Like some of the film, it's a little hokey. And yes, the film is dated a little: the music in particular. And for a movie that went as far as to clearly film on location in London's East End back when it was a working class neighborhood, if not actually a slum (now it is an exclusive area), the way it gets all unrealistic in the final dance (singers with no mikes, piano where one doesn't exist) is too bad. And of course every student is way too old. But that's almost always the case. Yet the film is refreshingly non-judgmental, I think: the kids and their parents are never condescended toward by the film (not in the way "Dead Poet's Society" really, when you get right down to it, looks down its nose at the local public school and its students); the teachers, some cynical and bitter, are not villains; and Mark Thackery really is not much of a dancer, deliberately so. I love the end when he says goodbye to Pamela. It was uncomfortable, yes—but it ends on a very realistic note. "Good-bye" she says and walks away. She's moved beyond him already.
So: we've seen a big urban high school in LA; a posh boarding school in rustic New England; and a London slum school where no one is going to college. All the films are on the side of the students; all of them acknowledge a world that is not always kind nor friendly to them. What the kids at North Quay have to look forward to is living a life a little better than their parents; yet they seem, in some ways, freer and happier than the privileged boys at Welton, whose lives are just as prescribed as the poor English kids' lives are. Harvard, Yale: law or med school: marriage: big houses and big money: and send their kids to Welton where they too can be treated like cattle and beaten by the headmaster when they get out of line. This is a picture of nineteen-fifties conformity and anxiety: maybe not all that different from the conformity and anxiety we see today. And in all three films is, at their center, an extraordinary teacher (interestingly all men, in a profession that is still more female than male).
1. Reaction to "To Sir With Love"?
Again, we know it's dated, both in how it's filmed and in its language (as we were talking about during the break, Thackery's use of the word "slut" is not how it is used today), not to mention, perhaps, its attitude toward men and women. Then again, on that last point, maybe not. Thackery understands the world these kids are going into: liberated and liberal it is not. He can't change the economic and class realities of 1960s England. So he begins with the fact that all of his diverse class (not that different than Pete Dixon's class) is entering a working class world.
So given all this: like? Dislike? Why? And what scene or moment in it stayed with you—and why?
2. A question you should expect for this part of our investigation of school. Is Mark Thackery a good teacher? Why or why not? Do you agree with the choice he makes halfway through the film to ditch the books and teach his class about life? Why or why not? And what do you think of the boundaries he creates with his students? Appropriate? Inappropriate? How so?
3. We've now seen three singular teachers: Pete, Keating, and Thackery. Which one of them would you want to have as a teacher? Why?
4. Finally: do you think these three teachers could switch schools easily? Could Pete teach effectively at Walton and North Quay? Could Keating teach effectively at Whitman and North Quay? Could Thackery teach effectively at Whitman and Walton? Give a sentence or two explaining each of your responses.
Okay. We'll see you all tomorrow. Deep discussion, we're hoping.
I had mixed feelings about To Sir, With Love. While there were definitely scenes that were really interesting and true to see, there were also some scenes or aspects of the film that are outdated and were not an accurate portrayal of high school. An example of this is the last dance when it is just Pamela and Mr. Thackery dancing, even after the dance is over Mr. Thackery doesn't pull back or talk to Pamela as a teacher usually talks to a student.
ReplyDeleteI think Mr. Thackery is a good teacher for the age group he is teaching. His students are seniors who are leaving school very soon and are planning on getting jobs directly out of high school. I think his decision to treat them like adults and throw away the books was a good decision for his class because of their age and based on their future. I think if he had tried that on a class of freshmen or junior high kids it would not have worked at all just because of how different the age groups are. I think he has a good relationship with most of his students but I think his relationship with Pamela is inappropriate. He has multiple chances to discourage Pamela privately and never takes them. At the end of the movie he also dances with her and then has a private conversation with her. I think by not telling Pamela he does her a disservice because he is treating her as a child when his whole point is to treat his students as equals.
Out of the 3 teachers I would rather have Mr. Keating. I think Keating and Dixon have similar teaching styles and relationships with their students, but Keating is the teacher who I would be more excited about having because he loves teaching and really loves his topic.
No I don't think the three teachers could switch schools easily. I think each teacher would be able to have some success at a different school, but they each would have to work very hard to get that success and they would not be nearly as popular with the other teacher's students as they are with their own because of their different experiences and teaching styles.
