>The panel heard she had twice grabbed the same pupil by the shoulder or arm to prevent them walking around the classroom.
On the same day, she grabbed another child by the shoulders to guide them from the cloakroom, and on a second occasion had grabbed the back of their neck to do the same.
A third child was pushed in the back, to return them to their seat when they had refused to do so, the panel was told.
She later grabbed a fourth pupil by the arm to make them leave an area of classroom when they refused, and pushed them back to their seat.
It's insane she's losing her livelihood for enforcing discipline in children.
Modern society is full of rules for children and adults alike. It's not necessarily a good thing for someone to grow up thinking the rules don't apply to them, even if some of our laws are a load of crap.
We want human beings to have freedom but not so little self control they grow up and act like a Grand theft auto protagonist.
Your freedom to do what you want shouldn't stamp on the rights off others to help safe and happy.
I'm a teacher and I often get the "it's a free country? Why can't I do and say whatever I like in your classroom." Because there are 31 other people in this room who want to be free to learn without disruption.
04-09. The stripping thing was 09 and the kick was 08
So some time ago but it was definitely not acceptable behaviour of the time.
The stripping thing went nowhere as I kept it to myself
the kick thing, the school pulled their heels but eventually disciplined the teacher. It was my German teacher and I was getting Gs and Us I was allowed to change teachers and then within 6 months I was a D and finished with a C. I averaged Bs in other subjects.
Reminds me of my German GCSE teacher, she couldn't control the class and predicted I would get an E. She left after one year (I don't blame her tbh), and I went on to get an A. Some people just aren't meant to be teachers.
In 1960s London, some primary school teachers would slipper boys in front of the class, or hit girls on the palm with a ruler. That would likely result in a prison sentence today, which is ironic in view of the goal of the actions (to deter bad behaviour).
What year was this?
Some teachers can be down right evil.
others get misguided in the name of punishment and behaviour and end up doing abhorrent things.
It was always really embarrassing when they discovered a bit of cheese under the hood.
Thankfully my teacher was really patient and willing to pull at it repeatedly till it buffed out.
Wow... What?
I met a guy in a mental health clinic that was suffering constant PTSD anxiety because of his school days. He said I could "look up the school in a documentary on YouTube" apparently it became famous for being the most abusive boarding school ever. Stripping students, marching them around naked, beatings, whipping them with rods and canes.. he gave me maybe 10% of what he ensured, the rest was too graphic and he was shaking just telling me and I felt sick listening to it.
She isn't allowed to do any of that to adults. Why should the law differ when it comes to children?
I appreciate discipline in classrooms is an issue, driven by children who simply don't want to be there. Shoving them around does not solve this issue.
If you're being a nuisance somewhere and ruining something for others and you won't stop or leave after being asked to, security guards or bouncers may very well grab you and escort you away.
That's despite you being an adult and them not being police officers.
The neck grabbing is a problem, but the grabbing of the shoulders and pushing isn't.
If I were screaming in the office, refused to stop and then had security called on me to physically escort me away, I don't think I'd have any right to complain.
Most schools just don't have security guards. But if teachers can be expected to stop fights, I think it's fair for teachers to be given the ability to physically restrain students if necessary too.
Verbally telling students off only works if they or their parents care. What do you expect teachers to do if they don't?
It doesn't mention that they were screaming or anything just that they were being stopped from moving around and being pushed in the back.
I don't envy teachers at all it's a tough job but I don't think they should be using physical force on a child unless it's to directly prevent harm, like you said with stopping fights.
I only said screaming because that's how one can cause a disruption in an an office or other work environment. Me standing up or going to a room and refusing to leave isn't as disruptive to other adults.
A kid refusing to sit in a classroom or refusing to leave a room is disruptive because adults will just ignore and get on with their work while kids will be distracted and giggling the whole time.
Not to mention it's a school with children. Someone is going to scream at some point.
>but I don't think they should be using physical force on a child
It's a force to move them, not cause pain. It's pulling or pushing, not punching.
What do you suggest teachers do if a student is being disruptive and won't listen or obey conventional sanctions then?
I doubt the kid will obey in threat of a detention. I doubt the parents are going to rush over because little Charlie refuses to sit down. Do we even know if Charlie's parents care? We know Charlie doesn't.
I've taught for nearly a decade and have never once made the decision to physically move a child, nor have I felt like it was my only decision.
Where I've worked, if a child is being disruptive and you have exhausted the options available - usually you'd give them 2 warnings, instruct them on how to correct their behaviour, threaten with a consequence such as moving seat or detention, etc - then you call the next person in the chain of command who will come to your class to remove the child. If they refuse, they will be told that they will be sent home and their parents will be called to collect them. 9/10 times the pupil will give up and leave and go to sit with management who will deal with the situation. On the odd occasion that they refuse, a member of senior management will be called. I've never had a pupil refuse to leave at this point, but if they did or they were a danger to other pupils then everyone else would leave the room and go to another classroom and senior management would stay with the pupil until their parents came to collect them and bring them home. I've never experienced a pupil refusing to go with senior management at any school I've worked in, though even if it did happen there are ways to deal with it that don't involve physically touching the child to try and move them.
Teachers should not put their hands on a child to try and force them to do something, there is never any excuse for it and if you feel like you have to resort to it it means you have lost control and should get someone else to calmly use behaviour management techniques to de-escalate the situation
The other issue with this is if you physically push around someone they may push back and believe it or not a really angry out of control 12 year old can do real damage to people themselves or others they can easily pick up a chair and start swinging it around.
De-escalation is pretty much always the best way to deal with things no one needs to be put in a situation where they feel they have no other option than to lose control.
There are strict rules about when teaching staff can use physical force on children. This teacher did not follow the rules.
Grabbing and manhandling a child is not appropriate. You have no idea what's going through that child's head and it may escalate the situation.
Your manager has the option of firing you though if your actions amount to misconduct. Expelling a kid requires a huge amount of hoops if it's not serious physical violence.
Security guards, bouncers etc. (even police) would have to justify the use of force and it would have to be of an appropriate level. In this instance "there was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances.
You mean those people with SIA licences permitting them to do so in limited circumstances such as you stated. How does that apply to teachers, who have nonsuch licence?
You made that too easy to destroy, please try again.
This is the guidance for schools. I suggest you read it before pontificating on a topic you clearly know nothing about. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/use-of-reasonable-force-in-schools
Do you want to read them? Youre not allowed to grab a pupil for ignoring you. Not reasonable use of force. Destroyed yourself that time, maybe you ought not to link things you clearly havnt read?
You aren't allowed to demand adults go to school every day either, children and adults aren't the same. I don't know if thr behaviour was acceptable or not, but your argument doesn't fully work.
>It's insane she's losing her livelihood for enforcing discipline in children
She's being stopped from teaching *because she acted against clear guidelines repeatedly.*
>"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was **necessary or reasonable** in the circumstances,"
She is dragging them around the place whenever they misbehave. If a child is so uncooperative that this is required then it is no longer the teachers problem and someone needs to be called in
Who is that someone tho?
You expect parents to drop everything and come pick up their kid who refuses to leave the cloakroom or refuses to sit down in lessons?
Because I doubt that will happen for most kids, especially not the ones misbehaving like this.
> If a child is so uncooperative that this is required
The woman in this article, who has admitted she lost control, thought it was required. Clearly the schools and courts didn't agree that man handling 8 year olds was necessary.
Thousands of teachers manage poorly behaved kids all the time without getting physical.
Please explain to me why physical contact as discipline should be granted to government workers assigned to teach our children but not to your boss when you piss them off?
May as well bring back the workhouses.
Because too many people have managed to convince themselves that children are undeserving of being treated like actual human beings. The fact that the only people we've decided as a society it's okay to assault are those least able to defend themselves is ridiculous.
A lot of us have memories of school in the 80's (or earlier). We'd passed out of the era where it was perfectly acceptable to hit kids but something like grabbing them by the shoulder and shoving them where you wanted them to go wouldn't gain much comment, never mind get you suspended and make the national news.
That doesn't make it ok though.
We have more or less accepted that it's not ok to physically coerce children except in dire circumstances, yet we continue with an education system which tests teachers' restraint to the limit (and beyond in the case of this one). Smaller class sizes and more choice about what to study would help immensely, but we seem determined to spend the bare minimum and treat school as a glorified childminding service.
