To be a bit hmmm about this teacher's choice of disciplining?

[GlomOfNit]

DS (13) year 9, science class. He's come home aggrieved and sad because his biology teacher has said that there will be absolutely no more science practicals in her classroom ... until either some culprits own up or their classmates snitch them in.

One of the boys (they're all boys) who apparently is a constant PITA, squirted another boy in the eyes with some milk out of a pipette. Obviously squirting someone in the eyes with anything during a science lesson isn't behaviour the school wants, and she came down like a ton of bricks and sent this boy straight to the isolation room. As he left, about a third of the rest of the class jeered, clapped etc - a big rowdy noise apparently.
One of them buried his safety specs into a fire bucket of sand (I'm imagining that may have scratched them.) She lost her temper with all this, and at the end of the class, demanded that the boys who jeered in a silly way/the one with the safety glasses own up, OR their classmates contact her to let her know which ones it was. (I mean, she was RIGHT THERE in the room!) And until she got that information there would be no more science practicals.

I'm probably being a bit perfect firstborn here (as he is) but is this not a bit unreasonable? It's unfair to punish the majority of the class for something that a few did right under her nose (so why couldn't she identify the culprits herself?), but massively unjust to withhold practical lessons (these have only just re-started after pandemic restrictions) which are part of their learning. And surely really bad practice to ask the 'goodies' to dob in the 'baddies'? Divisive and will have repercussions. Surely the onus was on her to identify the troublemakers?

To be clear, I'm supportive of the school to exact discipline and I appreciate that sometimes the entire class will suffer, but I don't think essential teaching should be withheld, and I don't think it's fair to ask the majority to act as her eyes.

I do wonder how much parents play a role in this.

There are are often complaints about uniforms but I do think even if the rules seem daft they should stuck to
Parents play a massive role in my experience. There's a certain type of parent who think their child is exempt from any rule they don't like and/or will repeatedly undermine school.

Eg School uniform says to wear school trousers, no fashion trousers or leggings. Parent buys their child leggings and then gets annoyed at staff in front of their child because the staff have said leggings aren't the uniform.

The school rules say school shoes, no trainers. Parent buys their child an expensive pair of black trainers and then gets confrontational with staff saying "I'm not made of money. How am I meant to find money for another pair of shoes? I've already spent £120 on the current pair". School staff point out that they are trainers, trainers have never been allowed in the uniform.

Child has been given a detention for repeatedly disrupting the lesson and arguing back with staff. Parent phones the school furious because their child said they didn't do anything, and how dare the teacher give a detention to a student who only wanted help with their work. They tell the teacher and child that they don't consent to a detention. School staff point out that consent isn't required so if the detention is missed then it will move through the behaviour policy. Parent probably goes to the local newspaper with a sad face about how their child was put in isolation by a draconian school for asking for help with their work.

They think they're helping their child, but they're really not.

And yet some schools have very few problems with behaviour. So clearly you can. It doesnt just divide bw leafy suburban comp and rough inner city ones either

I've worked in quite a lot of schools, none rated below good by Ofsted. The only secondary school that had few problems with behaviour was the private girls' day school I taught at. Out of the others, the one that had least behaviour problems was the Catholic one (which effectively had back-door selection). Some of the others do a good PR job of convincing parents that behaviour is good. The reality is somewhat different. Most parents don't really know what the behaviour in their children's school is like imo.

Imo the biggest factors in the behaviour in a school are the profile of the kids you get, and the attitudes of their parents. Schools generally have a very, very similar list of expectations/rules wrt to behaviour. Their ability to enforce them depends to a certain extent on the quality of their senior leadership and teaching staff, but a lot on their intake.

@LolaSmiles - can such a disruptive child not be removed from the lesson right away?

I completely agree that parental outlook plays a huge role - I went to private school but classmates would mess around more than people would in my home country. If I got in trouble at school, I would be more worried about what my parents would say at home.

DH went to state school (average-good) - but says the type of behaviour described here was pretty standard.

@LolaSmiles - can such a disruptive child not be removed from the lesson right away?
The behaviour policy has to be followed. Often that means the child has been politely reminded of expectations and 2 or 3 formal warnings before they can be removed.
Students can go through their warnings quite quickly if they are engaged in large scale disruption. The major issue in many secondary schools is what is wrongly called low level disruption, eg talking when shouldn't be, not following simple instructions, not getting on with work, but not making a big scene either.

