Chloë Musson looks at whether new legislation will cure bad behaviour in the classroom… or is it all ‘lip service’?
“Imagine being falsely accused of the worst crime imaginable. That’s what child abuse is to a teacher. My confidence is gone and I feel permanently dirty and violated.”
These are the words of 53-year-old Jane Watts, who was falsely accused of smacking a five-year-old girl on the hand at a local primary school in Chorley, Lancashire. Since that fateful day in September 2007, which brought an end to her unblemished 30-year teaching career, Jane has been haunted by the memories which lost her her job and her sanity. “I was off sick and on anti-depressants,” she says. “The day I was suspended I was hysterical. I had a pack of lies told against me. I was the first teacher in Britain to take a lie-detector test to prove my innocence. It’s the worst thing that’s ever happened to me.”
Pointing the finger
Astonishingly, previous surveys by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers suggest over a quarter of all teachers have been wrongly accused of misconduct – the majority of which are quickly cleared by police due to lack of evidence. Even after Jane was released, the school launched its own investigation and sacked her. Years of hard work are undermined, personal relationships are fractured, and many teachers spend years recovering from the stress and anxiety. “False allegations have blighted many teachers’ lives,” says Christine Blower, general secretary for the NUT.
It’s hard to imagine a state of mind where all hope, trust and self-belief is crushed on the word of a child. Many pupils – and indeed other teachers – probably don’t realise the severity of what they’re doing until it’s too late. But the most worrying part is they can get away with it – and they know it. “Children know their rights,” says Steve Williamson, Head of English at Kings’ School in Winchester. “They’ll say ‘I’ll do you for that’ or ‘I’ll get you in court’. They know you can’t touch them.”
It’s no wonder so many are throwing in the towel – or steering clear of teaching in the first place. Two thirds of teachers believe bad behaviour is driving staff to pack up their books, according to the Department for Education. Some may say it’s human rights gone mad. Others might blame the parents for not laying down the law. But most end up accusing the teacher. “Too many teachers report that the school’s first response to poor behaviour is to blame the teacher,” says Chris Keates, general secretary for the NASUWT teaching union.
New rules
Now, however, the pendulum might be about to swing the other way – back into the hands of teachers. As part of a surge of new discipline guidance, headteachers are being granted the power to prosecute pupils – and others – who make false claims against teachers in England. They will also be able to temporarily or permanently exclude lying students. Teachers will be allowed to use ‘reasonable force’ to physically restrain unruly pupils who cause trouble, search mobile phones for improper material, and confiscate drugs and alcohol without fear of violating ‘children’s rights’. “Improving discipline is a big priority,” says Education Secretary Michael Gove. “These changes will give teachers confidence that they can remove disruptive pupils and search children where necessary.”
This all sounds great, and in an ideal world stamping out such ‘no touching’ policies would once again allow teachers to do the job they’re paid to do – whether maintaining discipline by breaking up a fight, or putting an arm around a child to comfort them on their first day at school. The long-overdue changes will not only reduce the current guidelines from 600 pages of bureaucratic spiel to just 50, but also restore teacher authority and protection. Indeed, teachers will no longer be suspended as soon as the child opens their mouth, and malicious allegations won’t be included in employment records.
“Lip service”
But Michael Gove seems to have missed the boat on quite a few levels. As Jane Watts puts it, “What head is going to take a child to court?” It certainly wouldn’t do their reputation in the league tables any good. And what use is excluding a pupil when, according to the NASUWT, schools will remain accountable for the pupil’s “educational outcomes”. “Exclusion doesn’t solve problems but creates them,” says Steve Williamson. “What do they do? They go and watch daytime TV, and hang about outside school. It won’t change their behaviour.”
Jane Watts also worries that ‘policing’ roles such as confiscating mobile phones will only aggravate relations between teachers, parents and students. “It leaves teachers wide open to victimisation,” she says. “What if you take a mobile and then it stops working? Accusations start like, ‘you broke my child’s phone’. The guidelines make sense, but nothing will change. Gove is giving it lip service.”
Loose ends
Ultimately, teachers are afraid. If pupils can’t sue for assault they’ll sue for invasion of privacy instead. It’s just another loop for teachers to jump through. And what is ‘reasonable force’? Where is the line? And what about children who are under the age of legal responsibility? Will it actually deter pupils from making false allegations? There are still too many loose ends which need tying.
Steve Williamson is sceptical of whether what’s said on paper will work in practice. “There needs to be a test case really,” he says. “If it’s seen to work, if pupils are fined, it would be a breakthrough. But teachers must have a cast-iron case. It’s a legal minefield.”
Hands are tied…
Jane Watts says that giving headteachers more power is what concerns her most. “I was set up,” she says. “The LEA and the head all closed ranks against me. This is what happens when a headteacher has a vendetta against you. If he sacks the teacher, it makes him look good. It’s incestuous and corrupt.” The headteacher of Jane’s old school was unfortunately unavailable for comment.
Chris Keates from the NASUWT acknowledges, “teachers want more backing by school leaders” – and if they don’t get it, who do they turn to? “Even the Union didn’t help,” says Jane. “They told me to treat it like a paid holiday. I thought – this is my life we’re talking about. Then I was arrested – I could have been handcuffed or put in a cell. It was really traumatic. The jungle drums beat, and before long everyone knows who you are.”
Anonymity doesn’t do much good then either. Instead, human rights laws and bureaucratic red tape is wrapped around teachers’ necks. With their hands tied and no leg to stand on, it’s only a matter of time before they topple. “There’s no way I’d go back into the classroom without being able to prove my innocence,” says Jane. “I think body-worn cameras are needed.”
Passing the buck…
Is this really what it’s boiled down to? Teachers are so wary of their position that they want 9 to 5 surveillance? Steve Williamson believes it’s this lack of trust and leadership from the top which breeds confrontation. “There’s a psychological barrier between students, parents and teachers,” he says. “There needs to be a stronger ethos in schools and clearer structures and guidelines, so teachers, parents and pupils can work together. When there are perceived gulfs and gaps, that’s when the problems start.”
This is exactly the ethos that underpins Parents Helping Parents - we all must work together - and there are no perceived gulfs and gaps - more like bottomless chasms !
If this is the solution – and a starry-eyed one at that – parents need to stop passing the buck and accept responsibility for Little Jimmy’s bad behaviour. “Discipline and respect needs to come from the home,” says Jane. “The parents don’t respect the teaching profession any more than the pupils.”
And in her case? “I was the accused tried by the accuser. We need a third party to take over and form their own opinions without the head interfering. Yes, we must protect our young people, but we must also protect teachers. We need an independent external body… and we need it fast.”
Jane Watts’s blog ‘False Allegations Against Teachers’:
http://teacherallegation.blogspot.com/
