What do you think about reformed gang members working in schools?

[NewFriday]

We are seeing more and more of our children affected by and involved in gang activity - leafy mostly affluent area on the other side of the London Green Belt.

We are also getting increasing approaches from ex gang members who have set themselves up as mentors or running workshops, with the aim of reducing children's vulnerability to gangs. They don't come cheap, about £4/500 per day usually.

If they can be effective, it's work that needs doing, but I'm not convinced. e.g. one came in and told us all about the horrors of his early life, but it still sounds quite glamourous to certain students. Then about how much better his life is now he's doing this work - an opportunity that wouldn't have been available to him, if he'd stayed on the straight and narrow since childhood. He'd likely be in some minimum wage job from his background.

It also means we have the prospect of people with convictions ranging from drugs, to weapons to actual murder wanting to work with our children in and out of school.

The murder thing is true. There's one very high profile "mentor" working 121 with students in several local schools who's DBS includes murder. Murder when he was 18, a long time ago, but still. We haven't employed him, but he has complained about our approach to the LA and is bad mouthing us to other schools because we're not supporting our children to learn about gangs the way he thinks we should.

I'm not convinced these are the people we want working with and influencing our children, or am I being unreasonably cynical? The traditional methods don't seem to be reaching them, after all.

If it were on a voluntary basis, it’d be interesting to see who’d show up to speak.
I’m cynical alongside you.
It’s impossible to vet who is passionate about positively impacting students’ lives and who just showing up to collect easy money.
And the pay really gets in the way of truly knowing who you’re letting in.
It’s either an expensive mistake or a sound investment in the future of young men and women. It won’t be both those things though.

Also, the nature of the work is that they'll run 121 sessions with some students

1-2-1 sessions between a kid and a murderer?

How on earth would that pass a DBS check?

Anyone convicted of murder (and later released on life licence) would require permission from their Probation Officer before doing this. Anyone just cracking on without it would be in serious trouble.

You don't "pass" a DBS check. You'll only be prohibited from working with children if you have committed crimes against children. All other crimes are open to a risk assessment by the school.

If you want bona fide ex gang members working in school, you're going to have to accept they done some pretty terrible things (convicted or not).

Because kids in state schools including leafy areas are prime targets for drug gangs.

Eton and the like have their own drug problems.

So when they say "DBS checked", that just means the school knows he's a murderer?

I don't think I'd be happy in that scenario with that person having 1-1 access to children without supervision.

yes, that's exactly it, but any genuine ex gang member is going to have a nasty criminal record. Most of the ones doing this work claim to have reformed in prison.

There are also some claiming to be ex gang members who probably aren't.

The most interesting one I've spoken to so far was brought up in a world where he could easily have become a gang member but didn't. He wasn't involved in gangs but saw what happened to his peers.

The guy thats complaining about you still sounds like a dick.

I think schools can really fuck up when they decide to have external people come in.

If it was needed I would be looking at the course material, how much out reach they had done in the community and were still doing, what the out come of the session was supposed to be other wise it sounds like a complete grift.

Why isn't there an internal review system in place for this kind of stuff?

I wouldn't be happy about 1to1. Why does it need to be set up like that?

What do you mean by internal review? We are talking to lots of people and hearing about what they have to offer and how their sessions are structured. We can't review it until it's happened?

That's the view we've taken about him, but other schools locally have taken a different view and decided that doing something is better than doing nothing and he has the highest profile locally for this work, that's who they've gone with. i.e if it all goes wrong, they won't be the only ones.

can the 1-1 be online and recorded?

The most interesting one I've spoken to so far was brought up in a world where he could easily have become a gang member but didn't. He wasn't involved in gangs but saw what happened to his peers.

Does he work with someone who did end up in a gang?

We had a group in and they were brilliant. They have done work in various schools, they had a mock up prison cell. Very hard hitting but what some of our pupils needed. We have problems with drug gangs and county lines in my area.

It doesn't need to be, but for out most troubled students, that's often the format that has the most impact. They build relationships with the student as their mentor. A "lecture" to a group doesn't get the same traction. Of course the very fact that relationships are built also increases risk.

I would be very wary. The same happened years ago with ex drug addicts wanting to come into schools to talk to students. One primary school had a young woman in who told the kids how to not get caught shoplifting! She also went back on heroin not long afterwards so was not the best role model. Another example was a chap telling the children that a bit of ganga was OK! I worked for the LEA and these examples came directly from Headteachers.
The school would do well to consult with a well qualified PSHE Adviser and or the PSHE Association. By the way, the school should have a clear policy on the use of 'Outside Visitors'

what has your colour got to do with it ???

Yes, and the recommended provider currently is the murderer who's bad mouthing us.

I daresay the drugs people was something the experts recommended too.

I work in prisons and mentoring programmes are common, so I am not surprised that some people continue this line when they are out of prison.

I think having ex offenders in to speak to children could be both a brilliant or an awful idea. All depends on the individual speaker and school.

I guess this is where SLT need to take responsibility for finding out about the individual and their work to decide if it is appropriate. Possibly contacting school they have worked at previously etc. i would expect to scrutinise their approach before getting them in school. I assume the school has some third party checks process?

I don’t think it is unreasonable for them to be paid for their work. If someone is doing valuable work they should be paid. It is increasingly common for people with “lived experience” to be paid for sharing that (whether disability/care experience etc).

I would say I wouldn’t agree to 121 in schools. A talk maybe or even group work alongside a teacher but not 121.

Really, you can't think of any reason our colour might be relevant to a discussion about gang culture?

It's true that not all our children who are vulnerable to being groomed by gangs are black, but every one of the ex gang members who've presented themselves to us in the hope of getting this work has been.

We just haven't lived it, or even on the fringes of it. We don't know anyone in our personal lives who has. We're not relevant to the children concerned.

I would make sure you carefully scrutinise their CV and make sure you only use people who have worked with/ for governmental organisations such as the Home Office or one of the big children's NGOs like Barnardos.

I would ask if they have a safeguarding policy and grill them on what they would do if one of your pupils disclosed they were being groomed.

And lastly, I wouldn't allow any 1:1 sessions.

Hi Op

I dont think 🤔 that's the case that it looks like ex gang/ex con saying about his lived experiences as being look at how well my life has turned out now,

it's I think it's more there 🙌 for grace of god , that i had interventions such as coming across someone who gave me alternative to my way of life through faith or a mix of having a near death experience or finding out someone they know was murdered or died from drugs overdose or It's suicide ect,

Hmm, but 121 is the format that makes the most difference? No point if it's not going to have much impact.

Internal review was probably wrong - more like an assessor who can authenticate or agree that its ethical/verified teaching/coaching - so that your not having to go off word of mouth as it would be trusted source.

For instance - you dont know if a word of what these guys are saying is true. they could be embellishing what they are saying.

Its similar to external companies that come in to specifically talk about sex education. None of it is endorsed by the Gov.

I dont understand why it would have to be 121 to make an impact and surely they wouldn't actually be left alone with a man that wouldn't even get a cleaning job because of his DBS