Zero Tolerance, No Excuses...what should happen to pupils who can’t behave?

[noblegiraffe]

There are an increasing number of schools across the country adopting ‘No Excuses’ behaviour policies where the slightest misdemeanour is cracked down on and punished. Children are removed from the classroom and isolated if they break the rules. The level of expulsions is creeping up.

A tribunal has just criticised a school for putting its zero tolerance behaviour policy above the education of a child with special needs.
The student has ADHD and epilepsy, the behaviour policy was applied rigidly and the school now has to issue a letter of apology to the student for its failure to make reasonable adjustments.

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/academy-put-zero-tolerance-policy-above-pupils-education-tribunal

Do you think that schools should be allowed to have zero tolerance?

I think tiggy the problems often arise from two issues:

There are many pupils who do not come with a neat disibility label and have no dx. Often there will be no agreement by a school that they merit an adjustment

One school’s reasonable adjustment is another’s unreasonable

I wish all teachers were as questioning as you noble.

Well aren't you talking about zero tolerance for the majority and an individual behaviour plan for those with additional needs?

DS for example can not hear or understand complex instructions if they are in a noisy environment - if the teacher doesn't get his attention first he may appear disobedient or rude and get a behaviour mark, - it's invisabel

But then that’s not a zero tolerance behaviour policy, it’s just a behaviour policy. You can’t say ‘no excuses...except Tourettes, ADHD, recent trauma...’

If these zero tolerance schools are putting off students with SEN from attending, then that increases the burden on surrounding schools too. Remember the first £6000 of any SEN intervention has to come from the schools own funds.

I haven't come across a school with a zero tolerance policy on behaviour

Me either, but I understand that it is becoming a ‘thing’ in education.

The school that ended up at the tribunal clearly meant zero tolerance when they said zero tolerance. The kid with ADHD was expelled so it’s not like they’ll actually have to make adjustments for him, just apologise for not doing so.

Reading this post scares the life out of me . My son with ADHD is going to secondary school in September.

He tries very hard to behave , is a sociable boy and has a high Iq, loves learning but fidgets, doesn’t listen to instructions properly at times, and sometimes it is all too much .
He already has low self esteem. Handled well he does really well, handled badly he will be far more disruptive.

What strikes me as interesting in these discussions is when I think of my DD's secondary special school and the way they deal with discipline, they manage to have high expectations of their pupils, whilst allowing for reasonable adjustments and despite every single one of their pupils having SEN severe enough to require an EHCP and a specialist educational placement.

I realise the staff: pupil ratio is higher (about 1:5 at secondary level - they may have 2 staff in a class), but an example of a reasonable adjustment is that if a child is angry in class, they are allowed to get up and leave the room for 2-3 minutes to calm down, as long as they return independently and calmly. It is seen as a positive coping strategy (leave the room, deal with your frustration, return one you're calm, vs. hit or swear at the kid you're angry with).

DD1 hates the change of class bell, so she is allowed to put her ear defenders on just before the end of class, when she knows the bell will go off.

They have quiet rooms available at lunch time for children who don't want to eat their lunch in a big group. Etc.

Lougle that all sounds excellent!

Lougle - my son’s new mainstream school manages many of those adjustments. Pity his old one couldn’t.

The ed psych when writing his report on Ds made a specific point of not making any reccomendations that cost money or required extra staff.

I think some common sense needs to be applied in schools. A child with a SEN who is able to attend a mainstream school may obviously need adjustments made. I do wonder though if this is always in the best interests of both the child, and the school if large adjustments have to be made very often, to send them to a mainstream school.

However, I do agree there should be zero tolerance on behaviour only on children without SEN. So much lesson time is wasted, as much as half the lesson in my experience by kids just being disruptive. Behaviour such as refusing to sit down, refusing to open a book, answering back, having a conversation across the room with another disruptive child, throwing things, swearing, being on mobile phone etc. These kids are told again and again to stop but are often allowed to continue until they decide to stop. They are not dealt with consistently across teaching staff or even by the same member of staff. Most of these kids are simply trying to act cool and earn respect from others like them.

I don't think zero tolerance should apply to things like not bring in the correct equipment though, as this can depend on home life etc which the child should not be punished for.

The kids themselves can often identify the kids with SEN from the ones who are just the disruptive kids, trying to look cool.

It really annoys me that my child's education is disrupted by the kids acting big and cool. The kids themselves are fed up with it, but often laugh along with it or face being picked on. The disruptive kids need to be taken out of the class every time they display any of this behaviour, instead of that being the case in some lessons and others not.

These kids often behave in classes with strict teachers. They do their homework for the strict teachers which shows they can behave and conform to behaviours when it is expected.

Children with hfa may need large adjustments. Often they would not meet the criteria for their local ss.

There are far fewer ss places than when we were all kids

It's really difficult, because what constitutes a 'reasonable adjustment' is so subjective, and the impact on other children of those adjustments being made is so debatable. I think 'zero tolerance bar SEN' is fine for some issues, not for others, to be honest.

The problem with zero tolerance policies for minor behaviour infractions, school uniform rule breaches, lateness etc is that they often fall hardest on the students whose home lives are already disrupted. These are the students where school should be their constant in otherwise quite chaotic lives.

Exclude the student and the cycle of chaos just continues and society as a whole is the poorer for it.

