Why do some teachers have to be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO defensive?

[hobbgoblin]

My son is always in the naughty books. He is lovely, and always commended for adorable polite behaviour with friends on play dates and so on - all my mummy friends love having him over. However, he is naughty in an attention seeking way or when he feels lacking in confidence.

I liaise with the school regularly and we all know it stems from self esteem issues.

This term he has been excellent to date and was very good for me in the 6 week hols.

All good.

However, last week he had to be reprimanded for catching the Head's foot with his chair as he was being silly. Today he had to stay after school to clear up yogurt from the carpet. Apparently he made a mess with it but it was actually another boy who was to blame really and my DS caught the tail end of some shennanigans. The other boy went home, my DS had to clear up.

So, I decided to ask his teacher what had brought about the sudden downturn in behaviour as was disappointed but also to find out why it was only my DS doing the cleaning punishemnt.

Teacher explained that other boy escaped before she could get him to clean up and that she would be telling him off in the morning. I said fine but surely that this means my DS has been the one getting the punishemnt whilst watching the other child 'get off' with the bad behaviour. I said we all know that some of the behvaiour is due to low expectation of self and also DS's view of what others think of him, i.e. 'always the naughty child'. I said they perhaps ought to have been punished together instead of making DS clean up just because he went and confessed to the teacher whilst the other scarpered(she told me he confessed and soon after realised that it was not actually DS's fault at all).

Anyway despite acknowledging all this about DS being branded naughty and avoiding any dodgy ground re. self esteem and expectation she concludes with "it was my decision and it is up to me how I deal with it and I'm not leaving yogurt on the carpet for the caretaker".

I wanted to ask why she didn't flippin' clean it up then rather than making DS do it because that was easier. I didn't, but it makes me so mad that I go in and raise reasonable questions about what happened in a reasonable manner to be met with the response I was.

What do you lot think?

[clam]

And sometimes life isn't fair. The sooner kids learn that one, the better.

[clam]

This thread reminds me of one a while back where the OP was complaining that her DS "was made to" fish out a water bottle from the loo that he'd thrown it down. She was outraged. Lots of people felt that it was the caretaker's job to deal with that one. Many others took the line: "kid did it, kid sorts it out." That one ran and ran.

[Morosky]

Why do schools have janitors if not to clean?

this is the kind of thing grumpy year 9s come up with not grown women. Hearing a pupil say that is one of the few things that makes me genuinely angry.

Our cleaners are all sixth formers which means pupils generally have more respect for the school and the people who loook after it.

[stepaway]

OP, to answer your thread title question: I think the reason is that teachers are the target of a lot of complaints and constantly feel under attack.

I am amazed at how commonly I hear otherwise seemingly calm, sensible parents make casual, disparaging remarks about teachers and their actions. Teachers seem to be considered fair game for all sorts of comments.

I'm not saying that your conversation was in this category BUT teachers are called upon to defend their actions/inaction all the time and I imagine it gets very wearing after a time.

[clam]

Also, the OP asked why the teacher didn't clear up the mess herself if she was concerned about the caretaker having to do it. Same principle. Why should anyone else have to clear it up when one of the kids responsible (albeit only partly, but OP admits her DS was involved in some tail-end shenanigins) was there.

[Morosky]

"OP, to answer your thread title question: I think the reason is that teachers are the target of a lot of complaints and constantly feel under attack"

Speaking as a teacher I don't think we do, I certainly don't. I do think mumsnet attracts over obsessive parents and I have been lucky enough never to teach a child from such a home.

[glinda]

If cleaning up a mess on the floor is a "punishment" and even considered a humiliating punishment by one poster I think that I must have done something very, very, wrong as I have to do this most days.

[clam]

And if it's humiliating to a child to clean up mess they've helped to make, then maybe they'll think twice before getting involved with a similar offence in future.

[mathanxiety]

Scaryteacher, if all teachers were really professionals and respected the children they taught, then telling them pertinent information about the children would not automatically result in heads a-wagging all over town.

'Professional' means doing your job as best you can with each individual child and keeping your mouth shut about the child, neither discussing the child's situation at home, or your friends around town, or your friends in the staffroom, except in formal situations where progress is being evaluated by a team.

A pharmacist needs to know your pharmaceutical circumstances and you assume (perhaps with justification ) that s/he is not blabbing about your warts, constipation, earwax problem, etc., at the tennis club or the ladies auxiliary; parents who share information with a school should have the same assurance that information will be used appropriately and professionally and not turned into gossip by the teaching professionals.

OP mentioned that one reason for having the child clean up the yogurt was because she didn't want to leave it for the cleaner to deal with later. This seems to me like the teacher desperately casting around for justification for her poorly thought out decision to punish one child for a mess that more than one child made or contributed to.

[scaryteacher]

I hear a lot from parents about 'respecting the children'. Respect has to be earned on both sides. I didn't respect a lot of the students I taught because they didn't respect their education. It's hard to respect a year 11 who consistently turns up stoned in your classroom every lesson that you teach then for.

