To think disruptive behaviour in schools is out of hand?

In an ideal world, yes. However, a lot of reception age children arrive unable to eat by themselves hold a book, sit still, or be relied upon to be toilet trained. This is entirely the responsibility of the parents. It is also the case that in a class of 25 children there could be as many as 10 with additional needs, and perhaps five who are completely disruptive. Obviously, interventions are put into place, behaviour strategies are introduced, and an extreme cases suspensions or time outs are implemented. These usually have little effect and the kids are back, telling the staff to fuck off, within days. Being called ‘a fat lazy cunt’ by a 6 year old is nothing. Having to evacuate a class of 30 nine year olds, because two of their classmates decided to fight, throw computers, and smash desks, is not uncommon. Low level disruption can take 30% or more of the time allotted to each lesson.

I absolutely agree that all children should have access to education, but while we are bending over backwards to accommodate children with additional needs, we should also be aware of the impact on the children who are behaving and willing to learn.

Without massive investment and a complete restructuring of the education system, particularly early years, nothing will change.

Same here. It took 3 years to get my DS into a specialist setting and he required a 1:1 TA from pre-school onwards. He was asked to leave an independent school after Reception, and then his state primary said it couldn't meet need within the first half-term. He was absolutely disruptive within those 3 years and I had a great deal of sympathy with the state school when it put him onto an (unlawful) reduced timetable. He was violent to staff and pupils alike, all documented and shared with the LA.

I suspect most of the other parents, not to mention the teachers, breathed almost as big a sigh of relief as me when DS was offered a specialist place. The specialists are incredible at managing his behaviour and keeping him regulated, but it doesn't come cheap (c. £100k pa per child).

It's a tough gig being a SEN parent. People don't want our DC in mainstream schools if they are disruptive, which is fair enough. But the flipside is that society will need to fund appropriate SEND support, which often is a different setting and costs more per child, and is diametrically opposed to recent policy decisions for mainstreams to be inclusive because it's cheaper.

I do know of private school and state school pupils who regularly go to class high on weed, they take brownies in.

To think that teenagers are not going to be teenagers and push boundaries is naive.

Clearly it's not performance enhancing, but to think that teenagers, even ones at posh schools are not getting high in one way or another, well that's just not true.

Boarding schools are the worse!

Where is your evidence? You haven't got any so you're just spouting bullshit

Like they do with Adderall in the USA. It's not unheard of.

We are not talking about the occasional chatting here are we.

well come on, Adderall in USA, and we know the UK looks at the USA, get some ADHD, legal, prescribed medications, use them slightly differently to be a mild performance enhancing drug, is that beyond comprehension?

Many USA uni students, at Ivy League universities are on them.

I mean there are parents buying gummies to get their young children to sleep in car parks, it's natural, little nudge, bit of help here and there with prescribed medicines, but use in a different way.

It's not beyond the realms of possibility. And not illegal. Immoral perhaps. Or perhaps not, why shouldn't people use brain drugs like they use body drugs? It's a huge grey philosophical area.

If a scandal was exposed, and I am not saying it is going to be, but if it was, personally I wouldn't be that surprised, would anyone really?

Yes it seems that they are

Sorry, are you likening taking prescribed medication to manage a diagnosed neurological problem to "taking stimulants to churn out work"?

Better provision for sen children who can't go to mainstream school

Better provision for sen children who need extra support in mainstream school

More resources for education so class sizes are smaller and teachers are retained and children are taught by teachers who have specialised in that subject rather than tas or teachers in areas that are over subscribed (pe)

Less inspections report writing and testing in schools so teachers can spend time on teaching rather than prove they are teaching well

Studies on schools that have turned behaviour round to find out what actually works in the long term, results fed into teacher training etc

Alternative options for children who aren't academic

Would this be the case for school Sixth Forms though? I imagine it’s still only the kids who get a certain standard of GCSEs who can continue on to A-levels.

I have changed school this year after 28 years in a school in a very deprived area. I’m still in a state school, but it’s very different. The behaviour is really good. In my previous school I used to see children cry in frustration because of the constant disruption. It was heartbreaking and the reason I left.

No, but teach them separately from the motivated, well-behaved students.

This will help both sets.

A lot of kids start vaping at 10/11 now. The illegal, under the counter vapes (because shops can’t be seen to be selling the real ones as it’s illegal) are filled with lead and other chemicals that effect kids developing brains and causes an increase in aggression.

So to address a few points here:

• wealthy parents exist in state schools. In fact there are more wealthy parents using state schools than independent. This isn't a state Vs independent resource issue

• the % of SEND in independent is not significantly higher than in state if you exclude the data set from the SEN specialist schools which are classed as independent but can only be accessed via an EHCP and therefore skew the data

My child goes to a state primary in a middle class area. There were 6 year old calling each other the C word. 2 of the worst have been moved to specialist provision. They caused chaos for the whole year and shouldn't have ever been placed in mainstream.

The problem is the whole ‘SEN children should be allowed the opportunity to be included in mainstream’ has now turned into SEN children having no choice but to stay in completely unsuitable mainstream settings, when they desperately don’t want to.
My DS is autistic with fairly severe learning difficulties. He has a full-time 1-to-1 TA which helps but doesn’t change the fact mainstream school isn’t suitable. He has been very disruptive to others in his earlier years at primary, there have been incidents where he’s had huge loud meltdowns and a couple of biting/hurting others whilst we were waiting for his EHCP (that itself took a year)

I have been desperate for him to go to a specialist setting but it’s been a firm no from the local authority, despite all the evidence. Thankfully it looks as though he will have a better chance getting into one for secondary school but he’s spent his whole primary life in an unsuitable mainstream setting. I know lots of other SEN mums in the same situation.

As regards 16 to 18 year olds: until recently, if you didn't want to study, you didn't stay in school/college beyond 16. Now that some form of education is compulsory till 18, you have a fair few young people who resent having to continue studying and may take it out on teachers and more academically hardworking fellow students. Like some 15-year-old 'ROSLA' pupils in the 70s.

That's obviously not the whole story, as discipline problems have also increased with younger pupils, even in primary school; but I think it may contribute.

Agreed, we need a variety of schools with a variety of approaches to suit different children. Some need quiet and some need to be moving around, etc etc.

🤣🤣

I think I missed that on the optional extras list at DDs school

That's not how the PP presented their statement and then then clarified it to my Q : "are you accusing independent schools of drugging pupils?" the response was " bet it's not unheard of!
let's face it stranger things have happened".

I was very anti Michaela-type schools but trying to be open-minded (unlike BP), I can see that what Katherine Birbalsingh does is not random eg silent corridors so pupils arrive at lessons calm and ready to learn, family lunch with pupils serving and clearing away because not all pupils experience that at home. In my view, there isn't 'an answer'. Parents who pay have choice and can choose what works for their child. The state sector needs to offer choice too, and does in some places, not withstanding catchment areas.

Its was an optional extra but we decided it was worth paying for The DC to spend 5 years whizzing their tits off at school

The article pointed out what we all already know, that wealthier families are able to pay for private SEND assessments and access SEND supports fast.

Stimulants will make almost all humans able to focus and work loads - that's why they're abused as 'study drugs'. Then add the ADHD stuff on... I am saying there is a massive difference between a child in a state school who has undiagnosed ADHD and will have to wait 4 years for a diagnosis while getting called naughty and disruptive, and a child in a private school with ADHD (with lower level ADHD behaviours, as they wouldn't be in the school to begin with otherwise) who has a private assessment and access to medication that will almost certainly improve the quantity and quality of work immediately.