Girls being used to manage the behaviour of boys in DD's secondary school

[pastaandpesto]

DD(12) has just started Y8. She's told me that in all-but-two of her classes, the seating plan alternates boys and girls i.e. every girl is sitting between two boys.

DD is very quiet and compliant in class, and she laughingly said that all the teachers seem to have put the known troublemakers either side of her to keep them quiet.

Outwardly I laughed along with her, but inside I am bloody furious. DD had a truly shit time with MH this time last year and spending time in the company of her friends is one of the biggest positives about going to to school. She and her friends could be trusted to work alongside each other in class, but they are being denied the opportunity because they have been unwittingly assigned as support humans for male children.

And before anyone says it, I am almost certain that this arrangement is due to the perceived need to sperate the boys from other boys, not to separate the girls from other girls. I have other children (boys) at the school and they all confirm that the vast majority of disruptive behaviour is from boys.

I'm not sure whether to challenge the school on this. I do sympathise with the teachers, classroom management must be a fucking nightmare frankly. But I'm really unhappy about the message this is sending to our girls.

What @margotsdevil said.

I'm just as likely to use boys as girls as a 'buffer'.

The priority is a calm learning environment, not people sat with their friends. Girls do chat to their friends in lessons too.

My son was moved next to a boisterous lad and the teacher admitted to me that it was to make him less serious and more likely to contribute in class

it’s not all about the rowdy kids

My son is very very quiet and academic.

the seating plan alternates boys and girls i.e. every girl is sitting between two boys

Mmhmm. And every boy is sitting between two girls - which, from what I know of 12 year old boys, many will be less than impressed with too!

This isnt a sex thing, it's a crowd control kid thing. Most boys are friends with boys and girls with girls - a BGBG seating plan is a quick and effective way to break up groups.

I don't think this is sending any message to 'girls' at all. There's a good possibility that there will also be instances of the quieter boys being next to the rowdiest girls too, negatively impacting them. You're making it about girls vs boys when it isn't.

I don't arrange the class boy/girl but by a range of factors.

I don't sit friends next to each other because, despite what their parents think, they do talk and are distracted from learning.

We discuss seating plans with the previous year's teacher and we look at avoiding problematic combinations (the kids we know are trouble together) and that goes for boys and girls.

I try to balance abilities so that the children get to learn from partner work with their peers without it being detrimental to either child's learning.

I sit less confident children next to more confident children but am mindful of personalities so one doesn't dominate whilst the other becomes quieter.

Some children are more difficult to place and are almost unmanageable next to some children but absolutely golden next to others.

If, having considered everything, I am made aware of an actual issue (and not just a 'my daughter would like to sit next to her friends and not a mean boy', then I will move them).

I'm reminded of a class I taught a couple of years ago. There was a girl who was really, really horrible to the other children. Mainly the girls but the boys weren't immune. Just so spiteful she was constantly in with the DHT and pastoral support. There was also a boy who struggled with friendships, was very low ability and was often disruptive because he didn't understand the work even with support and differentiation and, tbh, couldn't be bothered because it was difficult.

I'd done my best with the knowledge I had at the time and it was post covid so I wasn't allowed to move any of the children during the first term.

I made some changes when I could and sat these two children next to each other. And I couldn't have planned it better. She was kind and patient. She didn't ridicule him for things he didn't understand, she worked well with him. He was happy and settled. He got more out of the learning and so stopped being disruptive. Both of them made better academic progress during the next term, were rarely in trouble and were both happier.

Even if it looks like the teacher has just arbitrarily sat them boy/girl, there is far more thought behind the decision than that alone.

It works both ways OP My sons are quiet and studious and are often seated next to the disruptive chatty kids, many of whom are girls. Ds2 is autistic and hates the stress of trying to keep someone else on track but he wouldn't enjoy the classes any more if all the disruptive kids were sat together.

We had this boy-girl seating policy when I was in Y7/Y8 and I was the good girl who was always sat next to the worst boys. I was badly bullied by one of them, he would constantly poke and prod me inappropriately and whisper obscene things to me or put his hands down his trousers and make a point of touching me etc but I was too socially awkward to say anything. He was suspended and permanently pulled out of the form after he was literally caught wanking in class right next to me. It wasn’t the first time he’d done it it was just the first time the teachers had seen it. In hindsight now I can see the boy was probably very troubled but at the time it was horrible for me and I never felt able to speak up about what he was doing.

Then the next two boys I was sat between used to pointedly passing drawings between themselves of different ways they would kill/ maim me, making sure they were clearly labelled and I could see, and again I was far too worried about getting in trouble to speak up and say anything and it was awful for my self esteem. Policies like this are so unfair on girls, especially when so often we’ve been conditioned not to speak up or make a fuss and to just put up with the boys behaviour.

Yes, being seated next to the boys who are already bullying you, because you're seen as a good influence, just means there is no escape from the bullying. Being poked, and prodded, and groped, and threatened with a lit cigarette lighter in class are all fine if it makes the seating plan work.

Being poked, and prodded, and groped, and threatened with a lit cigarette lighter in class are all fine if it makes the seating plan work.

Obviously this isn't OK. Stop creating a narrative that isn't there. If a student in my class told me this I'd move them immediately and be gutted this happened on my watch.