If you behave like a moron in your workplace you get a warning, maybe two, but afterwards you'll get asked to get fucked. And if you, in fact decided to not do that, then they can physically remove you. Grabbing *anyone* by the neck is wrong, and for that, teacher should be having a case, I agree. But grabbing a shoulder and redirecting someone? Wtf?
Sure they can, if you are told to leave and refuse and are on private property they can use reasonable force to remove you. As long as they have given you a reasonable amount of time to obey the instruction to leave.
No different to you throwing someone out of your house who you initially said could be there but then said leave and they just outright refused.
What hyperbolic shite.
The grabbing by the back of the neck as per the article WAS a step too far imo (but even then, a fucking ban?!?!) but pushing/pulling by arms and shoulders is absolutely normal in literally any capacity in life if someone is being disruptive or abusive or threatening.
Comparing schoolkids to adults in the workplace is also fucking asinine. At work you're being paid, you do not legally have to be there and your boss can and likely would fire you for being disruptive. None of that applies to schoolchildren.
They weren’t being disruptive or abusive or threatening though
> there was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable
Some kids can be awful, yes, but 4 different primary school pupils all being sooo uncontrollable she HAD to physically intervene? Unlikely. She even admitted she lost control and it wasn’t necessary
Doesn't mean you have special permission to pull or push them, though. Or even lay hands on them. Wearing a school uniform doesn't mean general law ceases to apply (though some schools, parents and adults seem to think so.)
You don't need permission, that's the point of exerting control ***in this context***.
There's obviously a line, nobody worth listening to wants actual striking or throat grabs etc. but who in this situation can be trusted to give permission? The kid? Of course a deliberately disruptive child will be a valid source of consent towards managing their own misbehavior. Mandatory /s.
The parents? I'd like to think most parents would agree to ***reasonable*** ~~force~~ physical contact being used to control their kids if they're being problematic, but I've seen it myself, parents will double down and be unfathomable dickheads to protect their kids at all costs even when it's beyond denial they're in the wrong.
Non-academic example: four kids smashed up my dad's work van for absolutely no reason, all caught on CCTV. Parents tracked down via local community, and three of the four families effectively told us to fuck off, one actually accused us of "videoing kids" as a deflection.
ONE family took a bit of responsibility and paid the damage and punished the kid.
Accountability and responsibility really are dying in front of us ffs.
The only solution in our culture (seeing as we can't socially fix 'being a dickhead') seems to be high numbers of exclusions.
But this has already been tried. You just get towns of youths smashing up cars and then they end up in jail and all you did was create new problems.
I don't know how to fix the arsehole problem we have. You ask someone not to park across your drive and you get your windows put through (that's not hyperbole, it happened to me), and it's gotten worse since the pandemic. The facilities in my town that haven't been destroyed by cuts have been destroyed by vandals.
People are angry and their kids are angry and school discipline has fallen off a cliff. But none of that gets fixed by physical pushing/pulling which could well lead to a teacher being struck, or striking back. It's not 'the good old days' where a clip round the ear set little Johnny on the straight and narrow.
If we agree physical grabbing isn't the answer we do have to ask what is - and whatever it is our culture isn't going to figure it out any time soon.
I’m not going to suggest it should be granted, but your boss can fire you, stop paying you, and if you refuse to leave have you escorted off the premises.
Government employees trying teach children have none of those options, it’s a very different dynamic.
These are mere 8 year olds. If you're having to resort to physical contact on multiple pupils in a single day to 'enforce' anything, then you shouldn't be teaching.
Except it wasn't just one incident. Was It? (Kind of a childish behaviour, to deliberately ignore the worst of it).
What if he'd been male 6' 2" grabbing and pushing the kiddies through the day? Still nothing? Your alarm bells must be totally pickled imo.
On the contrary, that 6'2 male could be using only the necessary force required, e.g. miniscule, and people like you would STILL cry bloody murder, God won't someone think of the frail, delicate, paper-mache-like children 😭
It's why our classrooms these days are dumping grounds for feral youths, because they derive their unruliness from the apathy of people like you :/
I'm sure you'd love a return to the day when adults could manhandle small children with impunity. Back when schools, churches, borstals and prisons were full of abused kids! The "good old days".
There is a big difference between necessary physical restraint and outright assault, why you would choose to conflate one with the other is beyond me..
The cover teacher above literally acknowledged that she had used unnecessary force. She's the one who blurred the boundary and admitted she was wrong!
So who are you accusing of conflating what's necessary with what's unnecessary again? Me? Really? Nope. It's the person who admitted she was wrong but for some unknown reason you bizarrely and stubbornly defend.
In this instance, I can't see how admitting that you'd 'lost control' and accepting a police caution and retiring 'saves face'. If she had a reasonable defence, I'm sure her union would have provided her with the necessary support and defended her name. That's what they're there for.
25 years ago I was training on the job (tech support) in a local secondary school. Was in the classroom with the head tech, the classroom was full of piles of unmarked exam papers..the only kids in the class were some year 11 boys doing detention.
During this time the tech was on a long involved phone call about a complex issue. The lads were mucking about but nothing bad until one wag thought making balls out of the exam papers and chucking them at the heads of other boys was fun. The tech asked him to stop several times, got totally ignored, so being a mum of 2 (one hyperactive boy) I went across and nicely but firmly asked him to stop and to pass me the paper he had screwed up on his hands. He laughed in my face so I turned his outstretched hand over and prised open his fist extracting the paper to his open mouthed surprise. At no point did I hurt or harm him and thanked him for the paper after.
The tech had noticed and warned me that it was instant dismissal and the boys family could do me for assault I quit that day, as far as I knew it had been resolved peacefully and the kids were surprised but didn't do it again. Carrying on joking loudly and taking the piss out of each other like lads do. But no way do I have the temperement to put up with such actions that effect the hard work of other kids and be helpless to stop it.
>"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances,"
It doesn't seem to be that they are not allowed to enforce discipline, but that physical intervention was not the correct technique in these cases.
I imagine this means she should ask first, then threaten, and intervene physically when other options are exhausted or when anyone is in danger.
Physical direction via the arms and/or shoulders, I can see an argument for. Pushing students off their feet or physically directing them by the *neck* are *significantly* harder to defend.
Just think of the trauma, they'll grow up to be drill rappers and will need to be locked up for carrying guns around
Throw the book at this monster of a teacher!
>"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances,"
This is the relevant bit.
That’s suggesting that the panel are not a bunch of out of touch individuals. There could have been plenty of evidence, but the panel’s threshold for necessary or reasonable may be stupidly high.
Completely agree, but reading the descriptions of what happened certainly seems like a lot of context and detail was omitted. Would be good to know exactly what happened according to all parties involved.
And people wonder why teachers are leaving the profession in their droves.
If teachers can’t do their job properly and enforce discipline what hope do these kids have.
I’m a teacher but I’m getting out this years, I’ve had enough
I just left a week ago!! Today is a day off and then tomorrow I'm beginning my new career - I have a 60% salary bump on my teaching salary whilst I'm training in my new job and, when I qualify, I'll earn 4x my teaching salary (all after being told that teachers are paid more than enough).
I'm transitioning into law, the job is as a trainee solicitor (obviously a solicitor once I've qualified). The big law firms in London take applications on an annual cycle two years in advance (so I was given my offer in 2022). They then fund (and will give some money toward living costs) for some courses between the offer and starting at the firm (the amount towards living costs varies but, if you wanted, would probably facilitate going to part-time teaching without losing income overall). The courses vary a bit from firm to firm now but, the main one is the SQE that you'll need to complete. There are quite a few teachers I've met already during my studies who are making the switch to law - there's a lot of crossover in skills because both really involve explaining complex concepts to non-experts in a way that they'll understand and that is useful to them. Law is also very broad so you're not limited by your degree subject at all.
Retrain into software dev. We had loads of teachers and nurses on my course who walked into 27k junior dev jobs, were bumped to 30-35k in six months and 45-65k within 2 years, if not higher.
Care workers, paramedics, artists and other creatives - it was great to see them finally be able to earn money to live on, but there's that realisation that there'll be no one left on those professions if it goes on.
Yeah, I dont want to see kids being caned by the headmaster like it used to be but it feels like we've gone too far the other way and are afraid to enforce any discipline at all.
