DD is always put with disruptive children...AIBU to ask her to move?

[peacockfeather11]

Every year this happens and I always try and say nothing because I don't want to be that mother that comes in to school complaining. But this year I am furious! My DD has been put on a table with the most disruptive and she's in tears and I can truly understand. It's too much too ask of her and she's so sensitive she never wants to let the teacher down which I feel is manipulated.

Do I ask the teacher to move her or AIBU?

" I use sparingly, but there are parents who find their DC whiz through work and find their DC is expected to go around helping the class."

I sometimes do this if someone has finished their work and there's about two minutes until the bell goes. It would take longer to explain a new task than we have got available to us. I usually offer a choice of things, but they do love helping each other and usually choose that. I'd hate to think that this was misrepresented at home and considered 'being used as a TA' by parents.

You know it can work both ways. Children are rarely brilliant at everything. I love it when the children who struggle academically are great at something, and can do the helping - making a particular shaped lid for a clay pot, attaching wire to a battery to make a bulb light up and other practical things. I always think it's such a confidence boost, and actually quite good for the pupils who find work easy to experience some real challenge and needing help.

@MsTSwift Not an arsehole at all. If a child makes a complaint we’d look into it. If she was moved it was obviously easy to do. What the teachers on this thread are saying is that we would all do our best to accommodate all children’s needs. What we wouldn’t do is pander to the child with the loudest parent so there’s one child who only ever has easy partners whilst the others take turns. They probably would be moved after a complaint but not necessarily immediately unless there was a good reason (“he’s hitting me” = good reason to move immediately; “he makes noises because of his Tourette’s” = continue supporting child with Tourette’s and move other child during the next scheduled seating swap).

You know it can work both ways. Children are rarely brilliant at everything. I love it when the children who struggle academically are great at something, and can do the helping - making a particular shaped lid for a clay pot, attaching wire to a battery to make a bulb light up and other practical things. I always think it's such a confidence boost, and actually quite good for the pupils who find work easy to experience some real challenge and needing help

So as I said, a useful strategy when well deployed and considered, but it should not be a default extension activity for able students.

A teacher who is routinely not planning challenging enough work for able students and is routinely expecting them to TA for the class is letting that child down.

@Whatwouldscullydo

Because if you've got, say, four children who exhibit unwanted behaviour, and you move everybody around every half term, 24 children will sit next to one of those children at some point

How long does this all go on for befire you twig its not working ?

I mean ( and I'm talking about regular nt kids here before you start trying to direct us back to SN to excuse doing nothing and blame everyone else for being arseholes and not putting up with it) it's usually the same kids in yr as it was in yr 2. After years of expecting them to learn how to behave via osmosis and allowing them to disrupt every kid on the rota every few weeks for years , I mean when do you realise all you have done is repeat strategies that aren't working and are about to palm it all off onto the secondary school teachers ?

I've never experienced it not working really. We set targets and receive support from other professionals, implement strategies and review them. Throughout the year, there are gradual improvements. The difference between, say, Year 2 and Year 6 is often extraordinary.

For some children, a move to special Ed is the best solution for them.

We do a lot of work around transition but I can't comment on what happens after, at secondary school really.

It would be easier with smaller classes, more adult support, more break-out space, more time and money to deliver/buy interventions.

At primary, I maintain, as I have throughout, that SEN, diagnosed and diagnosed, and social issues, are at the heart of the vast majority of unwanted behaviours. In any case, you tackle the behaviour not the diagnosis so I can't separate the two as you have asked.

Of course, parents won't know about a child's history, SEN, professionals involved, strategies in place.

(Note: children and parents wouldn’t necessarily know about the Tourette’s particularly if it’s not been officially diagnosed yet. They’d just look ‘fussy’ to an outsider.)

"A teacher who is routinely not planning challenging enough work for able students and is routinely expecting them to TA for the class is letting that child down."

Agreed. I don't know anyone who does that. Sometimes you are caught out when someone finishes a little earlier than expected.

