Advanced search

To think that no child should be allowed to ruin the learning of 29 children

(378 Posts)
ReallyTired Wed 08-May-13 09:35:05

My son's year 6 class has been constantly distruped by one or two children. It is unfair that 28 children cannot learn because of the behaviour of one or two.

I feel it really doesn't matter what the reason is for a child who constantly misbehaves (before someone gets out the flame thrower/ violin) the other children have a right to learn in a calm ordered environment. Often badly children do not have learning difficulties or difficult family circumstances.

Or put it another way some children with special needs or a difficult home life have explematory behaviour.

It is not fair that many hard working children have to put up with child X making stupid noises (NOT TOURETTES or any other special need) or constantly shouting out or arguing with the teacher because their parents can't afford private school.

It would be interesting to know what other countries do with children who constantly distrupt the class. (Other than using the cane.)

I believe that Britain's in ablity to deal with low level disruption in the classroom has reduced social mobility.

LaLaGabby Wed 08-May-13 23:47:15

What is your question OP?

MareeyaDolores Wed 08-May-13 23:44:43

Ah, just take all the 'bad' children out and shoot them. And why wait till year 6. Far too late. They've disrupted their classmates education for seven years by that point. If the parents can be bothered to object, they could always home educate before we send in the marksmen.

Or we could have really clear, consistent, behavioural policies starting from reception, which prevent classrooms being disrupted. And the dc who aren't responding to the standard behaviour training could have their SN identified and dealt with properly. For previously 'good' dc, who turn 'bad', we could enquire about what has gone wrong recently, and try to address it.

sweetmelissa Wed 08-May-13 21:09:36

Forgive me for not having the time to read the whole thread, so I do not know if my points have already been made.

I am an adoptive parent of 3 boys who had special needs and could well have been one of the children you describe. Unfortunately their greatest disability was in looking "normal" and hence other children and their parents were unaware of their difficulties. They were therefore seen as the disruptive children in the class, the ones that never got invited to parties or to play. Having also had other children without difficulties, I know the dramatic difference between how their education progressed, and also how they were treated differently by their classmates and their parents. Yes, they got invited to parties, even if they were the ones with the "mental brothers".

Behind the scenes of the other children/parents the school, medical services and ourselves were fighting so hard to get my sons' needs recognised, so they could get the help they needed. This wasn't at all easy - it took many years and eventually going to the highest level - but eventually their statement was amended to they could attend a school for children with moderate learning difficulties. That way the children they left behind in mainstream no longer had their education disrupted by them, and my children got the best possible education for them too. They were all in secondary school before "we won our case".

My children are now adults, but they still face the hurdle of looking "normal" but being unable to fully function in the adult world. I guess they are still judged.

I am now a foster parent. One child we foster was so disruptive/violent in school that the teachers/social workers admitted they were terrified of him. The whole class would have to be removed when he became angry - the other children and their parents were probably horrified. It wasn't fair to those children, of course - and equally there was little the school system could do. But our foster son has no particular special needs, it was merely due to the horrors of his past and being passed from carer to carer. Thankfully within a year of being with us, he had turned around - you would not know he was the same child and he is now able to take a positive role within the classroom. But once again other children and their parents would have no clue.

I am now going through the same thing with another foster child. I am sure we are judged. I am a bad parent, they are a bad child - I am sure other parents are saying "but they do not have special needs or a difficult home life" - and yes, it is unfair to their children. I am sure complaints are made, probably many...

I guess what I am trying to say is I understand, but as children do not come with signs saying "Tourettes", "ASD", "ADHD" or "Have been abused" around their necks, I am not sure I know what the answer is.

mumblecrumble Wed 08-May-13 21:07:53


I can guaruntee that one day your precious baby will be that 1 out of 30 being a [pain in the bum.

And I can guaruntee you would go ape shit if they were excluded from learning.

That 1 child would probably do brilliantly if those 29 other children didn;t get in the way of their one to one learning....

ouryve Wed 08-May-13 21:00:44

My DSs, brought up with high expectations of behaviour, are currently baiting each other when they're supposed to be going to sleep. DS2 is in a screechy mood, after a school trip yesterday, and DS1 is in a shouty mood, because he is DS1 and there is a y in the day, as far as we can tell. He also finds it very difficult to cope with DS2's screeching, which adds a whole different dimension. The only resolution to this will be sleep, for whichever one of them it finally reaches first.

