Colin Lever

Educational Consultant & Author

[understandingbehaviour]

Child Development and Childcare

It is well established that the first twelve months of a child’s life play a pivotal role in a person’s physical and mental development. This is the age when brain development is, arguably, at its highest. Children learn to walk, talk, co-ordinate. Theirs is a world of inquisitiveness as they explore their environment, all of which is new to them. The same is true of their emotional and behavioural development. In a loving and caring environment the child gains esteem, building a positive resilience in the knowledge that they are being supported. In the first twelve months, the young child endeavours to build secure attachments to their primary carer, usually the mother, and then with other family members.

 If a child is placed outside of the family unit at this formative stage then secure attachment may be compromised. Using Maslow’s Hierarchy of Need as a benchmark, placing a baby in childcare may result in their physiological and basic health and safety needs being met but we cannot be certain that its emotional needs are met. The younger a child is when placed with a carer and the longer it is away from its parents the more likely its sense of belonging will be compromised. It would be natural for a baby, developmentally between the ages of 6 weeks to 7 months, to strike an attachment to the adult it spends most of its waking day with. This might be the childcare adult in preference to the parent. This situation may create uncertainty in the young child, leading to anxiety, stress and affecting their emerging self-esteem.

 Much is made of children being born into poverty and the deprivation that ensues but what of the child born today in any social demographic where the parents are absent during these formative weeks and months? Diana Baumind identified four types of parenting one of them being neglectful. We have all seen the upsetting pictures of child neglect but is this too strong a term to describe parents who, as Nicky Morgan the Education secretary did in a BBC interview?

 “Some parents struggle to find just ten minutes a day to read to sons and daughters because of the demands of work”

 Other parents compensate for their absence by over-indulging their children. This permissive approach can lead to dietary issues such as child obesity and tooth decay, conditions not normally associated with negligence.

 Research tells us that the absence of a discrete primary care-giver leads to insecure attachments which in turn reduce self-esteem and builds a negative resilience, sometimes described as a ‘survival instinct’. The rise in challenging behaviour in schools is often put down to an eroding respect for teachers and their inability to discipline but the root cause goes much deeper. It is well documented that insecure attachment manifests itself as ADHD, ADD, ODD, PTSD and other socio/emotional behaviour conditions. S.E.B.D is no longer the sole domain of the poor in society.

 We cannot expect childcare providers to provide the necessary ‘emotional nurturing’, although many do exactly that as a result of their professional expertise, because by doing so they run the risk of, literally, taking the place of the parent in the eyes of the child. Nor can we assume that leaving children with a family member will fill the emotional vacuum. So where does this leave the child?

 Modern day parenting is driven by social trends. The demand on some families is such that both parents have to work in order to keep a roof over their heads. The situation is further complicated by issues over equality and the rights of both parents to have a career. There is also the more insidious aspect of governments trying to boost GDP buy encouraging a debt driven economy which may create jobs but the consequence of the ensuing rampant consumerism is that both parents have to work to maintain their lifestyle.

 Something has to give. There has to be compromise. After about 12 months, although child development is continuing, the resilience of the child is better established.  It should be borne in mind that insecure attachment can occur at any point in person’s life, be that parental divorce, bereavement or other cause of emotional trauma so any change in routine needs to handled sensitively.

 The timing of moving from full-time parental care to a part-time one is significant. In many countries maternity leave is quite short, around three months. This coincides with both parents being back at work when secure attachment between primary caregiver and child is at its most vulnerable. If leave of absence was longer, around twelve months, this would support wellbeing and a child’s mental health development in these early stages. This of course would have financial implications for governments and for business. Is it right for parents to have to choose between having a child and having a career? Should they not be able to have both without risking the wellbeing of their child?

 There are those in society who think that parents today are trying to have their cake and eat it. But society has changed. Yes there are families who may have their priorities wrong and put material assets before their child’s wellbeing, deluding themselves that all the extras will somehow improve the child’s quality of life. However, for many families today, both parents need to work just to keep their heads above water.

 Businesses that value their employees play their part but some are more interested in profit than helping their staff. The link between business and altruism is at best a tenuous one. Unscrupulous companies are reluctant to support maternity leave let alone allow employees to take a break and then resume their careers where they left off.

 Around 78% of families use some sort of childcare. Those that run nurseries have to have a level three qualification in childcare. But that is not the case with childcare ‘assistants’ who make up the majority of the adults in childcare. Much of the pay at this level is barely above the minimum wage.  