I don't need to know all the information about all the students I taught. Trying to keep track of the individual needs of 600+ students a week is impossible; and neither should we have information on the homelife of all the students. It is intrusive (I don't tell my ds's school what goes on at home), and from where on a lot of the students, would we get the information?

The problem with any dissemination of confidential information is that it leaks. In one of the schools I taught at, the male teachers were warned never to be on their own with a particular pupil; no reason was given for this, it could have been that the student was violent, or prone to falsely accusing teachers, or had been abused, or just didn't like males. Had the real reason been known, then I doubt any of them would have wanted this student in their classroom at it put the teacher at risk. What if they had then refused to teach this student? The tutor group and then the year group would soon have realised there was an issue and that would also have spread.

It's better to err on the side of caution in some cases, and to ensure the safety of teachers and students, perhaps it is best not to know.

[Hmentor]

Children can be labelled as 'naughty' which is sooo wrong, it is easier for the other children to take advantage of this and coax him into trouble, knowing that the teacher will blame him. talk to the hed or ask if a Ta should be in the class, common sense wud be if the teacher sat the other child away from your son.

[clam]

Hmentor... what a good idea. Bet the teacher won't have thought of that.

[scarletlilybug]

And some children are labelled as naughty because... guess what...they are naughty.

Surely an acknowledgment from the OP towards her son that life isn't always fair, together with praise for handling his punishment with dignity would be more productive in the long run, rather than expecting special treatment for him - however hard his earlier life may have been. In any case, who is to say that the other boy - the one who scarpered - doesn't have his own problems and issues that may have affected the teacher's handling of the situation?

[Hmentor]

none of us know what goes on in others lives.It is standard practise to have TA's in class not 'special treatment' it benefits all pupils having an extra pair of eyes and ears in the class room.surely it wouldn't be fair to let 1 child disrupt 29 others or fair for 1 child to lose out because caring for 30 children in class and getting it right 100% is not fesible.These are children who are developing NOT adults who are better able to cope.

[scaryteacher]

In secondary the TA is there to help a specific child with their learning; not to be an extra pair of eyes and ears.

There are a finite amount of TAs to an awful lot of children in many schools, so one may not necessarily be available for that class.

The 'special treatment' comment refers back to earlier in the thread I think, rather than having a TA in class.

[Hmentor]

check out if there are mentors in school that could work on self-esteem and behaviour issues. TA's also work with small groups of children

[mathanxiety]

I don't think you need to earn the right to have your personal information kept confidential? What have you done to earn the privacy you expect from your doctor?

Information disseminated about students does not automatically leak. If it does, then a school has a serious leadership problem, and also a very unprofessional staff culture. There should be serious consequences for teachers who gossip about children. And the idea that a teacher is less at risk because of knowing exactly what a child's problem is doesn't make sense. The problem is the child's and remains a threat or an issue whether the teacher knows the details or not, but knowing the details can mean a teacher can choose a better approach in the classroom than the standard 'one size fits all' to instruction and discipline. And how do teachers get away with refusing to teach a particular student? If there is a problem serious enough to warrant fears for life or limb, is a regular school the appropriate place for a child so dangerous? Are the other children safe with such a child among them?

As for the stoned Year 11 child (yes still a child) -- if you felt you were all wasting your time with this student, and the student wasting his time too, what about finding out why he was turning up stoned and working with the responsible adult (probably wasn't any, sadly) to address the basic problem which was making your efforts pointless. Your anecdote reinforces the notion that students are whole human beings and should be treated as such.

[londonone]

mathanxiety - exactly how many hours in the dya do you think there are, because if teachers took on evry students issues on a personal basis as you are suggesting with the "stoned" student, they certainly wouldn't have anytime to teach. TEACHERS ARE NOT SOCIAL WORKERS OR NURSES OR PARENTS.

[Morosky]

I have to say scaryteacher that as adults we should always repect our students even if inside we feel very differently. Often it is up to us to set the example rather than sinking to their level. I say that as a teacher who has dealt regularly with stoned, drunk, violent and don't give a shit students"

[mathanxiety]

But a teacher is surely wasting those precious hours if s/he is trying to teach someone who is coming to class stoned? And students who are constantly disruptive because of dysfunction in their homes are wasting everyone's time too. Are there no administrative staff in the school who take care of problems like truancy reports to the relevant agencies who could also be a liaison with social services and report a stoned student?

No, teachers are not nurses or social workers or parents, but they are dealing with huge numbers of often difficult and always immature people all day every day. Their job requires a bit of all those other professions and a few more too, psychologist, for example. Being an effective teacher is not just about expertise in a specific subject area.

I am not suggesting taking on every student's issues on a personal basis here. What I'm trying to suggest is that teachers seem to spend a lot of time banging their heads against unnecessary stone walls, trying to teach students who have little or no inclination to learn, all of whom are the products of their home environments -- better communication and use of resources can mean fewer burned out and jaded teachers, and better academic outcomes for students, which is, after all, why teachers and schools are there.

