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?

GnomeDePlume

I didn't say they shouldn't examine their policies.

And no, late students shouldn't be sat by the door so they can't bare through and sit next to their friends - what decent teacher attempts to teach without a seating plan?

Anyway, I doubt we will necessarily agree on which rules are useful and which aren't. I agree, of course, that unnecessary rules are counter-productive.

How pupils who break he rules are treated is significant. By having fewer rules the policy is clearer in my opinion, the regimented passive pupil is not in my opinion does not breed independent learners. It will work for younger pupils but in my option is not good in the longer term. To clarify I am referring to the overzealous rules not behaviour rules that promote learning within the classroom

twelly

Well, you're entitled to your view. I don't agree with it, but there we are.

When my dd had a sensory relapse (caused by another student accidentally falling & touching her shoulders which she can’t best) she couldn’t stand the feel of most clothes on her skin for several days.

She was able to stay in school because they relaxed the uniform policy for her & allowed her to wear a thin top & school tracksuit. She couldn’t even stand socks. She’d have lost a week of education otherwise.

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

What does that actually mean in practical terms? Tolerance of individual difference sounds a lot like letting people do what the hell they like.

I agree about uniform - it's unnecessary, causes a lot of friction and wastes teachers' time dealing with infractions. But other than that... I doubt schools generally have rules for the sake of rules for no reason. Why would they?

You don’t get sacked if you make a joke in a meeting occasionally or look bored in a training session...

Once, you might well do if you made a joke at the expense of a colleague or interrupted the meeting. Regularly sitting looking like you aren't paying any attention and don't give a fuck may also lead to being fired, maybe not on the spot but eventually.

No one is in favour of letting kids do what they like. Everyone wants a behaviour policy that addresses poor behaviour and is consistently enforced. The choice isn’t zero tolerance or chaos.

‘Zero tolerance’ is a specific type of super-strict behaviour policy which means immediate sanctions for even minor infractions, and everything is regulated.

And they might be illegal because they aren’t taking into account the needs of students with SEND.

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/zero-tolerance-behaviour-policies-could-be-illegal-send-expert-tells

noblegiraffe

But you can call a policy zero tolerance, provided you stipulate that reasonable adjustments will be made where required by law. No?

Calling a policy ‘zero tolerance’ or ‘no excuses’ would be a bit odd if you then tolerate stuff and allow some excuses. Better call it something else, like ‘strict’.

I'm in London where most secondaries seem to have similar zero tolerance policies, super-prescriptive uniform, etc. Do people have tips for figuring out whether a school will be reasonable in dealing with a kid with ASD and sensory issues, who is also intelligent and lazy and will encourage reduced expectations if at all possible? What is code for "if your kid has SEN, there are other schools you may wish to consider"?

I'm not in favour of zero tolerance/no excuses. Im a teacher of a creative subject so pretty 'liberal' and on the caring side of the teacher spectrum. If any of my students have a diagnosis or appear on pastoral updates with issues due to trauma, bereavement, home life (which are many, regularly) I cut them some slack where possible. If their behaviour is disruptive I will remove them but in a calm and supportive way. Maybe to take work into a colleagues classroom.
However, if nothing appears in their data and I judge them to be disruptive because they're bored/showing off etc then 'no excuses ' it is. Low level disruption snack of respect due to students getting bored it a perfect storm that needs adressing.

The new curriculum is harder, inaccessible for many, and often boring! It's leading to behaviour problems but how can we force these kids to engage?

noblegiraffe

No room for caveats?

Pengggwn, that’s what the words ‘zero’ and ‘no’ mean.

noblegiraffe

But that's what a caveat is

I would read it as, 'zero tolerance of X for the vast majority', and accept that SEND is a valid exception in SOME cases to the policy.

I think if you use the word zero but don’t actually mean the word zero, then that will just cause confusion. Parents of students with SEN who are obviously going to be concerned would need reassurance that no, the zero tolerance policy doesn’t always apply.

And we know how students like consistency and clarity.

Clearly, also, there are schools where exceptions aren’t made, flying the banner of ‘zero tolerance’. More reasonable and law-abiding schools should seek to distance themselves from such institutions.

The issue is that there has to be a line drawn up for the limits of behaviour, the problem is that its not a straight line and many pupils are quite rigid in their thinking about who is getting away with poor bahaviour which leads them to push the acceptable boundaries more.

noblegiraffe

But that's exactly the reassurance I'd give them: the reassurance that reasonable, not endless, adjustments would be made, specific to their child's needs. Once the adjustments required went beyond the reasonable and other children's education was being affected, a different conversation would be needed. But for the majority of students, a zero tolerance of disruption is exactly right, in my opinion.

But you wouldn’t have worried parents needing reassurance (or removing their child from the school, or not applying) if you hadn’t used inaccurate words in the first place.

noblegiraffe

Well, we disagree on this. I think it's fine, and substantially less confusing than 'strict' which could mean anything.

The label isn’t the policy, so why use an inaccurate one?

I’ve taught in a secondary school for boys with social, emotional and mental health needs for nearly 5 years. The students all have EHC plans. Their behaviour in mainstream (primary or secondary) was extreme (repeated violence/escaping and running away etc).
We’ve offered a “respite” provision to give students a break from he mainstream environment for a couple of years. The vast majority of respite students come from academies and over the last 18 months I would say the reasons for being referred have got pettier and pettier.

You can't use definitive terms with flexible policies. That's the bottom line. If you use a definitive term, such as 'zero', 'no', 'without exception', etc., Then say 'except', you are simply saying 'not really'

So, "Zero tolerance..... Not really....." Or "Zero tolerance..... Except these tolerances...." Or "no exceptions.... Except these exceptions"

Use the term "Behaviour policy" or better still "Inclusive Behaviour Policy" and have a policy called "Meeting the needs of pupils with additional needs" that outlines the reasonable adjustments that the school currently makes as normal provision within classes for pupils that need minor accommodations to enable them to learn with their peers.

How's that for a bit of radical proactive thinking? Actually advertise what you do for parents to see?

I'm not going to debate this further, I don't see the point. I think 'caveat' is a clear concept and would have no issue with it at my DC's school.