Redressing the School/Pupil Power Balance

[Chil1234]

School 'no touch' rules to be scrapped

Removing some of the paranoia surrounding the teacher/pupil relationship and giving teaching staff more confidence that they will be supported has to be a good thing.

seeker, the progressives are not a joking matter.

I don't know what else he has done. But does anyone have any articles showing teh teaching unions' response to what he has said.

Oh, and checked again: the Children's Act 2004 (2006) was also under labour.

Wow, Claig. I am so curious to establish your true identitty.. a few possibel ideas that have drifted through my mind as I read your posts
a) Margaret Thatcher?
b) editor of the Daily Mail?
c) Mrs Gove?
You seem to have such a polarised view of "the Prgressives" versus "The Truth (i.e the DM)
Decent teachers in decent schools know the existing guidelines and apply them sensibly. Michael Gove seems to be making out he's going to really jolly well sort things out in schools and that up until know no-one knew what they were doing or dared to buck the PC-progressive-leftie-orthodoxy.
You are quite misguided
"The Progressives" - sounds like a rock group

sorry, loads of typos. Too dumbfounded by right-wing self-righteousness to spell correctly. Still I expect my shocking literacy is a result of being educated by a bunch ot loony leftie teachers who couldn't think for themselves.

haha. Margaret Thatcher is great. I wish I were the editor of that august publication, the Daily Mail. Mrs Gove, no way, Michael Gove is not my type at all. In the beginning, I didn't like him, I thought he was smug, but after hearing him speak over a period of time, I have changed my mind. I think he is very capable and hope he does well.

I believe that that well-known progressive, Anthony Lynton Blair, was once a member of a progressive rock group, before he became leader of the progressive group called New Labour.

Still waiting for attributable Labour Lunacy.

Claig how do you explain the fact that some of the schools with no touching rules are in tory boroughs?

I think that this climate of panic etc. has infected all of society and Tories are also affected by it. As you said it is like an out of control juggernaut that is changing society. It is like a snowball that escalates. It didn't just happen out of the blue, an environment led to its creation. One day conkers are banned, the next day something else. It has ended up changing all of our perceptions. I hope that teh Tories in power can begin to chip away at it and return us to balance. I think that Gove wants to make a start on it. But only time will tell if he is serious or if it is just words.

I was cynical about whether the Tories would really do what they said about repealing Labour's erosion of civil liberties, but I think the coalition have been magnificent. We are even getting reports of top police chiefs saying that the police must now start treating antisocial seriously. It is that that makes many people suffer, and even take their own lives. It's about time someone cared. I think the coalition really care about the people. I think they mean it. I think they will make things better. The coalition are not control freaks like the last lot, the don't believe in big state. Let's hope they fulfill their promises.

I notice you haven't yet come up with any attributable Labour Lunacies.

Oh. I thought that this was a thread about teachers' power to restrain children in schools.

I now realise I'm on a thread about how the Tories are the greatest thing since free school milk.

How embarrassing.

seeker, there are literally thousands. But you are a determined Labour supporter. If I found them all, you would just say that there was no lunacy about any of them. The Daily Mail reports daily on these lunacies and it is the comments of the Daily Mail's readers that really shows how aware the public are about it. The Daily Mail lags behind its readers, because the readers see and live with these lunacies every single day.

I'm sure DM readers live with plenty of lunacies every single day. Some of which may or may not be attributable to Labour

You've always been allowed to comfort a child. The no touch is probably more on the negative end of the spectrum.

But they are middle England, the people that Ed wants to win over. But it's not just middle England who don't like what has happened. The working class are the same. They deserted Labour, just listen to them complain in any pub in the land. Ed also has to win these people back. The Islingtonistas will always vote Labour, but Labour abandoned the working class and the working class deserted Labour.

This pupil power balance issue is a result of the climate of political correctness. Some of it has gone too far, and the working class complain about it also.

But nothing has changed. The legislation remains the same. Teachers are and were allowed to restrain pupils.

Have I slipped into a parallel universe?

Yes, but I quoted the article from the Times Educational Supplement "Rough Justice
for Teachers"
www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6015327

Some teachers may be thinking twice about intervening due to accusations being levelled against teachers.

"Having to restrain a pupil intent on committing a violent attack is an unenviable scenario for any teacher.

But when police are called, an already shocking situation all too often takes a turn for the worse. According to teaching unions, rather than the police investigating the pupil, unfounded allegations increasingly lead to the finger of suspicion pointing at the teacher instead.

This is exactly what happened to a 45-year-old teacher last month when he restrained a teenage boy who lashed out with his elbows and his fists. But it was the teacher who ended up answering questions on suspicion of assault (see box, right)."

The Daily Mail often reports on these stories of teachers being suspended and investigated etc. because they think it is wrong and is PC gorn mad and lunacy. But it isn't onlt the Daily Mail that reports these stories. A few years back, I used to but the TES as I was interested in education. Week in week out there were tales of teachers being falsely accused and suspended, and this included deputy-heads etc. There were more of these stories in the TES than in the Daily Mail.