The difference between, say, Year 2 and Year 6 is often extraordinary

Yeah they can he worse than ever by yr 6. And by yr 7 they push your kid over on the stairs

certainly at dds school it got pretty bad.

Several parents myself included all took our kids out for a day just to give them a break from it all

I mean when do you realise all you have done is repeat strategies that aren't working and are about to palm it all off onto the secondary school teachers ?
The poor children get a shock when they get to secondary because instead of having one teacher who allows them to disrupt and expect others to put up with it, they have 10-15 different teachers, most of whom have zero interest in pandering to disruptive behaviour from NT students because they see a class for 2 hours a week for History, or 4 hours for Maths and haven't time to spend 25 minutes of a lesson with one child repeatedly explaining the bloody obvious fact that rocking the table, annoying their peers with silly behaviour and calling out stupid off topic questions is disruptive.

Most quickly learn to behave, those with really challenging needs in the background tend to get picked up by a bigger pastoral team or the SEN base depending on the concern. Economy of scale can be quite useful here, though size of school can also be a negative for some students. Most students, including non-disruptive students, also work out quite quickly which teachers have high and low expectations.

So you basically do in a few weeks what they tried to do fir years ?

Why on earth are they wasting everyone's time and allowing everyones education to be disrupted all that time then?

@LolaSmiles I don’t know any seriously disruptive children who are NT and/or don’t have ongoing child protection issues in my year group. There are low-level behaviour incidents which you deal with using normal classroom practice but that’s not what we’re talking about here.

I totally get that some Y7s will act up to test the boundaries and see what they get away with but please don’t assume that’s because those of us who teach primary don’t know how to manage behaviour!

"The poor children get a shock when they get to secondary because instead of having one teacher who allows them to disrupt and expect others to put up with it, they have 10-15 different teachers, most of whom have zero interest in pandering to disruptive behaviour from NT students."

A lot of our pupils who were making good progress do regress after transition to secondary school. In our area, we have found that the pastoral support and knowledge of the child isn't as good. Strategies that worked are not maintained. Resources and allowances that worked are removed.

It must be difficult for staff, who only see them for a few hours instead of all day, every day, and maybe have no relationship with the family at all.

It is difficult for the kids too - harder to build relationships when your teachers change every hour, the workload steps up, you are in a pool of hundreds etc.

I don't think it's fair to say that primary teachers allow them to disrupt. But we are able to accommodate certain behaviours, often on the advice of specialists working with the child. Sometimes certain behaviours are annoying to the other children, so in that sense they are disruptive I guess, but the strategy you're following involves working on one behaviour at a time or 'choosing your battles'

"Most quickly learn to behave."

That's an incredible turnaround. So all you have to do is sternly tell them to stop and they do? Show them that you won't tolerate it? Follow the Behaviour Plan to the letter and they comply?

I'm sceptical actually, from talking to colleagues at secondary schools.

I don't think it's fair to say that primary teachers allow them to disrupt
I haven't said primary teachers allow them to disrupt.

We're talking about students who have been shown it's fine to disrupt because their class teachers think other children should accept their education being disrupted.

I've already said that many teachers manage just fine not to expect quiet children to tolerate disruption.

That's an incredible turnaround. So all you have to do is sternly tell them to stop and they do? Show them that you won't tolerate it? Follow the Behaviour Plan to the letter and they comply?
Read what I said. Most learn to behave and those with additional needs and pastoral issues are worked with.

Unfortunately yet again you seem to be assuming that disruptive behaviour is a SEN need and actually many students who disrupt lessons are NT.

Several times on this thread I've given a list of disruptive behaviour that is displayed by NT students that you responded to with 'cry me a river'. You've said that students are whiny if they object to their learning being disrupted in that way. You've also said that they should tolerate disruption unless there's physical violence or bullying, and then later backtracked saying children shouldn't have to tolerate disruption as long as it's a genuine situation.
Still you've not explained exactly what is an acceptable amount of disruption before a child or parents is worthy of listening to.

