1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Incidents that didn?t result in a permanent exclusion

Discussion in 'Behaviour' started by oldandrew, Jan 31, 2007.

  1. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    Typical behaviour for some supply teachers in some schools (no matter how good the supply teacher is) - for post 180.
     
  2. It is certainly not "typical behaviour".

    The point was really that it was nothing to do with being a supply teacher.

    One student wasn't part of the class but came in and ran amok in two rooms, one with the regular teacher in it. He was obviously roaming the corridors looking for trouble.

    The other was known to be violent and volatile, but his behaviour was excused when it was a temporary teacher but not when it was the head.

    Both examples show the contempt some schools have for supply teachers.

    In both cases the easy option was to write it off as a supply thing instead of dealing with it.
     
  3. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    It certainly is typical behaviour for some pupils in some (admittedly, not many) schools towards supply (or any new) teachers.

    The pupils would not do that for an established teacher.



    Happy to agree to disagree.
     
  4. One pupil, not even part of the class treated another, permanent, teacher and the deputy head in exactly the same way during the incident. It was common behaviour for this student towards teachers.

    One pupil was kept out of most lessons because of his violence towards teachers but had to threaten to kill the head before being excluded.

    But you seem to feel the need to write it off as 'a supply teacher incident'.

    You are part of the problem.
     
  5. After being repeatedly punched, hit, spat at and verbally abused over a period of time by an autistic pupil in a mainstream school, the head said "Oh well, it's what we do, we just have to stand there and take it". And "Your welfare doesn't come into it at the moment, the pupils welfare is my biggest concern". Then when I threatened to call my union if the pupil hit me one more time. The head moved ME!!
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  6. happyhopey

    happyhopey New commenter

    is Jamie still around? I'd like to know how his ideas could be used in Primary. I am fed up with low level poor behaviour which eventually becomes more serious as they get older or if ther are generally more disturbed. I'd welcome looking at more positive ideas and willingly give them a go.

    will report back on how it goes. Please respond Jamie
     
  7. Just think this is helpful - from NASUWT website.

    "Violence at work includes not only physical assault but also verbal abuse, threats, harassment and malicious damage to property, whether caused by a pupil, student or member of the public, arising out of the course of one's employment. There is a clear responsibility on employers to protect teachers against violence, especially when it is foreseeable. A number of LEAs have 'Assaults on Staff' procedures, which often contain statements of support and provision for counselling, time off, legal aid and compensation.

    School management should:

    give an unequivocal statement of support for staff subjected to violence;
    investigate all reported incidents of violence;
    assess risks and devise strategies for the prevention of violence;
    devise, in consultation with staff, and implement a discipline policy;
    adopt a formal system for reporting and recording all incidents of violence;
    confirm that reporting an incident will not reflect on competence;
    take into account the fact that women are more susceptible to violence than men.
    H&S Reps should:

    consult members about potential risks and possible control measures which could be put in place;
    check that there is an official form for reporting and recording incidents;
    encourage members to report all incidents of violence;
    find out if the LEA/school has issued any relevant guidelines;
    monitor the effectiveness of control measures and keep a record of incidents;
    insist that all violent attacks are reported to the police;
    if a matter has been reported to police, advise the member to make a claim to the CICA (forms available from Regional Centres);
    if the member wishes to investigate the possibility of pursuing a legal claim, advise them to telephone the NASUWT free Legal Advice Line: 0808 100 2221.
    When an assault leads to an illness requiring sick leave, advise the member to complete and submit form BI95* (notification of industrial injury) to the local social security office or Jobcentre Plus. This will log the incident as work-related in case of any future benefit claim. The form can be downloaded for printing or submitting online at: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/advisers/claimforms/bi95.pdf.
    Violent attacks are reportable under RIDDOR**.
    Only National Executive can authorise members to exercise professional judgement in refusing to teach a pupil.
    It is possible that a member who is a victim of violence may face an allegation of wrongdoing arising out of the incident. If police wish to investigate such a matter, the member must contact the Regional Centre at the earliest opportunity."

    In any case, log incidents in either accident book or harassment book, depending on local systems in place. Logging things mean school has to address issue and also put measures in place to prevent it happening again.
     
  8. But as garyc has pointed out, you don't need to for supply teachers because they're to blame.
     
  9. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    coronel,
    I really didn't want to get into another disagreement with you about pupil behaviour towards supply teachers. I said I was happy to agree to disagree with you. You misunderstand me, I do not "seem to feel the need to write it off as 'a supply teacher incident'." I feel quite the opposite about treatment of supply teachers in schools! I was one for a year, so think they are badly treated by pupils.


