Overreaction about glue gun incident at school

[backinthestoneage]

https://www-thesun-ie.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thesun.ie/news/8810155/furious-mum-school-son-burn-glue-gun/amp/?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16912722078861&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesun.ie%2Fnews%2F8810155%2Ffurious-mum-school-son-burn-glue-gun%2F

Resulting in a teacher misconduct hearing
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-misconduct-panel-outcome-ms-sarah-mead

No wonder more and more staff are unwilling to do activities and trips. If the slightest thing goes wrong there will be a petition at the school gates and a public hounding

@truthhurts23 I haven't taught primary, but I've taught practical subjects to Year 7 and above. Consider a science practical with bunsen burners, or electrical circuits. It is just me in the room with a class of students. I have to circulate between the groups, trouble-shooting and giving advice. This means that I can't closely monitor what the other groups are doing even within the same room.

If this is unsafe, how would you suggest that practical activities should run?

No need for retraining or supervision at all. Perfectly clear the teacher had insight into what she did wrong.
at least we’re accepting that professional
misconduct proceedings were way OTT. Curious to know exactly who instigated those. There is clearly something wrong with the regulatory body of that person wasn’t told to go and boil their head.

It does seem from what’s reported (taking glue gun without permission, refusing to show injury or comply with sensible instructions on treatment) that this child may have difficulty with compliance. People will be able to judge for themselves whether this episode is likely to have helped with that.
thoughts and prayers for the next teacher faced with this delightful child, is all I can say.

(taking glue gun without permission,
the teacher did give him permission to use the glue gun , she even showed him how to use it

it was two other unrelated students who took the guns out without her permission and the teacher told them to put them back, they ignored her and then the teacher just gave in and let them use the guns .
so from that point forward the kids in that group were allowed to use the guns, including pupil A

refusing to show injury or comply with sensible instructions on treatment
he did show the teacher the injury and he did follow her instructions to run it under the tap, he also told his mother when he got home, which is what the teacher asked him to do

you can keep your thoughts and prayers to yourself
this child will be just fine after his injury has healed

I don’t know why you are so determined to massage the history here? Really odd.

I feel that at the moment, where I am often left, as a teacher, to supervise 32 10 year olds single handed, that the only solution is not to do any of these activities.

Rightly or wrongly, when we risk assess, we do assess that year 6 children will follow instructions, can cope, when shown with activities with 'some' risk (this wouldn't have occurred with year 3s for example), and can also communicate an injury for example with their parents). We also trust that parents will react to accidents proportionately. If we can't trust in these things, then to protect ourselves as teachers, I think we shouldn't choose to do the activities. That's what I'm taking back to school in September anyway.

And in the circumstances, who could blame you?
parents and senior leaders in schools need to think very carefully about the educational environment we are creating for our children here. Personally I am grateful I was educated in a very different environment.

This doesn't match what the report says. Why are you so invested in spinning your own version of events?

@murielstacey

I agree.

With the funding situation as it is, the children will get to do less and less.

The a abd e reports didn't say it was an issue. It says superficial tiny burns iirr.

Me too. In fact I have already started to make such decisions based on risk assessments that take into account today’s children, their lack of practical skills, their attitudes and behaviours, as well as in-depth knowledge of available school support and parental responses.

Will anyone do a risk assessment for that?

I think secondary schools will be the next to notice a lack of skills in their intakes, and will have to revise their risk assessments.

Then employers will do the same. And blame schools for ‘not teaching skills that today’s apprentices need’.

Of course 10 year olds have difficultly with compliance.

This incident was allowed to occur only by the teachers difficultly with compliance!

I would hope out of this other teachers recognise why processes in place to protect them and children are so important, but it seems not, twisting it to blame a 10 year old child, doing what children do, for a trained adults numerous poor decisions leading up to the injury seems to be the way to go.

Not all 10 year olds refuse to follow instructions or are raised by parents who encourage them to think they can do what they like.

If 10 / 11 year olds have that much difficulty with compliance, then all practical activities and visits become, by definition, unsafe and should naturally be stopped. It us not possible - has never been possible - to staff and organise Year 6 classes on the assumption that the children cannot be expected to follow instructions. Reception classes - yes, they are staffed, organised and equipped on that assumption, particularly early in the school year. But Year 6s just before leaving for secondary? No. If a parent assumes that their child can cross the road safely enough to allow them to walk home alone, then the school should be allowed to assume that the child can be expected to follow instructions.

No one is saying the teacher didn't make mistakes. She did and she admitted them.

10 year olds can absolutely be relied upon to follow instructions properly and carefully. It's how schools operate. If the assumption is that children can't follow simple instructions then how is a teacher supposed to teach?

I'm not especially trying to blame the 10 year old. I'm just saying that part of a risk assessment that teachers carry out daily would be assuming that 10 year olds can follow instructions and that a group of 10 year olds need slightly less direct supervision than a group of 7 year olds.

Also that parents understand that sometimes, despite a risk assessment, accidents happen.

If we can't assume these, then we can't do the activities. I am teaching year 6 next year. I am never going to have access to a class TA. Therefore if I can't put any level of trust into groups of 10 year olds for fear that something like this will happen, there's a huge number of things I am now crossing off the timetable.

As others have rightly said, this level of difficulty, if it is as described, is not necessarily within norms for 10 year olds. To put it in layman’s terms, if either of my DC had behaved like this at that age, I’d be a damn sight more worried about that than the superficial burn.

The difference may be that you are a parent to your children...

Perhaps a review of what’s planned with your headteacher, and get their sign off on what is and isn’t on the list? Tedious to have to do this back covering, but in your shoes I think it’s what I’d do.

I’m not quite sure what this statement of the obvious is getting at, but to the extent it is intended to imply that I have no understanding of diverse needs, worth mentioning that one of my dc has ASD, so I understand that children vary.
the point is this; it’s part of the job of a parent to recognise where their dc’s behaviour is posing a problem for them and others, and to do what they can to help that. That’s what would concern me most in this scenario; not the superficial injury.

I am fully in support of the teacher, but I know if the mother had started a thread on here 95% would of been in agreement with her and calling the teacher unfit and demanding they be sacked!

I interpreted it as a compliment to your parenting. IE YOU parent your child while the other mother does not.

Hard to tell, really