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. I completely agree with you. Humour is also a good tool to use if used in the right way. There are many things an individual teacher can do to diffuse a difficult situation. I also agree that children have free will, and, given the opportunity, they will use it in the best way possible.

    In my classes, I have used many techniques to show the students that their choices are important and they can make good ones, and this has often disarmed many a situation that could have escalated into something terrible. My point is that there are a few children that even the most disarming and talented teachers have no luck with. There are a few children that are failed by the system because there is no provision for them, or the provision is a short term solution to a long term problem.

    I think your ideas are great, but I still think that those children who simply cannot cope with the demands of a large secondary school are being failed by a system which does not provide them with the education they deserve. I have seen children at 11 show that they have lost all faith in the adults around them - including their own parents, and yet they are left to roam the corridors because teachers will not let them into classes. Or they are placed in the seclusion room forever by SMT who cannot, or will not deal with them. These children are totally failed. Saying that you can simply negotiate with these students in their current frame of mind is a nice idea, but also a little naive IMO.

    Obviously I do not know who you are and how effective a practitioner you are, and vice versa, but I have watched the most incredible teachers fail to engage with some of the most desensitised (sp), disenfranchished, fu*ked up kids imaginable and it angers me to read your offerings such as the rather obvious 'follow up with your consequences' advice. You are not getting the point. Some of these students are beyond mainstream education and it needs to be recognised. It is not fair on the rest of the students, and it is not fair on them.

    Some of these children are emotionally and mentally damaged, and need long term help if they are to reach their potential. Some of them come from shocking home lives, and need more help than the average teacher can or will, or indeed should have to, give them.

    Rule number one: Be cool. No sh1t.

    'An appeal to fairness tends to work.' For the majority, probably. But for the small minority who have been abused, grossly neglected, and generally fuc*ed up by every adult they have ever known, they may not know from experience what fair actually is.
  2. Can't disagree with you there at all about some of them being failed and being in the wrong place.

    Think you are mistaking me with someone else re- being fair.
    Children need to learn that life isn't always fair.
    And that adults are the ones in charge not them.
  3. Yeah sorry Sport - its not clear - the reference to fairness is for Jamie.Edward.Saunder
  4. Re consequences, i've seen enough teachers and parents in my time make numerous idle threats until they get to the point where they loose it.

  5. Okay, the comment was aimed at me and I make you angry. I am not sure how or if you want me to respond, so for once I will say nothing.
  6. davidgclare

    davidgclare New commenter

    These are all shocking tales, but what also shocks me is the fact that most of the teachers posting on this forum don't seem to have any grasp of basic spellings or basic grammar. If their errors are mere 'typos', then I am not impressed by their casual attitude towards communication.
  7. David, are there any mistakes in my communication that I should know about?
  8. i agree that for the majority, being 'fair' will work. the majority of children do respond to fairness, but, as blueplantlife notes, there are a core of children who are so s*****d over by life and/or education that they aren't going to respond.

    i've taught children who misbehave because life has taught them that adults are not to be trusted. that i understand, if one has been betrayed by the very adults one trusts- how are they supposed to trust us as teachers?

    it's no wonder behaviour strategies aren't going to work. the idea of using 'fairness' and negotiated rules work only if the children have faith in the very people implementing these strategies.if they don't, the whole system becomes a waste of time for all concerned. it's desperately sad for these children, but one can only work with what one has. the fact is obvious, one can only help the ones who want to be helped.

    one can try to gain the children's trust, but in a mainstream secondary school, one siply does not have the resources or the time needed to attempt to undo a lifetime of s**t and/or bad parenting. i agree that for the majority of children negotiation of rules work- most children when asked propose the same rules as adults and will adhere to them. however, i think it is a case of one size does not fit all. what works for the majority does not work for the most dangerous (and i mean that word) children. this is where a more hard line has to be developed. children simply have to learn, whatever their background that assault of any kind is criminal behaviour and in the real world will be dealt with and not escused.

    p.s. david, i think that your post was most unnecessary and unhelpful. also please note the following correction:

    'These are all shocking tales, but what also shocks me is the fact that most of the teachers posting on this forum' should read:

    These are all shocking tales, but what also shocks me is the fact that most of the teachers' postings on this forum'
  9. ladyhawk

    ladyhawk New commenter

    I currently have a foul-mouthed, violent EBD boy in my class who should receive short-term exclusions on a regular basis and SMT have offered to call his parents to take him home many times. However, I won't let them, as last time his father came in I had to hide his son from him until he had calmed down so that he wouldn't beat the c**p out of him.

    pepper5 likes this.
  10. Mexicola

    Mexicola New commenter

    Numerous incidents of serious sexual harrassment towards the female staff at my school including myself and a teacher who was 5 months pregnant at the time. The way in which these incidents were dealt with showed an almost total lack of communication among staff and proved that there's no discipline/punishment system in operation. The pupils in question were suspended for a few days. Also several threats/acts of physical violence - but, according to the senior mentor, "There's no such thing as problem children, only children with problems".

    So that's alright then.
    pepper5 likes this.
  11. i know exactly what you mean mexicola- i've had that problem, but in my case, there was no exclusion- or punishment of any kind.

    sure, there are children with problems, but that shouldn't mean that their problems are used as an excuse for their behaviour- ultimately, they themselves are responsible for their behaviour, and they make the choice to behave in an antisocial manner.

    there is no excuse for criminal behaviour in schools- and it is criminal. at least your smt did exclude the guilty parties. many of the teachers' postings show that we aren't so lucky. that doesn't make it any better though!
  12. Mexicola

    Mexicola New commenter

    ". . . ultimately, they themselves are responsible for their behaviour, and they make the choice to behave in an antisocial manner".