If you imagine that it only takes 3 or 4 students to be disruptive, but stop just before removal stage and the other 26 students could have had their lesson disrupted a dozen times. If their parents are of the view "DC said they only turned round to ask for a pencil so I've told them they don't have to do the detention" types then over the course of a day this minority of students can successfully disrupt the education of hundreds of their peers, all because their parents didn't bother to tell them to behave in school.

@LolaSmiles

I do wonder how much parents play a role in this.

There are are often complaints about uniforms but I do think even if the rules seem daft they should stuck to
Parents play a massive role in my experience. There's a certain type of parent who think their child is exempt from any rule they don't like and/or will repeatedly undermine school.

Eg School uniform says to wear school trousers, no fashion trousers or leggings. Parent buys their child leggings and then gets annoyed at staff in front of their child because the staff have said leggings aren't the uniform.

The school rules say school shoes, no trainers. Parent buys their child an expensive pair of black trainers and then gets confrontational with staff saying "I'm not made of money. How am I meant to find money for another pair of shoes? I've already spent £120 on the current pair". School staff point out that they are trainers, trainers have never been allowed in the uniform.

Child has been given a detention for repeatedly disrupting the lesson and arguing back with staff. Parent phones the school furious because their child said they didn't do anything, and how dare the teacher give a detention to a student who only wanted help with their work. They tell the teacher and child that they don't consent to a detention. School staff point out that consent isn't required so if the detention is missed then it will move through the behaviour policy. Parent probably goes to the local newspaper with a sad face about how their child was put in isolation by a draconian school for asking for help with their work.

They think they're helping their child, but they're really not.

Great post @LolaSmiles

@LolaSmiles - why not change the behaviour policy to zero tolerance? Just say no talking, unless medical emergency. Otherwise leave the lesson. If you forget your pencil, then you catch up by copying from your friend later.

It’s a bit rubbish - because I’m sure if you have a class of 15-20, you could tolerate a bit of asking for pencils etc. but can completely see how 3 successive people saying I’ve forgot my pencil, exercise book etc can waste 10mins for everyone.

I've had disruptive students removed, @Namenic, but in reality it's not always that simple. It's not as if you usually have 29 well-behaved, attentive students and one nightmare disruptive one. A third of the class might be quiet and attentive (some needing quite a bit of support), a third are chatty and easily distracted but not actively disruptive, and then the remaining third range from combative and angry through attention-seeking or over-emotional to maliciously trouble-making (any of these possibly due to difficult home lives, a variety of additional needs or just sheer desire to cause chaos).

Rigidly implementing the behaviour policy (especially with older students) often causes more problems than it solves. Because instead of laziness and mild mucking about, you then get agression and defiance, and the threat of escalating punishments has little effect on an angry, hormonal teenager except to piss them off further.

I guess that’s why I’d rather send my kid to a strict school like michaela or home Ed (which we do).

Unfortunately school is unlikely to solve angry kids’ problems if they have issues in their home lives etc. the question is, to what extent should it be allowed to disrupt the education and life chances of other kids. Personally I would not want my kid going to lessons if he disrupts other people. But understandably in some cases there is unmet mental health or SEN need so the kids aren’t getting the support required. I think funnelling kids to go down 9 gcses at 16 then btec/a levels is not suitable for everyone. Will keeping the disruptive kids in class benefit them compared to the damage they do to other kids’ educations?

Namenic
lazylinguist has said what I would say on that

Plus, I don't actually think zero tolerance, one strike and out you go is the answer. There's lots to learn about behaving in class and sending out every teen who spoke would be terrible for education, and cause endless gaps to plug later

What's needed is a clear behaviour policy and parents to accept that running an organisation of 1000 teenagers needs everyone to follow simple rules, even if they aren't rules parents would choose themselves.

@BurbageBrook

I’m not normally a fan of whole class punishments but in this case it seems entirely fair. What shocking behaviour.

I'm almost totally against whole class punishments too. But OP, surely you can see the difference between a normal classroom lesson, and a practical in the science lab? The latter is a massive responsibility for the teacher. When my kids were at school, a pupil was blinded in one eye by one of these behavioural incidents in a lab.

