I think the school head and the SLT have seriously mismanaged this project. Where is the evidence of the Risk Assessment having taken place before the event?
To project manage such an “experiment”, it would be normal practice to envisage all possible outcomes and plan / act accordingly.
On standby there should have been some suitably skilled classroom assistants who had been appointed for their skill set in maintaining order; such people do exist and are often recruited form the police or HM Forces etc. I worked with an ex RN officer who worked as a cover supervisor / “trouble shooter”, he would keep order while teacher taught.
Where is the schools internal exclusion unit, (other nomenclature is used in other schools), in all this? This and other tools should have been used to discipline offending students, one or two examples being made and the others would have behaved.
There is little evidence of the students being prepared for the upfront for the teaching methods being used, with one student saying he could not keep up.
Not too long ago, i.e. from my junior school days to my higher education, teachers / lectures orating from the front was the main method of teaching used, it’s advantage being that more ground is covered more quickly; this must be one of the reasons why Chinese students progress with greater speed than ours.
Notes. That is what they should taking, not a verbatim record. Writing speed 25 wpm. These 15 / 16s do not seem to have been given the skills to discern what to write and what to leave out.
If the school had prepared itself and the pupils for this it might have made interesting viewing, instead the school, the head and the pupils seem to have subjected themselves to ridicule.