AIBU to think no one has come out of this looking great?

[ilostdoryintheocean]

Really need help. DS is 11, and has been excluded for swearing at a member of staff. I don't condone his actions AT ALL - but I have been concerned about this TA for a while and I feel awful as I feel I should have spoken up for him earlier.

So here is the situation, DS has had a lot of early childhood trauma and he shows many autistic traits but has not been formally diagnosed. He colours in as a way of calming himself down but knows he needs to stop colouring and start work when the teacher has finished talking. Sometimes he refuses. The teacher then sends him outside to calm down (it's pointless confronting him.) The teacher has been really good with him.

The TA hates his colouring and shouts at him to stop. He then shouts back. It then turns into a shouting match. On Friday he told her to fuck off and that her breath stank. she is understandably furious but AIBU to wish she'd just back off him a bit, she really does seem to have it in for him a bit?

Who has said anything about kids getting away with swearing. If you think old fashioned schools were so great triffle you must be very young. I went to school in the 70s and it was pretty shit.

Evening all. Just popping by with a reminder that Mumsnet exists primarily to make parents' lives easier and we hope people will consider that when posting. Diagnosed or not, it sounds like the OP's son has not had an easy time of it and, let's face it, we can all do with a little bit of compassion and understanding now and then. We're happy for everyone to debate the issues as the OP has asked for opinions on the incident, but we will delete any posts reported to us that we consider to be either disablist or just a bit mean. We think it's possible to put across an opposing view without being uncivil and it's not really on to be taking pops at a child, we're sure you agree. Thanks!

Italiangreyhound: I didn't say that. I said I prefer an 'old school' approach to behaviour, by which I mean clear rules, consequences and high standards, not a highly 'progressive' approach where staff are discouraged from dealing firmly with poor behaviour in favour of 'strategies' that don't bloody work

And I am not sure why my age is that relevant.

I work in a school that is 'old school' in the sense that behaviour is very good, punishments relatively harsh and in 7 years I've never been sworn at. We still manage to show compassion and empathy for traumatised children and make reasonable adjustments for disabilities and SEN. It's possible to do both.

FuzzyWizard: I agree it is possible and it's better.

I just want to support OP, who has had some horrible replies on this thread.

I hope I can give you, OP, a little bit of encouragement. My DS, now in his twenties, has ASD and learning difficulties. Most of the time, his behaviour is excellent, but when he was at school he had the occasional meltdown and he still does to this day, but now only at home. When he is overloaded, he is violent, throws things and swears at us. When he comes down off the meltdown, he is the sweetest, kindest chap you could wish for.

We were lucky, he was handled well at school and we only had to intervene a couple of times.

Despite occasionally being "bratty", as someone up thread said, he has held down a fantastic job for over a year, is very well thought of at work and has been commended by the management!

Sending good luck wishes to you, your DS and your family.

Trifle your age 'seemed' relevant because I thought you were describing a time when teaching was better. But maybe had not experienced that better time. That was my meaning.

OP my dd has had theraplay and it has helped immensely on me if you wish to know more.

Fuzzywizard can you say how this balance is achieved, please?

Italiangreyhound: I see. No, not quite. It's more about traditionalist versus 'progressive' thinking and practice. For me there are worthwhile elements in both but my dominant philosophy is more traditionalist. That is based mainly on what I have seen work. The best teachers from my own education and from my (reasonably extensive) experience of watching others teach are the no-nonsense ones. It goes without saying that excellent teachers need lots of compassion and empathy as well, but the main emphasis on terms of managing classroom behaviour should be on students doing as they are asked, when asked, and behaving with respect, for the benefit of everyone's learning.

Thank you gurlwithacurl you have given me hope for my similar sounding ds1, may I ask what kind of job he has? No problem if you'd rather not say.
Sorry to derail op, I hope you can find a resolution of sorts.