I sometimes wonder what happens later down the line when the undermining parent ends up with a child that they can't do anything with themselves; when you teach primary, you don't often get the end of the story.
I remember one Year 4 boy caught shoplifting on an educational trip. We were approaching Christmas, so an alternative to detention was put in place. The Christmas party happened on the last day of term, when all the big occasions demanding best behaviour were safely past. He was developing a blase attitude to detentions, and we knew he had a SAHM, so it was decided that, on the last day of term, he would be collected and taken home at lunchtime. If it had been my own son, we would have had a talk at home about why the party was happening without him. I would also have been worried about the behaviour becoming entrenched as he approached 10 years old (age of criminal responsibility). Word was that he had "form" at his previous school, but hearsay was none of our business.
We learned later from the other boys that, later on that evening, all his best buddies were invited round to his house for an alternative party, to spare him the upset of missing out.

I guess that’s why I’d rather send my kid to a strict school like michaela or home Ed (which we do).

I'm not a fan of Michaela's strategy at all. Their Headteacher sounds like an utter loon, and I think my (well-behaved, able) dc would be utterly miserable at a school like that. I don't think Home Ed would have been good for my dc or me.

If I were going purely on the basis of what would give my dc the best education, I'd go for an excellent independent day school. But a) I couldn't afford it, b) there aren't any near me and c) I have some moral qualms about private education (though probably not enough to put me off if it were affordable and doable.

So my dc are in the local comprehensive. Yes there are problems, and yes it's infuriating that they'd be making faster and more enjoyable progress in a good independent school, but there is no viable better alternative.

I sometimes wonder what happens later down the line when the undermining parent ends up with a child that they can't do anything with themselves; when you teach primary, you don't often get the end of the story
They come to secondary school, quickly decide that they are untouchable and behave accordingly and the parents continue to undermine the school at every opportunity.
What happens next depends on how the school handle it, but assuming the school is a decent school with good systems then the child will usually be issued with detentions, may or may not attend, home will back the child, the student ends up in isolation a lot for persistent issues, parents are invited to school for meetings with form teachers, Heads of Year, subject staff, senior staff and on all occasions the parent will openly say that their child doesn't have to follow the rules/it isn't their fault/teachers have a vendetta against their child. The child will either go through that cycle regularly until they leave because they never quite do enough to justify exclusions, or their behaviour escalates and they have lots of exclusions.
In Year 11 the parents will either continue not caring about their child's education and continue the same cycle, or they'll sit with staff at the start of Year 11 and demand to know what the school will be doing to get their child their GCSEs (usually along the lines of "college have said they need X so that's what they have to get"). Parent seems to think that because their child is underperforming, the school should make their DC a priority for all interventions (even though their child is still messing around in class, still not doing homework, still not attending revision sessions). When staff mention what the student should be doing as a minimum, including completing homework, parent will say something like "but what can you do? They love their x box and they're always out with friends". Parents complain that school are preventing their child learning by putting them in isolation, but don't think their child needs to change their behaviour. Child doesn't reach their potential and both child and parent will claim it was because the school were rubbish, nobody ever helped them, they had a vendetta against them and it's school's fault they didn't get the grades.

Either way, the child's path is often fairly predictable from year 7 and possibly earlier, however hard the secondary school tries to channel them towards more positive and productive outcomes. It's almost always down to the parents, whether it's neglect, entitled attitudes, being spoilt and encouraged to blame everything on someone else, chaotic home life with substance abuse etc. It's very sad, but by secondary age it's very hard to unlearn those behaviour patterns.

including completing homework

Children should complete homework if it's set, although as far as I'm aware it's not beneficial for the majority of students, and I disagree with on principle. School should be for work, home for relaxation and entertainment. They should study for tests or assignments but these should be a half-termly thing, not a piece of homework from several subjects per week.

I sometimes wonder what happens later down the line when the undermining parent ends up with a child that they can't do anything with themselves; when you teach primary, you don't often get the end of the story.

Sometimes it works out for them.
They leave school and the world of work with its simple reward/sanction operation suits them. I’ve met former students who turned out bricklayers, carpenters, landscape gardeners, car-related jobs, youth workers and all sorts. One is a successful professional gambler.
Others, not so well. Young men wrapping cars round trees, alcohol and drug-related police involvement and teenagers with babies. A number shift through minimum wage or off the books jobs, as dysfunctional as they were at school.
My first class are 43 this year.

plumsageplum
That's fine for you to think that. Not everyone agrees with homework. I don't agree with it in primary school, but do see the benefits at secondary.

