Any governors out there?

[debs40]

Hi

I've decided to move my son from his current school after a discussion with the new Head teacher about a variety of policy issues.

The new Head was very difficult to deal with and during the meeting she, rather inappropriately I felt, raised some very minor issues about my son (e.g. she showed me some books he had chewed and told me she had seen him playing alone in the playground 'aggressively'). These concerns were not placed in any context.

I have very discreetly and politely withdrawn my son from Friday this week but I would like to raise my concerns about the way the head dealt with this and I wondered what the best way is for me to do that. Is it by a letter to the governors?

Thnaks

Another quickie on this.

The Head is not the Senco. The chair of governors is and I've spoken to her tonight. She was not approached about my son.

Does anyone know if there is a protocol for raising concerns? Should they be raised without consulting teachers/SENco?

I've never heard of any protocol and wouldn't really expect there to be one. At one level then, yes, it might be argued that a HT would do well to consult the class teacher before raising any concerns, as that might give a fuller picture. But, equally, I guess it could be argued that whether and how to raise questions with parents about any aspect of any child's experience at school is very much a matter for the head's professional judgement. The head, after all, is the senior professional in the school.

Thinking about your circumstances: do you know that the head hadn't in fact spoken beforehand to the class teacher (apologies if you mentioned this in earlier posts - I haven't re-read them)? And isn't the issue here that the head hasn't said that your son has special needs and hasn't (apart from mentioning the book-biting and solitary play) indicated that there are any significant problems?

I am trying to be constructive here but I wonder what you might have been posting if it had turned out that the SENCO had been consulted. Might you not then be arguing that the head should have brought you in at an earlier stage and that it was premature to consult SENCO before you?

As Romy (I think) said, it does rather sound as if the head might have been fishing for anything to explain the book-biting and aggressive play. If the head was concerned about aggression in the playground then I think we have to assume that they've seen enough playground behaviour over the years to know what is run-of-the-mill rough and tumble and what isn't. Similarly, I think chewing books is unusual enough for the head at least to be curious about whether there's some underlying issue. All in all, I don't think the head can be castigated for trying to understand your son better - isn't that what we all want from our children's schools? If the head has reached the wrong conclusions, that's a different issue.

Finally, I also think it needs to be said that even if the head had said that your son was having problems at school or possibly had special needs, that isn't an insult. Again, I may have got this wrong, but you do seem to be indignant at any implication that your son might be having a difficult time or have special needs. I can understand your frustration if these things were hinted at but not fully developed, but identifying any child as having special needs is not a criticism of the child or the parent - it's a means towards meeting that child's particular needs and ensuring they get the best out of their time at school.

Sorry, this post is too long. I ramble when I'm tired.

Hi

Thanks for this.

Please don't misunderstand me at all. I have absolutely no problem with a professional coming to me with genuine concerns. I really hope I haven't given that impression. I mentioned before that I would see no disgrace in any conclusion of SEN/problems at school. I would want my son to have the help he needed from school and us.

My worry here is that I really have a strong feeling from the context of the meeting that there was no such genuine concern in reality or if there was it was raised in an inappropriate/thoughtless way.

As you know I have written to the Head to ask for her clarification on why it was raised and if there is any evidence of a problem.

I raise the SENco issue because it was raised with me when I spoke to the coordinator who happens also to be the Chair of Govs

The head herself told me she hadn't spoken to any of the teachers.

Put simply, making comments about behaviour like this obviously worries parents so professionals should be very clear about what they are trying to achieve in raising these matters.

An overanxious, distressed parent won't help any child

I should add that all school reports to date have demonstrated my son to have had no issues in the classroom with either progress or behaviour.

I have also been told he is considered 'bright' and 'thoughtful' but I have asked to see his present teacher before he leaves to discuss educational development

I hope this comes to a successful conclusion.

Good luck!

Me too - I've now been searching the internet in case there is something amiss!

Thanks for your help. I'll let you know

Useful sources for anything to do with schools are the DCSF website and (less formal but there are some extremely well-informed people on there) the UK Governors website.