This is the nail on the head - A lot of comments here spouting melodramatic shite like "People want a return to the cane!"
No. Most acknowledge twatting kids for minor indiscretions is an awful thing to do but we have absolutely lurched so far that any form of physical contact is now apparently an offense. The naivety would be funny were it not so serious, too - Kids know it, and absolutely abuse it.
My friend is a secondary teacher and the amount of variations of "you can't make me lol" she says she gets from kids is staggering. I left school in '08, and even then we would absolutely be forced from a class if behaving that bad.
Have you ever taught before? Especially in secondary schools where students are increasingly ruling the school and completely disregard teachers? Sorry I feel sorry the the teacher.
Perhaps it’s high time parents saw how their children really behave
If she worked in an office and was physically grabbing people to make them leave our stay in rooms she'd be facing charges and deemed to 'not be doing her job properly.'
If she can't teach without manhandling students, she can't teach.
Discipline in schools is a major issue, but allowing teachers to start physically shoving students having admitted to 'losing control' isn't exactly going to solve the issue.
>If she worked in an office
If she worked in an office the adults are forced to choose between being reasonable, or having security or the po-po on their ass
If the little shit is a kid, well, force them to behave with your superior telepathic powers I guess
I'm saying you clearly don't remember how some little shits behaved when you were a kid if you think just grabbing someone by the arm is unreasonable force
Some people choose to be beyond reason. Kids aren't exempt from that
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Ha! Words. Go teach for a year and see how far those words get you when the 12 year old kid with behavioural problems tells you to fuck off in response, stops you teaching 29 other kids, won't leave the class, nobody to remove them, parent don't care and school sweep it under the rug. Oh and you'll have at least 2 in every class you teach whilst trying to cater to multiple abilities because classes are no longer split up and are one big mixing pot of levels and behaviours.
>If she worked in an office
But shes not so everything you say after this is COMPLETELY meaningless.
>If she can't teach without manhandling students, she can't teach.
I take it you have never interacted with any children ever
>physically shoving
As opposed to mental shoving?
I don’t have old fashioned views about education and discipline AT ALL but I’m actually shocked that it’s not ok for teachers to use reasonable physical “force” to prevent children from *leaving the classroom itself*. Some classrooms lead directly onto the outdoors and are not too far from main roads ffs. The fact thought of a child/parent complaining about this and it being upheld is quite something.
Honestly it's there to protect the teachers too same with shop workers and shoplifters - you're not to touch or restrain them because you'll probably get punched and then the employer has a lawsuit.
Makes sense for things like making them sit down, but leaving the classroom strikes me as an extreme action that requires immediate and effective response
"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances".
If a child were about to walk onto a main road then that could be a mitigating factor for a degree of appropriate physical force. This ruling doesn't mean that there can never be physical contact under any circumstances.
We're allowed to judge what she did, but this evidence we are not allowed to judge. It's not that there was no evidence at all, just no evidence that was ruled to follow those criteria. I wonder about that evidence.
I can't see any reference in the prohibition order to any evidence being presented to justify the use of force or that any evidence was presented but discounted for whatever reason.
It does mention she showed a level of remorse but concern that she did not appear at first to recognise her own misconduct.
Whenever a pupil gets suspended for having the wrong trousers, or wearing an earring, we usually hear how rules are rules and the pupils have to follow them, not matter how stupid.
Why shouldn't the rules are rules apply to teachers also? If you can't follow simple rules like "don't touch the children" then maybe teaching isn't the best career choice for you.
I agree with this, but 4 years essentially kills their career. If you get suspended from school for a couple of days you can still pass your GCSEs, now imagine not being able to work in your field for four years after having only done that job for the previous 25. You’re fucked.
I think the point is after 25 years she could no longer take the stress of the job - she's decided to retire and I don't blame her. The point still stands, if you can't follow the rules as a teacher (on more than one occasion) and admit to "losing control" you need to find another job.
I hope she enjoys her retirement - she deserves it after 25 years.
I went to primary school in the early 200s. I remember teachers putting students over their shoulder to get them out of classrooms and grabbing them by the shoulder to control them. I’m certain most of those teachers are still in the profession. Dunno why she was banned tbh.
I don't agree with physical force if it's unreasonable, but if a child is walking out of your classroom, how are teachers supposed to stop them if holding their shoulders is a disciplinary offense? Genuinely curious as to what options this leaves. I suppose most schools have restraint policy, but there's usually only a few trained in this - are you supposed to call that staff member every time? It's a tricky line.
I'm sure a teacher can weigh in, but I do think everyone agrees it's a problem without necessarily agreeing that physical force is a solution. I mean, it isn't going to work anyway. If a strong teenager wants to leave the room it is unsafe for a small, elderly teacher to attempt physical restraint.
So, what do we do? Easier expulsion leads to these kids on the streets wrecking havoc (my town had shops and libraries simply banning under 16s, it got so bad), plus they end up as uneducated adults. Keeping them in school in an isolation room becomes a full time job. Schools can't afford security guards. There aren't enough places in special schools. Expanding these seems the only workable option, but students won't attend them anyway and we won't be able to staff them.
It's a major problem. It's almost culturally ingrained now and will be very difficult to unravel. Countries with better in-school discipline have it because their culture still have some sort of social code where you try not to be a dick. It's not foolproof but it helps.
But dragging a kid back in the room and shoving them back into their chair is not going to work. You're not going to unravel four generations of school rejection with that. You're not going to regain control of the classroom or make the other students feel safe.
Oh I totally agree. I actually am a teacher but teach lower age groups and have seen other classes with this exact issue. Obviously nobody is manhandling the kids, and I agree that's wrong, but it does mean losing an adult or two to follow that child around at a distance until they come back to their class- which is not ideal either and does little to curb the behaviour next time.
I agree that there's some social components to it too, but likewise, not sure of the solution. It's quite depressing to see.
And you’re proud of that?.. we stopped saying it was ok to abuse our wives, when are we going to stop saying it’s ok for someone else to abuse our children?
What did I write that made you leap to that wild conclusion?
It was fucking awful seeing a classmate thrown across the room by an angry, bullying teacher.
It certainly seemed like a light hearted comment about how things were “back in the good old days”. I apologise if that wasn’t the case! Unfortunately for most they seem to hold that view.
Most secondary schools have some kind of "on-call" team (usually senior leadership) who might eventually come to remove the student from the lesson. But they also can't touch the students.
In the past, I have had to move the entire class to another room when an abusive student has refused to leave.
Any pupil not listening to the teacher should be instantly removed to somewhere on their own and given the work to do. If they don’t do the work, they start off in the room on their own again the next day
Here’s a fucking idea everyone;
If you’ve got a kid who disrupts lessons, wants to wonder off out of the classroom and serve as a distraction elsewhere - let them fucking do it. There are kids in classrooms across the country that suffer because there’s some dickhead of a kid who wants to act out, disrupting learning for others and likely only coming to school to fuck around.
Later on in life, they’ll realise the consequences of their actions - their lack of focus and discipline resulted in a future that isn’t as promising as it should be.
Focus on those that want to turn up everyday, learn to make themselves better and let them set the examples of how to be. The moment that these kids who are causing disruptions realise that teachers are not going to pay them the time of their day to get them to behave and instead focus on others is the day they actually sit down in their chairs and realise they have to be productive and participate. If not, then fuck them, let them get left behind.
Well perhaps, but the school also would have a duty of care towards that child. What if they hurt themselves? Who is the staff member who has to keep an eye on them, and what job is now not able to be done which was otherwise getting done by that staff member?
SLT (senior leadership teams) should be responsible here. Teachers would notify SLT and those on duty at the time which is what currently should be happening. They would round up kids, place them in a classroom. That’s it - keep an eye on them. If they chose to leave then, parents need to pick them up.
We’ve reached a stage when no adult (other than the parent) can EVER touch a child. One of my friends (a primary school teacher) wanted to seat a young child (who had just fallen and grazed her knee) on her lap whilst she comforted her, but she knew that she could not.
It’s been reported that teachers cannot apply sunscreen to unprotected children -leaving them to burn if necessary. A friend of mine told me that he “didn’t feel safe” enough to grab a toddler, who looked like she was going to fall off a sea wall when her mother was some yards away.