*The problem with zero tolerance policies for minor behaviour infractions, school uniform rule breaches, lateness etc is that they often fall hardest on the students whose home lives are already disrupted. These are the students where school should be their constant in otherwise quite chaotic lives.

Exclude the student and the cycle of chaos just continues and society as a whole is the poorer for it.*

No one is arguing that it isn't harder for disadvantaged students who struggle to meet behavioural expectations at school, but the answer isn't to allow their poor behaviour. That is a guaranteed way to fail them.

I am not in favour of zero tolerance policies. Whist I agree it impacts those who have additional but also alienates the more questioning pupils. The use and application of every single rule leads to pupils questioning the relevance. I believe it leads to pupils not questioning or thinking for themselves as they become more passive. That is not to say I believe that there should be no rules - just sensible ones implemented with common sense. With a more tolerant approach if there were pupils who could not comply and were disruptive the schools would then be justified in exclusion - as the policy would be fair.

twelly

It's far more likely the exclusion would be overturned because the policy was woolly.

"It really annoys me that my child's education is disrupted by the kids acting big and cool. The kids themselves are fed up with it, but often laugh along with it or face being picked on. The disruptive kids need to be taken out of the class every time they display any of this behaviour, instead of that being the case in some lessons and others not.

These kids often behave in classes with strict teachers. They do their homework for the strict teachers which shows they can behave and conform to behaviours when it is expected."

I disagree. Often, disruptive behaviour is masking behaviour for an inability to cope with the demands of am environment. I'm not saying that every child who disrupts has SEN. Some children will disrupt because they are disengaged, others because they crave attention and don't know how to get it positively, and yes, some because they want their mates to laugh. But the reason they don't do it for strict teachers is that almost without exception, strict teachers are consistent teachers, with clear, unmoving boundaries, albeit with reasonable adjustments that are also clear and unmoving, and structures in class that the pupils can learn to work within. Those boundaries make the pupils feel secure and safe, so that they know that they can push against them, but if they cross them, they know what will happen.

In DD1's school, every class has the same discipline structure. She takes a book with her to each class. In each lesson she hands the book in, and at the end of the class she gets a stamp in her book:
-A green stamp means that she has met the expectations of the school behaviour standards in class. This is the general expectation in every lesson.
-A purple stamp means she has exceeded the school behaviour standards in that lesson, and purple stamps accumulate towards a £5 gift voucher to spend in the school reward shop. Purple stamps are awarded for particularly hard work, overcoming barriers to learning and attending to their work (eg. Moving past an argument and getting back to class work without further fuss for the rest of the lesson without disrupting class), working hard to answer a particularly challenging question that is beyond their usual level of performance, being particularly kind or thoughtful, etc.
-A red stamp means she has persistently, despite 2 clear warnings about her behaviour, broken the rules in class, and will have 10 minutes of detention away from the Friday afternoon fun activities session. This would be reserved for clear, deliberate rule breaking. e.g. Repeated swearing at another pupil, hitting/hurting a pupil, defiance of a teacher's instructions, refusing to do work, storming out of class and refusing to return, etc.

Then they have after school and Saturday detentions for hard core offenders.

Pretty much zero tolerance, yes. Because the reason for the child's disruptive behaviour makes no difference to its impact on the learning of the other kids.

Zero tolerance removal from lessons does not mean that all children removed are tackled in exactly the same way about their behaviour. Sympathetically suggesting that a child spend some time out from the classroom to calm down is not the same as the tack you might take with a serial piss-taking class clown. With the latter, the removal should be viewed as a punishment rather than a coping strategy and the child might merit detentions, a letter home etc in addition.

I'm sick of hearing how regularly my child's education is disrupted and I do not believe that classroom management should be left to the individual teacher. You will never have a school where all teachers are equal when it comes to discipline, and pretending that all teachers would be brilliant disciplinarians if they just tried harder benefits nobody. A fully supportive, centralised system with the onus on SLT is necessary.

Eolian

Exactly.

My school shoots itself in the foot because, although SLT are willing to remove a child who is causing disruption, they're removed to a lovely area where they get early lunch, don't have to queue, have teachers sending work over for them and get to wander round as they please. It's bordering on the lunatics running the asylum.

“My school shoots itself in the foot because, although SLT are willing to remove a child who is causing disruption, they're removed to a lovely area where they get early lunch, don't have to queue, have teachers sending work over for them and get to wander round as they please. It's bordering on the lunatics running the asylum.”

I suppose it depends whether the idea is to punish or to fix.......l

BertrandRussell

It doesn't fix, though, that's the problem. It perpetuates the disruption.

I think people should judge a school on how well they treat their children with SEN.

@Pengggwn what a schoolcan and should do is examine its policies and processes to identify which ones are rules for the sake of rules and which ones are an actual benefit to the school and its students.

School uniform can be a simple one. What is a strict uniform policy adding? Is it just being used as a way of excluding the non-compliant?

Can the impact of persistent lateness be reduced by classroom arrangement so that late students sit near the door and are not allowed to barge through the classroom to sit next to their friend?

Could a culture of tolerance of individual difference actually work better than a culture of zero tolerance?

There was a quite interesting article published last year which looked at characteristics of successful school heads. One of the things it identified was that schools which had very strict heads who focused on conformity to strict rules were successful short term but in the long term were far less successful than schools with more inclusive policies.

When I have tracked it down I will post a link.