The reality is that most under 16 kids would be too anxious to approach a teacher to ask to move for any reason.

I don’t agree with using kids of any sex as a means of controlling their peers behaviour. This method made my eldest’s life hell in primary school and we were forever on the phone asking that she wasn’t sat next to the disruptive kids. Every year she’d be sat next to the same boy and every year we had to explain that this child was making her life hell. Eventually they’d be moved but end up back on the same table again as this kid kissed off every child in the class. It destroyed her confidence and her ability to speak up to the teacher about it because she saw that if they didn’t listen to us they weren’t going to listen to her. High school so far has been much better about keeping her away from the boy. They don’t seem to use this methodology and so far my daughters confidence and self esteem has improved.

Happens to my very quiet, completely serious DS all the time. Next to both disruptive boys and, more often, girls. It really isn't only about disruptive boys at all, and it isn't only girls being used as buffers. He absolutely hates it, but it's always gone on. It was the same at my secondary.

I too sadly believe this goes on. I have 2 boys who I like to think are semi well behaved, but I still think it goes on. I can't see any way round it though.

I understand that it's frustrating. My daughter is 16 and has often been sat by disruptive pupils. She and I have both said something when it's affected her happiness/learning and no teacher has ever refused to move her as I would never refuse to move a child who asked for this reason.

Logistically, there's not a lot else we can do. We have to sit 30 people in a small room, often in groups of 4-6. The children have to sit somewhere! Some children, for a number of reasons, are very hard work. The behaviour policy doesn't work for every child. I sit the very worst behaved children alone to reduce their impact on others. Last year, I had 3 sat separately. But there isn't enough space in the room and there aren't enough tables to do this for everyone.

Parents are obviously concerned with their own child but we have to balance the needs of all children. And create an environment that works best overall. The problem is that if a child/parent says nothing - there's not a lot we can do.

Our options are actually very limited.

The reality is that most under 16 kids would be too anxious to approach a teacher to ask to move for any reason.

Most really aren't. Some are, and to try and combat this I offer email instead of asking face to face.

@OldChinaJug Excellent post.

In our last parents evening of year 7, one of the teachers complained that there were so many boys in my son's class. She then said that there weren't even enough girls to put between them to split them up! I was too shocked to say anything.

I understand and appreciate the reasoning behind boy girl seating plans. As a parent, I’m less keen on the fact that my daughter has been perpetually sat next to students with special educational needs and then been instructed to assist them with their work. As an able student, her need is for meaningful extension work of her own, not to be treated as an unpaid teaching assistant.

They usually set up girls and boys like this in class rooms where I'm from

In the context of partner work, peer support is always useful and benefits both children.

Eg in maths it's quite common for HA children to be able to do the work but not explain how they did it. Metacognition is a higher level skill they need to develop and, often, explaining how to do something to a child who doesn't understand can be a useful way of developing this.

As an extension, I sometimes get my higher children to write instructions, for example, to explain how to do what they have just whizzed through and completed accurately. You'd be surprised at how many can't.

I get where you're coming from. But it's only one lesson - she'll see her friends at other times of the school day. Plus, it's a good way to learn to work with 'difficult' people which she will have to do in some situations at uni (if she goes) and certainly in the workplace.

While your DD is quiet and compliant in class, your view that all girls are quiet and compliant in class is wrong. Ask any teacher and they will tell you that girls chat and can be disruptive and are definitely not always focused, quiet, compliant little angels.

Given your sexist view of girls, it is hard to know if you have a point. Few classes have an exact split of 50:50 boys;girls so I don't know how that model actually plays out in a class.

Teachers do often split up the more disruptive students but the idea that putting a girl next to a boy solves the problems because girls are quiet and compliant is not true.

I think the fact that kids are at school to work is more important than they are at school to chat with friends which they can do at break. I can remember classes being divided boy girl boy girl for the sake of the teachers sanity. I would just see how it goes and not make a fuss too soon

DD's teacher once said something like this to me- that it was great having DD in the class as she could use her as a break between some of the disruptive boys (nb not saying all boys are disruptive)- and feeling furious like you that DD was being seen as a resource rather than a member of the class whose interests should be taken into account same as everyone else's.

I do think there's an element of how you phrase it though- if the teacher had just said that she doesn't sit the disruptive kids together I'd have thought nothing of it. Better not to see how the sausage gets made perhaps. Certainly, although I objected to the idea of using DD as a break, I wouldn't have wanted her in a class in which all the disruptive kids sat together and disrupted things.

This is not true and a rather sexist assumption. There were far
more problems with disruptive behaviour from the girls than the boys during the last term in Year 6.

Agree that there's a lot in how you sell it.

"BGBG seating plan to mix up the disruptive boys" doesn't sound great

"teacher selected seating plan to create the optimal learning environment for every pupil" sounds more palatable.

I have a quiet, studious DD in Y11. She is in favour of seating plans, as in the classes where they're not used a small cohort of boisterous kids together can easily disrupt the learning of others even if seated at the other end of the classroom.

I'd be really genuinely interested in reading what some of those who are critical of seating plans would suggest to ensure that all children in the room have the opportunity to learn. There are only enough seats in the room for the number of children in the class usually so having a number of children sat alone, whilst perhaps effective, is often not a viable proposition.