This movie didn’t resonate with me as much as Dead Poet’s Society did. I still enjoyed it though. I feel like I didn’t connect with the character’s as much and view their backstories. We heard them referenced once or twice, but the only character that you could really become attached to was Thackery, who I wasn’t truly a large fan of. So, in all, I don’t believe I got as much out of this movie as I did the previous one. But, besides that, the scene that stood out the most to me was most likely the scene where Thackery decides to box with the boy, I am forgetting his name, in the end and knocks the wind out of him. This is the first time, to me, that Thackery really goes against his morals and the way he goes about life in order to make a point to this particular boy that Thackery was never able to get to respect him. (I did like the theme song though, very catchy)
ReplyDeleteI believe that he was a good teacher for these students. He was able to bend his ways and see how he could get through to them and truly help them, which was to teach them about life. He knew, after a bit into the movie, that teaching them the basics such as math, reading, writing etc wasn’t really going to help these kids in the real world seeing as they were from lower class families and, in all honesty, didn’t want to learn it. So he taught them the necessities of life for them, which I believe was great. His boundaries for the students were good, considering he managed to have all of them respect him by the end. Though the one scene where he agrees to call Pamela by her first name skirted the lines for me a bit.
Before I say my realistic answer, I have to say it would be a dream to have Keating as a teacher because of the amount of fun activities they do. I love the hands on approach and how he makes poetry enjoyable, when it’s very hard to enjoy at times because of the tricky way it is written. I also just liked his character a lot, but that may have possibly been the fact that it was Robin Williams playing him. Realistically I would want Pete as my teacher because he has all of the qualities. He is enthusiastic about his subject, which rubs off on the kids, and promotes them to think outside of the box. He manages to have his kids respect him and doesn’t cross any boundaries.
I believe that Pete could teach at Walton, but not at North Quay. He would be effective at Walton since all of the boys there are taught to be respectful of their teachers, though at North Quay the students are too out of control. I don’t believe that Pete would be able to keep them in line. Thackery would be effective at either school since both seem to have students that respect their teachers. He may have trouble at first at Whitman since other teachers seemed to, but the kids know punishment there so I think he would figure it out. Keating on the other hand wouldn’t be effective at either school. Both I believe would take advantage of his teaching style and neither school would respect him.
I have kind of mixed feeling about the movie; I felt like it went kind of slow, but I enjoyed it more towards the end. At the beginning of the movie I felt like all of the students were pretty one dimensional as were a few of the teachers. I liked how many of the students and a few teachers grew a lot throughout the movie in a way that seemed pretty realistic.
ReplyDeleteI think Thackery was a good teacher given his circumstances. I feel like had his students been any less rowdy or had he been able to discipline them, his decision to ditch the books would have been much less justifiable. I think he saw that these kids we're receptive to normal academic subjects and instead of trying to weave in life lessons into class the way Keating or Dixon did, he went in a much more straightforward route.
I'd want to have Keating as a teacher the most. His style of rhetoric while teaching and the way he seemed to really be able to connect with his students made me really drawn to him.
I think Keating could probably teach effectively at any of the schools. He has an ability to really connect with the students. Though his lessons may not be exactly the same at each of the schools, I think he could maintain his teaching style well. Dixon could probably teach at Wellton, though I doubt he'd have the same impact on the boys lives that Keating did. Since the boys there have respect ingrained in them, I doubt he'd have trouble keeping them under control. I'm
less sure that he could teach at North Quay, but it' sea possibility. The only problem I could see popping up is that he doesn't discipline his kids that much either, and doesn't even require them to do their homework, so his ability to be stern with the kids the way Thackery did might not be there. Thackery could probably also teach at any of the schools. His adaptability to the circumstances he was in at North Quay, I think, make him an adequate candidate for teaching at both other schools.
This movie was hilarious. It was such an uncomfortable movie, and every time anyone said anything, I though, "now why would you say that?" But it was good. I enjoyed it. It wasn't trying to be a fancy movie that would be watched in a lit class, so it wasn't trying to be high class or hoity toity. It was just a movie, and this is what made it good. It didn't matter that it was ridiculous because it was supposed to be. It brings up some good points, mainly that teachers should teach real life stuff (how to make a good salad, for example). I don't think I'd like it at the time, but it would come in handy, especially if you weren't planning on going to a college. The fact that the students changed so quickly was also hilarious. Before they went to the museum, I kept thinking they were going to act up at the museum and mess up all of Mark's work, but they didn't, which was a surprise. It was a highly unrealistic movie, but putting aside any knowledge of how the students probably would have reacted, it was a lot of fun.
ReplyDeleteI think Mark was a good teacher for that particular group of students. He knew that they weren't planning on going to college and that learning to read would be useful, but not vital, whereas learning to make food and when to choose to marry someone would be much more useful things to these students. I wouldn't want to be in his class because I think it would be relatively boring, but for these kids, it's the perfect class. I think he made the right decision, even if it means that most of the students can barely read. I think that there were some very uncomfortable moments in this movie between Mark and his students (namely Pamela). He probably should've had slightly more conservative boundaries, but his relationships with his students, however awkward, were an important part of the movie and its humor.
