Controversial Behaviour Policy changes

Why not visit yourself and see first hand?

I think people should actually visit those schools before they judge them. Michaela school encourages visits, for example.

Isn't it because they have staggered lunch times so some students are still in lessons whilst others are on their lunch?

As I understand it, they have narrow corridors and they’re a trigger point for behaviour issues.

Absolute silence is probably unnecessary, but I’d think if you have narrow corridors then single file, keep to the left and hands off the walls is just common sense, rather than some draconian rule.

It unnerves me.

How are pupils meant to learn natural social interactions in public spaces if they are refused to opportunities to engage.

Ninestiles is already outstanding and outside the Ofsted assessment cycle so I don’t think this is about chasing ratings.

Seems like silent corridors are catching on. This was in my local news.
www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/news/croydon-news/croydon-school-bans-pupils-talking-2131812.amp

It’ll be interesting to see if that undermines the behaviour policy. Better not to have the rule about eye contact, than to ‘earn’ exceptions to it and only apply it to certain pupils.

WRT sitting up straight, physical disabilities aside, this shouldn’t really be an issue. It’s a bit worrying if a lot of teens are having an issue with it.

I have now seen my niece and got to learn about life under the new regime.
It's a mixed bag: the corridors are calmer, quite a bit of life outsode lessons is better as it is less chaotic.
However, my niece finds the requirements of sitting bolt upright and making eye contact in lessons surprisingly taxing. In fact, they are a distraction rather than an aid to concentration and some teachers are already relaxing these parts of the policy provided the children are otherwise behaving well. The pattern seems to be that complete consistency is impossible and teachers are letting children 'earn' exceptions to the more petty rules.

frog
I have already said countless times I think there are 2 levels of respect.
Level 1 - basic level of respect which isn't negotiable and means manners, students following perfectly basic instructions, completing work, not talking over the teacher, not being rude to peers etc.

Level 2 - The sort of respect that comes once people know each other. The respect which develop a when a teacher has helped a student through tough times, when theyv e established their reputation and relationship with the classes, when the kids see them going the extra mile.

A teacher does not have to earn the right to tell a child to sort their uniform out, enter a classroom sensibly etc. They don't have to prove themselves for students to be quiet whilst they are teaching.

You may believe (at least I think it was you) that it's some sort of tragedy that students would behave because they have to but I disagree. That is the basic starting point from which more personal relationships can be developed.

When people start suggesting that student behaviour is dependent on whether they like or respect a member of staff and that staff have to earn the most basic level of respect then that's a sign of people thinking that reasonable behaviour is a negotiation.

And Maisy, you seriously think that gaining the respect of your pupils is just 'courting the opinions of teenagers'?! Bloody hell. I feel like I've landed on the wrong planet. You know that 'gaining respect' is not the same as 'being liked', yes?

Arg! Sorry to shout, but I DID NOT SAY IT WAS OK FOR IT TO BE A FREE FOR ALL IF THEY DON'T RESPECT THE TEACHER! It's straw man central around here.

frog
It's pretty hard to get round to the learning if you're spending a reasonable proportion of time courting the opinions of teenagers and negotiating basic behaviour.

noble
Obviously. Everyone knows that expecting a reasonable standard of manners and behaviour is obviously exceptionally draconian and a wank fantasy of those who'd bring back the cane.

Back in reality, you, me and most other people know that a basic level of behaving so learning can happen is an entirely reasonable expectation.

So whenever a teacher takes over a class they don’t know, they need to spend 6 months issuing sanctions until the class decides she’s fair. And if she hasn’t been fair at any point, then free-for-all?

If they think she's fair, then that's respect, isn't it? You can't think your boss is a fair man but have no respect for him! If you only obey him because you'll otherwise lose your job, that's presumably because he's an arse or an incompetent. What a counsel of despair for teachers if their best hope is that kids obey them only because they have to. Isn't the point of teaching to inspire the kids to learn?

IME, respect comes after compliance. Once they are behaving correctly, learning well and taking advantage of the 'extras' most teachers offer - that's were respect tends to come in.
Yes. There's the basic respect and staff not having to negotiate their way to having students listening and then there's the 2nd level of respect which comes once you know the students and build those relationships.

E.g. first day of term I don't have to prove myself or earn the respect of pupils for them to enter the classroom sensibly, not talk whilst I'm talking, raise their hand to ask a question, not talk over their peers who are giving answers, follow basic instructions etc. Thats basic respect and is a non negotiable.

Over time however the relationship changes as they get to know me and I get to know them. That sort of respect is different ad it's the additional respect which emerges out of longer term positive relationships.

frog
People have suggested that teachers issuing sanctions is a sign of poor classroom management and that's ruling with fear. People have suggested that students will only behave if the teacher earns their respect. If staff can only expect decent behaviour after they've tried to earn the respect of teenagers then that means that there's a green light to misbehave until the teacher proves they are worth listening to.

I think it's about issuing the right sanctions for the right infringements. Quality over quantity if that makes sense.

No, she won't have earned their respect, she will have gained their compliance. I don't swear at my boss because it isn't in my best interests to do so. That doesn't mean I respect him. My point, though, was that issuing more sanctions than another teacher doesn't mean that she is worse at behaviour management. In her case, it's simply that she's new.

I was in response a pp who suggested that if a child is only getting detentions from one teacher that means the teacher is in the wrong. I'm pointing out that there is often other reasons.

IME, respect comes after compliance. Once they are behaving correctly, learning well and taking advantage of the 'extras' most teachers offer - that's were respect tends to come in.

The key word there is fair. If the NQT earns a reputation as 'strict but fair' in six months, won't that mean that she has, erm, earned the respect of her students? If on the other hand she gets a reputation as a either a pushover or a capricious tyrant, kids will keep trying to get one over on her. It's such a straw man to say that anyone was suggesting that teachers need to 'play to the gallery' to get kids to like them, or that they don't have to behave if they don't like their teacher. Nobody has suggested this at any point on the thread, least of all me.

The problem with instituting "clear and consistent" policies in difficult schools is that when "good" kids get sanctioned their parents often kick off too. "But my James is such a nice lad, he's never been in trouble before, he didn't mean it, he's sorry, surely you should be focusing on X, Y and Z who are far worse behaved than James." Those parents often don't see why 'low-level' disruption is actually that bad.

Behaving properly in a classroom isn't just about respecting your teacher, so the idea that teachers have to "earn" respect (i.e. basic manners) can fuck right off.

I have the "strict but fair" reputation in my school. And I now rarely have to issue sanctions. But we've had an NQT start and the kids are playing up for her. So she issues more sanctions than me. If she keeps up with consistently applying the policy, in 6months or so she will also have a "strict but fair" reputation. Fortunately, our slt (and most parents) know that the kids are pushing boundaries rather than telling her she is doing something wrong.

I’ve found sometimes, emoji it’s because I’m female.

There are definitely some kids who don’t respect women.