Unions

5 Apr 2016

Conditions of Employment: Part Two

Teachwell Behaviour, Teaching and Learning Discipline, Primary School, Secondary School, Teachers, Unions 0

As far as I am concerned all the teaching unions ought to be ashamed of the fact that they have never once called a strike in response to the death of a teacher in the classroom, never mind classroom assaults.

The union leadership are personally entitled to feel concern for pupils, even more than teachers, but it is utterly unprofessional to let this view affect the working conditions of teachers. Teachers need to learn to put their foot down with union leaders who go off on one regularly too. It’s a union, not a petty fiefdom.

The NUT bangs on about the baseline assessment but is not outraged by the assaults that lead to teachers leaving the profession. Bousted can hang her head in shame as well. She downplayed her own union’s survey results . 40% of those surveyed have been attacked and yet, the strongest thing she could bring herself to say on the matter was:

“It is shocking that more than four in 10 (43%) education professionals have had to deal with physical violence from a pupil in the last year,”

Except it’s not shocking at all. We know that the number of assaults has grown steadily. What is the tipping point here? 50%, 60%, 90%? When do the unions call a strike over it? They won’t, is the answer. They have not gone on strike over teachers being killed by pupils so why would they bother with a minor thing like assault? The only positive thing I can say about the unions in this respect is that they have yet to imply teachers are ‘causing’ the physical and verbal acts, but it’s hardly a compliment.

We have the same right to feel safe in our classrooms as any worker in their place of work – end of story. I think all physical and verbal attacks on teachers should have to be reported to an independent body, much the same way that physical handling of children needs to be written up and reported. This, and the actions taken in response, will be on record, as will staff absence, resignations and turnover rate in teachers which teach particular children. (Damn near all the turnover in one school was the result of 6 children, and the only thing that was evident was that each of those leaving had indeed taken the message that it was their fault seriously and to heart, the children’s behaviour didn’t improve a jot).

The fines for not doing so would be heavy, involve a no-notice inspection of the school (no point in trying to hide it all like one does for Ofsted as they would be looking out for that in the first place), and could result in dismissal for the member of SLT who is in charge for false reporting. Even better make it a computerised system that teachers and SLT log onto separately. If SLT start moving against a teacher who has written up an assault, the independent body will be allowed to oversee processes so that teachers can’t be penalised for reporting what has happened. The governors would also be expected to get reports of this and the actions taken. They would be able to communicate with the board independently if they have concerns.

As for the children and parents, if there isn’t multi-agency involvement already then this should be triggered. A police officer should be involved in speaking to both parent and child. Which they are entitled to do. The fact is that the police can speak to any child (and detain if necessary) who is committing a criminal offence, regardless of age. Without a plan in place, agreed to by the parents and child, including that they have understood that any further assault will lead to expulsion, the child should not go back into the classroom.

What about children with disabilities, SEN such as autism, etc.? For a start I don’t associate SEN with physical or verbal assault because quite simply none of the children who would fit that category have had those issues. I don’t accept it is a ‘normal’ part of teaching those children. In the case of PRU’s, they may wish to give the children more chances but then they would need to justify why.

The fact is that teachers, like all other workers have the right to be safe and free from abuse/assault. We have trained to be teachers, not punching bags. If the unions can’t or won’t protect us then we need something else, that much is clear.

This post was originally published on the Labour Teachers website.

5 Apr 2016

Conditions of Employment: Part One

Teachwell Teaching and Learning Primary School, Secondary School, Teachers, Unions 0

One of the reasons I left my last union is because I disagreed with them on a wide range of issues and in the end was not happy about what they were spending my dues to promote. Much of the political activities were counterproductive to improving the lot of teachers. Is it too much to ask that the unions focus on the needs of their members rather than their ideological commitments to certain practices, and denouncing the government over matters that are of secondary importance at times?

I expect to be accused of being selfish but I can’t say I care. Fact is that I have worked in jobs other than teaching and I expected the union I joined to stick up for the best interests of its members, full stop. That unions have done nothing sensible to improve our conditions over the last decade is another reason why I won’t pay to be a member. I would rather hire a lawyer.

So what conditions would I like to see changed?

Number one is the notice period. It is ridiculous to only be allowed to resign a post three times in a year, have to endure working in a place that you no longer wish to be at for a few months and open oneself up to all sorts of nastiness as a result. Also if one moves to a school and realises that it’s just a bad move, having to wait months makes the difference between requiring a reference from the headteacher or not. This can trap a teacher into a horrible state of affairs in a school they hate but can’t leave because they have found themselves in a nest of vipers. One week’s notice is standard in most jobs. Longer if you’ve worked longer, but nothing like the notice periods that teachers have to give.