Out of the three teachers, I would want to have Pete. I think he would be a fun teacher to have (if he would start enforcing his homework). He's enthusiastic about what he does and he wants his students to learn. I think it would be fun to be in his class. Theoretically, Keating would be a fun teacher to have as well, but I don't think I would get along with him well at all. I think I would like Pete most of the three.
I think Keating could Whitman because the students there are enthusiastic about learning and he would be able to show his more liberal ( and when I say liberal, I mean wanting the students to think for themselves) teaching style without having to worry about the consequences. I don't think he would be able to teach at North Quay because the students are so unenthusiastic about learning school stuff that he would get frustrated there quickly. I think Pete could teach at both Welton and North Quay. He is a calmer teacher than Keating, but is still more radical than most people at Welton, so he would please the students without angering the administration too much. He's very easy going, so I think he would be able to ignore the North Quay students' attempts to scare him off until they respected him. I don't know if Thackery would be able to teach at any of the other schools. If he were to teach somewhere else, I think he would have to teach a normal school subject instead of his life lessons. We only saw a little bit of how he teaches normal school material, so I don't know how conservative or enthusiastic he is. He would probably be somewhat like Pete, easy going enough to tach at both schools and interesting enough to be liked by the students, but I don't know.
I have mixed feelings about this movie. I thought Thackery is a teacher that those students needed to have to learn common courtesy and skills they'd actually need in life, but he did this by ignoring the curriculum he's supposed to teach and sometimes taught them in a rather harsh way. His lecture after finding the burning tampon, yelling and calling the girls sluts, really stayed with me because it was so brutal. Thackery is offended by the girls' behavior and takes it upon himself to teach them that they could not act like that. These teenagers find themselves learning about a much greater crime in the process of being punished for a minor one because it's symbolizes the girls' ignorance as to their limits. He does the same with the boys, teaching them the harsh realities of life. While it was a thought provoking movie, I would not want to watch it again because there were so many uncomfortable scenes with realistic, stressful problems.
ReplyDeleteI touched on this a bit in my last answer- I have mixed feelings about him not teaching the cirriculum. Those students definitely needed to learn what Thackery taught them, but won't they have to take some sort of exam to graduate his class? Or will they all get A's because they've become ladies and gentlemen? Thackery's boundaries with his students was another source of ambiguous feelings for me. While those students had been deprived a close, smart, well-mannered mentor, Thackery's dancing with Pamela and his punching of Denim felt like actions that crossed a line that teachers should sleeve uncrossed.
I'd want to have Keating, for sure. We saw him teaching his subject the most out of the three and he was really engaging and passionate about literature. Thackery used fear to teach his students a lot, which is not my favorite teaching style, and Pete would be fine to have but didn't seem as fun as Keating.
I think Pete could teach effectively at Walton because he was very smart and encouraged his students to think freely, similar to Keating. I think he'd also teach well at North Quay because I think he dealt with similarly tough educational conditions at Tyler. I think Whitman could teach effectively at Whitman because the students there needed similar lessons to those at Walton, but I do not think he would teach effectively at North Quay because I think his teaching style depended on a level of respect that he would not be able to receive without fear at North Quay. Keating does not seem like the kind of teacher who would be able to instill, let alone use, fear in his classroom. I think Thackery could teach effectively anywhere after dealing with the worst students of the three movies.
I have mixed feelings about To Sir With Love. I think I liked it the least of the three movies/TV Shows that we have seen. I think it was a little hokey and dated, but it still had some moments that I felt were relatable and not too unreasonable to believe. I agree with Madeline when she says that it was a very uncomfortable movie, many parts made me squirm and I couldn’t help but feel very uncomfortable, especially one of the last scenes where Sir and Pamela were dancing.
ReplyDeleteI think Mark Thackery is a good teacher for these particular students and the kind of students that attend North Quay, but he probably wouldn’t be a good teacher for other students, like the ones that attend Paideia. I think it was a good decision for him to take the students on outings and teach them things that they would use in real life.
I would like to have Keating as a teacher the most. I think that he made the lessons fun for his students and used real life examples to demonstrate his ideas, like when he made the boys walk in the courtyard.
I don’t think it would be easy for the three teachers to trade places with each other. I think they fit in well at the school they teach at and would not be the right fit to teach the students at the other schools. The only ways I could think of this working is if Thackery and Pete maybe changed schools. I think they both needed to assert their dominance to control their classes and get the students to respect them and take the teachers and themselves (the students) seriously.
I have to say that To Sir, With Love was not my favorite movie thus far, for we knew so little about the characters, and I felt a lot of the movie was Thackery standing around looking sullen. I agreed with some of the lessons Thackery did, but was rather taken aback by his reaction to the boy threatening to hit a teacher. We all saw the reasoning behind why the boy threatened him, and while it was totally a childish move, it showed a kid trying to grapple with the new concept of standing up for what he believes in and acting like an adult. Thackery showed no realization of these intentions. I thought his teachings were even more unclear than Keatings, if possible. I liked his idea to ditch the books because of how practical it was, but the man was nearly impossible to read. His teaching method was firm, but I didnt believe any of the connections he made with the students, because his face and actions the whole time were completely monotone. Even if Keating was kind of flaky and difficult to understand, at least he was exciting and passionate-I saw none of this in Thackery.