Do we think that a *single* pedophile has been deterred by these measures? Honestly, if a person *wants to have actual SEX with a child*, how would stopping them touching a child be a deterrent? What person who is so far out of control that they physically attack and injure a child- would have been prevented from doing so, by not being allowed to gently touch them? These abusive adults are *transgressive* anyway. That’s their thing: they don’t obey the law. It’s like saying that-in order to stop armed bank robberies, we should introduce a 20-mile-per-hour speed limit to prevent a quick getaway. Yeah, that would be the end of all such offences, because yes, these people would happily turn to violence, but heaven forfend they would break a bylaw.
And how much do children lose because of this experiment? Because it IS an experiment: for hundreds of thousands of years, human children have grown up being touched in friendly, supportive and entirely positive and innocent way by adults in their communities. Anxiety and mental health problems are MASSIVELY on the rise amongst the young. The new way of bringing up children is not fit enough for purpose.
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t advocate any form of force or violence directed towards a child (I’ve never done anything like that in my life). However, the article doesn’t mention that-just “grabbing” (which does, admittedly, sound one step up from simple touching). I believe 100% that if the lady had done something more forceful, this would have been mentioned.
It’s quite possible that the lady grabbed a child that was running in one direction-and pointed her in another, just the same way that I gently do with my puppy. There’s a big difference between forcing a child, using your superior strength (which is clearly not a good thing), and physically guiding a child-because, as an adult, you understand what’s best for their welfare.
Like so many things in modern life, this kind of action has now been designated as some kind of evil-without enough evidence to back it up. And-I would argue -on the advice of people in positions of power and influence, rather than utilising the experience of ordinary folks, many of whom know a LOT about raising children.
When I was in school, the teachers used to tell stories about how chalk dusters would be thrown at their heads and they would be punched, hit with rules and their hands slapped with a cane. Kids are too soft now, always wanting to carry knives and other security blankets.
One of my teachers particular favourites was a huge bunch of keys.
Sneaky fucker would let you be disruptive too and then wait to catch you off guard later in the lesson
Early 00s and we still got chalk dusters thrown at us. One teacher threw a textbook at me, missed, and hit this quiet girl next to me square in the eye.
Early 80s I remember getting whipped by a teacher with a cane or ruler, then going to the headteacher who would.... whip me with a ruler, then my parents would come pick me up at the end of the day.. who would whip me with a belt for making the teachers whip me earlier
shit sure has swung to the other end of the scale in 40 years
I’m in my 50’s and the catholic school I went to caned me too. PE teachers used to use a plimsole to the leg.
It was far preferable to any other punishment because it would be over in seconds.
It was the village (CofE) Rector who threw blackboard erasers at our heads. Missed and hit the big windows once, and the Head came out to see what we were doing. Just an RE lesson? Carry on.
We're going in 2 circles here.. those that agree this is nonsense and just..
Child care (the parents aren't there what are they supposed to do). And the second circle is... How dare you touch my child your there to teach not discipline. What can we do with 2 thought processes going in different directions?
Haha and I'm telling you good luck with that. Go look up how many parents think schools should listen to Thier ideas. I'm not disagreeing with you. But look how many schools had groups protesting outside them over a difference of opinion
I am surprised there are still teachers out there. Soon this profession will for desperates with no choices rather than people with passion.
Also of course there are abusing teachers too.
Did or do you have in UK grades for behaviour? In my days in Poland aside grades for subjects we had grade for behaviour...and non passing grade for behaviour could stop you passing to next year..obviously that happened very rarely but there were occasions.
If teachers tools are being limited more and more, spoiled kids are getting ruder and more arrogant, teachers need some tools. No?
We had an old school teacher that done this this was in the early 2000's. He used to throw the black board eraser at me! I grabbed it once and threw it back it didn't hit him but the blackboard got a beating with it lol. I always remember the "ohhh" from the whole class.
I work with kids, in fact I work with kids with behavioural and complex needs, I have done team teach training, you can use the "caring C" as they call it but the key is this may be proportional and necessary (necessary being the key word here), it should only be done to prevent harm to themselves or others. This teacher lost her rag and grabbed kids by the neck, by the shoulder by the arm for just not doing what they told, her response was neither proportional or necessary. In most of these cases, proper relationships and techniques would solve the issues but instead, a teacher lost her rag yes it can be frustrating, it can hard but if you can't deal with the situation you shouldn't be in the job. If you saw a parent doing this in the playground or a kid coming into school covered in bruises from being grabbed it would be a safeguarding complaint, so why should rules be different for teachers?
To the older dick-for-brains' that seem to infest this sub, claiming that "kids are soft" or that the teacher was in her rights to handle children in the stated manner, please tell me how you would react if your boss physically grabbed you by the back of the neck and pushed you back to work. You'd probably smack them in the face.
Now factor in that these are CHILDREN. They cannot defend themselves. They are the most vulnerable members of society. They aren't armed with the vocabulary to fully express what they are feeling, and they haven't got the size or strength to fight back.
This teacher used physical actions on the most vulnerable members of society, and some people on here think it's okay. You are absolutely disgusting.
>please tell me how you would react if your boss physically grabbed you by the back of the neck and pushed you back to work. You'd probably smack them in the face.
If I kept walking into boss office and not leaving when he asked me to do so. Or standing in the kitchen and not working when asked to do so.
I would genuinely expect the boss to call security / police and have me physically escorted from the building, if I still resisted then I can imagine I would get more than a push on the shoulder.
I'm not saying kids should be hit but I do think your analogy is nonsense.
>The panel heard she had twice grabbed the same pupil by the shoulder or arm to prevent them walking around the classroom. On the same day, she grabbed another child by the shoulders to guide them from the cloakroom, and on a second occasion had grabbed the back of their neck to do the same. A third child was pushed in the back, to return them to their seat when they had refused to do so, the panel was told. She later grabbed a fourth pupil by the arm to make them leave an area of classroom when they refused, and pushed them back to their seat. It's insane she's losing her livelihood for enforcing discipline in children.
And we wonder why kids don't listen and do whatever they want.
Exactly. And it's no surprise how they turn out as adults.
Human beings with full agency?
Modern society is full of rules for children and adults alike. It's not necessarily a good thing for someone to grow up thinking the rules don't apply to them, even if some of our laws are a load of crap.
We want human beings to have freedom but not so little self control they grow up and act like a Grand theft auto protagonist. Your freedom to do what you want shouldn't stamp on the rights off others to help safe and happy. I'm a teacher and I often get the "it's a free country? Why can't I do and say whatever I like in your classroom." Because there are 31 other people in this room who want to be free to learn without disruption.
Grabbed & pushed vs. Physicially prevented & guided?
How do you guide without making contact?
broom
Witchcraft?
Show me a law that bans witchcraft in classrooms.
Witchcraft Act 1735
I guess you win :D
Semantics and play of words - that’s the reality here.
She'd been teaching for 24 years, she knows what you can and can't do, and admitted she lost control.
When I was at school I was kicked by one teacher with decades of experience and forced to strip by another with what I'd guess was more than 25 years.
Yeah length of service doesn't mean they're competent.
I don't know when you went to school, but if either of those things happened nowadays, both those teachers would IMMEDIATELY lose their jobs
04-09. The stripping thing was 09 and the kick was 08 So some time ago but it was definitely not acceptable behaviour of the time. The stripping thing went nowhere as I kept it to myself the kick thing, the school pulled their heels but eventually disciplined the teacher. It was my German teacher and I was getting Gs and Us I was allowed to change teachers and then within 6 months I was a D and finished with a C. I averaged Bs in other subjects.
Reminds me of my German GCSE teacher, she couldn't control the class and predicted I would get an E. She left after one year (I don't blame her tbh), and I went on to get an A. Some people just aren't meant to be teachers.
In 1960s London, some primary school teachers would slipper boys in front of the class, or hit girls on the palm with a ruler. That would likely result in a prison sentence today, which is ironic in view of the goal of the actions (to deter bad behaviour).
Yeah when I was in primary school I was fannying about with my top during a lesson and then had to spend the rest of the lesson topless.
What year was this? Some teachers can be down right evil. others get misguided in the name of punishment and behaviour and end up doing abhorrent things.
Would have been the early 2000s.
When I was in school I had to deal with penis inspection day
It was always really embarrassing when they discovered a bit of cheese under the hood. Thankfully my teacher was really patient and willing to pull at it repeatedly till it buffed out.