Thanks - it's more book chewing sites I've been looking at!

I'm prepared to be open minded. It's either a problem with the school or my son. Best to consider both options!

Will report back when Head gets back to me

Thanks so much for your time on this

Well, we spoke to my son?s teacher today for an update on his progress prior to him leaving.

Her view is that ds is a confident, happy, loving child who likes asking and answering questions. She says he is a ?sideways thinker?, who is funny, sociable and joins in with everything they do. She felt he was an asset to the class and could not see where any concerns had come from. The only point she made was that he is very tactile and physical and that led to contact with other children but said she felt it was ?nearly always loving? - her words.

She said she did not consider him as someone who played alone and she knew him to play happily with his friends.

She was unconcerned about the chewing and said she chewed the bottom off pens as a teenager. She would not have raised it.

The Head has not returned by email asking her to explain her concerns.

She did not speak to the class teacher about any concerns before raising them in my meeting which was about the teaching of RE and playground supervision.

Can you see where my anxiety about this has come from?

I want to pursue the Head for an answer to my email. At best, I think she was thinking out loud without reference to any evidence. I think you know what I think the worst case scenario is.

What is the best way to do this? Do I write again asking for a response from the Head? We leave on Friday

speak to the chair of governors again and ask what is the best way to proceed. tbh, i would assume a chat with the chair, and writing a letter to the governing body copied to the HT would do it, and then take your leave. not worth wasting any more of your time over. that way the gb have a record of your concerns and you have to trust them to monitor any further issues that may arise.
further contact with the HT when the class teacher has put your mind at rest is unnecessary. a letter copied to both detailing your discussion with the class teacher will suffice.
enjoy the new school.
it is still perfectly possible that she did it with the best of intentions, just unwisely. leave it for the gb to ponder over, that's their job. you've done your bit.

Thanks. I agree.

I just think it is not good practice for the Head to ignore my email on this. I asked specifically for her response on the issues she had raised.

We raised them with the class teacher ourselves.

If we don't go back to her directly won't she say she assumed the teacher had dealt with it.

the teacher has dealt with it. she has alaayed your concerns regarding your child. your issue now is presumably with the HT, so speak with the GB, write a final letter copied to HT, and leave quietly. no point going any further.

alaayed? allayed lol

Can't add much to what Romy's already said.

I think it's a bit soon to say the Head has 'ignored' your e-mail - it was sent yesterday wasn't it? - and I imagine/hope that the Head is taking time to send a considered reply. Anyway, as Romy has said, now that the teacher has settled your anxieties you have less need of any further explanation from the Head.

In your shoes, I would just send a 'for the record' letter to the GB, detailing your concerns about the way in which the Head handled your meeting. I wouldn't even copy it to the Head - she already knows of your concerns - and what the GB does with the letter is up to them.

Good luck at the new school.

You are both right.

Thank you both. I couldn't have coped these last couple of days without your well-considered advice!

I'm always amazed at how kind some people can be on the internet. Taking the time and effort to advise a complete stranger.

Thanks so much. It really has been appreciated !!!

Aww shucks.

You're very welcome.

I think we (well, I) have been quite challenging but maybe that's the benefit of anonymous forums - the givers of advice and opinions can be pretty forthright and the recipients can choose how much or how little of that advice and opinions they follow.

All the best.

Here is the response from the Head:

?I think that you are right, DS has been happy at school, he has friends and has settled well.

I watched DS play on the morning before I spoke to you and what I observered was that he chose to play alone ( that day) and that his play was imaginative and sometimes agressive but not toward others just in his imagination and play actions. This was in the context of you raising about his interactions with X and I think we agreed that it was more X that 'invaded' his space than the other way round.

The chewing remains a mystery. I think we discussed that he had chewed his books and quite regularly chewed pencils and that you had observed him chewing his swimming 'woggle', but we didn't conclude why he needed to do this. I have no concerns about DS's behaviour and I'm sure he will settle at his new school and make new friends quickly.?

This is essentially what his teacher said and it is not how she raised matters with me.