ReplyDeleteI personally would want Pete as a teacher, simply because he is predictable, kind, and stays calm. He taught his class how to think for themselves, but not in a wildly outlandish manner. It also rested well with me how he was the only teacher to stand up for his student when they had done something wrong with good reasoning. I would like some Keating here and there, I loved his carpe diem lesson, but I dont know how well Id adjust to a whole year with him. However, both these teachers showed enthusiasm, passion, and a love for their students.
I dont personally think any of the teachers would be able to switch. Keating was a success because he knew the boys and their situations, the artistic outlet they needed. He would be totally overlooked at Thackery’s school. Pete did so well because his class was a controllable size, unlike Thackerys. However, I don't think he would understand the boys at Welton enough to be a great teacher, although he would be decent enough most likely. Thackery doesn't belong as a teacher, so I dont think he should be anywhere.
Out of the three movies we have watched so far, this movie would have to be my least favorite. The storyline was almost too simple, and the movie consisted primarily of one on one dialogue. One scene that I found humorous and almost out of place was the last scene where Thackery danced with Pamela. It caused the serious tone of the movie to fade away, and ended the movie on a more hopeful note. One thing that struck me as odd in the movie was that the kids went from playing pranks and disrespecting Thackery to smiling obediently at their seats when he walked in the room. The transformation happened unrealistically quickly.
ReplyDeleteIt was clear from the start that Thackery didn't know how to teach academic classes. He had no experience, and the "kids" he was in charge of were beyond difficult to handle. Teaching, for him, was just a way to get dinner on the table. He made the right decision to drop the textbooks halfway through the year. He was wise to know that it would be a waste of time to try and teach them anything more, because he knew they wouldn't care or put in any effort. What those students needed to realize was that they would be adults soon, and they would need to know how to actually live life on their own, without parents or teachers. He needed to create boundaries with his students so that they would learn to have discipline and responsibility.
Between Pete, Keating, and Thackery, I would prefer to have Keating as a teacher. His immense passion for what he teaches would help inspire and motivate me even further. He's experienced, and knows how to help build the characters of his students and teach them the material. He's also funny, unexpected, and says things like they are. I felt like Pete had a lack of discipline in his class, and a lack of responsibility by letting the substitute teacher step in for him. Thackery did not know how to teach academics, so i probably wouldn't want to put my education in his hands. He would be a very good counsellor or life coach.
I feel like Pete could teach effectively at both Whitman and Walton, where the students are well behaved. I don't think he would be able to handle the students at North Quay. I don't think that Thackery could teach effectively at either of the other schools because of his boring teaching style. He taught at North Quay for a reason, even if he didn't know it when he applied for the job. As for Keating, I think he could teach at any school he desires. He's comfortable to be around, compatible in different environments, can handle any sort of student, and is very well experienced.
Though not very personally relatable, I enjoyed the film. It was a completely different take on High School and it was interesting to see what school may be like in another country. I never thought that kids could spend their entire lunch break dancing. I did feel like it was completely unrealistic for a student and teacher to be dancing together at a graduation party. Another scene that resonated with me was when Mr. Thackey ripped the letter at the end of the movie. It really showed how important teaching and helping kids become adults had become to him.
ReplyDeleteI feel like Thackey is a bad teacher from an academic standpoint, but he's a great teacher of life. It's clear that the knows a lot about how the world works and that he cares about helping his students become adults before they take on the real world. He realized that he wouldn't be successful in teaching them things like math and geography so he throws away his books and decides tot each them about life. I think this was definitely a good move my him and it yielded positive results. He completely transformed his students from disrespectful teenagers to pleasant young adults.
I would definitely want to have Pete as a teacher. Like Thacker, he really cares about his students, but he's also able to teach them academic material. He's the full package
I feel like Pete could teach at Walton, but not North Quay. He could teach at Walton because the students are well mannered and want to do well in school and be successful in life. He couldn't teach at North Quay because the disruptive and uninterested students would take advantage of his lenience and friendliness. I feel like Keating could teach at either North Quay or Walt Whitman. He is patient and he is also a skilled teacher from an academic standpoint. I don't think that Thackery would be able to teach at Walt Whitman or Walton because he doesn't have the ability or experience to teach any real classes.