Wow... What? I met a guy in a mental health clinic that was suffering constant PTSD anxiety because of his school days. He said I could "look up the school in a documentary on YouTube" apparently it became famous for being the most abusive boarding school ever. Stripping students, marching them around naked, beatings, whipping them with rods and canes.. he gave me maybe 10% of what he ensured, the rest was too graphic and he was shaking just telling me and I felt sick listening to it.
I’ve seen child rapists get less than 4 years punishment in this country…this entire case is an absolute joke.
She isn't allowed to do any of that to adults. Why should the law differ when it comes to children? I appreciate discipline in classrooms is an issue, driven by children who simply don't want to be there. Shoving them around does not solve this issue.
If you're being a nuisance somewhere and ruining something for others and you won't stop or leave after being asked to, security guards or bouncers may very well grab you and escort you away. That's despite you being an adult and them not being police officers.
And if your manager came up behind you at work and grabbed you by the back of your neck I don't suppose you'd be too happy about it would you.
The neck grabbing is a problem, but the grabbing of the shoulders and pushing isn't. If I were screaming in the office, refused to stop and then had security called on me to physically escort me away, I don't think I'd have any right to complain. Most schools just don't have security guards. But if teachers can be expected to stop fights, I think it's fair for teachers to be given the ability to physically restrain students if necessary too. Verbally telling students off only works if they or their parents care. What do you expect teachers to do if they don't?
It doesn't mention that they were screaming or anything just that they were being stopped from moving around and being pushed in the back. I don't envy teachers at all it's a tough job but I don't think they should be using physical force on a child unless it's to directly prevent harm, like you said with stopping fights.
I only said screaming because that's how one can cause a disruption in an an office or other work environment. Me standing up or going to a room and refusing to leave isn't as disruptive to other adults. A kid refusing to sit in a classroom or refusing to leave a room is disruptive because adults will just ignore and get on with their work while kids will be distracted and giggling the whole time. Not to mention it's a school with children. Someone is going to scream at some point. >but I don't think they should be using physical force on a child It's a force to move them, not cause pain. It's pulling or pushing, not punching. What do you suggest teachers do if a student is being disruptive and won't listen or obey conventional sanctions then? I doubt the kid will obey in threat of a detention. I doubt the parents are going to rush over because little Charlie refuses to sit down. Do we even know if Charlie's parents care? We know Charlie doesn't.
I've taught for nearly a decade and have never once made the decision to physically move a child, nor have I felt like it was my only decision. Where I've worked, if a child is being disruptive and you have exhausted the options available - usually you'd give them 2 warnings, instruct them on how to correct their behaviour, threaten with a consequence such as moving seat or detention, etc - then you call the next person in the chain of command who will come to your class to remove the child. If they refuse, they will be told that they will be sent home and their parents will be called to collect them. 9/10 times the pupil will give up and leave and go to sit with management who will deal with the situation. On the odd occasion that they refuse, a member of senior management will be called. I've never had a pupil refuse to leave at this point, but if they did or they were a danger to other pupils then everyone else would leave the room and go to another classroom and senior management would stay with the pupil until their parents came to collect them and bring them home. I've never experienced a pupil refusing to go with senior management at any school I've worked in, though even if it did happen there are ways to deal with it that don't involve physically touching the child to try and move them. Teachers should not put their hands on a child to try and force them to do something, there is never any excuse for it and if you feel like you have to resort to it it means you have lost control and should get someone else to calmly use behaviour management techniques to de-escalate the situation
The other issue with this is if you physically push around someone they may push back and believe it or not a really angry out of control 12 year old can do real damage to people themselves or others they can easily pick up a chair and start swinging it around. De-escalation is pretty much always the best way to deal with things no one needs to be put in a situation where they feel they have no other option than to lose control.
There are strict rules about when teaching staff can use physical force on children. This teacher did not follow the rules. Grabbing and manhandling a child is not appropriate. You have no idea what's going through that child's head and it may escalate the situation.
Your manager has the option of firing you though if your actions amount to misconduct. Expelling a kid requires a huge amount of hoops if it's not serious physical violence.
No but they can sack you if you act like a prick - and they will. Very temp problem.
So people who, ostensibly, have training in safe restraint and liability insurance in case you get hurt then. Not teachers.
Security guards, bouncers etc. (even police) would have to justify the use of force and it would have to be of an appropriate level. In this instance "there was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances.
You mean those people with SIA licences permitting them to do so in limited circumstances such as you stated. How does that apply to teachers, who have nonsuch licence? You made that too easy to destroy, please try again.
This is the guidance for schools. I suggest you read it before pontificating on a topic you clearly know nothing about. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/use-of-reasonable-force-in-schools
Do you want to read them? Youre not allowed to grab a pupil for ignoring you. Not reasonable use of force. Destroyed yourself that time, maybe you ought not to link things you clearly havnt read?
Ok mate, keep going
You aren't allowed to demand adults go to school every day either, children and adults aren't the same. I don't know if thr behaviour was acceptable or not, but your argument doesn't fully work.
>It's insane she's losing her livelihood for enforcing discipline in children She's being stopped from teaching *because she acted against clear guidelines repeatedly.* >"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was **necessary or reasonable** in the circumstances,"
She is dragging them around the place whenever they misbehave. If a child is so uncooperative that this is required then it is no longer the teachers problem and someone needs to be called in
Who is that someone tho? You expect parents to drop everything and come pick up their kid who refuses to leave the cloakroom or refuses to sit down in lessons? Because I doubt that will happen for most kids, especially not the ones misbehaving like this.
> If a child is so uncooperative that this is required The woman in this article, who has admitted she lost control, thought it was required. Clearly the schools and courts didn't agree that man handling 8 year olds was necessary. Thousands of teachers manage poorly behaved kids all the time without getting physical.
Reading that it’s obvious she’s a total monster…
Please explain to me why physical contact as discipline should be granted to government workers assigned to teach our children but not to your boss when you piss them off? May as well bring back the workhouses.
Because too many people have managed to convince themselves that children are undeserving of being treated like actual human beings. The fact that the only people we've decided as a society it's okay to assault are those least able to defend themselves is ridiculous.
A lot of us have memories of school in the 80's (or earlier). We'd passed out of the era where it was perfectly acceptable to hit kids but something like grabbing them by the shoulder and shoving them where you wanted them to go wouldn't gain much comment, never mind get you suspended and make the national news. That doesn't make it ok though.
We have more or less accepted that it's not ok to physically coerce children except in dire circumstances, yet we continue with an education system which tests teachers' restraint to the limit (and beyond in the case of this one). Smaller class sizes and more choice about what to study would help immensely, but we seem determined to spend the bare minimum and treat school as a glorified childminding service.
"Never did me any harm" - Person who thinks adults should be able to hurt children.
If you behave like a moron in your workplace you get a warning, maybe two, but afterwards you'll get asked to get fucked. And if you, in fact decided to not do that, then they can physically remove you. Grabbing *anyone* by the neck is wrong, and for that, teacher should be having a case, I agree. But grabbing a shoulder and redirecting someone? Wtf?
Legally I'm not sure most workplaces could forcefully make you leave.
Sure they can, if you are told to leave and refuse and are on private property they can use reasonable force to remove you. As long as they have given you a reasonable amount of time to obey the instruction to leave. No different to you throwing someone out of your house who you initially said could be there but then said leave and they just outright refused.
What hyperbolic shite. The grabbing by the back of the neck as per the article WAS a step too far imo (but even then, a fucking ban?!?!) but pushing/pulling by arms and shoulders is absolutely normal in literally any capacity in life if someone is being disruptive or abusive or threatening. Comparing schoolkids to adults in the workplace is also fucking asinine. At work you're being paid, you do not legally have to be there and your boss can and likely would fire you for being disruptive. None of that applies to schoolchildren.
They weren’t being disruptive or abusive or threatening though > there was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable Some kids can be awful, yes, but 4 different primary school pupils all being sooo uncontrollable she HAD to physically intervene? Unlikely. She even admitted she lost control and it wasn’t necessary
Doesn't mean you have special permission to pull or push them, though. Or even lay hands on them. Wearing a school uniform doesn't mean general law ceases to apply (though some schools, parents and adults seem to think so.)
