I have been re- reading the press releases (2009) on the latest round of discussions on pupil behaviour in schools and I look at the wording with interest as I think it's still the common approach 3 years later on
Classroom powers 'not being used'
..dealing with bad behaviour
..children who disrupt classes should be isolated
... an explicit legal right to discipline pupils
It is unacceptable for a pupil to disrupt the learning and teaching of an entire class (Ed Balls)
As someone who advocates a child-centred approach, I think perhaps a look at the underlying issues need to be added to this discussion.
Are the lessons sufficiently interesting, engaging and relevant to the student's level of competence - too difficult or too simple and the result is the same - disaffection, disinterest and disruption.
Are our responses to the pupils' behaviour conditional?
Do we consider the context for that individual student or are we taking the behaviour at face value and not contextualising it?
They may be there, but their respect and participation is not mandatory
Sure, it is much simpler to have a blanket ruling:do 'x' and get 'y' is great to manage, but I think quite poor if you are trying as a school to build emotional wellbeing into your community.
So what do I think we should be considering instead of power, discipline and isolation? How about support, understanding, caring, coaching, validating and helping? I think these traits will, in the right environment, build a better community with pupils working out , with help, how to manage their feelings, inadequacies, intolerance, triggers, hostilities and building an enabling programme rather than a controlling one.
Build a programme that works through rather than doing to and I think you will build young people that will have the capacity to be reflective, self managing and independent thinkers with a clear understanding of their personality traits, which areas they excel (multiple intelligences), learning styles, where to get support when it's needed and how to communicate their frustrations in a positive way.
If we provide them with emotional rescue centres in the schools (support rooms), then they will bring unresolved issues and discuss them, rather than shouting them across the classrooms in frustration.
Behaviour is a reflection of emotional state
so 'bad' behaviour is a reflection of 'bad' emotional state, not bad children. They don't have the tools to manage their emotions, but we do have the capacity to help and support them through this. We need to be dealing with the emotional issues present, not punishing 'badly behaved' children.
We are the adults - we don't need to control, we need to coach the young people in our care to take the controls themselves and make good decisions when they can and if they think they may make bad decisions, then giving them resolution pathways and the support that is needed, they can feel empowered and in charge.
That's what we really want, isn't it? Pupils who manage themselves, otherwise we'll be doing it for ever
To be fair to the article, it does balance the strong message with one of support, but I think it gives teachers a mixed response and I think I know which approach most teachers would favour.
Comments welcome
First published 14 April 2009
Classroom powers 'not being used'
..dealing with bad behaviour
..children who disrupt classes should be isolated
... an explicit legal right to discipline pupils
It is unacceptable for a pupil to disrupt the learning and teaching of an entire class (Ed Balls)
As someone who advocates a child-centred approach, I think perhaps a look at the underlying issues need to be added to this discussion.
Are the lessons sufficiently interesting, engaging and relevant to the student's level of competence - too difficult or too simple and the result is the same - disaffection, disinterest and disruption.
Are our responses to the pupils' behaviour conditional?
Do we consider the context for that individual student or are we taking the behaviour at face value and not contextualising it?
They may be there, but their respect and participation is not mandatory
Sure, it is much simpler to have a blanket ruling:do 'x' and get 'y' is great to manage, but I think quite poor if you are trying as a school to build emotional wellbeing into your community.
So what do I think we should be considering instead of power, discipline and isolation? How about support, understanding, caring, coaching, validating and helping? I think these traits will, in the right environment, build a better community with pupils working out , with help, how to manage their feelings, inadequacies, intolerance, triggers, hostilities and building an enabling programme rather than a controlling one.
Build a programme that works through rather than doing to and I think you will build young people that will have the capacity to be reflective, self managing and independent thinkers with a clear understanding of their personality traits, which areas they excel (multiple intelligences), learning styles, where to get support when it's needed and how to communicate their frustrations in a positive way.
If we provide them with emotional rescue centres in the schools (support rooms), then they will bring unresolved issues and discuss them, rather than shouting them across the classrooms in frustration.
Behaviour is a reflection of emotional state
so 'bad' behaviour is a reflection of 'bad' emotional state, not bad children. They don't have the tools to manage their emotions, but we do have the capacity to help and support them through this. We need to be dealing with the emotional issues present, not punishing 'badly behaved' children.
We are the adults - we don't need to control, we need to coach the young people in our care to take the controls themselves and make good decisions when they can and if they think they may make bad decisions, then giving them resolution pathways and the support that is needed, they can feel empowered and in charge.
That's what we really want, isn't it? Pupils who manage themselves, otherwise we'll be doing it for ever
To be fair to the article, it does balance the strong message with one of support, but I think it gives teachers a mixed response and I think I know which approach most teachers would favour.
Comments welcome
First published 14 April 2009