I personally did not quite enjoy the film and the overall flavor it had to its story. The school that Thackery taught in was a notorious school known for the history of its students, who were mostly rejects from other schools or children from various underprivileged and poorly-conditioned backgrounds. I felt that while Thackery was a good teacher, he was mainly a kind person who did not necessarily enjoy teaching. As portrayed in the beginning, he initially wanted a job in engineering, but he came to the school for his need of "finding an appointment." He shows his dislike of teaching and being around students through his inability to tolerate the students even during the most benevolent situations. Moreover, the students do not tolerate learning and behave immorally, and it somewhat gave you an comfortable feeling that they are doomed to follow their families' date had they not encountered Thackery who just so happened to be a nice person.
ReplyDeleteI don't find Thackery a particular teacher who enjoys his teaching. He portrays himself as a strict and unenthusiastic teacher in the beginning by forcing the students to read their books and copy down tables (math) without excuses. He finally breaks down when the students' behaviors gets worse, and that's when he decides that he can no longer tolerate them. He does not even consider keeping the books aside because he was completely occupied with the lessons of immorality that he desperately wanted to tell his students. The fact that he threw away the books completely shows that he never thought of teaching his students in a new way that would still tie in to their curriculum, and thus he actually does not put thought into what he even teaches in class. However, I guess I'd have to agree with the fact that the students were unreceptive to their books, but I felt that a more experienced and enthusiastic teacher like Keating would connect himself to the students and reshape his style of teaching "books" that would adapt to the learning environment of his classroom, no matter the quality of the students various circumstances. I thus find Thackery a problematic teacher, who somewhat does not even tolerate Pamela.
Among all the teachers that we've encountered in the films so far, I'd have to say that Keating was the best teacher based on our own formulated standards. He shows enthusiasm for what he teaches, enjoys his job, and connects with his students deeply. Pete is also similar to Keating in many ways, but I feel that he was influenced too much by school policies. Keating, however, also demonstrated his skill of teaching by producing successful students out of his classroom who have learned to enjoy what they study, but I suppose that the type of students in a classroom setting is a different matter when you compare it to the students in "To Sir With Love." Thackery, on the other hand, portrayed himself as an inexperienced teacher who only hopes to survive in his class instead of tackling the challenges in his classroom.
I feel that Keating would be a teacher who could adapt to all the different school environments portrayed in the film. He would observe the situation in his classroom and conclude the way he should teach and interact with his students. In fact, Keating portrays himself as a different teacher from the teachers at Wellton, who also portray themselves as strict and unenthusiastic calculus or history teachers who hope to control their students in a similar way that Keating does. I feel that Keating would overall be the best candidate.
I wasn't really crazy about the movie, but I'm pretty biased because of the sexist dialogue. Ignoring that fact, I do like that the kids eventually learned to respect themselves. But still, the movie felt kinda slow in parts, and some plot devices just randomly fixed themselves. What happened to the principal telling Thackery that his new teaching idea didn't work? And it does bug me that some of these kids couldn't even read and the teachers did nothing about it. I also thought, as a few other people have said, some parts of the movie made me feel uncomfortable. For example, I knew nothing was going to happen, but the whole thing with Pamela was creepy. Overall I thought the movie was ok; good intentions, maybe not the best execution.
ReplyDeleteI think Thackery was a good teacher in the area of caring about his students. He really wanted them to make better lives for themselves, and tried super hard for that to become a reality. He wasn't the best teacher in the sense that he didn't really teach them how to read or do basic arithmetic. But I guess he did teach them something, and it can be argued that survival tips are more helpful than how to add fractions.
I personally would want to either have either Keating or Pete for a teacher, but that is mostly based on the fact that they taught actual school subjects while Thackery didn't. I love how the first two have a way of making literature or history exciting, and since we didn't really get to see him teach a school subject, I don't know if Thackery would have the same enthusiasm. And both Keating and Pete seem to have known they wanted to be a teacher for a while, and went into their job excited and ready to help kids. Even though he came to love it, teaching was just a job for Thackery at first.
I think Pete is the type of teacher that could teach wherever he wanted. He has a very good temperament, is enthusiastic about what he does, likes kids and helping them out, and knows his stuff. He seems like he would be better at handling Hellton's strict rules better than Keating; his head isn't as far in the clouds. He also seems like the type of person the kids at North Quay would respect. He seems like the type of guy who doesn't give up. I know Keating could teach at Whitman, since the kids there seem to be very open and ready to learn. I'm not sure about North Quay though. He has such a soft personality that he might have trouble controlling the kids enough in order to break through to them. I think Thackery could teach at either Walton or Whitman, especially if he could wrangle the students at North Quay. I don't think he would be as exciting a teacher as Pete or Keating, but he wouldn't bad.