Why is nursery education not a degree entry profession like the rest of education and paid accordingly? Of all the areas within education Pre-school is where there is least investment from all levels in society and yet this is where the foundations of social, emotional and educational development are built.

 This article has been adapted from the book ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP’. I am also the author of the book ‘Understanding Challenging Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge).

  kg�>�q�

[understandingbehaviour]

Wellbeing & performance based education

What is the connection between the Duchess of Cambridge and the fact that the number of people between the ages of 15-59 years old with mental and behavioural disorders associated with alcohol use has risen increased by 94% in the past ten years? The answer? Wellbeing. The Duchess is the patron of the children’s mental health charity ‘Place2Be’and alcoholism is one possible consequence of a lack of wellbeing.  Others include;

·         In 2013, there were 8.2 million cases of anxiety in the UK

·         In 2013, 6,233 suicides were recorded in the UK for people aged 15 and older. Of these, 78% were male and 22% were female.3

·         Major depression is thought to be the second leading cause of disability worldwide and a major contributor to the burden of suicide and ischemic heart disease.

 We have physical health and we have mental health. Whilst we are usually aware of our physical wellbeing we are not always conscious of how fit we are mentally. Both are shaped by life but our mental health is not always within our control, especially in our formative years. There is a continuum in respect of mental wellbeing from the cradle to the grave with the former influencing the latter. The World Happiness report of 2013 stated that half of the adults who are mentally ill experience the onset of their mental health problems by the age of fifteen.

 §  1 in 10 children and young people aged 5 - 16 suffer from a mental health disorder (around three children in every class)

§  1 in every 12  children and young people deliberately self-harm 

§  Over 8,000 children aged under 10 years old suffer from severe depression 

 Developing wellbeing is as is important as learning Maths and English; some would argue more so. And that development begins at birth. Carol Dweck and Professor Michael Seligman have shown that by attending to a baby’s emotional needs in their first year, parents can begin to establish resilience in their children. They advise that it is better for a child’s mental health to acknowledge effort regardless of achievement; a ‘well done’ rather than only rewarding success. In that simple change of emphasis lie’s the key to educating for wellbeing. How often do you get praised for doing something well and if so, how does it make you feel? And if you don’t?

 In pre-school there is the rise of what is described as ‘seating time’ and a pre-occupation with teaching literacy and numeracy as opposed to structured play. Parents may push their offspring to be readers before they start full time school so that they can be ‘ahead of the game’. Yet recent research shows that structured play is essential in developing mental wellbeing.

 Once in full-time schooling, children largely follow a prescriptive structure where emotional development is no longer a priority. The emphasis from the age of four to sixteen is to hit set targets. Attention is given to attainment rather than effort. Teaching is becoming formulaic and putting the profession under increasing stress as they too have to meet targets. Stress is infectious and, combined with parental pressure to succeed many children are growing up fearing failure. Ten GCSE’s with a D in Maths or English is failure. The child who works really hard to get an E or an F does not even get a ‘thumbs up’. Continuous, performance based education does not sit easily with wellbeing.

 Pupils that don’t make the grade have difficulty getting apprenticeships because they lack Maths & English. The whole post sixteen set up is being squeezed as finances are focussed elsewhere in education, leaving this cohort of pupils with little else to do except accept low paid jobs or zero hours contracted work.

 Those that get to university, are excluded from the most prestigious ones. If they get a degree they are saddled with debt for much of their early career and for a significant minority the degree they get does not lead to a lucrative career. Many of this group have to accept jobs that are below the level of expertise they were trained for.

 Whilst every parent wants their child to do well at school they do not want success at any price. Parents are taking notice, putting the needs of their child first. Some are home-schooling rather than starting their children too early in full-time education, others are making the conscious decision to ‘back-off’ and work towards achieving a better work-life balance for their children even if that means not performing to potential.  They are realising that their children need support and protection, nurturing in an environment that is conducive to their long term mental health.

 The part education should play in society’s wellbeing is crucial. Mental health has to be sown into the fabric of education if it is to work. It needs to become a part of a school’s educational ethos. Facilities, where they exist, play a key part in supporting our children’s mental health but they are largely reactive. Wellbeing is not just about ticking a policy box. It is a case of being rather than doing. Our education system should be pro-active. It is encouraging that plans are afoot to raise awareness of mental health in schools but before any attention is paid to raising attainment surely our education department has to ensure the mental wellbeing of the pupils it has in its care.  