“They have to sit next to somebody”
“Move to sit them on their own”

The goalpost moving, the contradiction, the determination to say all disruptive behaviour is SEN. Incredible.

"The goalpost moving, the contradiction, the determination to say all disruptive behaviour is SEN. Incredible."

The vast majority of challenging behaviour in primary schools is due to SEN, diagnosed or undiagnosed, or social issues. I've said it from the start and I'm still saying it now, whether you find it incredible or not.

Regarding the contradiction : there is no space to move children in my classroom. I have 33 children in a classroom designed for 30. I cannot routinely move children, there is nowhere to move them to. We have no breakout space, SLT are all teaching. This year the children are in rows and I have no furniture whatsoever.

When pressed to answer a very specific question about a child so troubled that s/he rattled the table for 6 hours a day I explained how my school would respond to that. That is extreme disruption. That is not a minor inconvenience I would expect any child to tolerate. We would attempt to address it in the ways I outlined but, failing that, I would not expect any child to put up with it. That child would have to be moved. In the past that has been working 1:1 in the Head's office for example (not that exact thing but something similar) but clearly that is not something that can be done routinely.

"We're talking about students who have been shown it's fine to disrupt because their class teachers think other children should accept their education being disrupted."

I think we are probably talking about different levels of disruption but I think you know that.

"Read what I said. Most learn to behave and those with additional needs and pastoral issues are worked with."

How do you get the NT children to learn to behave?

The vast majority of challenging behaviour in primary schools is due to SEN, diagnosed or undiagnosed, or social issues. I've said it from the start and I'm still saying it now, whether you find it incredible or not

How can it be when its already been explained that within a few weeks these kids are behaving at secondary school.

If you have never experienced your methods not working as you said earlier then it would be those kids who were being passed on to the pastoral team on secondary .

Instead most learn to behave in a few weeks.

So either you have no idea what's going on in your classroom if these kids are still being a pain on the back side at secondary until those teachers finally sort them out, or you are not being truthful.

And FYI I think of your bar of acceptable disruption before doing anything is 6 hours of stopping a child from doing work then I'm actually shocked at whT you expect your kids to put up with.

"Still you've not explained exactly what is an acceptable amount of disruption before a child or parents is worthy of listening to."

Why do I have to? Who cares what my personal tolerance is? I look at every incident within context. Without knowing the characters involved, none of it would mean anything to you or anyone else on here.

My only point really, is that it is possible for some kids to complain about unreasonable things, or to exaggerate incidents, or to scapegoat children they perceive as naughty.

And it is possible for some parents to have unrealistic expectations of a mainstream setting, to misunderstand a situation, to seek unfair privilege for their child.

Do you think I should act on every parent or child complaint, even if they are unreasonable?

"And FYI I think of your bar of acceptable disruption before doing anything is 6 hours of stopping a child from doing work then I'm actually shocked at whT you expect your kids to put up with."

No, don't be ridiculous, that was a specific scenario I was asked for an opinion on.

"How can it be when its already been explained that within a few weeks these kids are behaving at secondary school. "

Well they're not are they. When were you last in a secondary school? All straightened out and behaving like angels are they?

Instead most learn to behave in a few weeks.

Lol. Every year we hear countless stories of children who coped perfectly fine in primary who end up getting suspended or expelled at secondary because of the lack of connection and pastoral support. Their behaviour goes to pot.

It's certainly not the case that primary schools struggle with behaviour then everything is perfectly fine at secondary.

Didn't lola just explain?

Certainly many of thee kids who's parents were always being spoken to in the play ground ( or the parents themselves discussing the incidents) were the same ones who were taking about their kids detentions or c1s and phone calls I Yr 7.

They all appear to have settled down now and are doing well.

Which is what lola was saying.

There will always be some with struggles who will continue to struggle but you seem to think that they all have SN and all children work SN are disruptive which actually is untrue because neither of my dds have ever come home complaining about children who clearly have SN. Its been the children lola is talking about who get sorted out in a few weeks in Yr 7.