I enjoyed To Sir, With Love. It wasn’t as amazing as Dead Poets Society, but a good story nonetheless. I did find a lot of it (obviously) outdated, particularly the dialogue. For some reason, the scene that stood out to me the most was when Thackery and Gillian and the kids are standing by the bus, waiting for the two boys to do their errand so they can go to the museum. It’s a very short, small scene, but I liked it because it was the first time other than the museum montage when everyone (excluding Denim) was happy, happy with Thackery, and happy to be gaining great life experiences. It struck me as particularly hopeful and optimistic, and it made the class and Thackery seem almost family-like.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely think Mark Thackery is a good teacher. He gives them an education perhaps unlike the one they are used to, but it’s an education consisting of lessons they are strictly in need of (compare him to Keating, who teaches also teaches unusual but crucial lessons to the Welton boys!). Teaching the North Quay kids algebra and literature would be a waste of time and probably not even beneficial to them at all. So Mark Thackery teaches them stuff that will actually help them with their future lives and that they are acutally willing and eager to receive. I’m sure Thackery is fully capable of teaching a standard high school curriculum, but instead he teaches what he knows his students need. I don’t think his boundaries with his students are inappropriate, even with Pamela—he never really leads her on purposefully or makes any inappropriate moves. It was sometimes uncomfortable but I don’t think he ever intended to engage in any relationship with Pam and seemed to know that she would get over it. Although the one part where he maybe crosses the line by a hair is when she asks, “Will you call me Pamela tonight?” and he goes, “Yes… Pamela.” Yikes. That was definitely the most uncomfortable moment, and maybe the only (in my opinion) inappropriate one.
I think I’d still like to have Keating as a teacher the most—I could easily see him at Paideia, he is charismatic and fun, and his “carpe diem” lessons would benefit me more than Thackery’s lessons would; Keating’s class would be more relevant to me. But if I were a underprivelged, lower class British kid in the 60s, I’d totally be all for Thackery.
I can’t really speak for Pete since I wasn’t here that day and I have only very vague memories of him from the last time I was in this class. I don’t think Keating could have taught Thackery’s class at North Quay: those kids would have ridiculed him and eaten him alive. They wouldn’t have found his Shakespeare impersonations funny, and anyway, I don’t think they needed to be encouraged to be more wild and “individual” than they already were. And I think Thackery would fit well into the proper, rule-abiding mold of the Welton teacher, but I don’t think he would have been able to effectively teach Keating’s class or make the impact Keating did.
I enjoyed the movie. I thought its scenery and where it was set was well thought out and appeared wonderfully on film. I thought the actors and actresses did a great job as students, and as teachers, especially the main bunch in the class that are shown the most and of course the small faculty group. I also really enjoyed the theme song for the movie. Yes, the film is dated, but that's part of why I enjoyed it. It has a certain style to it that you can't get out of films anymore. The moment at the end where Thackery begins to choke up at his students' present is definitely a moment that stood out to me. It was a touching moment for him to know that his work had paid off and that he'd given his students something valuable to take with them-something they really can hold onto forever.
ReplyDeleteI think that only at the end of the movie can one make an assessment of how good a teacher Thackery is. Towards the beginning, he's still learning the way around these kids, but by the end, it's clear he has been steered in the right direction. I think that at the end of the film, he is a good teacher because he had a goal in mind for these kids and he reached it. He had to figure out on his own that at this point it was useless to teach these seniors from books. They were only a few steps away from the real world and so in order to just help them survive out there, he knew he needed to teach them important everyday concepts and skills that are beneficial and make for an independent man or woman. He did the right thing to ditch the books. With this group of kids, during this time, in this area, he did the right thing. Thackery's boundaries with his students are all fine for the most part; the one that might appear questionable is the one with Pamela. Aside from the last day celebration, I feel as though Thackery acted quite properly with Pamela-even refusing when she offered to tidy up his desk every day. It is obvious that Pamela had a crush on Thackery, for he was one of the only nice men she'd ever met. When she yelled at him during the scene where he calls her in to talk about her mother's visit, I feel like this was a place where Thackery could have gone wrong in regards to boundaries. She made it seem as though Thackery was in the wrong for not being on her side. If only Thackery had somehow avoided this because they he knows they can't be good friends that side with each other no matter what and that simply can't be the case with a student and teacher.
I would probably want Keating as a teacher out of all of them because I, in general, really enjoyed his message. He was about opening yourself up and taking chances even when all those around you might laugh and think your crazy. He got his boys to do something which I feel is very important and that is to stick up for what you believe in. I found him to be creative and easily approachable and sensible. I would want some of him and his values and beliefs to rub off on me
I don't think these teachers would teach as well as at other schools than they do at their current school. Keating for example would not be able to teach at North Quay because his passion is for poetry and the kids at North Quay can't even read properly. His creative exercises wouldn't have worked on that group of kids who have a different outlook on life. They aren't like the boy's who held the dead poets meetings. These kids don't have much after high school nor do they have wealthy families to support them on their way to Ivy League schools and doctor or lawyer-like jobs. On the other hand, Thackery would perhaps be a pretty good fit for Walton in terms of his character and disposition, but he wouldn't have learned all that he learned at North Quay. He wouldn't have experienced what he did at Walton, and without that-he's just another new teacher. People are shaped by their experiences, so naturally it's the same case here.