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’. He is also the author of ‘Understanding behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge)

  i��;��k

[understandingbehaviour]

Social & Emotional Aspects of Behaviour

As adults we have the capability to understand our feelings and control our emotions and, if necessary, to articulate them to a third party. Most children do not have this skill and, as a result, may express their angst in inappropriate ways such as temper tantrums, bullying or self-harming.

 Many issues relating to challenging behaviour have their roots in deprivation. But increasingly S.E.B.D is not the preserve of a social underclass. Problems manifest themselves as emotional issues due to basic needs not being met and, whilst as teachers we are not in a position to affect a child’s private life, we can educate them to be able to come to terms with their feelings.

 We may (rightly) question where we are going to find time to ‘teach’ these skills in a curriculum that is already full to bursting and hidebound by performance targeting. Developing social and emotional skills in children is not so much a case of doing as it is of being. How we as teachers interact with the children is how we develop these skills.

 Social and emotional issues affecting children tend to manifest themselves as either physical and/or emotional neglect. Whereas physical neglect is there for all to see emotional neglect is not always so obvious. Emotional aspects of behaviour are one part of a broader perspective relating to social issues. Maslow’s Hierarchy identifies the needs that have to be satisfied before a person can ‘function fully’. Maslow calls this ‘self-actualisation’. It is presented as a hierarchy because a person cannot operate effectively at a higher level until the levels below have been satisfied.

 At the base of the hierarchy are physiological needs. Until basic physiological needs are satisfied a child’s capacity to function in class is going to be compromised. This might lead to confrontation and conflict. The child may not (be able to) articulate what their needs are and may be locked into an approach where they have learned (through bitter experience) that shouting out or being aggressive is what is needed to get themselves noticed. Complaints like this are not always so clear cut, they form the basis of excuses for not complying or utilised as avoidance tactics to escape work being done in class. As a teacher we do not know for sure, denying them may exacerbate a needy situation and conceding might be playing into their hands.

 Classroom order does much to put children at ease and the more confidence that they have in the teacher the safer they will feel. Something as simple as classroom routines help engender a feeling of security. Even the most challenging children take comfort in accepted routines. For some children stepping outside of a routine or trying something ‘new and exciting’ can cause behaviour to deteriorate as anxieties rise. However change is a fact of life and so exposing children to change should be part of a teacher’s style albeit a managed one.

 It is often the case (infuriatingly) that the most challenging children rarely take time off school. The reason for this apparent anomaly is that the school provides the child with a sense of belonging. The need to belong can manifest itself in many ways. It might be a child that ‘clings’ to a teacher or a child that misbehaves in class but is ‘perfect’ when it comes to playing for a school sports team. Challenging children find comfort in extra-curricular activities because they satisfy most of Maslow’s Hierarchy.

 Being overtly critical of a child in class does not help to foster a sense of belonging. Where a child feels that they are not accepted by a teacher, conflict is likely to result. The child may disrupt from the outset knowing that they will be removed (and in some cases teachers engineer such scenarios knowing that the child will ‘kick off’ and will no longer be their responsibility).

 Children can also gain a sense of belonging by joining a gang. Gangs can be very intimidating and tend to draw like minded individuals to them. There is empathy in the group especially if it is formed out of adversity that can satisfy each individual’s need for acceptance. Once established the sum can become greater than the parts. With peer support they are more likely to test boundaries. If this occurs in a classroom situation, for example in the creation of a ‘sink group’ they can be near impossible to teach.  Placing pupils with behavioural problems in the same group sends a message that they do not ‘belong’.

 A school that engenders a sense of belonging is less likely to suffer from petty vandalism. Vandalism is usually a reaction by individuals designed to exact ‘revenge’ because of the feeling of rejection they feel.

 Emotional Intelligence is the ability to;

Ø  Recognise and manage your own feelings (emotions)

Ø  Understand the feelings of others that you interact with.

 Emotionally Intelligent people are subjected to the same hardships as everybody else but what makes them different is in the way they react and deal with problems that they face. Emotionally Intelligent people are more resilient. The first step in developing emotional intelligence is to get a child to recognise how thoughts, feelings and actions are connected.

 By disrupting the lesson the child antagonises the rest of the class (including the teacher) and so the thought that ‘nobody likes me’ is re-enforced. This type of scenario is played out in the minds of many children but especially those with emotional and behavioural issues.