We put action plans in place for students with specific requirements, regardless of whether they have a formal diagnosis or not. Those plans are shared with all teachers and support staff who work with those students and staff are expected to use the strategies outlined in the plans. Students on these sorts of plans have regular contact with support staff (mentors, counsellors, heads of year etc) and teachers are regularly asked for feedback on how they are doing and kept up to date with the whole-school picture for that child. If a member of staff escalated a situation in the manner described here the student would stil receive a punishment (as we always hold them account for their actions) but the member of staff would be spoken to and if there were repeated incidents then I would imagine it would become a disciplinary matter. If a TA in my class shouted in a child's face I wouldn't be happy to have them in my classroom again until they'd had some additional training or had it firmly explained to them that such behaviour was not acceptable.
I think our sanctions are very fair but threads on here make me realise they are at the more severe end of the spectrum. Swearing at a teacher would absolutely result in a fixed term exclusion, that being said it is practically unheard of at my school, I'd say it happens less than once a year in a school of 1,000 pupils. Using a mobile phone in class would get a 1.5hr detention, a repeat offence gets a fixed term exclusion (but again it's very rare, in 7 years I've had this twice). I'd say we're fairly lenient on the little things (uniform, equipment, homework) that can be more difficult for troubled kids to comply with but we have very clear red lines on rudeness, defiance, violence and mobile phones (which can be a bullying nightmare).

The thing that strikes me most here is that the OP herself says "I in no way condone the behaviour" yet many posters ask her why she thinks it ok her Ds swore

But the important thing is that the TA may have escalated the behaviour - and people seem to think her shouting in his face is ok because she's in a position of authority and he should respect and obey her.

If you were in employment and yiur boss should in your face woukd you accept it? No, we'd make a complaint through the official channels and you'd expect it to be followed up. So therefore in this case yes, I would exspect the TA to be held accountable for her actions.

It's a really bad message to be teaching children to allow school staff (and I am one!) to speak to them how they like and to tell them to accept it. We should be raising children to be able to go out and be employable but also to know what is and isn't acceotable behaviour from those in power.

Swearing at a member of staff=day in isolation in my school. A previous school would exclude for a day.

I see no difference between a fiddle toy (overused strategy at my school) and colouring. The TA needs some updated training, maybe.

youarenotkiddingme: You can't reasonably compare a school to a workplace. A boss has mechanisms for exercising authority that teachers don't have, eg the power to hire, fire, promote, demote. Adults have to follow certain rules at work or they get fired. They have to follow certain rules or they get prosecuted. They have to pay certain costs (food, rent, bills) so they need to abide by social norms in order to earn money to meet those costs.

Children and young people have certain protections from those things that adults don't have. For that reason we can't treat them exactly like adults. When an adult raises their voice to a child to exercise authority, like it or not, it is sometimes necessary, especially when you have a child who tends to reject authority. As the child gets older and more mature it becomes more of a negotiation and then, eventually, self-discipline and mastery of the norms of social interaction.

It is ridiculous to suggest adults should never raise their voices in an educational setting.

The thing is, it is possible to have autistic traits without having "a diagnosis". From my understanding of it, the diagnostic criteria consisted of three discrete branches of difficulties - the Triad - and within that there were a number of broken down difficulties within that branch. If there were 6 difficulties, tick 4 as being present and that part of the triad was complete. The majority had to be ticked, so 4 out of 6, 3 out of 4, etc. (I put it like this because I don't have the book with the criteria outlined in it, so I can't just quote from it). When the three sections were examined, if the majority was positive, you would get a dx of autism. If you only had 2 out of 4, or 3 out of 6, you didn't. No dx. What you did get was a statement of "Autistic traits" and a child who still presents with difficulties that they struggle to manage, and potential of no support from school at all because they shrug and say No Diagnosis = No Problems.

So it's not as simple as saying "OP, your bratty kid needs to learn to behave as they have no dx". Please have some compassion for a struggling child. My ds behaves so well at school but he could NEVER cope with someone shouting at him, I can't imagine how he would respond but shouting back and screaming would probably be involved...

TheNoodlesIncident: Most of the children on my school's SEND register have no formal diagnosis. They do have strategies agreed with the school that are in place across the curriculum. The teachers and TAs are made aware of those strategies. The existence of those strategies does not exempt them from sanctions; if you are following the advice (could be to seat a child in a particular place, allow them 'time out', give clear, direct instructions in simple language, allow thinking time, use praise, let them fiddle with a 'tangle' or any number of other things) then the child is then expected to adhere to the behaviour policy like every other student.

The issue here is that there are no agreed strategies, just the teacher using her discretion. That is good but it isn't enough. And the TA isn't necessarily in the wrong for using a different approach because nothing has been formally put in place for the child. At no point has it been established that the child 'can't cope' with someone shouting at him.

OP, I know that you have avoided giving specifics, but if your DS has ever been in care and is in receipt of the Pupil Premium Plus, I suggest you meet with the head to discuss using this money for staff training on early childhood trauma and how this can impact on behaviour.

