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. Stan, as many posters on here already point out when this question is raised, teachers don't go to the police because the school then get arsey with them for bringing the police in.

    I think that schools don't want to accept that there are problems within their establishments and therefore turn a blind eye. Head teachers and SMT can make a teacher's life a living nightmare (from posts I've read) for going to the police over such matters of assault :s
    It's completely wrong! So much for support!
     
  2. delenn

    delenn New commenter

    When I was assaulted- eggs thrown at me in school Idid contact the police but they were of little help. One of the girls involved did get permantly excluded- not for just that incident but she was excluded and the other got about 10 days and I refused to be in a classroom with her after she returned.

    The policeman I saw told me that it wasn't assualt just possibly criminal damage to my jumper(!!!) and just advised me that the best way to proceed was a stern letter to their parents and the incident to go on file and count towards an asbo.Later when the girl who was excluded was hanging around the streets near the schol the police were not interested even though she was threatening and as we are a split site school there were times when I had to walk passed her because I don't drive.

    I was later told that I could have proceeded with an assault and I do feel that the policeman just wanted me to take the easiesyt route possible. The head and SMT were supportive, I chose not to go home, I faced the kids that day and I went on to be observed as planned for Performance management. So while I believe that some SMTs are at fault, I also think that the police are quick to play down the situation as well- it's only a teacher attitude!
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  3. Sorry if I or my wife were attacked at school I would contact the police - if the school got arsey - so what - your not the problem the child who attacks you is at fault!!! We must stop taking the blame!!
     
    Libby2012 and pepper5 like this.
  4. feather

    feather New commenter

    Hi

    How about assaulting a teacher on three separate occasions and being allowed back in school after two days each time. On the third occasion I walked out. The LEA is to be replaced by a private company after an abysmal inspection and the school is on special measures.

    The whistleblower is being chased by the GTC following the above employer being allowed to supply it with a load of drivel (after I lodged a complaint with the police not before). By the way the employer has conveniently missed out the assaults, missed out the physical injuries requiring physiotheraphy and missed out that because of these injuries I am waiting to see a surgeon.

    The discredited employers words seemingly amount to proof according to this GTC. This GTC which I never willingly joined, its a sacking tool, and currently I am not paying any money to because of its grossly abysmal way of not bothering to listen to anyone but the employer. Nevertheless it still thinks I care.

    Just a tinsy tiny little point I don't want to work in schools governed by you with fully inclusive drug dealing going on inside them. Oh and if that isn't enough how about a helping of registered alcoholics plus kids from London famillies on witness protection. Yes they all were in one gang. What a cocktail.

    Oh and yes the drug dealers will be having a good laugh won't they with the support they get from the teachers employer.

    This is why I don't want to be a teacher until things change dramatically.

    I am enjoying teaching elsewhere where drug dealers are seriously dealt with when they come anywhere near. What a difference.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  5. Recently a teacher raised their voice at a pupil who refused to cooperate throughout the lesson (who has not done that??) pupil shouted & swore & threatened teacher - told mother how dreadful they'd been treated (!) teacher nearly suspended & incident on teachers record. Feel so supported by the head teacher! By the way - pupils behaviour is clearly acceptable as the head has written a letter of apology to the mother of the little darling!
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  6. Skyler

    Skyler New commenter

    I don't think I want to be a teacher anymore..

    This thread is horrific.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  7. So Old Andrew what are your answers? I need to speak to a Year 10 boy about smoking. He will get an after school DT but really I need to dissuade him from smoking. A solution needs to come first. Punishment is a secondary matter.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  8. I think you must have posted to the wrong thread.

    This thread isn't about smokers it's about serious incidents that haven't resulted in an permanent exclusion.

    The solution to this is to exclude them.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Blog at: http://infet.co.uk/blog/index.php/a/a Last updated 15/2/2007
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  9. No, Andrew I was thinking of more serious incidents too. Permanent exclusion means that students enter a life of crime, ignorance and unemployability. The Government has no choice but to be firm on permananent exclusions. As teachers I think we need to have the humility to accept that we still have much to learn about inclusion strategies. That is why I asked for solutions.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  10. "Permanent exclusion means that students enter a life of crime, ignorance and unemployability."

    No, a permanent exclusion means they go to another school, away from those they have already victimised and endangered. Allowing them to remain at a school where they have behaved in a way that is criminal, ignorant and that would make them unemployable is a far better route to the life you describe.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Blog at: http://infet.co.uk/blog/index.php/a/a Last updated 15/2/2007
     
  11. And many of them continue the same patterns of behaviour at a new school. Some respond to a second chance, I agree. But I still think we have a lot to learn about inclusive practice.
     
  12. Have you been reading the thread? What the hell has inclusive practice got to do with being subject to violence, abuse and criminal behaviour?