Despite the unrealistic change in behavior of the students, I liked the movie. I think how the students respond to Thackery’s change in teaching styles is way too quick–in about 30 seconds they became generally well-behaved students. The scene that stuck out to me was when the kid whose mother dies comes to class, and Thackery immediately consoles him. This scene shows that the kids are lacking a responsible adult figure in their lives who will teach them how to behave in the real world. For most of the kids, I assume, Thackery is unlike any adult they’ve ever met–determined to change their behavior. They respond so well to him because they aren’t bad kids, they’ve just been raised poorly and live in a poor environment.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t call Thackery a schoolteacher–he’s more of a life coach. However, teachers teach, and Thackery does in fact teach the students manners and behavior, as well as making salads. For the group of kids he receives, it is clear teaching academic subjects would be useless. I agree with his decision to ditch the books and help the kids grow up. After Thackery’s classes, the kids are more prepared for the real world, so Thackery’s methods have to be considered successful. I t think his boundaries with his students were appropriate, from hitting Denim to making the kid apologize to the gym teacher. The way he looks at the student who is hitting on him was a little inappropriate, but that doesn’t escalate to much, so it’s all good.
I would prefer to have Keating as a teacher. For me, a teacher who would introduce me to different approaches to thinking would be more beneficial than a teacher who would teach me to learn about salads and who to marry. Pete isn’t as special a teacher as Keating, and it is proven by how the students respond to Keating. They look forward to his class and enjoy every exercise, so I would have to assume I would too.
I think Pete would fit in fine at all three schools–his teaching style and strong charisma is very versatile. Keating would only work at Walton–he would get mocked at North Quay, and the students at Whitman don’t seemed dedicated enough to school to get the most out of Keating. North Quay would be a disaster, and Whitman would be a decent, but not great, fit for Keating. Thackery could teach at Whitman–he is similar to Pete. Thackery’s intellectual side is never really shown in the movie, so his fit at Walton is hard to decipher.
I have to say that I did not enjoy To Sir With Love. I thought that many components of the movie's storyline were unrealistic, including some of Thackery's reactions to his students and the transition the students went through to become well-behaved students. The scene that stuck most to me is at the end, when Pamela Dare asks Mr. Thackery to dance with her. This scene, although somewhat unrealistic in my opinion, does show the change that the students and even Mr. Thackery go through in the movie. Both Pamela and Mr. Thackery never would have done anything like this in the mindsets they had at the beginning of the movie.
ReplyDeleteI think Mr. Thackery is a good teacher in what he is trying to achieve. He realizes these kids are lost causes when it comes to educating them in school subjects and preparing them for education after secondary school. He knows he has to teach them to become "men and women" and he does a great job in doing just that. He opens his students up to their surroundings and teaches them valuable lessons they will encounter in their adult lives. I, as an upper-middle class student at a prestigious private school, will never have to go through a school like this. Personally, I would like to have a teacher like this to prepare me for adulthood, but I do not need it as much as these students do.
Like I said, each teacher is special for the environments they are in. Keating is a breath of fresh air for the students at Welton who are controlled by the structure of the school. Dixon is helpful and supportive of his students at his school, which seems like the most traditional school. Thackery is something the students at North Quay need due to their situation. If I was in any of these situations, I would want each of these teachers in these situations, but I do not have a preference for the situation I am in right now.
Like I said above, each teacher is placed in the situation they are most needed in. This means that there is no way they could switch schools. Keating and Dixon would be ripped apart at North Quay. Thackery would be feared at Welton and at Dixon's school (the name is slipping my mind). Dixon is the only one that could be somewhat accurately placed at Welton, but like Keating, would not do well at North Quay.
1) At times, this movie was a bit slow, but I did like it quite a bit. It was a completely different world from Dead Poet’s Society, but an important one. There were a lot of interesting dynamics concerning race, class, and power/authority, presented in a very honest way. One scene that stood out to me was after Thackerey’s hand began bleeding and one boy stated something along the lines of “Wow, red blood!” Pamela Dare, angered, replied “What’d you expect? Ink?” As she continued her defense of Thackery, probably fueled by the fact that she liked him, you could really see how much she had changed. She had always been outspoken, evidenced at the beginning when she boldly read a passage from a school book, but she seemed to have turned a corner in the WAY she thinks, the way she views the world, and how she USES her outspoken-ness.