The problem is parents who tell their children they don't have to do homework, then say their children don't have to do detentions for missing homework are the ones undermining their child's education. They're also very quick to point fingers at teachers if their children don't do well, seemingly oblivious to the fact their child's underperformance is something they've created

@plumsageplum - in primary school not only did I have to complete homework, but my mum would set me extra. I guess it’s a different culture. It doesn’t work for all kids - but for me I’m glad about it. I think I got used to working extra - so revising for exams was normal, so was doing coursework which meant that I did well and could choose more options at uni. It was also helpful when I had to study for post grad exams and work a job as well. It wasn’t all plain sailing and I’ve had my share of failures too, but learning to work hard was helpful for me.

I think that homework in KS3 should mostly be to go over the work done in class, with a little quiz at the beginning of the next lesson and maybe just a couple of written homeworks a term. GCSE students should have more focussed hwk tasks, but not all written.

@LolaSmiles

I sometimes wonder what happens later down the line when the undermining parent ends up with a child that they can't do anything with themselves; when you teach primary, you don't often get the end of the story They come to secondary school, quickly decide that they are untouchable and behave accordingly and the parents continue to undermine the school at every opportunity. What happens next depends on how the school handle it, but assuming the school is a decent school with good systems then the child will usually be issued with detentions, may or may not attend, home will back the child, the student ends up in isolation a lot for persistent issues, parents are invited to school for meetings with form teachers, Heads of Year, subject staff, senior staff and on all occasions the parent will openly say that their child doesn't have to follow the rules/it isn't their fault/teachers have a vendetta against their child. The child will either go through that cycle regularly until they leave because they never quite do enough to justify exclusions, or their behaviour escalates and they have lots of exclusions. In Year 11 the parents will either continue not caring about their child's education and continue the same cycle, or they'll sit with staff at the start of Year 11 and demand to know what the school will be doing to get their child their GCSEs (usually along the lines of "college have said they need X so that's what they have to get"). Parent seems to think that because their child is underperforming, the school should make their DC a priority for all interventions (even though their child is still messing around in class, still not doing homework, still not attending revision sessions). When staff mention what the student should be doing as a minimum, including completing homework, parent will say something like "but what can you do? They love their x box and they're always out with friends". Parents complain that school are preventing their child learning by putting them in isolation, but don't think their child needs to change their behaviour. Child doesn't reach their potential and both child and parent will claim it was because the school were rubbish, nobody ever helped them, they had a vendetta against them and it's school's fault they didn't get the grades.

Oh yes. This with bells on!

The problem with expecting the better behaved kids to turn on or grass on the naughty ones is the naughty ones are usually the tough nuts anyway so no one dares vocalise their annoyance to them. When I was at school there were several really naughty kids in my lessons and we'd often get punished as a class but no way would I have spoken up and risked getting the shit beaten out of me

@LucySullivanIsGettingMarried

agreed, I can witness a horrible incident and if I try and raise it with the victim more often than not they try and pretend it didn’t happen as are
Petrified of the perpetrator

@LolaSmiles

I sometimes wonder what happens later down the line when the undermining parent ends up with a child that they can't do anything with themselves; when you teach primary, you don't often get the end of the story They come to secondary school, quickly decide that they are untouchable and behave accordingly and the parents continue to undermine the school at every opportunity. What happens next depends on how the school handle it, but assuming the school is a decent school with good systems then the child will usually be issued with detentions, may or may not attend, home will back the child, the student ends up in isolation a lot for persistent issues, parents are invited to school for meetings with form teachers, Heads of Year, subject staff, senior staff and on all occasions the parent will openly say that their child doesn't have to follow the rules/it isn't their fault/teachers have a vendetta against their child. The child will either go through that cycle regularly until they leave because they never quite do enough to justify exclusions, or their behaviour escalates and they have lots of exclusions. In Year 11 the parents will either continue not caring about their child's education and continue the same cycle, or they'll sit with staff at the start of Year 11 and demand to know what the school will be doing to get their child their GCSEs (usually along the lines of "college have said they need X so that's what they have to get"). Parent seems to think that because their child is underperforming, the school should make their DC a priority for all interventions (even though their child is still messing around in class, still not doing homework, still not attending revision sessions). When staff mention what the student should be doing as a minimum, including completing homework, parent will say something like "but what can you do? They love their x box and they're always out with friends". Parents complain that school are preventing their child learning by putting them in isolation, but don't think their child needs to change their behaviour. Child doesn't reach their potential and both child and parent will claim it was because the school were rubbish, nobody ever helped them, they had a vendetta against them and it's school's fault they didn't get the grades.

With bells on!