As much as I am concerned when schools use ‘no-excuses’
and ‘zero-tolerance’ as statements on their website to outline their behaviour
policy as macho selling points to parents,
I am also uneasy about much of the criticism these schools attract
because it could be perceived to be seen as a complaint against any kind of
strong behaviour policy at all. Do I as a teacher have Zero tolerance to
racist, sexist, homophobic comments being made in class? Yes. Do I as a teacher
have zero tolerance to persistent disruption to lessons? Yes
Some union members have been quite vocal in their support of a recent campaign to #Banthebooths. This in in relation to Isolation
booths. It is often necessary for pupils to be removed from classrooms, because
of disruptive behaviour. These pupils therefore need to go somewhere else,
sometimes they can’t go to another classroom because there may not be a teacher
there. Usually pupils will go what is
called an isolation room. It should a supervised Safe space. It is seen as
sanction. If a pupil has been removed from the class, then it’s because of
their impact on the learning of the other students. To be put in an isolation
room it has to be relatively serious.
The word "Isolation" can be misleading. I’d rather call it a "Removal room"
or as one Catholic school called it, a "Damascus room". I’d like to call it a place of conversion but
to equate it as inhumane conjures up images of Andy Dufresne in solitary
confinement in “Shawshank Redemption” which it certainly isn’t. It is ludicrous
to suggest that having a pupil work in silence in reflecting on their behaviour
should be seen as inhumane. Sitting quietly is not a punishment. A short
sanction might be useful for the pupil.
We remove children from classrooms because we care about
their well being and the well being of the other students who want to learn. We
talk about the rights of the child. But what about all the other 29 children?
What about the severe harm caused to the education of others if the pupil with
persistent disruptive behaviour is not removed?
What about the
rights of teachers to teach their lesson? I teach a challenging Year 9 class
and having the option of removal for some of those students who want to destroy
the learning of others is a life saver. Feedback from pupil voice continually
requests that the teachers deal with this disruptive behaviour so that that
their learning not be disturbed
We talk about workload and getting to grips with behaviour
can greatly reduce it. What about the misery of some of our members who suffer
in disorderly schools where there is Chaos?
Some senior leadership teams have leaders who won’t tackle behaviour and
increase teacher’s workloads by telling teachers to give detentions after
school while some good senior leaders will run centralised detention systems
that decrease a teacher’s workload. Decent teachers leave schools not because
of bad behaviour per se, but by inept, bullying leaders who will talk about
raising results and 4 levels of progress instead of recognising the elephant in
the room.
Please don’t put me in a position next week, where I say to
our members, we’ve decided as a union to ban the booths as they are inhumane
because they will say “What is the alternative?” If it does not involve
supporting teachers actually removing disruptive pupils from classrooms when
their behaviour is out of control, then we will lose all creditability
Oppose the amendment
