I went for a coffee with a former colleague a few days ago and inevitably, after some small talk, the conversation turned to a discussion of his school. He started off by confiding that the GCSE results had fallen again, before launching into a tirade about how unbearable he found teaching. One of his biggest bugbears was the school’s behaviour policy. This ‘policy’ has been rebranded under the heading ‘See it, own it’. Essentially, this means that when teachers see students flouting the school rules they must then own the consequences and enforce the appropriate sanction. There are no whole school systems to support teachers in doing this other than a computer system on which teacher are supposed to record what they have seen and how they have owned it.
My baseline assumption is that all decisions made in schools must come from good intentions rather than, say, laziness, but in this case it’s hard to see how this policy is likely to benefit anyone. The logic underpinning the approach (here’s a non-education website all about it) is that if we do own what we see then we won’t blame others for stuff going wrong. When applied to a school it suggests that if teachers are responsible for upholding standards of behaviour then they will work harder to forge stronger relationships and be less likely to simply palm off problems on overworked members of SLT. But, frankly, this is nonsense. If you teach a full day, where are you expected to get the time to fill in computer records, run detentions, phone parents and discuss with students all the misbehaviour you might have seen during the day? Even the most committed, enthusiastic teacher will be forced to perform some savage calculations in order to determine exactly how they can spend their most precious resource. As part of that calculation, they will have to decide what they will interpret as misbehaviour bad enough to to own, and what will be reclassified as ‘just the bants’ or ‘kids being kids’. It’s self-preservation to choose just to focus on what goes on in your own classroom and ignore the corridors and playing fields. More cynical teachers will very quickly decide that they will just not see all sort of things which they don’t have time to own.
In no time at all, students learn that only the most grievous misbehaviour is likely to be sanctioned and then only when perpetrated against the most experienced and senior members of staff. When more junior teachers, or support staff are expected to own all the disrespect and rudeness flung their way in any given day, students quickly see that there is no support for these individuals, that they sink or swim by their own efforts. Those that do manage to more than tread water are forced to pander to students’ whims and become the kind of groovy teacher who teachers ‘fun’ lessons. Anyone who sees school as about hard work, respect and following the rules is in for a tough time. Every time one member of staff allows a child to flout a rule, the job of every other member of staff is made harder.
No one rises to low expectations. As the bar lowers, standards slip. As students get away with increasingly gross misconduct, more students perform the arithmetic and work out that it just doesn’t pay to do the right thing and that, hey! no one minds that much if you muck about. As long as you hush up when a more senior member of staff wanders in and avoid telling the head to eff off, you should be fine. Teachers either become increasingly stressed, overworked and resentful, or are forced to remould themselves as being down with the kids. Oh, there are always islands of rigour; teachers who have worked in the school for 20 years and taught everyone’s mum, but they become increasingly rare, and often, as other teachers are forced to become more about fun and relationships, seen as embarrassing dinosaurs.
So, if you want to improve a school, don’t ask teachers to “see it, own it”. Get out of your office, be present in every classroom and corridor, insist on the same respect for less-experienced staff that you would expect for yourself and make it as easy as possible for staff to report minor incidents. One school I visited recently has improved behaviour massively in a very short space of time. If students are engaging in anything which might be said to constitute low-level disruption they are given one warning and then sent to internal exclusion where the responsibility for correcting the problem becomes the SLT’s. Once teachers hit the button to send a student to the exclusion room, they have 5 min to get there after which consequences ramp up steeply. The role of SLT has become to strip out every extraneous demand on teachers so that all their efforts can be focussed on planning, teaching and assessing.
Hi David. From what’s written here it looks as if what’s being suggested in your friend’s school is flowing through everything with consequences and sanctions etc being the responsibility of the teacher that ‘sees’ and I can see that being arduous and unworkable. I do though think that ‘see it, own it’ may be appropriate if ‘own it’ was seen as meaning speak up, intervene or redirect. As you state, “Everyone time one member of staff allows a child to flout a rule, the job of every other member of staff is made harder,” and this is for me where ‘see it, do something about it’ might be a way of approaching things. Absolutely agree that senior managers need to be out of offices but if they’re the only ones taking action then there won’t be the respect for all staff that you rightly day is crucial.
Hi Colin – you’re right, if ‘owning it’ means following the workable, sensible, proportionate system, then great. Sadly, that’s not the case in some cases.
Words of wisdom, as (almost) always. Managing low level disruption is key to a successful school and the best approaches are firmly embedded over time and supported by all staff. The system outlined here is a disaster waiting to happen. It will then be changed again which looks to parents and pupils that the school does not know what it is doing.
“…a computer system on which teacher are supposed to recorded what they have seen and how they have owned it.” Ahahah! That’s too funny! Honestly, I personally gave my teachers no fuss because I could see they were already strained by the system, but I was also in ‘that class’ the one no one wanted to teach because of our collective behaviour. My classmates weren’t bad people, just had a sense of fun and mischief, that’s all. If we found out that teachers had to ‘own’ our bad behaviour and write it into a computer, we’d have gleefully pooled our imaginations coming up with inventive ways to misbehave so our computer record was funnier than other classes. Who cares right? We were already the worst behaved class in school. Might as well be inventive about it!
A great line by a retired Headteacher at my school (retired before I joined but a phrase still repeated still over 10 years on), ‘What you permit, you promote’. A whole school behaviour system making it easy for teachers to sanction and report low level disruption is the only sustainable way to focus on the important stuff – learning. Hope you’re well David, Matt Bebbington.
That’s a great one liner. My version is “what’s accepted becomes acceptable.”
Thanks Matt
Thanks David
I like to be reminded of the latest daft notion ,de haut en bas as usual.