    I couldn't agree more bagpussfan! Our job is to teach our chosen subject, not control behaviour - classroom management is one thing, trying to get a young offender to hand over a weapon or zip his trousers up is another. Inclusivity is very noble, but if a school is to have this policy it needs an efficient system of punishment in order to counter the inevitable fallout. Unfortunately my school doesn't have one. Pupils who do the kinds of things included in this thread know they'll be expelled for a few days, which basically spells 'holiday' - I've heard them laughing and joking about it. There are a small number of particularly appalling pupils who appear to have immunity, and senior management seem almost scared of them. These kids play the school like a fiddle and get away with offensive and dangerous behaviour all the time.

    Tomorrow sees the return of one very nasty piece of work who attempted to kick my classroom door down while I was standing against the other side of it, then said he was going to kick my "f&*!ing head in". Lovely. Thank God it's almost Easter!
    pepper5 likes this.
  13. One of the biggest issues in this is the question of whether Headteachers are prepared to stand up to the LEA or not over exclusions. It's a shame that having a backbone is not something terribly common in headteachers these days. The best headteacher I ever worked for permanently excluded 15 students in a year. The school showed massive improvement in pretty much all respects.

    Teaching Blog at: http://infet.co.uk/blog/index.php/a/a
    Latest entry: ?If Only They Didn?t Have To Learn? 1/4/2007
  14. These children are criminally insane and should not be around normal members of the student body. Why? Because their actions damage the sanity of otherwise stable teachers and students.

    I wish that those educationalists (James Sauders et al) could witness the outcome of their ideas.

    The violence is horrific. I think those who experience it and who carry on, are heros of both gender.

    My partner has been bullied off her PGCE. Reading this, I think it is just as well.

    We have to face it. Some people are Pond Life, whether they are 12 or 19 - they are just not worth educating. So let them join the workforce.
    pepper5 likes this.
  15. My boss has the best idea, if a pupil cannot follow basic instructions - they are ill - and as a result should see a doctor and not be allowed back into school until this illness is sorted.

    My head excludes kids on a regular basis for various incidents in and around school, she is great, but the idiots at the LEA make her take them back, she has had to go for several meetings to resolve the issue about poor behaviour.

    Let the idiots teach these kids for a day - see how long they last!!!!
    pepper5 likes this.
  16. Perhaps, just perhaps what the real problem is here si not that SMT are spineless, but that they actaully do not know what to do!

    Seriously, at secondary level, there is little or no training for any teaching or SMT staff on violent pupils. Previously the answer was simple, SMT excluded them, but now exclusion are constantly overturned, so SMT regard the process as pointless.

    Now I am not excusing the SMT, they are afterall paid a darn good wage, but they lack basic training in such matters. Although I would say this, the huge wage increases that SMTs have seen over the last ten years make them very reluctant to disobey their paymasters. The question is, is this the SMTs fault, (afterall if it was your mortgage/family's income on the line would you honestly do things differently), or are high wages for SMT a way for policy makers to buy silence?

    This means of course that the education system in this country is being asked to deal with pupils who should not be in mainstream schools, as they imperil the safety of pupils, staff etc.

    This proves that current education policy and the way inclusion has been used to save money by closing special schools and units, is wrong.

    Look outside the school gates, and see the real villains who are destroying Britsh education. Ask why they are doing it too? saving money is one reason, another is so government ministers can go on National TV and say 'behaviour is improving, look at how exclusion rates have dropped', when it is those very ministers that are putting out directives instructing LAs abnd ultimately SMTs to reduce exclusion.

    Whose purpose is all this serving? Policians and soundbites! Oh and the medias constant misrepresentaion of the behaviour problem in schools too, it isn't just 'run down city comprehensives' anymore, if the middle classes of middle England ( those that decide elections) really saw what was going on in schools there would be outrage.

    pepper5 likes this.
  17. you've got a really good point there dodat, i'm glad someone else has said it!

    what we really need at the moment is the de-politicisation of our schools. the sooner teachers are trusted to do what we know is best, the better off i think we will be.

    lea's don't teach our kids day in day out nor do politicians. so why do they seem to assume that they know best because they (at best) have spent a couple of afternoons in a school?

  18. hhhh

    hhhh Lead commenter

    Yes, recently read an article by a Labour MP who had observed lessons for a whole week- she blithely said: you'll be fine as long as you pick up on things and don't let the little things go- and compared it to someone heckling her when giving a speech! I'm sure she often has people holding a knoife to her throat- and has to make sure these same people achive a grade B in their exams!

    That article was recently in The Teacher btw- I can't belive the NUT didn't challenge her-they almost seemed to approve of her! Any comments please if you saw it?
  19. It's just part of the Big Lie, namely "the only discipline problem in schools is low level disruption" repeated again and again by people who should know better.

    Teaching Blog at: http://infet.co.uk/blog/index.php/a/a
    Latest entry 13/4/2007
  20. Low level disruption is a very subjective term. I mean, it seems to me that what used to be called a riot is now classed as low level disruption.

    Also is not always how disruptive pupils are, it is how MANY pupils are disruptive! When I was at school in the early 1980s it used to be one or two kids, not half the class!

    However, i do think that there does need to be a distinction for the purposes of debate between, disruptive behaviour, and the kind of aggressive, violent, and disturbing behaviours that have been mentioned in this thread.

    I would like to ask those government members who have visited schools, then chirp on about how behaviour is not that bad, have they EVER asked the head how many disruptive or aggressive pupils have found themselves on exclusions, internal or otherwise on the day(s) of their visits!

    I would suggest that schools knowing full well that a minister is visiting, would do, as they do for OFSTED, make sure those pupils who cause problems are 'not available' on the day in question.
    pepper5 likes this.

Share This Page