To be furious teachers keep sitting 'naughty' kids next to my 'angelic' DC

[Flaky]

So he is then upset by them being mean to him and doesn't want to go to school?

This is at least the 3rd occasion a kid like this has been moved next to him.

Last year the teacher admitted that she had done it so DS's good influence rubs off but why should he suffer for it?

He's the youngest in the class as well (Yr2)and some of these DC are almost a whole year older.

Isn't this just very lazy teaching?

From following this thread @maisypops has described all situations perfectly. She’s absolutely spot on.

this happened to my daughter so I told the teacher at parent evening that my daughter had demands, one being the naughty child on her table is distracting her and with her being colour dyslexic does not need that !!! she also wanted the teacher to give her more time to finish her work. Sometimes you just have to tell the teacher whats wrong and they can try and fix it. The child was moved the very next day !

If you get a school like mine then there's almost no differenve between us and private (our unsupportive parents tend to be more in line with the parent problems my friends have in private).

I would absolutely support this. My DC go to a good comp, but through extracurricular activities have a lot of contact with / i give lifts to children from a range of other schools, from superselective grammar through private through to a comp in difficulties.

The level and type of disruptions reported by the grammar/private/ good comp pupils are, tbh, very similar. Grammars and private schools also have apathetic students, class clowns who cover up lower academics than 'the norm in that school' through silly behaviours, smart alecs who want to disrupt the teacher, those who have always been told how wonderful they are by their parents and take direction very poorly.

However, those from the struggling comp report problems that are out of line with the good comp / private / superselective 'norms' - because, as Maisy said, the disruptive / non-disruptive balance has tipped to far, and behaviour management / overall school management is less strong.

So it is not so much school sector as individual school-dependent.

Schools aren’t coping with “naughty” children so they’re getting “good” children to do their job for them to get them to behave.

Most “brats” have a story, they may be tired, they may be frustrated because of a condition like dyslexia or adhd, they may be hungry or come from an abusive home. Will these kids get the help they need? nope. Is this the parents fault, in some cases yes but in many cases the parents are trying their best to help and in some ways schools are actively stopping them.

My daughter git no help for her obvious dyslexia, my son got no help for his problems. I begged Chams to help, they didn’t, I went to all the meetings were I was abused. I felt for the teachers because my son can be hard work but I stopped feeling for them when they showed they had blame and no respect for what I told them.

Sitting “good” kids next to “bad” kids may work when a child needs a bit of positive peer pressure but it won’t work wen the root causes of the bad behaviour are complex. Your child I should not a teaching assistant and the school needs telling this. Schools are rotting to the core right now.

I think maisie’s Child 8 exists in just about every school regardless of sector.

I think the balance of ‘nice but easily led’ kids can often be what makes the difference. On their own they don’t cause an issue but if there are enough of them together, what might be an isolated issue from one or two children in another class becomes an absolute nightmare.

Yes exactly RafalsTheKingOfClay. In DD's case - I mentioned this thread to her as I wondered what her own views were about parents on here being willing to treat the more troublesome of their DC's classmates as lepers - she said being seated next to the child in question for Y5 and Y6 prevented all out war in the classroom. She said had he been placed near any of the boys there would have been a near constant riot. (She also volunteered without prompting that she can concentrate far better than many of her peers now too which can't be a bad thing as GCSEs approach this summer).

Not many kids are downright unpleasant but a lot have less perfect backgrounds, so perhaps more allowance should be made. Especially from those posters who posters think schools are 'rotting to the core'. Sometimes it requires a team effort - teachers aren't magicians.

I meant less than perfect. As in seriously bad.

Not worth correcting the rest! Poor concentration!

Two classes in particular spring to mind. O I taught in a very leafy mc primary, which actually was OK as long as you kept certain children away from each other and accepted that the 3 children with more serious issues were better seated together with an adult close by all the time.

The second was my language set from school. 3-4 smart Alec ring leaders and 75-80% nice but easily led. I think the top and middle sets in many less desirable comps might have caused less disruption than we did.

I think the top and middle sets in many less desirable comps might have caused less disruption than we did.

Absolutely. I remember the behaviour of a top set Year 9 RE group in my highly selective girl's boarding school. The traditional seating pattern of single desks facing the front did nothing to reduce the mayhem we caused.

Not rtft. Dd had two very different experiences of this at primary. Both dc had sn, rather than being brats.

First, crap teacher. Child had quite complex needs and allocated 1-1. On difficult occasions needed 2-1. Usual 1-1 was on sick leave and teacher decided she needed the replacement 1-1 to prop up her bad teaching, so dd could step in. This was y1. Neither were provided with the differentiated activities they needed, so dd spent a few days whizzing through the average stuff for both of them, and then being told off for playing with other child, when he got loud/ excited. Then he had a bad day and spent the morning hitting, punching and kicking dd. She was covered in bruises that night. Everytime dd told the teacher and every time she did sweet f.a. When he threw her off her chair to the floor dd eventually lost her temper and went for him, resulting in the two fighting.

Teacher mentioned it as though it was simply two dc getting carried away play fighting. I got the full story from dd, and also informed the other mum about how our dc were being treated by teacher. Her rage understandably eclipsed mine.

Head was able to corroborate dd's version and the situation was quickly resolved.

Second scenario, last few years of primary. Dd and other child both outliers at either end, doing completely different work to rest of the class. Dd was well able to absorb distractive behaviour without detriment to her own. Not that she is angelic but she was mature enough to understand that joining in with a bit of silliness in class with friend could soon escalate. Great for both attitude wise rather than sat with nearest ability peers and comparing work/ ability. Also nice because they were/ are great friends.

I don't know if this has already been said, but I do use well behaved children to separate the not so well behaved children from each other. This is because these "naughty" kids have to sit somewhere and with class sizes the way they are, there is simply no way to sit them on their own even if they are very disruptive. The space just doesn't exist. And I can't permanently remove them from my class as that's not allowed; we have to be (and should be) inclusive. I deal with the disruption as best I can and one of the ways I do that is to sit the "naughty" kids next to the "nice" ones, often at the front where I can keep an eye.

Having said that, if a parent phoned up and complained, or if the "nice" kid came to see me about it, then I would move them, and to be fair I don't put the loud disruptive ones next to the sensitive ones who I don't think will cope. I try to find the confident, sensible ones. Seating plans are an art in themselves, trust me!!

It's just the way things are in education unfortunately.

JUst keep objecting, I would.

There is a lot of difference between junior school children and some of the examples above relating to senior school but let's look at this from a lower school perspective.

It's absolutely NOT OK that your child is unhappy going into school so that need sorting but I take exception to your 'angelic' and 'naughty' labels.
Some of the most 'angelic', i.e. quiet, conforming, academically achieving children in my older DC's year group are also some of the biggest passive aggressive assholes so let's keep angels out of this for now.

Schools are a social environment as much as a learning one and your 'angelic' child could maybe benefit from socialising with children that are more extrovert?

The teachers mix students of different abilities and personalities to encourage collaboration as a social skill, they are unlikely to be using your child as some sort of babysitter.

'Naughty' children does not mean academically less able or otherwise underachieving. Maybe they learn differently and many of these so called 'naughty' kids are the ones who are the most creative thinkers and some of them will be bored out of their minds with the teaching methods but still grasp the teaching.

All children need to learn to coexist with others, even the 'angelic' ones. Keep up the dialogue with the school as your child should not be unhappy but keep an open mind too before you decide to homeschool or similar.

Good luck.