 To establish a permanent change in a child’s perception can be a long and exhausting business. The more ‘damaged’ a child is the harder it will be to effect change.  A child that has had a life time of not having their needs met is likely to have negative thoughts and emotions heavily ingrained. Much of the work needed will be beyond the remit of a class teacher but teachers can (and should) play their part in bringing their concerns about a child to the ‘experts’ within the school and in creating an inclusive environment that endeavours not only to accommodate a child with emotional issues but also tries to educate them in dealing with their problems. To achieve this, the teacher must also be emotionally intelligent.

 The emotionally intelligent child;

·         Takes responsibility for their feelings

·         Is resilient

·         Confident

·         Optimistic

·         Self Aware

·         Self Disciplined

·         Courageous

·         Co-operates

·         Communicates

·         Has long term life goals

  In society children that exhibit behavioural issues as a result of social and emotional issues are the least ‘appealing’. Society seems to be able to accept a child’s challenging behaviour if the root cause is cognitive (as with autism or dyslexia) or if it is physiological. If a classroom is to be truly inclusive it must find a way to accommodate these ‘damaged’ children. This does not mean that challenging behaviour should be condoned in any shape or form it means that oppositional behaviour should be tackled with tact and with the needs of the child foremost.

 Emotional intelligence often lags behind intellectual capability. As teachers we assume that bright, articulate children can express what they feel easily but this is not always the case. The skilled teacher understands each of the children in the class and recognises the signals, acting upon them unobtrusively so as not to draw too much attention to the child.

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book ‘Understanding behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). He is also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’.

  .gfycad��� �

[understandingbehaviour]

Educational Eugenics

During World War Two over two hundred thousand ‘degenerates’, mainly children, were euthanized by the Nazi regime. Their organs were removed and became the subject of biological diagrams which could still be found in medical text books up until the mid nineteen seventies.  Parents at the time saw it as a mercy to have their ‘feebleminded’ offspring put out of their misery. The powers that be saw them as an unnecessary burden on society and a threat to the purity of the Aryan race. Today these ‘degenerates’ have labels. We describe them as being disabled, Down’s syndrome, autistic, dyspraxic, A.D.H.D and, of course S.E.B.D.

 In schools across many countries the drive to improve examination performance means that many of these ‘labelled’ pupils are seen been school management as a threat to the system, hindering progress at every juncture; a small number of individuals taking up time that could be better spent educating others. By setting up strict boundaries many of these ne’er do wells are identified and permanently exclusion engineered. 78% of all exclusions are pupils that have special educational needs. Is it not odd that there are 80% more permanent exclusions in the Secondary sector than there are in Primary schools. This is tantamount to educational eugenics, sanitising schools at the expense of the most vulnerable in society and it is the Academies and Free Schools that are in the vanguard. It could be argued that by permanently exclusion is discriminatory because it denies the child the right to be taught in a mainstream school.

  In a modern, caring society there is no need for permanent exclusion. Using a graduated response approach the needs of the individual child can be addressed without having to destroy their self-esteem. Time-bonded referral to outside agencies, making sure the door is left open for a possible re-integration is a more even handed way of dealing with challenging behaviour.

 So many schools today go one step further, creating two lines of pupils in the playground. The academics and those on the borderline are marshalled into rooms to become examination fodder, their noses pushed to the grindstone in order to squeeze every last grade out of them before they are cast back into society to fend for themselves with few skills other than an ability to learn by rote. The rest are left to feed on the educational scraps. Even the teachers are segregated. However, divisiveness in education is not simply about having a two tier system.  

 There is a ‘final solution’ taking place whereby some schools only measure pupils on their intrinsic value to the school rather than how the school can serve them. There is much talk of inclusion but for many there is little enthusiasm, especially if it affects a school’s position in a league table.

 To some, inclusion and examination performance are a conflict of interests, putting teachers in an impossible position. What was once a vocation is fast becoming a job. Guilt ridden many are walking away rather than be forced to work as prison guards. In the classroom something has to be sacrificed and it is the ‘challenging child’. But, as Hans Asperger pointed out, these ‘little professors’ and their compatriots have so much to offer. Theirs is not a disability but rather a ‘diffability’. The same is true of so many children with special educational needs.  If you want to talk in terms of examination potential, they are a resource that, if handled properly, can outshine most of their ‘neurotypical’ peers. To achieve this, teachers need to have the proper training and time to exploit this rich seam of talent. But education should not just be about exam performance. However, until the worm turns educational eugenics will continue to thrive at the expense of the most vulnerable in society.