Heads don’t have to buck up their ideas about retention while they hold all the cards if one is on a permanent contract. Unlike most posts, their reference is required if one is to move onto another school.

Ah but what about the children? Well, maybe head teachers and senior members of staff should think about that a bit more. I don’t see why this consideration should be placed on the doorstep of the teacher. All this state of affairs has done is lead to teachers accepting worse and worse conditions. It’s easier for SLT to pander to difficult parents rather than backing the teacher; continue with ineffective behaviour management systems and refuse to accept the extent of the problem of abusive behaviour in the classroom because the fact is the teachers are trapped in that situation. A shorter notice period would give teachers the ability to move on faster.

Headteachers do have the discretion to release you from your contract sooner, but it’s simply a caveat in what is an unreasonable policy in the first place. What I want teachers to have is the ability to vote with their feet without it damaging their careers.

This post was originally published on the Labour Teachers website.

5 Apr 2016

Behaviour Management: Shying Away from the Issues?

Teachwell Behaviour, Political Parties Discipline, KS1, KS2, KS3, Methods, Primary School, Secondary School, SLT, Teachers, Teaching Assistants, Unions 0

On behaviour management, it is fair to say that the Labour Party has left the debate on discipline in schools to the Conservatives. We need to pull back and have a real discussion. Lucy Powell has a real opportunity here to tackle the issue of discipline in our schools and redefine Labour Policy on it. So what do I feel she needs to address?

The association of left-wing teachers with poor discipline.

The idea that left-wing thinking requires permissive discipline in schools needs to be rejected. This does not mean that the shadow secretary of state needs to ‘get tough’, but she does need to think of the real cost to teachers, pupils and schools. Call them reasons or excuses, but either way the education of thousands of pupils is affected on a daily basis by a doctrinal belief that children are not for responsible for their actions. How is it acceptable that working class children have their life chances affected by the ideological stances of their middle class teachers?

Personally I feel that a start would be to actually engage with teachers who support the Labour Party and find out, rather than assume, what they think and what their experiences have actually been. I can accept being in the minority in my views but I cannot accept a situation where no one in my party is even bothering to find out if I am in the minority!!

Poor discipline in the classroom

What is the impact of disruption on the poorest? How many lessons do they miss? How many classes have to be evacuated? What are the solutions that local authorities suggest and how effective are they?

If Labour want to transfer power back to the LEAs if they get elected ,then so be it. However, to pretend that the training and solutions provided to classroom teachers was adequate in the past is again to ignore reality. Only 3 months ago, I was told of the Head of the Behaviour Support Team telling a Head Teacher that her staff needed to become more resilient to the verbal and physical abuse they faced. Is this good enough? I do not claim that this is mirrored across LEAs in the country, but in my own experience LEA advisors have been hippy idealists still peddling theories and ideas from the 1970s, without revision or indeed any kind of analysis as to the weaknesses of their approach.

This particular Head Teacher is now off with stress, the deputy has left and the school is in a state of low level chaos. Meanwhile, nothing has changed for the teachers and there are no solutions for them. Also remember there are vulnerable children in those classrooms who are not behaving poorly and they have to come into school and watch members of staff being abused. How is this an acceptable state of affairs?

We need fairness in our dealings with children – there is nothing left wing about assuming that the child with the greatest behaviour problems needs the most attention from the class teacher.

Research

An evaluation of current practices is needed and I believe it is the Labour Party who needs to do it. What works and what doesn’t? I am not interested in seeing a shadow secretary of state being the mouthpiece of ideologues or those with vested interests in particular modes of behaviour management. I want to see her create her own views based on the experiences of teachers and parents. Should we institute nurture groups in schools with the explicit goal of creating dependency (in order to create independence it would seem yet I have seen very little of the latter and a lot of the former) when the evidence from psychology points to developing better relationships between child and parent?

Another issue that troubles me greatly is that these groups are targeted at the most vulnerable and yet no long term study exists as to its impact. Intervening in emotional and mental health issues simply cannot be left to those with vested interests in particular types of behaviour management

The Way Forward?

Lucy Powell has a real opportunity to critique and revise Labour’s education policy and solutions to the issues of behaviour management. It would be a tragic waste if, yet again, assumptions trump experience and reality in our stated policy positions.

This post was originally published on the Labour Teachers website.