Statutory guidance states that exclusion should be a last resort for children who are in care- logic dictates that this principle should be applied to those who have left care too. Trauma has a lasting and significant impact on many children.

defineme DS has been working in a supermarket cafe for just over a year. He does basic tasks and we occasionally have to meet with his line manager to sort out issues, such as how he interacts with his colleagues or to suggest ways in which they can support his development. It has been absolutely amazing to see how he has gained in confidence and has managed to learn and improve his work. The company have been excellent with him too.

He is moaning his head off now because he is working tomorrow, but he will probably come home with a big smile on his face.

Best wishes for you and your DS and please don't hesitate to PM me if you need more info.

OP, I hope things work out for you.

Would have Stop making up a diagnosis. The OP's .DS DOESN't have one

As another poster has observed, you do seem to have comprehension problems, petitpois. I didn't make up any diagnosis. But I pointed out that OP's son has a number of problems that are not of his making, which is evident from her post. Do you seriously believe that learning difficulties only exist if someone has stuck a label on them?

triffle I think when comparing traditional and progressive teachers and teaching methods it is important to consider those who 'experience' the teaching.

Children (or indeed adults) who are being taught will experience that teaching differently. I think knowing the best way to teach different kids is most helpful.

Sometimes that means having one rule for all the class (no swearing).

It is just my opinion but good teaching will sometimes mean having different rules for all the class. E.g. some children get to do colouring or play with blue tac while the teacher is talking - because that will actually benefit the whole class.

IMHO.

So in terms of sanction for the TA. I was not thinking a big 'penalty' but rather a consequence. Like getting told that you made a mistake. Maybe being offered some training or guidance.

For example, if I know flashing a flickering light in someone's eyes will cause them to get a migraine, or even just a headache; yet I do it, I would expect someone to tell me off! At the very least the headachee (the person who gets the migraine/headache). If I were a child -my parent, if I were at school -a teacher, and if at work -my boss.

So if this TA understands that not allowing the child to colour while listening to instructions could/would/might cause a meltdown or whatever, that's wrong. Especially as the class teacher or head has agreed to colouring.

And that 'meltdown' (I am hypothetically using the word 'meltdown') or whatever, causes swearing, which causes a child to be excluded then the TA has done something wrong. Wrong by causing the situation that led to the swearing.

That is my opinion.

Schools nowadays have all kinds of kids with special needs, some diagnosed or recognised, some not. The price for this inclusion includes the possibility of children not being able to cope, having melt downs etc. So, really, in this environment I think it benefits all, staff, students with those behavioural issues, and the rest of the class for staff and pupils to follow guidelines for any student/child who needs some sort of extra care. Because this extra care is not unfair treatment it is levelling the playing field ever so slightly.

Specifically in the Op's example Triffle the TA shouted at the child and that seems to have 'set them off' (my words).

If being shouted at for no good reason led to the child swearing would you say the TA was in the wrong to shout and so there could be some consequence for the TA, however small?

When is it right for a teacher to shout at a specific student?

I can imagine a teacher shouting at the whole class to get control, or to be heard.

But for a TA or teacher to shout at one child I might expect the child to be doing something dangerous to others of themselves or very reckless, etc.

Sorry if this is way too long-winded, my example above of meltdown was hypothetical, this point is trying to relate to the OP's post specifically.

I guess what I am saying is if TAs or teachers contribute to children misbehaving then it is just so unhelpful IMHO and that does need to be recognised.

I don't think you should have posted here tbh. We don't know the situation - that's between you, your son, the TA, the teacher, the Head and possibly the rest of the class.

There's obviously a lot of questions to be asked that you can't just leave hanging. When you're calmer on Monday make an appointment with the Head and raise your concerns about the TA and ask any questions, but leave your dislike of the TA out of it.

But I also think you need to accept the exclusion. That can't be changed now and I think it's fair. The swearing and humiliation is fairly extreme, and if it was done in front of the whole class I think action like this should be taken. If he's not diagnosed, other children might see him as just "naughty", and not really know about his situation. Regardless of anything, he definitely should be punished in some way like this, as he absolutely needs to know not to lash out.

A diagnosis isn't going to change his behaviour overnight. It essentially amounts to a piece of paper and the implementation of a few changes in his school life. Any change in his behaviour has to come from his own experiences and how you handle them, and speak to him.

That was meant to be a kind post, essentially I think speak to the school again but accept the exclusion.