    Maybe in post 183 when I said "The pupils would not do that for an established teacher" I should have said "many pupils would not do *that* for an established teacher", ie the pupils' behaviour alters when they have a supply teacher in charge.
    That's all I'm saying.
    I have NEVER said that supply teachers are to blame (as you dishonestly claim, post 188), just that:
    (i) pupils always play up more for supply teachers than permanent/established staff (see comments on Algela Mason thread, I believe this is indisputable)
    and
    (ii) SMT in schools give far less support or sympathy to supply staff than permanent/established staff.
    Do you disagree with (i) or (ii)?





    For example, when I started a new job in the summer term at a school the first time I met one class they were outrageously rude to me! One pupil pulled faces, made noises and basically took the **** straight away. I was ignored by everyone in the class, they wouldn't even listen to me or sit down. The face-pulling boy walked out.
    I logged on the computer in the room, got class details up, found boy who was rude via photos. A pupil asked what I was doing; I expolained I was going to phone boy's parents, organise a detention and have a chat.
    As soon as the class realised I wasn't a supply teacher (they assumed I was) they changed from uncooperative rabble to a better class of teachable pupils! (Not perfect, but markedly better, immediately).




    Incidentally, I am not a teacher any more, as I've commonly mentioned on here. This being the case, how on earth can I be said to be, "You are part of the problem" (post 184) when I don't have anything to do with schools, or teaching any more?
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  10. OK.

    I was responding to the thread title and my examples were about how being a supply teacher allows SMT to ignore behaviour they would otherwise have to deal with. In my examples, the supply teacher element was irrelevant to the behaviour. That was the point.
     
  11. I was supplying in year 6 recently, with a very difficult child in, who IMMEDIATELY called me 'not very bright' 'crazy' and an '********' amongst other actions which sent the class off in peels of laughter and they wouldn't do a thing for me. The CT (in school on training) fortunately heard something happening, came and read the riot act, the girl was removed and excluded till the end of term and the rest of the day went fine. I felt really well supported here and not undermined as I felt the teacher was working with me as much as she could and not over me...
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  12. An 11 yr old said to me once - 'if i was bigger i would slap you'. I laughed and told him to get out. He was excluded for two days but only because i had the attitude that it was him or me. I am quite happy to go on long term sick and go on holiday if a school won't support me, but that is the point isn't it - the school did support me because i was valuable and I knew my worth. Every teacher should do it. I knew teachers who were assaulted more seriously and yet would not go to the head and demand that something be done.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  13. I'm not a teacher, but a TA. I tried the ultimatum bit. ie "if she does that again, I'll be phoning UNISON". All that happened was they moved ME and put another TA with her instead!!
    That made me feel like I was the one who had been at fault, and it was just before all the nice Christmas activities, so I missed out on all the lovely stuff with my class. I 'd never felt so low.

    Especially as shortly after, she spat and kicked a teacher and got suspended immediately for 2 days!
     
  14. gingerella

    gingerella New commenter

    Pupil threw a bit of paper at the bin, it hit my leg, pupil got two days. OFSTED come in ignore 12% increase in 5A*-C over two years of new HT/B' Management policy and threaten us with Special Measures. OK lets go back to the good old days when the nice well behaved pupils suffered because the little sh*ts
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  15. pepper5 likes this.
  16. "As far as I can tell, the govenment tries to discourage permanant exclusions, so often the Heads hands are tied. I am not defending the heads and I know that not every head is prefect."

    Some heads do the exclusions anyway. Heads' hands are only tied if they let them be. The exclusion rate differs drastically between Local Authorities and between schools.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  17. marmot.morveux

    marmot.morveux New commenter

    If schools are not prepared to permanently exclude pupils then they should make isolation in school really unpleasant.

    A room with nothing in it except a chair and table with nothing to do. Pupils might think twice about behaving badly.

    MM
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  18. "But are you trying to tell me that all SMT are rubbish at their jobs to this degree?"

    No, just the overwhelming majority. It is normal for students to assault staff and not be permanently excluded. It is normal for students to verbally abuse staff over a dozen times and not be permanently excluded. It is normal for students to endanger the safety and sometimes the lives of their teachers and their peers and not be permanently excluded. It is normal for teachers to be blamed for causing serious incidents in the first place and be victimised for trying to comply with school disciplinary policies.

    There is ample testimony to this on the TES forums but you should easily be able to find it out for yourself.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Teaching Blog at: http://oldandrew.edublogs.org
    Latest entry: 21/3/2008
     
  19. amberzak,
    I worked in industry for 17 years before I became a teacher. I was a manager for 10 of those years. I can honestly say that most smt are hopeless managers who would not last a day in industry. Most smt are self-obsessed career-obsessed and never want to waste their time dealing with anything which does not get them closer to their next payrise.

    I have left the uk and now live happily in vietnam.

    red
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  20. "I worked in industry for 17 years before I became a teacher. I was a manager for 10 of those years. I can honestly say that most smt are hopeless managers who would not last a day in industry."

    One day I will meet a teacher who worked in industry who doesn't think that.

    One day...
     

Share This Page