Inclusion policies are not working

[somewherbetweenHoneyandTrunchbull]

I am an experienced teacher. And every year budgets are being cut and more and more children are being chucked into mainstream. Non-verbal, extremely sensitive to noisy kids being put into an overcrowded open plan mainstream school. Some have a little speech but couldn't hold a conversation. Many not toilet trained. Many cannot control their emotions and anger. Some where English isn't a first language. Many with social work involvement and living through ongoing trauma at home.
Meanwhile support staff numbers are being cut, year on year.
I had been managing just about. Spinning many plates. Constantly juggling. But then they enrol another two kids with complex needs into my class on 28 individuals. I just can't do it any more. This week I've been bitten, scratched, hit so hard I thought they had cracked a rib. Violent incident forms all filled in but reality means not much will change as I can't get more that 2 20 minute slots of teaching assistant time each week.
I love my job. I love the kids. I love those lightbulb moments. But at the moment I can't do my job of teaching children. I can barely keep them and myself safe in my class. I try. I'm exhausted. I'm worn out working day and night so that I'm super organised so everything can go smoothly but it never does. If it was just one child having a meltdown I probably coolyld cope. I just do t know which firework will go off when. I don't know what is setting them off and once they go, others follow.
I cry most days at how hopeless it feels. I have some really bright and eager children too. They are also being let down by this system. I'm not sure who the current education policies help. It doesn't seem to help anyone except desensitising children to daily bouts of violence and the language.
I'm very broken tonight. I'm so sleepy but won't help x

@Pollyputhekettleon

do teachers have to explain to pupils that some are exempt from disciplinary policies (to an extent). I would think violence against a teacher by a child with no underlying issues would result in at least suspension?

are governing bodies in any way aware of what teachers are going through and their legal duty of care?

do teachers that lobby of suggest a child is removed from their care criticised for being 'anti-inclusive' and simply good to try harder with the chi ld?

A lot of SEN support that students can access is provided after parents have fought and fought. Unfortunately it's not always the case that parents will be willing or able to do that

I don’t think children are told exactly why said child isn’t punished. More of a X can’t help it as they don’t understand.

We all remember that one child at school in our classes who seemed to be star of the week or whatever for what would be considered the expected behaviour in everyone else. The child always picked to be the one to run the register because they need to, all little things they get to do for maybe sitting still while you’re told off for fidgeting. Never did it help that child build a good peer relationship though everyone just avoided them.

The children who had extra things because of needing a wheelchair or walker seemed to be pretty popular at least in my school anyway. The child off for cancer treatment got millions of cards and art and was treated like a hero whenever they could be in school the whole class pretty much doted on them. The child who couldn’t ever hit the ball in rounders was still picked we just threw the ball easier for them and ran a little slower so they could still get to a base rather than being out every go.

I don't think they're required to explain that to the other children, no. They certainly don't seem to. The cases on here were simply told something along the lines of 'they have ASD, they can't help being violent.' I don't think they were explicitly told that the child was exempt from normal disciplinary policies. Anyway, in practice violent children without SEN are frequently also exempt from normal disciplinary policies, because they could be neglected or abused at home so schools don't want to exclude them.

Yes teachers seem to often be told that it's their fault and they must do better. But there also seems to be an understanding that their job is frequently impossible. Teacher's governing bodies would know about this, but the education profession in general seems to take the view that the right of a violent child to education trumps the right of teachers/other children to not be assaulted. So that's the answer to any questions about duty of care.

You'd get a better answer if parents and teachers started suing schools for failing in their legal duty of care to them/their children whenever they were injured or their mental health suffered as a result of the unsafe environment. Then governments would have to defend laws that place the rights of violent children to education above the rights to safety of others. Money would magically appear if that ever became a trend, but I don't see it happening.

You said I was really hoping that people who work with this at the coalface would be able to point to lots of research about the causes,
That’s why I posted the links you can’t be bothered to read.
Im not sure why you’re so angry with me? I have tried to answer your questions, you maybe haven’t understood the relevance of the answers but I have tried.