Typo at start of para 3 on/no
Couldn’t agree more on this one. Is it part of a general trend?
Absolutely agree. I teach up to 400 students, up to 22 classes and up to 7 subjects and can end up spending at least one hour every evening ‘owning it’. This system also places a lot of pressure on parents as they can have several phone calls a week or even in one evening. Students become very adept at playing the system and can even enjoy the ‘games’ involved and the negative attention they get. As you say affecting junior staff and supply staff most.
Also, these systems often have disparity where some staff are able to send students straight up to management and some don’t.
But when support is there and senior staff are present and supportive my high expectations are met, my hard work is put into planning, teaching and effective assessment. Students learn there is pleasure to be found in hard work and enjoy their lessons. That is what teaching could become.
We need to move away from the model of management being holding your employees to account and delegation and back to one where it is about strategic planning, making effective use of resources and setting up an environment which enables staff to do their jobs productively as well as accountability.
Many managers and support staff can be heard to say “but that is the teacher’s job” and can begin to resent their own workload and so see the need to push it onto the teachers. There are various reasons why this has happened. Low paid support staff, low public and government opinion about how hard teacher’s work, tick box managing and many more.
Of course at first some students and parents will find the detention systems difficult. Ultimately though the students will feel safe and relaxed and parents will be less confused and aggravated by so many frequent phone calls. Also, teaching students to self manage rather making their negative behaviour the teacher’s problem will be a better preparation for life outside the school gates.
When I have more time one thing I always prioritise is praise calls and emails which build positive relationships and self esteem. I love making these calls and look forward to a time when I can make many more.
I love the idea of a ‘one warning and then you’re out’ system. The ultimate in high expectations. I am in a school with a decent leadership team when it comes to behaviour, but it is a system where we, as teachers, are to work up ‘levels’ of consequences. The problem with this is there is so much confusion and personal interpretation about what constitutes a ‘level 2’ or a ‘level 3’ incident in the classroom and pupils capitalize on this; ‘Mr X wouldn’t have given me a Level 3 for that’ or ‘Yeah it was bad sir, but only a Level 2’. Level 4, internal isolation, seems to be much more consistent but even so this seems reserved for major incidents: swearing at a teacher, verbal or physical abuse and so on. If a pupil keeps shouting out when they are not supposed to, taking too long to be quiet before a teacher speaks, then we are not supposed to elevate this despite having gone through a process of rule-reminders, choices before consequences and so on. My question is – if it gets to a Level 3 – a break/lunchtime detention – where does it go next if a Level 4 is seen as ‘too harsh’ for that behaviour.
A system where one-warning communicates a much stronger message. Of course it isn’t enough on its own, but it really sets the tone regarding low-level disruptive behaviour.
As a beginning teacher struggling to establish myself – this is a constant source of confusion and weakness in behaviour management. I recognise the importance of sticking to a whole-school system but in my opinion, it is not fit for purpose for persistent low-level disruption. For anything more serious, it is highly effective and a member of SLT will be with you within minutes but I am not receiving the kind of support to clamp down on persistent low-level disruption.
Am I asking too much?
Interestingly, when I challenged the school about this and asked, why even give them one warning? The answer was, everyone deserves a second chance. Good answer.
Also happens in primary schools. As a result, the teachers of older year groups end up with an increased workload because some teachers of younger year groups have their own policy of being sweet and ‘nice’ to their charges. SLT never in corridor helping out, despite having a few days out of classroom; they just seem to disappear. I was told by SLT that the door to my classroom should be a ‘portal to learning’ where all the children should be eager to access all the exciting learning and then their behaviour en route to class would be perfect.
This was the most depressing thing of yours I have ever read, until the final paragraph.
Our child was at the mercy of the fists and feet of kids who didn’t behave throughout juniors; we asked our child to uphold our behaviour standards which didn’t make his life any easier.
We did everything we were supposed to do. Kept teachers informed, kept our own records. Finally submitted a formal complaint, even went to a Hearing. We discovered school records were needed to uphold our complaint and it seems they did not exist; including a teacher informing us that he was thrown to the ground and his groin stamped on. After complaining to the school our son became a bigger target, including assaults on him with his teacher in the room – the antibullying lead whose records had also disappeared. [I still don’t know if I seriously misjudged her character, or if the HT put her under pressure.]
Our son’s final day of primary school ended with the ringleader ‘accidentally’ throwing ketchup on him, then the others copying him; our son was sauce covered better than a set of ribs, and that is his final memory of primary school; a school with just over 60 kids from 4-11yrs from nice homes.
We still decided to put him on the bus bound for a week at an Outward Bound course. It wasn’t an easy decision, as we gambled it would show him that there are other types of kids in the world, other types of ‘normal’ behaviour. It could have gone so wrong. Instead, the staff and other kids were great with him, and he loved being part of a group, being included.
Any GB/SLT who allows an HT to tell them it is just ‘boisterous’ kids and ‘kids being kids’ fails to understand the impact of poor behaviour on children and staff, particularly over a long time. I would say to anyone responsible for governance or the health and safety of children, read the research: poor behaviour management has a deep and long-lasting effect on staff, children, families and the community. It is the job of governors and HT/SLT to provide a safe environment – and it won’t happen by passing the buck.
This is an incredible and sobering comment.
I worked in a school with this policy once. Along with a large group of staff I went off-site for lunch every day. I learned to avoid all playgrounds and walk along staring at the ground 3 feet in front of me. Other than that I stayed in my classroom. Why do anything else?
[…] See it, own it: how to destroy a school 31st August – My despair at some of the stupider attempts to bring order to the chaos that is a secondary school. […]