I think Gove is saying that he wants to change the environment and back teachers, even if the law remains unchanged. He is trying to change the environment and show support for teachers.

Events of this type are fuelling concerns about the vulnerability of teachers who intervene physically when pupil behaviour gets out of control. Special-needs teachers, who encounter the most severe behavioural difficulties, are said to be especially at risk.

sorry last paragraph is part of the original quote

But that was always happening, claig. Litigious parents are not a recent phenomena. The TES has its own agenda for the timing of its article. This has been happening for years.

The best and most effective way to deflect unwarranted accusations is through certificated training. The school can then rest assured that it has equipped its staff to intervene physically in a way which is safe for all. If a teacher decides to physically intervene in a different way, it must be reasonable, proportionate and necessary, as per the legislation. The legislation is there for a reason- I have had to pull teachers off children on more than one occasion. I have seen a teacher punch a child in the face. And before you ask, there was no ensuing parental complaint- the school decided to investigate off its own back.

"Events of this type are fuelling concerns about the vulnerability of teachers who intervene physically when pupil behaviour gets out of control. Special-needs teachers, who encounter the most severe behavioural difficulties, are said to be especially at risk."

No argument from me there- however, the solution to this is mandatory physical intervention (and de-escalation) training, not Michael Gove pointing to existing (inadequate) legislation and agreeing with it.

claig - I take that to mean that you can't actually find an attributable example of the lunacies you mention - just hearsay.

But do you really think that Gove is just doing this for hot air. He knows most teachers don't like him, he knows he won't be able to curry favour with them. I think he believes in it anyway. I am looking forward to his speech at conference. he may flesh it out more. He doesn't need to say all this to be popular with Daily Mail readers, he's only just got his feet under the desk, and we support him anyway.

I used to read the TES and quite often it seemd to me that it was the student's word against the teacher's. Are you saying that that never happens? and that all that is needed is more training in restraint techniques? Also, why should teachers be expected to put themselves at risk like this? I have read of stories of a teacher being paralysed for life because she was shoved into a filing cabinet by a primary school child.

seeker, you're right, it's just hearsay

"But do you really think that Gove is just doing this for hot air."

Is that a rhetorical question?

"I used to read the TES and quite often it seemd to me that it was the student's word against the teacher's. Are you saying that that never happens?"

I'm not sure where in my posts you got that from, claig?

I am saying that the current flimsy legislation does not go far enough and seems deliberately vague, and highlighting it is ineffective in engendering confidence in teachers' ability to deal with physically challenging children.

Teachers get very little behaviour management training when training- most comes 'on the job' and is erratic and school/LEA specific. I would like to see mandatory behaviour management training centred around de-escalation of which safe physical intervention is part.

The incident you describe could have been prevented if the child who shoved the teacher had been dealt with differently.

"Also, why should teachers be expected to put themselves at risk like this?"

Teachers theoretically put themselves at risk every day- they do not work with predicatable machines. Instead of focusing on punitive consequences for children who injure teachers, should we not be trying to ensure that it doesn't happen in the first place?. The power to restrain without the knowledge of how and when to do so increases this risk dramatically IMO.

This is from the OP's BBC article

"But Children's Rights Alliance spokeswoman Carolyne Willow warned: "Giving even more powers to school staff to restrain children is a dangerous move that could contaminate schools and risks breaching human rights and child protection laws."

She said the priority should be making lessons "more simulating and engaging for all" and added: "Many schools are finding that adopting human rights values, with an emphasis on listening to children and young people and responding to their ideas and interests, bring great change."

Mr Gove also vowed to reduce the timescale within which allegations against teachers had to be investigated, as well as granting accused teachers anonymity while inquiries were ongoing.

The move is likely to find favour with teaching unions such as the NAS/UWT, which have complained in the past that teachers who are the subject of false allegations become the victims of a public "witch hunt" while they are investigated."

I think Gove is on the side of teachers and doesn't think that what he is doing is a "dangerous move". I doubt that he agrees with the Children's Rights Alliance. he is also goiong to give teachers anonymity while inquiries are ongoing. I think it is a positive move. I hope he goes further and strengthens the law in teachers' favour.

Power without knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Untrained staff restraining a child can do a lot of damage to the child and themselves, both physically and emotionally.

Of the training I deliver, 95% is non-physical behaviour management techniques; 5% is for when physical intervention is necessary. IME, physical intervention is rarely necessary in mainstream schools. the focus should always be on avoiding physical restraint; this is often done through stimulating and engaging lessons, listening to young people and responding to their ideas and interests. That is not hot air or left-wing political rhetoric, it is a tried and tested means of avoiding physical conflict. It is also not enough on its own.

It does not have to be one or the other. Mandatory training would help to ensure this.

I think this is too important an issue to become a pawn in a political game.