However, I have written back to thank the Head for these comments and I have politely pointed out that the way she raised these issues without warning (in a meeting about RE) and without talking to my son's teacher caused real concern that his behaviour was in being unnecessarily pathologised.

She has said thank you for the feedback.

Do you think I should still raise this with the GB or leave it? I kind of think she knows she messed up What do you think?

i don't think the gb will do much, tbh - better that behaviour is 'pathologised' unnecessarily than ignored when a child genuinely does need help - obviously not in this case.
she does suggest you raised the concerns about a particular relationship/ playground behaviour though, so her points did have a basis, however weak.
if you are happy, leave it and walk. i think it's all blown over now as far as the school are concerned. it is a shame you felt you had to remove him, tbh, but we all have to do what we think is right for our dcs.

I'd echo what Romy has said.

You sound satisfied with the Head's reply, so if you're determined to take your son away from the school and there's literally no going back, there's really not much to be gained from further correspondence with the governors.

And as Romy says, in the most general terms I think it's far better that schools go through the process of asking 'does that child have behavioural difficulties or special needs?' 'After consideration/investigation: no she doesn't' than that what might be evidence of such needs is overlooked. Behaviour which catches the school's attention isn't necessarily being pathologised, but schools are often the first to notice that a child is struggling and are often the first to put the child on the path to receiving the help and support they need.

Thanks but we will have to disagree on this.

I have no problems with questions being asked but sensitively and appropriately and when supported by genuine concern/evidence

This was a new Head (2 weeks). She did not know my son. She watched him for 10 minutes. She had not bothered to speak to his class teacher. She did not make the comments in a concerned fashion. She was accusational and aggressive. She dropped his chewed books and pencils on my lap. The manner in which she raised this behaviour in the context of a difficutl meeting on completely different matters was inapproproate.

I do not say this lightly but this woman was inexplicably aggressive in dealing with me on the question of RE. When this came up out of the blue (the issue raised about the playground had been about another boy (with known problems) hitting my son)

Every other parent I run this past has had the same response - they would feel this woman was trying to have a go.

I have taken him away because trust has broken down.

You can't get away from this fact - if she was really concerned, she would have spent 5 minutes talking to his teacher (reception or Year 1) before throwing these things in to our discussion. As I said at the beginning of these posts, she was unprofessional and uncaring.

The parent is not always wrong about these things. When I corresponded with her and told her we were felt policy matters had become personal, she did not correct me and has never done so since.

By the way, you'd have to read my post on God and religion to see the background to this. This school is a community one with a large christian community which emanates from one church which is creationist in outlook.

It has been a troubled school which barely kept going after its last Ofsted when two local heads were called into keep it afloat.

When parents left the school, the christian community stayed.

This woman was setting out her stall.

That's fine. It really is. I truly don't expect you to agree with everything that I've said. You asked for the views of a school governor and that is what I offered. I don't claim to be a 'typical' or 'representative' governor and other governors may well see things differently. Nor do I know the circumstances of your school or of all the events which led to your dissatisfaction with it.

Good luck to you and your son at the new school.

Thanks.

Have contacted Chair of Govs who says I have to write to them but doesn't know procedure from then on! I asked if I could just write a letetr explaining why we had left but she doesn't know.

Not sure what you would gain by writing a letter to the Chair of Governors bearing in mind the decision to leave has already been made.

Personally I think that having made your decision you would do better to put this whole business behind you and enjoy your ds's new school.

it depends what letter you write tbh. if you raise valid concerns of the professionalism or manner of the HT then they would probably take advice from the lea, but the gb would be aware of issues. as they are involved with HT performance review (and her pay increments lol) it stands to reason there would be discussions and they and the lea would make the decision IF there was anything to progress and the appropriate procedure. your job is not to worry about any of that - it truly doesn't matter for you what happens next, and you would not be a party to it. if you want to write a letter detailing your concerns then do it. but do make sure you stick to the detached version and try not to muddy the waters with irrelevant historical info. they will be party to all that anyway.