How disruptive does a child have to be to be removed from Primary School?!

[Juggletits]

Ongoing saga at our primary school. One child has been hugely disruptive since day one - attacking other children (stabbing with pencils, stamping on chests, stomach punches, facial damage with nails or sports equipment amongst many others), attacking teachers, throwing chairs, upending tables and regularly trying to escape.

Last term they brought a pocket knife in to school and showed it to other children, cut his own trousers and threatened other children that he "could stab them"

There is an ever growing list of assaults and incidents against many children and the parent community is absolutely baffled as to why the child has not been removed. They clearly need serious and ongoing support and our school is not set up for a child with such a level of additional needs.

The reason from the HT is that "certain thresholds haven't been met"

Does anyone know what these thresholds are from a legal/professional point of view?

It has reached the point that parents are keeping their children out of school because they are not safe in the classroom.

Multiple emails have been sent to the school, Academy Trust, Ofsted and MARU

What more can be done? An entire school is being disrupted by one child - this cannot be right?!

When a staff member has a break, somebody else takes over.

I always watched my son, at all times, when he was in my care, which was when he was not in school or at collegel, or with a carer, until he was 22 years of age. Now his support workers watch him all the time.

It is surely like what parents do with babies and children under the age of four. They are vigilant all the time and watch them, at all times, don't they, and know where the child is?

I did actually work as a TA in a primary school, , supporting children with ASD, one-to-one, when my son was at primary school. Because the environment is safe, you can sit down and be aware of where they are. But that is with ASD children who are also extremely focused on an activity when they enjoy it, and getting engrossed in it. They stand still at a play table or sit and do something for quite long periods, when not kicking off.

The child being described by OP, is different though. He isn't typically ASD, is he? His way of behaving is different. He isn't getting engrossed in one pursuit. He's interacting with other kids, inappropriately. He needs a male mentor. The mentor could engross him in a game of football or something and take control of the agenda, by appealing to the boy's interest and the fact that he is motivated by a hip young mentor and role model.

The school so need to demand funding. Funding is available, but schools and whoever need to know the processes to go through.

It makes me so angry how little regard people have for the safety of school staff

Kids in secondary pupil referral units have 1:1s who are with them, at their side, all the time they are in school. The key worker starts a dialogue and negotiate goals and rewards. They use a style which isn't very authoritarian. This type of work could be started in Year 5 and 6, I think. It would be nice if the school OP writes about tried something at all to improve the situation.

I actually think 1:1 TA work is ok. There is plenty of time sitting down supervising the child, which is just looking and being encouraging, without expending a lot of energy. It isn't like working in a small community supermarket, being on the till, standing up, packing bags, and then, when it goes quiet, being sent to stack the shelves. That job looks to me to have no let up. You certainly don't get assemblies which involve sitting chilling, for thirty minutes.

When I worked as a TA, 20 years ago, it was a popular job, which staff enjoyed.

20 years ago it may well have been, what you described is nothing like the job currently

I do agree that a lot needs to be done to prevent injuries. I got hit in the mouth by a flying toy thrown through the air, by a child I was supporting, and had my lip split up. Luckily it healed, and doesn't show, but I was aware that it would have been different if it had been my eye. In that case the environment wasn't properly adapted, because I couldn't get out of the room I was in with them. That's important, constant risk assessment.

Staff being hit with chairs, head butted, kicked, punched, scratched hard enough to draw blood

Oh my goodness you have no idea what life is like for our 1:1 support staff. Please educate yourself before spouting such nonsense.

It's not nonesense, if I have first hand experience. Not all children who are assigned 1:1 staff experience challenging behaviour. Are you saying that all children with ASD in your school are violent? I'm not aware that the incidence of challenging behaviour, co-existing with SEN, has greatly increased. Are saying that all 1:1 support workers in your school are being assaulted?

What involvement is there from social services, when a child hits an adult with a chair and injures them?

Didn't you say your experience was 20 years ago?

Our 1:1 staff rotate who they work with throughout the day as some children are violent and it's not fair for the same member of staff facing that throughout every day.

Your comments about chilling for 30 minutes in assembly were particularly offensive. Supporting a child with ASD through a long assembly takes experience and skill, there is no 'chilling' involved.

Not to mention many don’t go into assembly due to the volume of interventions

Exactly. Assembly time is a perfect time for interventions! We do tons in ours!

I’m baffled by the amount of people who think a 1:1 just sits watching the child all day long, occasionally encouraging and then jumping into action to stop the child as big as them harming someone in the room.

Files, breaks, evidence gathering and writing up, general chaos in the classroom, lunches, toilet breaks, a member of staff needing a quick word. None of these things happen apparently. Just sitting and watching

I don’t think 1:1s sit and do nothing. Far from it. However, breaks and lunches can be, and often are, covered by a second 1:1.

General classroom chaos and a member of staff needing a quick word shouldn’t mean leaving a pupil requiring 1:1 unsupported, especially if they have a history of challenging behaviour. Evidence gathering and writing up and filing should not be happening whilst working 1:1.