I do feel for teachers, I've known some amazing teachers and been fortunate that they were involved with my child.

I volunteer for an agency that supports parents with help around sen legislation. I also have a child with very complex needs.

One of the biggest issues parents have is school not knowing or deliberately mis-leading parents about when they can do and what children are entitled to in terms of educational support. I suspect many teachers don't fully know or are mis-lead by the la.

Some parents are entitled to free inde assessments for their children on legal aid if they go through the tribunal process, which can be for refusal to assess, content or ceasing the plan.

Once in section f. The provision must be made and parents can enforce via Jr. The la is responsible not the school.

If you feel a child requires more speech/ ot/ pt write it down so the parent can evidence need, every need should have provision to meet it.

If you need training in something like makaton please say, get it minuted.

I can't help but feel schools hinder parents, if there is evidence of a need it's reasonable for parents to request a full assessment by a specialist. If you don't agree with the provision please write it down or minute it. The only real people who can hold the la to account are the parents/ carers of the child with send, help them to help the child and in turn help you.

In regards to pp asking about discipline, clearly if a child is displaying behaviours they are not having their needs met. This isn't the child's fault. If they're doing this repeatedly they're repeatedly not having their needs met. Yes for a child with send it would be discrimination to discipline. Unfortunate no amount of discipline will meet their needs.

@Pollyputhekettleon

thanks for the answer. It seems all really depressing.

The inability to exclude must be really difficult as I am guessing a high proportion of those that meet the criteria for exclusion do have SEN.

In the adult world assault is assault, a crime, so it seems we are saying that teachers (and children) have no access to a legal system to deal with physical violence.

I really do feel for teachers.

My DDs schools is very careful to ensure the children don't see differences. My DD is challenging but rarely physical which may make a difference. She can be very vocal as she has a very strong sense of justice but can't filter when and how to challenge something appropriately. She can also be a runner.

She gets appropriate responses and consequences but they are done away from the classroom. If she isn't calm enough to be in class she isn't. So the other children might see her being "rude" and she is taken out of class. They don't know what goes on in the gap between. She's in year 4 and I think we've had 3 maybe 4 physical incidents since year R. I believe the other child was told she processes the world differently but it isn't okay. Again, they wouldn't have seen the consequence.

@Cubic

isn't the problem that we have a moral duty to protect teachers and children from violence from any source? It is really difficult but if violent behaviour is exhibited by an adult or an older child outside of school then this probably would be criminal. SEN can't be used as a reason not to prosecute someone in the adult world.

it seems from these posts we really need to address violence in schools as a protection measure and exclusion from a class could be as more of a protection measure than a punitive one.

Oh you've done it now 😂

Yes. Like in the legal system punishment serves several purposes. One is simply punishment, the other is keeping the person from causing further harm for a while at least, the other is demonstrating to others that they can't engage in the same behaviour.

While it would of course be wrong to punish a child who has no control over their behaviour, the other purposes remain. They're ignored.

@ArmWrestlingWithChasNDave

that makes depressing sense. I would not want to be a teacher :(

They could report it to police as you could if a random child attacked you in the park. Nothing would happen though, whether the child has SEN or not. Maybe when they get to 16 and are on their 17th violent offence.

This ideology isn't limited to children, or SEN. Look at this guy who recently stabbed a random stranger outside Dublin airport:

'A random knife attack on a German tourist at Dublin Airport was “a cry for help” from a man “driven to despair” after being made homeless, a court heard.'

Random knife attack at Dublin Airport was ‘cry for help’, court told – The Irish Times

People have been saying for a long time in criminal law that the rights of perpetrators are increasingly given precedence over the rights of victims. This is the same thing applied to children. It happens because the majority of people tolerate it. People are easy to manipulate through compassion.

