Sir! Would you like a milkshake?

[egg&chips]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

A thought provoking response, thanks egg&chips. You have made me think again about writing all teachers off as the same.
However, I do think teachers in general have brought this situation on themselves to an extent.
During and after WW2 our fathers were all away in the forces and many of our mothers were working. There were some really wild, uncontrolled kids about.
However- school was a different ballgame! Rules of behaviour applied and you broke them at your peril(although I never saw the terrible bullying listed above). The teachers dressed smartly, you called them 'sir' or 'Mr/Miss' and they called you by your surname. They weren't your friends, they were your teachers!
Now, if you go in a sixth form collage you can't tell the teachers from the students, they're all dress the same(as sloppily?) and on first name terms. How can the teachers expect to be treat with respect- they're just one of the gang. And teenagers are naturally testers of boundaries and won't let someone take over and set rules for their gang unless they recognise them as separate and dominant.
I couldn't do a teachers job now, I'd soon be in court. I don't see how teachers can ever retake control of their schools either.

You are probably right Gordon. I think some kind of social revolution would be necessary to make meaningful and useful change. I suspect that this is unlikely to happen.
I fully recommend a book written by Peter Pook, possibly Britain's funniest neglected writer called The Teacher's HandPook, in which it is reflected that the single most prominent reason for teachers failing to commend respect is their inappropriate dress code.
On the other hand I also find that respect is a quality that is unlikely to be offered up by individuals who do not recognise it as something which anyone, least of all themselves is actually due.
Sorry to be pessimistic

[annesingleton]

Originally Posted by kestrelx

Anne you say that he would have been better dealing with the pupil by removing him from the room! But you also say that no teacher should be able to restrain a pupil without training - well how does one remove a pupil without making physical contact? So your contradicting yourself!

Also what about the human element - you get a milkshake thrown over you then possibly anticipated further attack - the response then is to protect yourself.

Also there was no complaint made by the pupil. This was all the doing of the school authorities.

I am relaying correct safeguarding procedures with regard to use of restraint, not giving my own personal definition. And as for the fact that no complaint was made, again safeguarding procedures would expect that any inappropriate behaviour should be investigated regardless of whether a complaint had been made. The school authority had a duty to investigate through the correct safeguarding channels (safeguarding used to be known as child protection).
As for removing the pupil from the classroom, if he refused to leave when told, then the teacher should have called for assistance immediately.
And I agree about the human element and reacting instinctively - I work with some violent and dangerous young people who can test the patience to say the least. I have had extensive training in avoiding and managing disruptive behaviour and risk managing situations. I would say that the main criteria is to keep yourself physically safe whilst ensuring the safety of the young person and others present - for the adult to involve themselves in a physical altercation could well escalate the situation and significantly increase the risk.

[Neil]

The kids assaulted the teacher who defended himself from what he thought was going to be a more serious assault. The kids then threw a chair at him which proves he was right. The kid should be dealt with by the police. The headteacher should be sacked. The school governor's who sacked him are incompetent and should be replaced immediately.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Neil

The kids assaulted the teacher who defended himself from what he thought was going to be a more serious assault. The kids then threw a chair at him which proves he was right. The kid should be dealt with by the police. The headteacher should be sacked. The school governor's who sacked him are incompetent and should be replaced immediately.

I can go wi that no problem.

[Alan Varrechia]

Originally Posted by Neil

The kids assaulted the teacher who defended himself from what he thought was going to be a more serious assault. The kids then threw a chair at him which proves he was right. The kid should be dealt with by the police. The headteacher should be sacked. The school governor's who sacked him are incompetent and should be replaced immediately.

Neil for prime minister. With common sense like that you can't go wrong.

[Studio25]

Originally Posted by Neil

...The school governor's who sacked him are incompetent and should be replaced immediately.

Bear in mind that school governors are unpaid and (for most schools) it's very hard to attract candidates to fill the posts.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Studio25

Bear in mind that school governors are unpaid and (for most schools) it's hard to attract candidates to fill the posts.

I know that but what chance have we of sorting out the problems in schools if we allow people who think the teacher was wrong to run our schools?

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by Studio25

Bear in mind that school governors are unpaid and (for most schools) it's very hard to attract candidates to fill the posts.

And therein lies the problem in this particular safeguarding case, people without training and nous are interpreting laws and screwing up...

Anne's post is wholly correct, internal investigation is the first step and safeguarding are made aware of the circumstances and that an investigation is underway. In this particular instance I have no doubt that the safeguarding team would have accepted that the teacher was sent for training and given a wrist slap as a suitable response and would have closed the file.

The school and governors on the other hand do need investigating by Ofsted. e.g. Was suitable training given? Was there a risk assessment in place to ensure the safety of teachers in a canteen? What safeguarding investigation training have the governers had?

[Studio25]

Originally Posted by Neil

I know that but what chance have we of sorting out the problems in schools if we allow people who think the teacher was wrong to run our schools?