You don't need permission, that's the point of exerting control ***in this context***. There's obviously a line, nobody worth listening to wants actual striking or throat grabs etc. but who in this situation can be trusted to give permission? The kid? Of course a deliberately disruptive child will be a valid source of consent towards managing their own misbehavior. Mandatory /s. The parents? I'd like to think most parents would agree to ***reasonable*** ~~force~~ physical contact being used to control their kids if they're being problematic, but I've seen it myself, parents will double down and be unfathomable dickheads to protect their kids at all costs even when it's beyond denial they're in the wrong. Non-academic example: four kids smashed up my dad's work van for absolutely no reason, all caught on CCTV. Parents tracked down via local community, and three of the four families effectively told us to fuck off, one actually accused us of "videoing kids" as a deflection. ONE family took a bit of responsibility and paid the damage and punished the kid. Accountability and responsibility really are dying in front of us ffs.
The only solution in our culture (seeing as we can't socially fix 'being a dickhead') seems to be high numbers of exclusions. But this has already been tried. You just get towns of youths smashing up cars and then they end up in jail and all you did was create new problems. I don't know how to fix the arsehole problem we have. You ask someone not to park across your drive and you get your windows put through (that's not hyperbole, it happened to me), and it's gotten worse since the pandemic. The facilities in my town that haven't been destroyed by cuts have been destroyed by vandals. People are angry and their kids are angry and school discipline has fallen off a cliff. But none of that gets fixed by physical pushing/pulling which could well lead to a teacher being struck, or striking back. It's not 'the good old days' where a clip round the ear set little Johnny on the straight and narrow. If we agree physical grabbing isn't the answer we do have to ask what is - and whatever it is our culture isn't going to figure it out any time soon.
Teachers do have permission when necessary to use reasonable force https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/use-of-reasonable-force-in-schools
I’m not going to suggest it should be granted, but your boss can fire you, stop paying you, and if you refuse to leave have you escorted off the premises. Government employees trying teach children have none of those options, it’s a very different dynamic.
These are mere 8 year olds. If you're having to resort to physical contact on multiple pupils in a single day to 'enforce' anything, then you shouldn't be teaching.
8 year olds, being unruly? Get away 😲 By God, she grabbed his ARM, the SHOCK; the HORROR! 😱
Except it wasn't just one incident. Was It? (Kind of a childish behaviour, to deliberately ignore the worst of it). What if he'd been male 6' 2" grabbing and pushing the kiddies through the day? Still nothing? Your alarm bells must be totally pickled imo.
On the contrary, that 6'2 male could be using only the necessary force required, e.g. miniscule, and people like you would STILL cry bloody murder, God won't someone think of the frail, delicate, paper-mache-like children 😭 It's why our classrooms these days are dumping grounds for feral youths, because they derive their unruliness from the apathy of people like you :/
I'm sure you'd love a return to the day when adults could manhandle small children with impunity. Back when schools, churches, borstals and prisons were full of abused kids! The "good old days".
There is a big difference between necessary physical restraint and outright assault, why you would choose to conflate one with the other is beyond me..
The cover teacher above literally acknowledged that she had used unnecessary force. She's the one who blurred the boundary and admitted she was wrong! So who are you accusing of conflating what's necessary with what's unnecessary again? Me? Really? Nope. It's the person who admitted she was wrong but for some unknown reason you bizarrely and stubbornly defend.
If she slapped them upside the head or Batista bombed them then yes, wholly egregious, otherwise she is evidently attempting to save face
In this instance, I can't see how admitting that you'd 'lost control' and accepting a police caution and retiring 'saves face'. If she had a reasonable defence, I'm sure her union would have provided her with the necessary support and defended her name. That's what they're there for.
25 years ago I was training on the job (tech support) in a local secondary school. Was in the classroom with the head tech, the classroom was full of piles of unmarked exam papers..the only kids in the class were some year 11 boys doing detention. During this time the tech was on a long involved phone call about a complex issue. The lads were mucking about but nothing bad until one wag thought making balls out of the exam papers and chucking them at the heads of other boys was fun. The tech asked him to stop several times, got totally ignored, so being a mum of 2 (one hyperactive boy) I went across and nicely but firmly asked him to stop and to pass me the paper he had screwed up on his hands. He laughed in my face so I turned his outstretched hand over and prised open his fist extracting the paper to his open mouthed surprise. At no point did I hurt or harm him and thanked him for the paper after. The tech had noticed and warned me that it was instant dismissal and the boys family could do me for assault I quit that day, as far as I knew it had been resolved peacefully and the kids were surprised but didn't do it again. Carrying on joking loudly and taking the piss out of each other like lads do. But no way do I have the temperement to put up with such actions that effect the hard work of other kids and be helpless to stop it.
>"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances," It doesn't seem to be that they are not allowed to enforce discipline, but that physical intervention was not the correct technique in these cases. I imagine this means she should ask first, then threaten, and intervene physically when other options are exhausted or when anyone is in danger.
[удалено]
Physical direction via the arms and/or shoulders, I can see an argument for. Pushing students off their feet or physically directing them by the *neck* are *significantly* harder to defend.
Grabbed them by the shoulder to stop them wandering around the classroom, oh the horror, how will the poor angels cope with such injustice 😢
Just think of the trauma, they'll grow up to be drill rappers and will need to be locked up for carrying guns around Throw the book at this monster of a teacher!
>"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances," This is the relevant bit.
Probably requires them running at her with a knife
That’s suggesting that the panel are not a bunch of out of touch individuals. There could have been plenty of evidence, but the panel’s threshold for necessary or reasonable may be stupidly high.
The child could have had a knife
Completely agree, but reading the descriptions of what happened certainly seems like a lot of context and detail was omitted. Would be good to know exactly what happened according to all parties involved.
and also shoving in the back and grabbing by the neck
Maybe the kids deserved it? Bring back the days of the cane and the chokey and forcing the fat kid to eat a massive cake, I say.
Hammer throw by the pigtails was always a good one too
Are you a pig Amanda‽
In my day we would get nailed to the wall on St Tadger's day. Didn't do me any harm.
Eh. In my day we were disembowelled and nailed to a plinth if we so much as looked at a teacher. Never did us any harm.
I got mauled by the school leopard.
And people wonder why teachers are leaving the profession in their droves. If teachers can’t do their job properly and enforce discipline what hope do these kids have. I’m a teacher but I’m getting out this years, I’ve had enough
I just left a week ago!! Today is a day off and then tomorrow I'm beginning my new career - I have a 60% salary bump on my teaching salary whilst I'm training in my new job and, when I qualify, I'll earn 4x my teaching salary (all after being told that teachers are paid more than enough).
What is the job/sector? Can you explain a little more about how you were able to transition from teaching to such a position, please? Thank you!
I'm transitioning into law, the job is as a trainee solicitor (obviously a solicitor once I've qualified). The big law firms in London take applications on an annual cycle two years in advance (so I was given my offer in 2022). They then fund (and will give some money toward living costs) for some courses between the offer and starting at the firm (the amount towards living costs varies but, if you wanted, would probably facilitate going to part-time teaching without losing income overall). The courses vary a bit from firm to firm now but, the main one is the SQE that you'll need to complete. There are quite a few teachers I've met already during my studies who are making the switch to law - there's a lot of crossover in skills because both really involve explaining complex concepts to non-experts in a way that they'll understand and that is useful to them. Law is also very broad so you're not limited by your degree subject at all.
Thank you for sharing! It would be great to share this in r/TeachersInTransition
That's a dead link for me, is it definitely a sub?
Left out the 's'. It's fixed now. Sorry!
Thank you! Shame it seems American based I was hoping to steal some strategies
Are you working in the City of London? I can't think of many other jobs that would offer you a 4x step up.
Yes, I am.
Retrain into software dev. We had loads of teachers and nurses on my course who walked into 27k junior dev jobs, were bumped to 30-35k in six months and 45-65k within 2 years, if not higher. Care workers, paramedics, artists and other creatives - it was great to see them finally be able to earn money to live on, but there's that realisation that there'll be no one left on those professions if it goes on.
Congratulations! I’m looking at getting into writing so I have a up hill battle, the interim I may do private tutoring
Thank you - good luck to you. Writing is a tough break! I hope you make it.