ReplyDelete2) Thackery, due to his own struggles with money, recognizes that most of his students grew up without a strong mentor figure to help guide or instill strong principles in them. As a result, the kids are rowdy, resentful, and rule-breakers. He decides to treat them like adults, a completely brilliant move. The kids had never received that level of respect before, of being called “Sir” and “Miss.” When Thackerey treated like adults he was telling them that they were worth that respect, that they had a life beyond the classroom, and that they were individuals. Though the life lessons were a bit outdated, they meant something profound for the students, who never had any real structure to their lives or thought for their futures. I think also that the school labeled these kids as delinquents and treated them as such rather than actual students. I don’t think that the students ever felt like they deserved respect, or that they deserved to go make a living or marry or have a nice, secure life because after all, they were just “delinquents.” Thackery really showed the kids they didn’t have to be so trapped; they could get go get jobs, and demand, in a polite way of course, respect from others. Most of them being lower-class, they probably always felt beneath most people, particularly rich people. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but I think Thackerey’s lessons gave them a very subtle sense that they were human beings, not delinquents, and didn’t have to be so subservient. I think Thackerey was a successful and necessary teacher.
3) I’d love to have Keating as my teacher. I feel like it would really make me believe outside of the box in so many ways and that I’d have a newfound appreciation for different things. I would also love to study poets in an un-abashed, free for all sort of way as well.
Delete4) I think the teachers switching schools would be tough, but doable in some cases. Pete and Thackerey seem like the most flexible of the three. Pete could teach at North Quay, however, he would really have to adjust, as he is used to the somewhat comfortable lifestyle of Walt Whitman and the cooperative-ness of the students there. He also could teach at Welton, but that might be too much power and responsibility, and I think the fact that everything has to be spotless, might unnverve him, though he would certainly appreciate the determination of the students. For Thackerey, I think Walt Whitman would be a comfortable place for him to work, where his persistence and politeness would be admired and respected. I think Thackerey would have a harder time at Welton, where the concentrated power and wealth might unnerve him, but certainly he would appreciate the intentions to be a fine institution. Keating, I feel, would have a hard time at Walt Whitman or North Quay. Maybe he could do it, but Keating is used to being at higher educational facilities and I feel like, though admirable, passionate, and romantic, he wouldn’t want to be that uncomfortable. At Walt Whitman, I think he could convince himself he liked it, but ultimately would feel trapped and bogged down by being in a public school and having to follow “state codes,” dealing with teaching assistants, having the principal check up on his class and his curriculum, etc. At North Quay, I think Keating could reign in and inspire the students but would again have a hard time with the institution itself and the disparaging situations around him.
1) I had mixed feelings about the movie. I felt as though it was somewhat slow and could have progressed a little faster with its plot, but I also loved the classroom and the progression that everyone made. I found it so interesting how that group of people was able to come together and put aside differences to try and achieve what was best for them. I think the moment that stood out to me was when Mr. Thackery and the rebellious kid were boxing in the gym. The way that Thackery let the kid sort of have his way with him for a while was interesting and then it was even more interesting that when Thackery finally took a stand, he didn’t completely destroy him, only gave him a punch to the stomach to get him to stop. I think that this showed the maturity and respect of Thackery compared the wild and unruly kids of his class.
ReplyDelete2) I think that Thackery is a great teacher. He is obviously passionate about his work and tries very hard. The fact that he even keeps coming back to the class after his students disrespect him so is a testament to his perseverance. I thought that the choice he makes to abandon the books and teach his students about life was a brilliant move and the turning point in the film. Thackery understands the students’ situation and realizes the best thing that he can give them is the knowledge of the outside world they will be facing in just a couple of months. I think that this move also leads the kids to respect him which leads to a successful classroom. I thought that he was pretty appropriate with his boundaries. Things between him and Pamela got a little weird but in the end they worked themselves out and no harm was done.
3) I think I would want to have Thackery as a teacher. I like his classroom and teaching style the best. I think that to learn about life would be a fresh new experience and I would benefit from it greatly. Also, I loved how he was so invested and determined with his students and gave them great respect. I also liked how he let them chose what they wanted to learn about and how the class was discussion-based with the students doing most of the talking. I think that this led to a much more effective classroom and a setting where I would look forward to having a class.
4) I think that Pete could teach effectively at Welton but not at North Quay. At Welton, he would just be another teacher and wouldn’t have to deal with any problems, and he’d even be more of a bright spot with the students as opposed with their other classes. At North Quay however, I feel like the students would overrun him and he wouldn’t have the kind of charisma or willpower that Thackery had to control and get a grip of the class. Keating I think would have a similar story, as he would be able to teach at Walt Whitman and have the students there love him. However, I don’t think he has the same strength that Thackery does and would not be able to get a hold of his class at North Quay, where his nonconformist lessons would be thrown back in his face by the students who already knew more about nonconformity than he did. Lastly, I feel as though Thackery could teach at any of the schools because I feel like he is able to adapt the best to his situation and could make the most of where he was at, no matter the school.