I'm just playing devil's advocate here, but (broadly speaking) what if the mentality which makes someone think that this teacher's actions were wrong is the same mentality which makes someone volunteer to be a governor?

Why do we even need governors? They seem to be inserted into the hierarchy of paid employees which starts at the teacher and ends at the secretary of state for education.

[Gordon Booth]

Originally Posted by annesingleton

I am relaying correct safeguarding procedures -
Safeguarding who? The young thug or the teacher?
with regard to use of restraint, not giving my own personal definition. And as for the fact that no complaint was made, again safeguarding procedures would expect that any inappropriate behaviour should be investigated regardless of whether a complaint had been made-
What about the young thugs inappropiate behaviour? Will that be investigated and punished?
The school authority had a duty to investigate through the correct safeguarding channels (safeguarding used to be known as child protection).
As for removing the pupil from the classroom, if he refused to leave when told, then the teacher should have called for assistance immediately.
Then what happens? He refuses to be removed and makes 2 teachers look fools rather than 1?Can 2 touch him where 1 can't?

And I agree about the human element and reacting instinctively - I work with some violent and dangerous young people who can test the patience to say the least. I have had extensive training in avoiding and managing disruptive behaviour and risk managing situations.
So you avoid taking them on and they get away with it and know they can do it again?
I would say that the main criteria is to keep yourself physically safe whilst ensuring the safety of the young person and others present - for the adult to involve themselves in a physical altercation could well escalate the situation and significantly increase the risk.
So the safety of the young person takes priority, followed by yours if you can?
If you let a bully get away with it(whether they're 5, 15 or 50) they will carry on doing it. Your reasonableness is seen as weakness

You're quoting 'Correct safeguarding procedures', Ann. Do you agree with them or are they imposed on you against your better judgement?
More important, how many of these young persons have you converted to a better way of life and behaviour? And how many have ridden over you roughshod?

[Gordon Booth]

Another thought(ran out of edit time)- the adults with 'extensive training in avoiding and managing disruptive behaviour and risk managing situations' may survive unharmed, they're trained for it. But the same can't be said for the many other young people who come up against these out of control young persons-they're the ones who will suffer.

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth

Safeguarding who?The young thug or the teacher?

Both. The teacher from the garbage he's currently going through and the pupil from some of the anecdotal evidence on this thread about bullying teachers

What about the young thugs inappropriate behaviour? Will that be investigated?

Should be if the school has the correct procedures in place and has governers who will support the teachers instead of sacking them.

So you avoid taking them on and they get away with it and know they can do it again?

No, you attempt to de-escalate a tense situation and deal with it under better conditions.. e.g. if a guy is threatening you with a gun, would you attack him or try to talk to him until the SAS arrived.

So the safety of the young person takes priority, followed by yours if you can?

No, your own safety is paramount, which is what Anne said, and this is the point in this particular situation that these governors have not taken into account.

If you let a bully get away with it(whether they're 5,15 or 50) they will carry on doing it. Your reasonableness is seen as weakness

Nowhere does Anne or safeguarding say that bullies 'get away with it', they are simply a set of guidelines that are meant to prevent escalation at the original point of contact when tempers are heated. There is no point arguing with anyone at 5,15 or 50 when their judgement is clouded by anger, it's just going to make the problem worse.

As for your postscript post..the young people would not come up against out of control young persons if it hadn't been allowed to escalate to that point in the first place.

I'll say it again, nothing wrong with the principles of safeguarding, it's how they are interpreted by the untrained that's the problem.

[annesingleton]

I'm really sorry for being controversial and I'm not even saying that I agree with everything I'm saying, I'm just telling people the way things are for people working with young people.
Professionals need to be protected in their work, and given the escalating number of young people who are out of control (I don't work in education but have many links to people who do) I honestly don't know what the answer is.
I've previously for many years worked in and managed residential child care services, working with some very damaged children, in my current job I've had a police marker on my address in case of emergency from repercussions for my actions. I've also worked with a psychologist specialising in behavioural problems in young people, and from my knowledge and experience maybe the answer is to avoid confrontation whilst addressing the issues which contribute to the behaviour. However this is no answer to the situation the teacher in question found himself in - no doubt properly trained people may have been able to avoid the situation, but teachers - in my opinion - do not necessarily receive the correct training to equip them to deal with seriously disruptive pupils - after all their remit is to teach and impart knowledge.

[Guinness]

Originally Posted by annesingleton

I'm really sorry for being controversial

Don't apologise..You're not being controversial, you're being factual. Your experience at the sharp end has given you some insights that others don't immediately see until they are given an alternative view to consider.

[annesingleton]

Originally Posted by Guinness

Don't apologise..You're not being controversial, you're being factual. Your experience at the sharp end has given you some insights that others don't immediately see until they are given an alternative view to consider.

Thanks Guiness, but I completely realise I'm giving the corporate line with no consideration for the person doing the job and putting up with the flack they receive - unfortunately that's the way it is. My main concern as is the vast majority of people working with children and young people is to achieve the best outcome for them possible, although given the outside influences including family, peers and lifestyle it's extremely difficult.