Like Polter, I think it would be lovely if we could simply parent their ASD away.

StarlightMcKenzie Wed 08-May-13 20:55:54

yes, but Harry Hill is helping me move so bleugh!!!!!!

CloudsAndTrees Wed 08-May-13 20:53:23

Thank you Wellthen. I would also object o anyone saying that these children don't belong in mainstream education. Sometimes mainstream is the wrong thing for a child, but it can be a brilliant thing if done properly.

dayshiftdoris Wed 08-May-13 20:51:40

Lol the irony of starlight stealing my well... starlight grin


dayshiftdoris Wed 08-May-13 20:50:43

I don't think my child belongs in mainstream but as an intelligent child with high functioning ASD there is no where else for him to go.

He needs a smaller class, more structure, higher ratio of staff to children (rather than 1:1), better inclusion in terms of not feeling different and a better way of learning & teaching than the NC allows.

My son will be risk of exclusion again before very long - its just a matter of time, even with the most fantastic teacher... very frustrating for all concerned.

FE is not expected to teach classes of bigger than 20 and effectively differentiate yet we pack our precious children into classes and expect the 2 adults (1 of which might be part time!) to shit miracles.

Wellthen Wed 08-May-13 20:46:49

Oh also dayshiftdoris I realised I aimed an earlier post at starlight that should have been aimed at you! Sorry!

Wellthen Wed 08-May-13 20:42:13

Thanks for the flowers and wine! I have to add I am lucky to have an extremely supportive Head and AMAZING TAs who work with my 'disruptive children' (and are specifically trained and paid to do so. Their main aim is keeping said children in the class, included and learning).

I havent read further back so I'm not quite sure where cloud came into the firing line but some of the things said recently are not so untrue: policies can only do so much. What is needed is action and cloud is certainly right in saying it is needed NOW before the problem gets worse.

But I think you are wrong, cloud, in saying that complaining makes no difference. It is only through these that schools are pushed to get support. The only thing that gets you support in school: money.

1 to 1 TAs cost money - they cannot be produced overnight. Equally referals take a long time and are only a sticking plaster really.

Mainly I think people object to the attitude that these children dont belong in mainstream. I dont think it is meant like that, but most of the time it sounds like the person is saying 'you are not equal to my child'

sparklekitty Wed 08-May-13 20:41:22

Imagine what it's like for the teacher.

I teach in a school with a no exclusion policy. We refuse to give up on kids so early in their little lives.

At least I can feel I'm making an impact in their lives (yes ALL of our disruptive children have shitty lives and/or SN) I'd find it hard teaching a disruptive kid whose reason was mummy and daddy can't afford a posh enough school.

dayshiftdoris Wed 08-May-13 20:39:38


This from the Children's Commision...

^Whilst from a cursory analysis a number of activities described here share similarities with illegal informal exclusions, there are a number of vital differences. The most important of these is that, where they are done well, managed and monitored alternatives to exclusion are formalised, and carried out openly, transparently and in the best interests of the child. They are co-owned, managed
and monitored by all the schools in an area, and by school operators across Local Authorities, Academy chains and other authorities.^

So no your son wasn't excluded

But mine being moved to sit with a book at the back of the yr 5 class when he was in yr 3 for hours at a time or being hidden in a room when visitors came in to 'work' was exclusion.

TigerSwallowTail Wed 08-May-13 20:36:14

I think you should write to the head teacher with your complaints OP, and the school governor for your area. Infact, all those that are outraged at the disruptive children in your dc classrooms should complain.

My son has AS (no other parents at the school know this, just the teachers) along with a small handful of other issues, he has sensory issues and finds his classroom too noisy. This causes him to act up and become very disruptive, to get hyper and to shout out and make random noises (no Tourette's, just caused by his ASD). His classroom doesn't have appropriate furniture for him either which has a big effect on his ability to sit down and concentrate on his work, and he also has a degree of learning difficulties so needs support to do his work.