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Blog at: http://infet.co.uk/blog/index.php/a/a Last updated 15/2/2007
     
  13. jamie.edward.saunder is either SMT or a trainee teacher. Or a troll! They clearly have no sense of what it's really like out there!
     
    pepper5 and headflower like this.
  14. "Permanent exclusion means that students enter a life of crime, ignorance and unemployability."

    Bull ! It's so difficult to get a permanent ex. these days that it's more likely that they get into crime etc. for the same reason they are a pain in the neck in schools. There's a correlation but no causation.

    "The Government has no choice but to be firm on permananent exclusions."

    Why ?

    "As teachers I think we need to have the humility to accept that we still have much to learn about inclusion strategies."

    That they are **** and don't work ?

    "That is why I asked for solutions"

    If they continually behave like swine, don't give them 300 chances, make them suffer.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  15. How about introducing apolicy that states that pupils have to stay at school until they get 5 GCSEs at 'C' grade or above.

    This might teach some of the time wasters to stop wasting time. They will soon realise that they'll be in the classroom (still) at the age of 20, learning how to write essays, do maths or whatever.

    At the end of each year, those who have not made enough 'progress' have to stay down a year & repeat it. So even the Y5s might start being a bit more ambitious! The Y11s will be asking for extra homework & hiring tutors to ensure that they get their grades!
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  16. WolfPaul

    WolfPaul New commenter

    jamie.edward.saunder wrote: "Permanent exclusion means that students enter a life of crime, ignorance and unemployability."

    Alternatively: Students who enter a life of crime, ignorance and unemployability are often permanently excluded.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  17. in my NQT year I got strangled by a Year 11 Schizo girl. She repeatedly said she wanted to kill me, and one day tried with a piece of string. She wasn't excluded but put on early study leave, however as I am an MFL teacher I had to do speaking exams, on my own with her in a room a few months later. I never got any support from my school either.
     
    pepper5 likes this.
  18. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    jamie.edward.saunder is an independent school teacher who firmly believes that "children do not misbehave for excellent teachers."
    Naive does not come close..........
     
    pepper5 and headflower like this.
  19. Solution? Progression by ability or not at all. As young children, being made to retake a year would be an embarrassment.

    Re-introduce competitive sport and proper competition, yes taking part is important but so is winning.

    As to the violence - outside of the school gates many incidences would be prosecuted. We have had staff pushed and punched. I think each incident just lowers your own standards. I hear derogatory language but have not had it directed at me until recently.

    As the the SMT line, yes, a student can tell a teacher to F*** off every day, or be abusive and disruptive in other ways, but a one off incident of swearing at SMT is an exclusion.

    Different SMT have different criteria. I was called a ***** by a Year 8 student. He was excluded for the rest of the day and his father insisted he apologise to me.

    I was called a F ***ing C*** by a Year 9 student and was told to put him in detention with me for half an hour.

    I just have a tickbox of general behaviour/language addressed to Dear Parent and keep sending them home.

    Detention is impossible as the students already have a full social calendar, so by the time I get them for MY detention they have racked up another 10 or so with me - but I can only give them the one detention.

    Teachers AND students can see inconsistency in SMT and their approach. Good kids get sent home for a slight bit of the wrong dye in their hair. The terrors walk around with a multi-coloured do, facial piercings, wrong uniform and SMT are glad they are in school. Not in lessons, just on school property.

    Students have no consistent boundaries. The RULES are not followed in the same manner by each SMT or applied fairly to each student. Yet we are constantly told to be fair and consistent.



     
    pepper5 likes this.
  20. i'm now working in the private sector due to previous schools' attitudes to behaviour (see previous post). My current school says that swearing results in an immediate DT and assault results in instantaneous and permanent exclusion. consequently, we have very few serious behavioural problems. people who say behaviour is all down to bad teaching are talking rubbish. the only way a child is going to behave is if they are taught to, and have real and negative consequences for not doing so. unfortunately, many children are being raised without boundaries, which are only being reinforced by idiotic government and smt who fail to back up their staff.

    in no other working environment would we be expected to accept what we are being forced to accept.

    i for one will not accept being used as a punchbag simply because some namby pamby policies require it.

    nor will i trade my own safety and that of my other students for the (somewhat dubious) benefit of one. it's simple mathematics.

    "students enter a life of crime, ignorance and unemployability." there is no reason why 800 students should be subjected to this due to the behaviour of one.

    the legal system has a word for what's currently happening in too many schools - it's called 'reckless endangerment'
    it's called 'assault'
    it's called 'threatening behaviour'
    all of which would be dealt with by the police in any other environment. certain individuals have lost sight of this fact i think.
     
    pepper5 likes this.

Share This Page