To think disruptive behaviour in schools is out of hand?

My younger daughter is 6. She has already learned that her role in the classroom is to act as a buffer for the badly behaved children because they will be slightly less disruptive if they are made to sit next to someone quiet and compliant. She told me very matter of factly that (yet again) she has to sit next to X so he will be less naughty; she doesn’t like it but she tries to ignore him.

My older daughter is 10. Last year was ruined for her by constant low level disruption, meaning learning progressed at snail’s pace. She is bored and demotivated because she knows that half her lessons will be spent either dealing with the behaviour of a couple of students, or recapping something that they have already gone over a million times because too many people were talking or messing around during previous explanations. Their class is now significantly behind the curriculum in maths - we spent the summer doing extra maths with her because we don’t have confidence that the school will have the capacity now to catch them up to where they need to be at the end of primary. Again, her classroom experience is being the quiet conscientious child who is put in between the troublemakers and spends lessons having them pass notes across her or chat loudly while she is trying to work. But when the quiet children aren’t used as buffers, class discipline deteriorates completely (as happened early last year).

It feels like the wellbeing and education of the children who want to learn are repeatedly being sacrificed to the need to keep some level of control over those who don’t.

This is a state primary serving quite a leafy suburb, not a school in a rough area. If it is bad here, it’s going to be bad anywhere.

I just work with younger kids so this may not be the case with older children, but it would break your heart all over again if you knew what was making these disruptive kids act like such cretins. The trauma some six and seven year olds walk around with is absolutely unreal.

I tend to agree. In our village, we have a (now long closed) 300 year old school originally founded by endowment from a local landowner. There's quite a bit of research been done on it. Apparently the terms of the endowment was that free education to be provided to village children in the classics and science, but not free numeracy & literacy lessons! Numeracy & literacy was taught, but at a charge, as it was expected that parents/family would teach numeracy and literacy, so those who couldn't or didn't want to would have to pay for someone else to do it!

But some state schools do too. At my son's state school, in year 7 they did a residential outward bound week in the Lake District. The headmaster went along with a variety of teachers (not their form teachers). My son found himself in a canoe with the headmaster who insisted that my son call him "Dave" rather than "Dr Smith" as he was known in school. They had a blast in that canoe. My son looked at the Head in a completely different light after that hour or so, but back in school, he was back to being Dr Smith and being a somewhat "formal" person again. Apparently, it was the same with the other teachers, in after school clubs & societies etc. where things were far more informal, friendly, using teacher's first names, etc. In latter years, whenever my son had a problem, it meant he was far happier to go and talk to teachers he'd been "informal" with outside school, than his form/subject teachers who he only knew in the formal setting. Likewise when it came to parent's evenings in years 10 onwards, they expected the pupil to attend with the parent, and they were more of a one on one chat teacher to pupil with parents just as audience rather than parents and teachers talking, which again, my son really loved as it was a chance (often the only chance) for a few minutes of direct talking between them, which apparently never happened in the classroom as any spare time was spent with the teacher doing crowd control, discipline control, etc and no time for any real communication/relationship with those in the class who actually behaved. So there can be relationships in state schools if there's the will to do it.

So there’s a really high threshold for excluding disruptive pupils or even for just putting them on a reduced timetable and specialist provision, in my area at least, is full and EHCPs despite being legally binding do not have enough money attached to pay for the support that they demand we give. I’m not saying all disruptive children are send (or all send children are disruptive) but it’s a huge contributing factor. Until there is more money poured into the system lessons will continue to be disrupted.

Yes it’s a good thing to learn, it’ll be in demand anyway.

Compulsory education has only been a thing for just over 150 years.
I sometimes feel like it's an experimental social idea that's gone horribly wrong.

I used to get so frustrated as a teacher when I had kids who I could see were fed up of the constant disruption and they’d be sitting quietly waiting to learn.
Why should rude, disruptive children ruin things for others? They always do though.