What he needs is a smaller quieter classroom, appropriate furniture and 1:1 support. He doesn't receive any of this. There are also at least 3 others in his class with SEN who don't receive appropriate support either. If they all received the help they need then the disruptive behaviour would be more than halved and the teacher and teaching assistant would be able to focus on all the pupils rather than distributing their time and energies unequally.

Maybe if enough complaints were sent to the gov' then support would be given to those pupils who need it (although I've no idea where the funding will come from!), which will hopefully reduce a lot if the disruptive behaviour from children with SEN and then the teachers could get on with lessons and any continuous disruptive behaviour that would be left would be from children with no SN that are just acting up but hopefully then the teacher would have more time freed up to be able to carry out suitable behaviour strategies for these children.

Onemole Wed 08-May-13 20:32:13

I personally feel I lost a lot of my education to disruptive behaviour.

I was a well behaved child who happened to have aspergers (undiagnosed at the time) and was working several years ahead of my peers across the board. I grew up poor in an area ravaged by drugs, brought up by parents who didn't give a toss about my education.

Four of the 'disruptive' kids from my primary class went from bad to worse and are now in prison. I was turned off education at the age of 11, left school at 16 and it took me many years working my way up from the bottom ranks in the workplace to get where I was before having DCn.

So basically, everyone lost out. The teachers were on their own and could not have possibly catered for us all and dealt with extreme behavioural issues like they did.

Anyway, my point is, all of us on here care about our kids education and help them along the best we can. It is the children who's parents don't care who are the ones that need the most support, disruptive or not. And for that to happen we need Inclusion with support. And that costs money. Therein lies the problem. Perhaps parent helpers could ease the burden, listening to kids read etc.

CloudsAndTrees Wed 08-May-13 20:31:54

removing a child from their classroom to be taught something different is actually a form of illegal exclusion.

So my child's school was acting illegally when in Y4 they took him out of French lessons for a term to work on handwriting? confused

dayshiftdoris Wed 08-May-13 20:31:21


The exclusion guidelines /code has been tightened recently so that now it would be almost impossible for a school to exclude a child with a statement.

Illegal exclusions now also include headteachers encouraging parents to move schools as their children will be happier elsewhere

PolterGoose Wed 08-May-13 20:29:26

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

kungfupannda Wed 08-May-13 20:28:06

Why isn't the title of this thread "AIBU to think that no child should be so unsupported in school that they are disrupting the other 29?"

It's not the child's fault. It may or may not be the parents' fault, but unless you know the exact home situation, you can't make that judgement.

But if a child is being left unsupported and is resorting to behaviour that is causing disruption, then there is something wrong with the education system in general, or with that school's systems specifically. Not with the child.

dayshiftdoris Wed 08-May-13 20:27:23


What you are describing as a strategy... removing a child from their classroom to be taught something different is actually a form of illegal exclusion.

My son's old school was doing it to him and the Ed Psych warned them of the legal implications in doing so...

Schools can use working in units / isolation / other parts of the school but only in an open, managed manner and with appropriate access to their normal and expected education maintained.

StarlightMcKenzie Wed 08-May-13 20:27:10

I know a free school that was planning to have no inclusion policy on the basis that they considered there to be NO grounds for exclusion, ever.

I wonder if it went ahead and kept that policy.

CloudsAndTrees Wed 08-May-13 20:26:23

So what if it appears that the child needs more focused attention to do any work, and when they get that they work well?

Is it still wrong?

What if the underlying need is impossible for a teacher and a couple of TAs to identify because it's more complex than that?

BeerTricksPotter Wed 08-May-13 20:26:12

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

StarlightMcKenzie Wed 08-May-13 20:25:30

Because the EVIDENCE (as opposed to experience) shows that those children do far worse with a TA than with no TA.

TA's are very poorly trained in behaviour management.

If they are lucky they might get some training in how to stop disruptive behaviour, but absolutely none in how to encourage LEARNING behaviour.

StarlightMcKenzie Wed 08-May-13 20:23:52

It's the OWSLA!!!!!


Calm down bunnies.......

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now