If a toilet break outside of break and lunchtime is necessary then if the pupil is volatile or a serious flight risk another member of staff should be called to provide 1:1 for the short duration to ensure the safety of all.

Where do you think all these staff are appearing from? There isn’t a back up 1:1 trained staff floating to cover prep and file time, TAs are out every single break and lunch with their 1:1. You honestly have no idea

I have seen it happen in practice so yes I do have an ‘idea’.

With an EHCP prep and paperwork time can be funded in addition to the time supporting their 1:1 pupil. I know it can as DS3’s 1:1s have this and I have supported numerous others to get in included in their DC’s EHCP.

You only have to read MN or even just this thread to see not all 1:1s are out at break and lunch with the pupil they are supporting. Many DC don’t have break and lunchtime funded, although they should.

For toilet breaks there’s many possibilities e.g. the HT, deputy, SENCO if not teaching, any TAs who aren’t working with a pupil with 1:1 specified and quantified in an EHCP, a member of staff on PPA... Failing the availability of another member of staff the class teacher should provide it after setting the class on a task they can complete independently.

The class teacher cannot support a child with specific needs that mean they could be violent. What happens if they are violent? The class teacher has the rest of the class to look after.

There aren't tons of spare staff to cover breaks etc. All staff are timetabled to the hilt with no room for manoeuvre. There's no cash in school to provide the staff we need let alone anyone spare.

In my school the deputy and senco are both teachers, the head is very rarely available to cover due to meetings etc.

PPA is protected and asking an adult the child may never have had much interaction with is setting up for a disaster. TAs are timetabled to be somewhere at all times, if a class has 31 children you need 2 adults in the room.

Perhaps 1:1s aren’t out at breaks or lunch time because the headteacher recognises the adult needs a break themselves? 10 minutes to get a drink and use the toilet.

The class teacher cannot support a child with specific needs that mean they could be violent. What happens if they are violent?

I have seen it work well, more than once. They are more likely to violent if left unsupported. The teacher supporting the pupil directly whilst the 1:1 is on a toilet break wouldn’t change how they dealt with the pupil becoming violent during that time compared to the teacher teaching the class as a whole and the pupil becoming violent whilst being unsupported. It would though reduce the chance of violence. If the pupil became violent whilst there is only the teacher in the classroom they handle the situation like they would any emergency if there wasn’t a pupil with 1:1 in the class.

There aren't tons of spare staff to cover breaks etc.

Again, break and lunch 1:1 can be written into EHCPs so a second 1:1 is funded.

There's no cash in school to provide the staff we need let alone anyone spare.

EHCPs can be fully funded.

1:1 written into EHCPs is also legally protected. PPA time could be given at a later date if necessary. Providing 1:1 with someone unknown may not have brilliant results but leaving the pupil unsupported is also more likely to set them up “for a disaster”.

if a class has 31 children you need 2 adults in the room.

Only in infants and only if none of the exceptions apply.


Perhaps 1:1s aren’t out at breaks or lunch time because the headteacher recognises the adult needs a break themselves?

Again, a second 1:1 can be written in to EHCPs and funded.

You’re living on a different planet, there are no second 1:1s there just aren’t. Children who throw chairs at staff, bite them and head butt them. Constantly swear and threaten to kill staff and other children do not get these magical EHCPs. They’re bare bones, schools have to fight to get 30 minutes of lunch cover.

Err, no I’m not. It happens in schools up and down the country. For example, DS3 has 2 1:1s written in to his EHCP to ensure break and lunch is covered. The one that covers break and lunch has their break at a different time. It’s always been the same since he got his EHCP many years ago.

Parents may have to appeal, but getting an EHCP for a pupil displaying such behaviour is possible. I have supported many parents in similar situations to do just that.

The class teacher has a whole class to consider. When I had a violent child in my class they were never unsupported.

I could never just support them and focus on them while responsible for the rest of the class. There were many needs amongst the other children.

The class also included a few very anxious children who would get very upset when the child was violent, other children who given half a chance and a distracted teacher would cause havoc and a child who was did a runner when faced with danger.

Suggesting a class teacher can adequately support a class and a child with significant and unpredictable needs alone is dangerous.

When I had a violent child in my class they were never unsupported.

That’s as it should be. My post was in response to what should happen if the 1:1 needed a toilet break and there was absolutely no one else to provide 1:1 for the short period of time.


Suggesting a class teacher can adequately support a class and a child with significant and unpredictable needs alone is dangerous.

Again, my post was in response to the poster saying what about toilet breaks. I didn’t say a teacher on their own could adequately support the pupil needing 1:1 and the rest of the class. It was a suggestion when all else has failed so the pupil requiring 1:1 isn’t left unsupported and therefore more likely to become violent and thus the other anxious pupils more anxious. The risk is greater leaving the pupil unsupported.