Young People Aren’t Fools

Once you open the Pandora’s Box of school rules, it’s difficult to put the lid back on.

My initial article about secondary school behaviour strategies – written before the much-covered letter from one head teacher about school toilets went out – makes no claim to represent all sides of the argument about zero tolerance policies and other strategies that I raised.

Schools can speak for themselves – and hopefully to the pupils and parents – in terms of their particular approaches.

When Gef HQ gave me the go ahead for that first article, I sought feedback from parents, pupils and teachers past and present before filing anything.

One thing that struck me was how some of the experienced teachers and educationalists emphasised the need for adults to remember that young people are constantly developing and not at the same rate.

Rather like a sponge, it was suggested, there was only so much a developing young person could absorb before things start to drip out. Adults needed to allow students flexibility and also to understand that a young person needed to feel some control or ownership over what is expected of them.

Do zero tolerance policies allow for that?

(I’m not talking of control over whether you hit someone, but control over whether a crowded school may make you late for a lesson, or whether a neurodiverse child is able to cope in the situations some rules may create.)

Another theme was teachers needed to be allowed flexibility in their approach. Different things will work for different teachers. Having rigid rules that don’t allow those teachers to use their own experience and discretion risks making them uncomfortable about what they are asked to do.

Young people aren’t fools. They will pick up on that.

It was put to me, rather than asking why young people don’t behave, are school leaders looking at successful lessons and asking why the young people in those don’t misbehave?

One argument used in support of strict rules, even if they at times seem unfair, is they help to build up resilience in young people.

Resilience can mean different things to different people.

For instance, a bullied child may think resilience means not telling anyone, but still dragging themselves into school every day.

What about the young person who is a primary carer for parents with health problems, who has to learn to make what little money they have stretch far enough to keep younger siblings fed?

They still come to school each day, but sometimes they may be late, or they may have forgotten to change out of their trainers or be behind on homework. If the school has zero tolerance policies that lead to an automatic punishment, even if rescinded after the situation becomes clear, how does that help?

Do zero tolerance strategies with a rapid turnaround in punishments allow time to assess whether the action is appropriate?

In the face of unfairness, there’s fine line between resilience and resentment.

Strategies are often brought under the arch of ‘ready to learn’ principles, there to cut down on learning time lost to disruption. But a zero tolerance approach and rigid application of everything from uniforms to the SLANT technique, regardless of individual needs in the classroom, surely risk having the opposite effect of the desired aim, for a number of children?

Some parents echoed the general consensus of children that secondary uniform policies are outdated and cause more problems than they solve, not least that teachers are having to spend time enforcing uniform rules rather than teaching and building relationships.

Will rules on punctuality deter a student from vaping illegally, either in school or out?

Others parents, meanwhile, said school expectations matched behaviour policies as they were set out.

Interestingly, however, more than one mentioned they knew of parents who moved their children from one secondary to another, citing inconsistency of behaviour management as a key reason.

Again it may come down to how policies are implemented, but inconsistency appears to be something that bothers parents and students alike.

Another irritation that cropped up was when 100 per cent attendance was rewarded, as part of the push to ensure children have all the learning opportunities they need.

What about children who for physical, emotional or mental health reasons could not manage 100 per cent attendance, some parents asked.

If you’ve seen some of the school attendance slogans on social media or posters, you may wonder whether the nuance of the motivation behind them might be lost on those they are aimed at.

And finally, we often hear that primary schools need to ensure their pupils are ready for the move up to secondary school. We don’t hear as much about how secondary schools should ensure they are ready for the new intake of 11-year-olds.

Perhaps we should.