Foul bevaviour at previously fantastic cofe school - teachers' advice welcome

[sparklersmum]

My child attends a cofe secondary school with an incredibly good reputation. Now in Y8. The year seems to have a lot of dysfunctional and disruptive personalities. There are up to half a dozen girls who are loud, insolent, bullies. They have interrupted lessons, they have sworn at teaching staff. There were several complaints last year and this resulted in a bit of a shuffle and things seemed to get better for a few weeks this term.

However, things have gone from bad to worse. One girl (age 12) went missing last summer, all over the local papers, and was with her 16 year old boyfriend - swanned back into school with a grin. This year there has been a theft (admitted) from another trouble maker and the stolen item was sold on. There doesn't even seem to have been as much as a fixed term exclusion for anyone. There was then retaliation from two trouble makers and no further action from the school. So far the school is content to let these girls disrupt lessons, swear at teachers and spoil an otherwise very nice environment as well as to sanction their behaviour and give criminality and immorality the seal of approval.

I don't think the school's response has been adequate. I don't think it reinforces the family values of the majority and I don't think it is doing anything to protect the school's reputation.

I would have thought theft following the behaviour in the summer should be taken seriously; combined with the disruption and the unrest that has been caused. I also think stonger measures were required than getting the local policeman to come along and have a chat to all the girls about personal safety.

Would be interested in the views of teachers about this. I am stunned that no significant action has been taken at what was until very recently a school with an exceptional reputation for the behavour of its girls. There hasn't been so much as an explanatory letter sent home to parents due to the serious nature of what has been happening. This is a school with seven to eight applications for every place so it isn't as if vacated places couldn't be filled.

In short, girls are more concerned about the latest scandal than learning as well as being very wary about what will happen next. Surely an exclusion or two would benefit learning, benefit the school's reputation and send a message into the local community that if girls can't behave they will not be staying. Surely proper disciplinary action woudl also be supportive of the staff and the fact that they need support to do their job properly in a civilised environment.

Are the governor's accountable for the head's lack of action and should they be exerting more influence? What will happen if someone ends up being assaulted because this bunch of unmanageable pre teens have been allowed to rule unchecked?

Ime there are schools that manage to steer a sensible middle path between breach of confidentiality and complete helplessness. All dcs' schools have been strong on discipline (ordinary state schools, not Outstanding, lower to middling area).

When I have been in to raise any concerns, I have always taken care to phrase it in terms of "how can you reassure my child that they will be safe/not bullied etc?" rather than demanding any specific course of action to be taken concerning the other child.

In return, the school has answered exactly that. They have not given any details about the other child's circumstances or exactly what they will do to them, but they have made it clear that the matter will be dealt with- and dcs have then reported that there has been no re-occurrence. From dcs' picking up of school gossip I have sometimes got an idea of the kind of disciplinary measures they use (temporary exclusion etc). And certainly you can get expelled (several children got expelled from dd's junior school), but it will be at the end of a systematic procedure.

It sounds awful. The views saying this is totally normal in state education make me suddenly feel quite relieved my dd1 is at an independent secondary.

At dd1's school there is a very clear code of practice on what happens at each stage when there are breaches of law/school rules. It is all very transparent. That doesn't seem to be the case at state school and I wonder why?

"We've got kids who will disrupt lessons, swear at teachers etc. I think all state schools probably do."

How sad that a teacher has such low expectations of her pupils. I have not read all the thread, but some of the posts written by teachers seem to imply that this type of behaviour is expected and doesn't need to be taken seriously.

Maybe if schools expected higher standards of behaviour from pupils, this type of situation would be frowned upon, instead of just accepting it as normal. I think I might start saving for private secondary education!

Do you really genuinely think that children that go to independent schools never have terrible problems at home? I am stunned by that. I can't be bothered to carry on with the discussion to be honest.

I think I'm going to join you!

My dc are in independent pimary and we were planning on state secondary (financial - holidays would be nice, and because of positive discrimination for uni these days (imo)) but maybe not!

I can see both sides of the argument of course - children who have experienced the terrible things mentioned here obviously should have all and every resource made available to them. And the rich kids are always allright - Daddy always bales them out ime. But you do have to wonder what is wrong in our society when the "normal" kids with parents who try and help where they can (and arent actively abusing them) seem to have absolutely no incentive to do well.

Furminator - you are right of course - but maybe school is more of a refuge then if the resulting disruptive behaviour isnt as prevalent and the children can at least learn and try and do well and rise out of whatever issues they have at home. I went to independent secondary abroad and you're right - there were issues with drugs, pregnancies, abortions, alcohol etc - mostly stemming from children given too much money and not enough parental attention. One of my classmates is now in prison. But at school everyone was pretty much able to learn and do well if they wanted to (that was the base expectation) and no lessons were disrupted so the other children weren't affected.

Not that I am a massive proponent of private schools mind - but as a parent of young dc the level of expectation shown on this thread is very worrying, and it sounds like teachers have a much harder balancing act than they used to.

That's true - I know of a private school round our way where children have been "managed out" as they call it before they get to the secondary school (where results and league tables kick in).