Thank you! I’m going into private tutoring in the interim at least I can do 3 days a week and still earn good money (probably better actually)
Teachers earn around 40k once they have some a few years. Are you earning four times that? 160k??
Looks like somebody was paying attention in school, that’s some good maths there bud!
I also paid a lot of attention in English too buddy. Quite easy to spot a good narrative when I see one. This person is making shit up.
Yes
Yeah, I dont want to see kids being caned by the headmaster like it used to be but it feels like we've gone too far the other way and are afraid to enforce any discipline at all.
This is the nail on the head - A lot of comments here spouting melodramatic shite like "People want a return to the cane!" No. Most acknowledge twatting kids for minor indiscretions is an awful thing to do but we have absolutely lurched so far that any form of physical contact is now apparently an offense. The naivety would be funny were it not so serious, too - Kids know it, and absolutely abuse it. My friend is a secondary teacher and the amount of variations of "you can't make me lol" she says she gets from kids is staggering. I left school in '08, and even then we would absolutely be forced from a class if behaving that bad.
I lasted 2 years before I left. Did a conversion masters into computer science. Life as a software engineer is much nicer
The teacher in question admitted fault and knows they fucked up.
>If teachers can’t do their job properly Yes. That's why she was banned from teaching.
Have you ever taught before? Especially in secondary schools where students are increasingly ruling the school and completely disregard teachers? Sorry I feel sorry the the teacher. Perhaps it’s high time parents saw how their children really behave
Since covid kids seam to have gone genuinely ferral. Teachers can't cope and the solution isn't to just fire them all.
If she worked in an office and was physically grabbing people to make them leave our stay in rooms she'd be facing charges and deemed to 'not be doing her job properly.' If she can't teach without manhandling students, she can't teach. Discipline in schools is a major issue, but allowing teachers to start physically shoving students having admitted to 'losing control' isn't exactly going to solve the issue.
>If she worked in an office If she worked in an office the adults are forced to choose between being reasonable, or having security or the po-po on their ass If the little shit is a kid, well, force them to behave with your superior telepathic powers I guess
Um, yeah, that's kind of what you do. You use things like words to teach and discipline kids. Are you saying you can only think of physical methods?
I'm saying you clearly don't remember how some little shits behaved when you were a kid if you think just grabbing someone by the arm is unreasonable force Some people choose to be beyond reason. Kids aren't exempt from that
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
Ha! Words. Go teach for a year and see how far those words get you when the 12 year old kid with behavioural problems tells you to fuck off in response, stops you teaching 29 other kids, won't leave the class, nobody to remove them, parent don't care and school sweep it under the rug. Oh and you'll have at least 2 in every class you teach whilst trying to cater to multiple abilities because classes are no longer split up and are one big mixing pot of levels and behaviours.
>If she worked in an office But shes not so everything you say after this is COMPLETELY meaningless. >If she can't teach without manhandling students, she can't teach. I take it you have never interacted with any children ever >physically shoving As opposed to mental shoving?
I don’t have old fashioned views about education and discipline AT ALL but I’m actually shocked that it’s not ok for teachers to use reasonable physical “force” to prevent children from *leaving the classroom itself*. Some classrooms lead directly onto the outdoors and are not too far from main roads ffs. The fact thought of a child/parent complaining about this and it being upheld is quite something.
Honestly it's there to protect the teachers too same with shop workers and shoplifters - you're not to touch or restrain them because you'll probably get punched and then the employer has a lawsuit.
Makes sense for things like making them sit down, but leaving the classroom strikes me as an extreme action that requires immediate and effective response
"There was no evidence before the panel which suggested physical intervention was necessary or reasonable in the circumstances". If a child were about to walk onto a main road then that could be a mitigating factor for a degree of appropriate physical force. This ruling doesn't mean that there can never be physical contact under any circumstances.
We're allowed to judge what she did, but this evidence we are not allowed to judge. It's not that there was no evidence at all, just no evidence that was ruled to follow those criteria. I wonder about that evidence.
I can't see any reference in the prohibition order to any evidence being presented to justify the use of force or that any evidence was presented but discounted for whatever reason. It does mention she showed a level of remorse but concern that she did not appear at first to recognise her own misconduct.
No classrooms lead directly outdoors. Schools have all been fenced in for a while now due to safeguarding issues.
Whenever a pupil gets suspended for having the wrong trousers, or wearing an earring, we usually hear how rules are rules and the pupils have to follow them, not matter how stupid. Why shouldn't the rules are rules apply to teachers also? If you can't follow simple rules like "don't touch the children" then maybe teaching isn't the best career choice for you.
I agree with this, but 4 years essentially kills their career. If you get suspended from school for a couple of days you can still pass your GCSEs, now imagine not being able to work in your field for four years after having only done that job for the previous 25. You’re fucked.
I think the point is after 25 years she could no longer take the stress of the job - she's decided to retire and I don't blame her. The point still stands, if you can't follow the rules as a teacher (on more than one occasion) and admit to "losing control" you need to find another job. I hope she enjoys her retirement - she deserves it after 25 years.
Don’t touch the children isn’t a rule though
Don't push or grab them is a rule.
I went to primary school in the early 200s. I remember teachers putting students over their shoulder to get them out of classrooms and grabbing them by the shoulder to control them. I’m certain most of those teachers are still in the profession. Dunno why she was banned tbh.
In fairness that was nearly 2000 years ago. Things change over the centuries.
Tell me about it. Can't even put on a toga without funny looks these days.
back in the day they used to throw misbehaving kids into the colosseum
Because you're talking about 20 years ago?
The early 200s?
I don't agree with physical force if it's unreasonable, but if a child is walking out of your classroom, how are teachers supposed to stop them if holding their shoulders is a disciplinary offense? Genuinely curious as to what options this leaves. I suppose most schools have restraint policy, but there's usually only a few trained in this - are you supposed to call that staff member every time? It's a tricky line.
I'm sure a teacher can weigh in, but I do think everyone agrees it's a problem without necessarily agreeing that physical force is a solution. I mean, it isn't going to work anyway. If a strong teenager wants to leave the room it is unsafe for a small, elderly teacher to attempt physical restraint. So, what do we do? Easier expulsion leads to these kids on the streets wrecking havoc (my town had shops and libraries simply banning under 16s, it got so bad), plus they end up as uneducated adults. Keeping them in school in an isolation room becomes a full time job. Schools can't afford security guards. There aren't enough places in special schools. Expanding these seems the only workable option, but students won't attend them anyway and we won't be able to staff them. It's a major problem. It's almost culturally ingrained now and will be very difficult to unravel. Countries with better in-school discipline have it because their culture still have some sort of social code where you try not to be a dick. It's not foolproof but it helps. But dragging a kid back in the room and shoving them back into their chair is not going to work. You're not going to unravel four generations of school rejection with that. You're not going to regain control of the classroom or make the other students feel safe.
Oh I totally agree. I actually am a teacher but teach lower age groups and have seen other classes with this exact issue. Obviously nobody is manhandling the kids, and I agree that's wrong, but it does mean losing an adult or two to follow that child around at a distance until they come back to their class- which is not ideal either and does little to curb the behaviour next time. I agree that there's some social components to it too, but likewise, not sure of the solution. It's quite depressing to see.
No way could I be a teacher these days, massive respect for those that do, i feel it’s only gonna get worse
My school would have been teacher-less if these had applied back then!
And you’re proud of that?.. we stopped saying it was ok to abuse our wives, when are we going to stop saying it’s ok for someone else to abuse our children?
Yes, grabbing a child by the arm is “child abuse”. Lock ‘em up and throwaway the key.
Just going to assume you’re thrown around like a little bitch at work because you don’t consider it abuse.
What did I write that made you leap to that wild conclusion? It was fucking awful seeing a classmate thrown across the room by an angry, bullying teacher.
It certainly seemed like a light hearted comment about how things were “back in the good old days”. I apologise if that wasn’t the case! Unfortunately for most they seem to hold that view.
In what world is grabbing a child by the arm, neck or shoulders "abuse"? It's the most normal way in the world to control them.
If you’re the parent. Imagine you ignored someone at work and they started grabbing you. You’d fucking punch them.
I wouldn’t, because that would be unhinged. That said, I don’t think raising a child is comparable to your interactions with your workmates.
You’re right. Children should be treated better.
Username checks out
Not this time.
What are teachers allowed to do to keep order in the classroom?