It's completely inappropriate for someone to compare a disregulated primary school child with special needs lashing out to an adult choosing to commit an act of criminal violence. That's twice it's happened on this thread (thankfully the first time it was rightfully deleted). This isn't fair or reasonable, it's disingenuous, bigoted and offensive. I do appreciate PP know this and the attempt to give their prejudices a feminist (lol) or victims-right kind of sheen is pretty half-hearted & transparent but I do think it's important this grim narrative is at least mildly challenged.

If a child was having their needs met, they wouldn't be violent. Why aren't you asking why is the child be violent? Are they being shouted at? Do they eel ridiculed or thick because they can't do the work or aren't working at the level that's being taught? Is the physical environment too much for them? Are they being abused at home? Can they communicate or is this their only form of communication? What triggered it and if they're repeatedly being violent why is the trigger still being used with them? Are they being bullied? Do they have mh needs? Do they need pictures or symbols to understand? Do they have a good working memory, are they frustrated because they can't remember what was asked of them? It could be a million reasons or a mix of any. Teachers aren't responsible for everything and shouldn't be but they are responsible for their own actions or inaction and allowing a child to continually go without having their needs met without giving the parents details of those needs or even suspected needs is questionable.

the education profession in general seems to take the view that the right of a violent child to education trumps the right of teachers/other children to not be assaulted. So that's the answer to any questions about duty of care

I think this is definitely part of the problem. Schools often encourage the child to attend and when things don't work out, as a first step, fault is placed with the teaching staff.
The duty of care towards the other children is usually met by removing the child from the classroom (temporarily) or placing the child in another classroom...
I our case DS was moved to another class as the violent child picked on him - and before anyone thinks its DS at fault, its not. The violent child was physically stronger than DS on every level. The violent child then seeked him out on the playground, and when that didn't work out, VC went for another smaller, weaker child. It took 3 years (YR - Y2) to remove VC from the MS school.

Then there is also the parents (emotional exhausted, frustrated, in denail, traumatised*) who want their child to attend school, not just for educational purposes but also to give them a break, a few hours of normality in a chaotic family life.

Reading and commenting on these threads, I keep asking myself if the parents of violent children actually know about the type of violence their child has caused. Do they know that their child stabbed child A in the face with a pencil that resulted in a trip to A&E plus a lifetime of visible scarring. Do they know their child nearly killed another child through strangulation?
How would they feel if tables were turned?

• insert whatever you feel is fitting.

@Pollyputhekettleon

It seems like if teachers had the right to exclude or start a process leading to exclusion would help a lot. In a sense it is a compassionate act for staff and fellow children.

The thing that scares me is that even relatively young children can be very strong so an attack is not trivial. What could make it worse is that any kind of physical defence could be misconstrued in any investigation. I guess even physically restraining a child could put a teacher in a difficult situation.

It just must be scary.

It would help them and the other children yes, but it would harm the violent child. That's why they're not allowed to do it most of the time.

It would be shocking if someone did that, yes. You point me to her and I'll get her silenced pronto.

@Cubic the answer to all your questions is this thred.
Needs aren't met: money not given, saff not trained or employed, specialist school places not available, victims being silenced, parents made to fight over every scrap of support, ... at which point we arrive at politics and funding of public services.

I think I would walk away if any child tried to hurt me but I realise this isn't possible in this setting

I wasn't making a comparison to criminal violence to offend but just to point out that an age of criminal responsibility you can commit assault. The law is there to deter and protect as well as punish.

I think there is a parallel in school where protection of staff and pupils have to be paramount. The levels of violence described in this thread are simply scary. When it comes to violence there may be many reasons for the act, often complex, but this should deflect from the fact a violent act has occurred and a person harmed.

It must be depressing knowing your recourse to any policy measure to help prevent violence is limited.

Teachers are responsible for not meeting children's needs to be protected from violence, sure. Allowing them to continually go without having that need met without giving the parents details of those needs is indeed questionable. But isn't it a bit harsh to expect teachers to be able to meet those needs when they're unable to meet their own need for personal safety and bodily integrity either? Some of them are already suffering mental health problems as a result of the violence and fear.

By legal system I meant a policy for suspension/exclusion for protection of the staff/pupils.