I also know of some parents with dc with SN who have moved them independent to state as the SN provision is percieved to be better.

As it should be. But that still leaves the OP and the "doing ok" kids left out on a limb in the middle doesn't it? All down to resources as usual I guess.

Yes, you are right, it is easier for independent schools to expel constantly disruptive pupils writes cheque

timetoask you appear to have misunderstood my point. I do not have low expectations of my pupils and neither does my school. But high expectations are not enough to stop a kid kicking off if they really want to.

In my school if you swear at a teacher you will be excluded (internal or external). That doesn't mean that no child ever swears at at teacher. Like I said, I think all state schools have students who will occasionally kick off.

And permanent exclusion is a very long process which needs to be followed and files of evidence collected. Some people seem to think that if a kid kicks off you can just boot them out. You can't. Not without trying other strategies first. Unless, of course, the incident is so serious that their place in school is untenable.

So grateful I was at work yesterday and didn't have a chance to check this. I am shocked by the attitude of the teachers. I don't understand how you disregard the right of the majority to learn at the expense of the few who will not behave and I say will not rather than cannot because there is a clear distinction.

I don't understand why teachers make excuse after excuse for bad and potentially dangerous behaviour - don't expect those excuses to wash if another child is assaulted due to lack of action.

When I was at school in the 70's children must have been abused and must have suffered at home - looking back I can imagine which children were affected. But teachers set boundaries and expected decent behaviour. There were consequences and everybody knew what they were and when they had been implemented. What is the point of PSHE if schools don't distinguish the difference between right and wrong? There are only so many excuses before a prison sentence is imposed and what favours in the longer term does that do a young person - except that it was easier for schools to go with the flow a decade before. Also, I'm not sure I want my daughter taught PSHE by people who appear to condone theft and physical violence.

What is happening is not right, I know it isn't right and I know it isn't helping well behaved children, badly behaved children or even teachers. Why should the education of the majority be sacrificed (20 minutes of many lessons - a third of teaching time) for the dysfunctional minority? That has to be the difference between a C and B, or a B and an A, or an A and an A*. Multiply that by 28 and tell me that is fair either to the children or the teaching profession.

My mind is made up and I am going to go in and principally approach it from the learning point of view but I am also going to mention the apparent support for behaviour which is illegal. I will point to the school rules and ask why they are being implemented selectively. I am going to remind them why we chose the school and point out that it is falling short of expectations and of what was promised at the admissions stage. I don't care if they don't like it because something needs to be done.

In hindsight I am no longer upset about the comments from teachers, I am pleased because you have made me determined to make a stand.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15715627

I like pottering along's comment on p.1 - she has summed it up for me.
Yes I hate the things I sometimes hear about disruptive behaviour at my girls' school (officially 'good'; very mixed catchment), but I take on board the point that they dont actually think to mention the good things and the support they get which is tailored to their individual learning needs.

'Do you really genuinely think that children that go to independent schools never have terrible problems at home? I am stunned by that.' Yes you can say that again Furminator, that's exactly what the mojority of teachers & TAs believe: Children in the private system have perfect lives and are spoiled!
It makes me mad everytime I hear it.

Not long ago, there was a murder all over the news; a husband killed his wife and disposed of her body in a park. Their children go to a private school and they lost both parents but none of them started disturbing the class,..... or swearing!!!?

Many children in the private schools are neglected, ignored....their parents are alcoholics yet don't cause all the chaos that's seen in the state comp.

The difference is the way issues are handled. The children with problems in private schools don't walk around feeling that the world owes them and staff members don?t feed them that believe!!

Not all children in private schools are rich either!

Ignorance is a dangerous thing.

Oh come on, of course there are problematic home backgrounds in all strata of society, but to pretend that there is as much more on independent schools than the comps servicing inner city estates is just .

How do you know, the kids didn't swear after such an appaling event?

And as the point is made above, problematic kids just simply seem to disappear from the indies (if they are let in in the first place). Sure, in a situation like you mention, it might be different (or delayed a while for appearances sake). That's fine. Indies are businesses (more or less) and need to keep the punters coming in and the staff happy. They are under no statutory obligation to deal with troublesome families, and that is indeed why many, many (certainly in London) choose these schools, but don't pretend its just as hard for the privileged (of which I am one) as for the disadvantaged ....

^Many children in the private schools are neglected, ignored....their parents are alcoholics yet don't cause all the chaos that's seen in the state comp.

The difference is the way issues are handled.^

Could you explain how it is handled and what lessons could be learned from this?

'The children with problems in private schools don't walk around feeling that the world owes them and staff members don?t feed them that believe!!'

Happycamel explained really well, plse look it up on p2

Low expectations doesn't help anyone!

Indeed private schools are well known for turning out modest and unassuming pupils.

Private schools just boot out any kids who look like they might mess up their exam results into the state sector don't they?

State schools...where could they boot them out to? How about that nice cofe school down the road?

On the contrary noblegiraffe - all of the private school children I know - not most - ALL - are polite, modest, thoughtful kids. There is a load of crap spouted on here about private schools.

Is that a selected group?

So is 'Private schools just boot out any kids who look like they mess up their exam results' a load of crap too, out of interest?