[TheFallenMadonna]

"better communication and use of resources"
What does that mean? Communication with? What resources?

I teach a lot of disaffected pupils. I think their needs are massively important, because they will very soon be disaffected sdults, and without our input, uneducated disaffected adults. And that isn't good for anyone. I agree with Morosky. Of ocurse we must respect the children we work with, whatever their attitude. Partly because they are worthy of respect as people. And partly TBH out of self interest. They will know if you don't repsect them, and you will not come out of that well. These are often children who do not get a lot of respect outside school. They need to realise that repsect should be the default position.

[mathanxiety]

Better communication within the school, and better communication with the parents. I see teachers as resources who can't be effectively deployed if they're operating in a vacuum either within the school or in the community.

Yes, respect should always be the default position. Some of what teachers accomplish takes generations, which is immensely frustrating when your job is done on a shorter timescale. Maybe schools are now reaping a harvest sown in former decades...

[Morosky]

Although I no longer teach in a church school I try to employ Ignatian/Jesuit principles in my teaching especially when dealing with my more difficult students. I do believe in educating the whole person, preparing them to be a leader in society, whether it be a leader of a family unit or a company. I try to see each person as made in the image of God and a life to be valued and treasured ( that can be a challenge)

I bet I have killed the thread now .

[pluto]

I really like my teaching job because my school's ethos is one where the whole child is educated as Morosky suggests. I could not turn a blind eye to a student who was stoned in class - and to ignore it would be the height of irresponsibility. I don't understand teachers who say "we're not social workers etc." Of course we aren't - but we have a duty of care and teaching can never be about simply imparting subject knowledge.

[scaryteacher]

I didn't say I turned a blind eye to his stoned state; I looked at him, called the Nurse and had him taken to her room to deal with. I reported it to the HoY and his tutor. This went on weekly for an academic year. P5 on a Friday (the last of the week) with a GCSE class is not the time to delve into why he went off site at lunchtime, or where he got the weed from. He smoked because he could, and he thought it amusing to disrupt classes (mine wasn't the only one). I didn't let him disrupt my lesson or the learning of the 26 others in the class to whom I also had a duty of care, and to get through a GCSE.

I also think that respect needs to be defined. For me respect is what I feel towards someone I look up to and admire. I was polite to my students, I liked some of them a great deal; they made me laugh and had an original take on life; but for me politeness and courtesy were the default positions; holding doors open for them, picking up something they'd dropped; noticing a haircut or a piercing, or a funky pair of boots; making sure each member of my tutor group got something for their birthday (and boy, did I have to beg for those dates from my HoY), so they knew someone was bothered about them.

I think respect is a word we use too easily with regards to student/teacher relations. I find it incredibly hard to respect someone intent on being rude to me, about me and about what I do..so politeness was my default. Those who tried their hardest even if their academic attainment wasn't very high had my respect and my help after school and during breaks and lunches if they needed it; but not all of them had it, (the respect
that is, the help was always on offer).

Mathanxiety - do you teach?

'The problem is the child's and remains a threat or an issue whether the teacher knows the details or not, but knowing the details can mean a teacher can choose a better approach in the classroom than the standard 'one size fits all' to instruction and discipline.'

The problem is also that of the teacher. We are all at risk of false allegations, assault, injury from students. As to discipline - you follow the policy laid down by the school, and it has to be applied consistently by all the teachers for it to work. For the majority of lessons you don't need the discipline policy anyway. One size fits all to instruction wasn't mentioned in my PGCE, VAK, the rest of the learning styles and differentiation were.

'And how do teachers get away with refusing to teach a particular student? If there is a problem serious enough to warrant fears for life or limb, is a regular school the appropriate place for a child so dangerous? Are the other children safe with such a child among them?'

I have refused to teach certain students because of their constant disruptive behaviour, and my HoD dealt with them. Quite often, we would swap some students. Sometimes, it was the fact that you were a female teacher, and they responded best to a male one.

Sometimes, it is not life or limb that are the problems, but consequences from elsewhere; and at times, when I found out the background of some of the students, I wondered why they were in mainstream; they should have been elsewhere. However, not everywhere in the country is adequately resourced enough to be able to do that, so mainstream ends up as the default.

'I see teachers as resources who can't be effectively deployed if they're operating in a vacuum either within the school or in the community.'

I am a person, not a resource, and yes of course we operate within a vacuum in the community. I certainly didn't live where I taught and had no desire to. I don't see not having access to confidential information as being in a vacuum, anymore than I saw not being privy to discussions about the rate of Council Tax in full council as hindering me from doing my job when I worked in a Council Tax Office.

I was responsible for a tutor group of 30, and then taught 600+ students per week. Realistically, and given that I also have a child of my own and normally including teaching time did a 55-60 hour week, how much time do you think I should have been spending doing pastoral care that fell within someone elses's remit?