You're not being unreasonable, but as a teacher and a parent, the government need to actually butt out a bit. Their drives for attainment and backing of things like behaviour hubs, putting punitive over relationships, is part the issue. The private sector place more emphasis on relationships.

Yup, that sounds exactly like the kind of things they should be doing. In my old school, the worst of the disruptive kids did "outdoor pursuits" which was a mix of sports like cross country, with hill walking, canoeing, etc - I think the idea was to get them out to let of steam doing physical things. The main problem was that it wasn't offered to anyone else, so it was a kind of reward for poor behaviour.

I've said it 1000 times but what we need is to scrap comprehensive system and create more choice:

• vocational schools for 14+
• technical schools for 14+
• more grammars ie make them more accessible
• more independent schools
• more free schools

Scrap compulsory education age.
Make compulsory single education up until end Yr 8 ie core curriculum then for Yr 9 pupils can choose from the list of settings above for the best fit for them. They then follow that pathway until 18 but can change pathway at 16 or choose to leave education at 16.

Nail on the head. Since the scrapping of the grammar/sec mod system, the emphasis has been on giving the academic/grammar style of education to all, and it's just not worked. Likewise Blair's crazy nonsense goals of 50% of 18 year olds going to University. We've had decades of looking down on manual skills and trades, which is what a lot of pupils actually want to do and would be happy doing. We're really not going to get far with the compulsory (in some schools) of teaching a modern foreign language to GCSE level with kids who can barely read/write in English!

They do that in Scotland. DS is dyslexic and struggles with some subjects ( great at physics/ maths/art) and has chosen to go to college twice a week and does a practical course, he’s doing professional cookery as wants to be a chef but can also do hairdressing, car mechanics, electrical engineering type stuff. He’s 15 so in three years will have cheffing qualifications plus academic ones.

At my school the working class deputy head would take the non academic lads out of French and taught them to be tradies. They did jobs round the school, learnt how to behave in site, make the tea etc they even dug a swimming pool. They loved it. Wouldn’t be allowed now.

Breaks my heart for the decent kids who want to learn who are prevented from doing so by the cretins.

Exactly!

@OonaStubbs I remember reading something years ago (or it might have been a TV documentary) about teens that were in Young Offenders Institutes.
They would be required to do some schooling (usually just English and Maths) but they would also be taught vocational skills. I remember that a group of the boys were taught woodwork and made benches and tables for the outside exercise area.
Basically they were doing something that they could see the actual end goal (need a bench...build a bench).
What I remember most is several of the boys said if they had been given the opportunity to do these types of things at school they wouldn't have messed around in school (got expelled/stopped attending) and ended up on a criminal path.

There needs to be some fear factor to make badly behaved kids and lax parents fall into line. This nicey nicey approach by schools doesn’t work.

If I was in charge persistent bad / disruptive behaviour would mean the badly behaved NT pupils are kept within the school but taught separately by AI robots. Leaving the decent kids to learn in peace with the teachers. If the badly behaved ones decide to fall into line they can be allowed back into general population.

Or we could bring back more manuals/skills in schools so that they'd be more interested, such as better training in the trades, car mechanics, etc. alongside the basics of life skills such as numeracy, literacy, etc. You know, like we used to do before the "one size fits all" (but doesn't) comp system.

I agree school culture needs to change. But not in a way that we force masses of children into a life of crime, that isn't good for society. These people still go on to have children and the problem would get worse.

Imagine if your child was one of the ones who had SEND or a traumatized life that made it harder for them to focus in a traditional classroom, would you want them to be slung in the sin bin with the other bad kids?

I don't for a second believe it would deter younger kids. The messege would be 'misbehave and you can leave' which I'm sure many would jump at the chance.

Well it's pretty clear our current "softly softly" approach to poor behaviour, disruption, etc isn't working either, given the sheer number of kids leaving school innumerate and illiterate, who already go into a life of idleness or crime. We've tried inclusivity and being soft for the past few decades. It's not worked, so how about we change things?