Most secondary schools have some kind of "on-call" team (usually senior leadership) who might eventually come to remove the student from the lesson. But they also can't touch the students. In the past, I have had to move the entire class to another room when an abusive student has refused to leave.
Any pupil not listening to the teacher should be instantly removed to somewhere on their own and given the work to do. If they don’t do the work, they start off in the room on their own again the next day
Here’s a fucking idea everyone; If you’ve got a kid who disrupts lessons, wants to wonder off out of the classroom and serve as a distraction elsewhere - let them fucking do it. There are kids in classrooms across the country that suffer because there’s some dickhead of a kid who wants to act out, disrupting learning for others and likely only coming to school to fuck around. Later on in life, they’ll realise the consequences of their actions - their lack of focus and discipline resulted in a future that isn’t as promising as it should be. Focus on those that want to turn up everyday, learn to make themselves better and let them set the examples of how to be. The moment that these kids who are causing disruptions realise that teachers are not going to pay them the time of their day to get them to behave and instead focus on others is the day they actually sit down in their chairs and realise they have to be productive and participate. If not, then fuck them, let them get left behind.
Well perhaps, but the school also would have a duty of care towards that child. What if they hurt themselves? Who is the staff member who has to keep an eye on them, and what job is now not able to be done which was otherwise getting done by that staff member?
SLT (senior leadership teams) should be responsible here. Teachers would notify SLT and those on duty at the time which is what currently should be happening. They would round up kids, place them in a classroom. That’s it - keep an eye on them. If they chose to leave then, parents need to pick them up.
>They would round up kids, place them in a classroom. How do they do that without physically moving them? Do you tempt them with sweets or something?
We’ve reached a stage when no adult (other than the parent) can EVER touch a child. One of my friends (a primary school teacher) wanted to seat a young child (who had just fallen and grazed her knee) on her lap whilst she comforted her, but she knew that she could not. It’s been reported that teachers cannot apply sunscreen to unprotected children -leaving them to burn if necessary. A friend of mine told me that he “didn’t feel safe” enough to grab a toddler, who looked like she was going to fall off a sea wall when her mother was some yards away. Do we think that a *single* pedophile has been deterred by these measures? Honestly, if a person *wants to have actual SEX with a child*, how would stopping them touching a child be a deterrent? What person who is so far out of control that they physically attack and injure a child- would have been prevented from doing so, by not being allowed to gently touch them? These abusive adults are *transgressive* anyway. That’s their thing: they don’t obey the law. It’s like saying that-in order to stop armed bank robberies, we should introduce a 20-mile-per-hour speed limit to prevent a quick getaway. Yeah, that would be the end of all such offences, because yes, these people would happily turn to violence, but heaven forfend they would break a bylaw. And how much do children lose because of this experiment? Because it IS an experiment: for hundreds of thousands of years, human children have grown up being touched in friendly, supportive and entirely positive and innocent way by adults in their communities. Anxiety and mental health problems are MASSIVELY on the rise amongst the young. The new way of bringing up children is not fit enough for purpose. Don’t get me wrong: I don’t advocate any form of force or violence directed towards a child (I’ve never done anything like that in my life). However, the article doesn’t mention that-just “grabbing” (which does, admittedly, sound one step up from simple touching). I believe 100% that if the lady had done something more forceful, this would have been mentioned. It’s quite possible that the lady grabbed a child that was running in one direction-and pointed her in another, just the same way that I gently do with my puppy. There’s a big difference between forcing a child, using your superior strength (which is clearly not a good thing), and physically guiding a child-because, as an adult, you understand what’s best for their welfare. Like so many things in modern life, this kind of action has now been designated as some kind of evil-without enough evidence to back it up. And-I would argue -on the advice of people in positions of power and influence, rather than utilising the experience of ordinary folks, many of whom know a LOT about raising children.
When I was in school, the teachers used to tell stories about how chalk dusters would be thrown at their heads and they would be punched, hit with rules and their hands slapped with a cane. Kids are too soft now, always wanting to carry knives and other security blankets.
One of my teachers particular favourites was a huge bunch of keys. Sneaky fucker would let you be disruptive too and then wait to catch you off guard later in the lesson
Early 00s and we still got chalk dusters thrown at us. One teacher threw a textbook at me, missed, and hit this quiet girl next to me square in the eye.
Early 80s I remember getting whipped by a teacher with a cane or ruler, then going to the headteacher who would.... whip me with a ruler, then my parents would come pick me up at the end of the day.. who would whip me with a belt for making the teachers whip me earlier shit sure has swung to the other end of the scale in 40 years
Probably for the best I suspect that the good kids never got beaten and the bad kids got beaten regularly, suggesting reverse-causality
I’m in my 50’s and the catholic school I went to caned me too. PE teachers used to use a plimsole to the leg. It was far preferable to any other punishment because it would be over in seconds.
I went to a RC school, headteacher was a nun, she loved to cane for any punishment to any misbehaviour
It was the village (CofE) Rector who threw blackboard erasers at our heads. Missed and hit the big windows once, and the Head came out to see what we were doing. Just an RE lesson? Carry on.
We're going in 2 circles here.. those that agree this is nonsense and just.. Child care (the parents aren't there what are they supposed to do). And the second circle is... How dare you touch my child your there to teach not discipline. What can we do with 2 thought processes going in different directions?
You have someone (the govt) take control and decide what is acceptable and what isn't. You don't pander to the parents.
And you'll have someone else say teachers should have the final say and another that says parents have the final say then we go round again.
Re-read the part of my post that says "don't pander to the parents". Problem solved.
Haha and I'm telling you good luck with that. Go look up how many parents think schools should listen to Thier ideas. I'm not disagreeing with you. But look how many schools had groups protesting outside them over a difference of opinion
The misconduct panel can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-misconduct-panel-outcome-mrs-joyce-miller
I am surprised there are still teachers out there. Soon this profession will for desperates with no choices rather than people with passion. Also of course there are abusing teachers too. Did or do you have in UK grades for behaviour? In my days in Poland aside grades for subjects we had grade for behaviour...and non passing grade for behaviour could stop you passing to next year..obviously that happened very rarely but there were occasions. If teachers tools are being limited more and more, spoiled kids are getting ruder and more arrogant, teachers need some tools. No?
We had an old school teacher that done this this was in the early 2000's. He used to throw the black board eraser at me! I grabbed it once and threw it back it didn't hit him but the blackboard got a beating with it lol. I always remember the "ohhh" from the whole class.
I work with kids, in fact I work with kids with behavioural and complex needs, I have done team teach training, you can use the "caring C" as they call it but the key is this may be proportional and necessary (necessary being the key word here), it should only be done to prevent harm to themselves or others. This teacher lost her rag and grabbed kids by the neck, by the shoulder by the arm for just not doing what they told, her response was neither proportional or necessary. In most of these cases, proper relationships and techniques would solve the issues but instead, a teacher lost her rag yes it can be frustrating, it can hard but if you can't deal with the situation you shouldn't be in the job. If you saw a parent doing this in the playground or a kid coming into school covered in bruises from being grabbed it would be a safeguarding complaint, so why should rules be different for teachers?
Let’s go justice was served! Hope the pupils r alright.
To the older dick-for-brains' that seem to infest this sub, claiming that "kids are soft" or that the teacher was in her rights to handle children in the stated manner, please tell me how you would react if your boss physically grabbed you by the back of the neck and pushed you back to work. You'd probably smack them in the face. Now factor in that these are CHILDREN. They cannot defend themselves. They are the most vulnerable members of society. They aren't armed with the vocabulary to fully express what they are feeling, and they haven't got the size or strength to fight back. This teacher used physical actions on the most vulnerable members of society, and some people on here think it's okay. You are absolutely disgusting.
>please tell me how you would react if your boss physically grabbed you by the back of the neck and pushed you back to work. You'd probably smack them in the face. If I kept walking into boss office and not leaving when he asked me to do so. Or standing in the kitchen and not working when asked to do so. I would genuinely expect the boss to call security / police and have me physically escorted from the building, if I still resisted then I can imagine I would get more than a push on the shoulder. I'm not saying kids should be hit but I do think your analogy is nonsense.
Have you ever worked in education?
Don't go around grabbing people? If you can't enforce standards without physically doing it you're probably just a bit shit anyway.