Controversial Behaviour Policy changes

Boney This was end of year exams not public ones. The invigilator probably was a teacher I would have thought.

My teen lost all respect for the teaching staff, and things like this is going to continue to erode his esteem of authority figures.

Did you explain to him that the invigilator is not a teacher?

Chattonnoire

We implemented a "no excuses" rule, this is/was about those pupils that disrupted lessons and that always have an excuse, its never their fault, someone else was doing the same thing and they would argue (not discuss) this point so that they could disrupt the lesson and prevent the learning of others.

The policy changes I have broached about the "silent transition" and no playground for break or lunch, or not allowed to leave seat for entire lunch break to talk to friends, is not on their published behaviour policy document.

I think that's never a good sign. I would politely repeat my questions until I got a clear answer.

A school not following its own procedures will struggle to deal with the students who do push it.

I feel let down as it's no longer the school environment/ideologies/structure I bought into, nor was I notified of the policy change in time to make an thoughtful decision

Schools decide their own behaviour policies and consulting on them is not a good plan. To an extent parents do have to lump it, but inherent in that is the idea that all schools conform to a reasonable range of policies- as has been the case for decades. Unfortunately it has been government policy for the last 9 years to dismantle the systems of oversight, support and consistency whilst slashing funding.

Still the teaching staff have not suddenly all changed. I would not make any hasty decisions.

I see nothing wrong with Silent Transition or even SLANT minus the T. However, no playground time is a terrible idea. All school children benefit from outdoor time and sitting all day is just bad for you. Better to have compulsory exercise around the perimeter like a prison than making children stay on chairs. When behaviour policies are demanding, some physical respite is a good idea. There is a primary in London that has transformed behaviour and fitness by starting every day with a long jog. Much better approach. My nephews went to a school that had P.E. for all every afternoon on the basis that kids got twitchy doing all that learning and had to run it off.

Which part appears to be an exageration or untrue?

I am not suggesting you are lying. I was expressing general scepticism about the way a strict new regime can be interpreted. Indeed you've been very clear and convincing in your description- enough to concern me.

I would hope the stuff about even smiling on a corridor being punished would be a case of overstating a policy to make a point to the kids. I just can't imagine this being applied.

I would hope the incident in the mock exam is not as you describe. Even the best kids are not honest when they get in trouble.

I think I would be breaking confidentiality if I copied the school's response to my questioning certain aspects of the new policy my teen recounted to me after his first day back

It would not. A schools behaviour policy is not a confidential document. I would want to see it first hand.

Still even if the practicality is not as bad as you think, I would be worried about it.

I find this interesting

A child with dyslexia would cope, nor would a child with ADHD.

So these rules wouldn't suit a SEN child - I think NT children's ould also struggle.

They don't appear to have any flexibility.

Yes distruption needs to be dealt with - but this isn't the way

I see where these rules are coming from- because change is needed in schools with behaviour problems. They’ve been written by heads and leaders in schools where so much of everyone’s time is taken up by the bullshit of low level disruption that they’ve got desperate.

This. In some schools the behaviour of a relatively small number of pupils is allowed to infect the rest, until all classes massively under achieve and no student has a safe learning environment. I'd far rather my kids were at a strict school.

That said- I've never encountered anything like described here. I struggle to imagine it existing and assume it must be exaggeration. For example, the SLANT thing is just the normal expectations of attentiveness I would have (without the nodding) and I can head off distractions without needing to be draconian or dull.

I would refuse to follow some of the procedures described, indeed I'd feel it went against my professional standards to do so. I really hope this stuff simply isn't true.

I don't think it's reasonable to lump all these schools together and talk about them as if they are all the same and follow the same policies. I've read quite a lot about Michaela, and a number of things you've said here definitely doesn't apply to them.

While I can certainly believe that there are schools out there who are doing strict behaviour policies badly, I think you need to specify what school you are talking about, and what specifically you find problematic at that school, rather than talking as if they are all the same. It would make for a much more reasonable discussion.

I see what you're saying reggie but you can have a calm, positive learning environment (sorry for the buzz words!!) without such an authoritarian regime.

Where I work we have very clear behaviour management policies, we police, for want to a better word, the corridors, and use a calm, straightforward routine at the start and end of lessons. These things have made a huge impact in the couple of years I have worked there. It doesn't have to be like a prison camp to turn a less well behaved school around.

HPFA- I agree. Michaela’s “no excuses” discipline seems to have resulted in a widespread belief that it’s a miserable place. I’ve never visited the school but, being North London based, know a fair few teachers who have. Every single one was very impressed by the school, the students and the behaviour there. Although some of them said it wasn’t their cup of tea and they wouldn’t choose to work there none of them said it was miserable or prison-like. A couple came back really inspired by what they’d seen there. I’m not sure it would be my sort of place but some of the criticism strikes me as unfair.
This was what Tom Bennett had to say about it. behaviourguru.blogspot.com/2016/10/sympathy-for-devil-my-day-at-michaela.html?m=1

I teach at a school which is in direct competition with one of the above mentioned. We have quite a large number of students who have transferred to us mid year from the other school. At least two pupils I have spoken to have described feeling extremely anxious as a result of the rules.

I have also heard from a former member of staff that they all have to teach using a set PowerPoint and are not allowed to deviate. So no modifications for your specific class or expertise, or any kind of free thinking. It actually horrifies me slightly.

I would not send my own children there in a million years.

Take, not tie.

I have ADD. Rules against looking out of the window in lessons would have been impossible for me. I was well behaved, worked quickly, finished early and then daydreamed silently. Punishing me for than would have been pointless and far more disruptive than leaving me alone.

As a teacher who has taught in very challenging schools and less challenging schools, after being a pupil in a girls grammar where bad shit just didn’t happen, I have a tie on this. If you’d asked me before I became a teacher if I thought this kind of thing was needed I would have said no- the vast majority of kids are good and respectful... because that was all I had ever seen. I reaslise now I was privileged and the girls I went to school with were well supported and aspirational as an accident of their upbringing and situation.

Since being a teacher in less great schools, I see where these rules are coming from- because change is needed in schools with behaviour problems. They’ve been written by heads and leaders in schools where so much of everyone’s time is taken up by the bullshit of low level disruption that they’ve got desperate. They’re under pressure from governors and inspectors to raise attainment in poor achieving, low income and low aspiration communities. It would cost money to increase funding or employ more teachers, so they’re encouraged to work on free solutions. That’s what this is, in my opinion. It’s a wonder no one has seriously floated the idea of corporal punishment again, after all it costs fuck all and I imagine would probably shut a few kids up who otherwise aren’t towing the line.

It needs all the children and parents to agree to tackle this. The school could not isolate the majority of the children the next day or prevent them from leaving the school.

Or if every child in every class who was issued a ridiculous request went against it?

You could try reading the Michaela book "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Teachers". Sometimes you realise that they have a point in some areas - other parts will probably make you distinctly queasy.

I think some of the "Britain's strictest school" has been more about self publicity than reality. If you read the book it publishes a lot of nice comments from children which say things like "my teacher really listens to me and helps me". The Ofsted report also spoke of the teaching being "lively and engaging". So I suspect that in reality the school and teachers rely more on the soppy, progressive "building relationships" and "making lessons interesting" than they care to admit!

What would happen if every single pupil, who was allocated a detention, did not turn up to the detentions?