people happier.
Jade (01:26:15):
Yeah, I've read about that as well. Sheryl Sandberg's book “Lean In,” she talks a lot about a way that she overcame her grief for her loss of her husband was doing a gratitude diary or every day writing three things she was grateful for. I definitely try to do that because there is a lot to be grateful for.
Ben (01:26:38):
Great.
Jade (01:26:39):
You can always find something.
Ben (01:26:40):
Well Jade, you strike me as an awesome and brilliant teacher who is going to go on and you have many great ideas. So I hope you go on and do much more teaching and get promoted and make a real big difference which you seem to be doing. So Jade, thank you very much.
Jade (01:26:55):
Thank you. Thanks, Ben. Thanks for chatting with me.