 The importance of inclusion in schools should not be understated. It brings with it so much more than equal opportunities. It enriches the lives of all concerned, breeding tolerance and compassion, traits sadly lacking in today’s consumerist society. However, the scramble for exclusivity is endemic and its effect on society is writ large in history and without inclusion the lessons of the past may return to haunt us.

 This article has been adapted from ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP’. He is also the author of ‘Understanding Challenging Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge).

 Follow him on Twitter: behaviourinschools@colin_lever

[understandingbehaviour]

Rewards and Sanctions

The psychology of sanctions is to effect control by creating an atmosphere of fear. A child learns that if they transgress they will be punished. The technique is typically Behaviourist. With the demise of corporal punishment, other punitive sanctions have come to the fore but these sanctions seem tame in comparison and it is moot to question their effectiveness in maintaining order in the classroom.

 If a teacher is going to resort to sanctions then it stands to reason that the sanction should act as a deterrent otherwise it is valueless and might even prove to be counter productive as sanctions are not conducive to building positive relationships. If a teacher threatens to give a sanction they must make sure that the sanction is enforceable, that they are prepared to impose the sanction and that the sanction is appropriate ‘to the misdemeanour’.

 It would be naive to think that a teacher could get through the year without issuing a sanction but an over reliance on sanctions in the classroom will lead to resentment as teacher-student relationships break down.  Some presume that the threat of sanctions will instil ‘fear’ into the child. This method of control has a name, bullying.

 If sanctions are used they should be delivered as soon as possible. The reason for the sanction should be explained to the child and, once completed, the slate should be wiped clean.

 Challenging children can often collect sanctions like confetti to the point where there are not enough hours in the school day to accommodate them. This stacking up effect calls into question the effectiveness of sanctions particularly with very challenging children. Sanctions that are merely an inconvenience rarely work.

 Many schools have tariffs, with each misdemeanour carrying a fixed penalty. Tariffs may be fair and equitable but the down side is that not all misdemeanours are cut and dried. In criminal justice a judge is able to work within a tariff range. Life can mean anything from 10 years to 30 years or more. A tariff range allows for flexibility.

 In a fixed tariff system, a child may decide that they have nothing to lose. Having a flexible tariff encourages compliance and an opportunity to turn a negative into a positive. Trying to impose a sanction may result in an escalation of conflict as the child seeks to maintain control of a situation and so the teacher is tempted to raise the stakes.

 “You have a 15 minute detention.”

“I’m not doing that.”

“Then you will get a 30 minute detention.”

“I’m still not doing it.”

“Make it an hour.”

“There’s no way I’m doing an hour.”

“Then you will get two hours.”

“This is pathetic, a two hour detention for being five minutes late to lesson.”

 “Whipping and abuse are like laudanum. You have to double the dose as the sensibilities decline.” (Harriet Breeder Stowe. Uncle Toms Cabin)

 Where does the teacher go next, a formal suspension, expulsion?

 Ultimately, sanctions do not work. Many children that are externally suspended will happily just sit at home and play games all day. The disaffected child may even seek confrontation legitimising their absence from school.

 Many situations can be resolved by a child simply apologising for their misdemeanour but this is not as easy as it would first appear. Giving an apology is one aspect of a process known a restorative action. Restorative action in a school environment is a process whereby a child is made accountable for their misdemeanour by trying to put right what they have done wrong.

 Rewards and sanctions are the strategies teachers use to create the motivation for behaving. Whilst sanctions work for some for others they have little impact. For some children sanctions are a way of life both at home and in school. A dysfunctional family background might mean that they are screamed and yelled at constantly, physically hit so giving them a school detention might not even register on their radar.

 Many schools have a graduated reward system. It is sometimes the case that those who get most rewards are at both ends of the behavioural spectrum. The challenging child might be festooned with plaudits to the consternation of others who rarely get recognised.

  “If you are naughty you get rewarded for being good, if you are always good you get nothing.”

(14 year old girl)

 Recognising and rewarding good behaviour at every occurrence is nigh on impossible to carry out and such a volume of rewards would, most likely, devalue the whole reward system. For many children a simple ‘well done’ is recognition enough.

 Rewards can also have a negative effect on behaviour for example an overindulgence of rewards can result in children demanding a reward or being dismissive of a reward. It is important that rewards have an intrinsic value to the children.

 There is a temptation to use rewards as bribes and while this might help in the short term (to get you to the end of lesson without any more disruption) it is unlikely to work as a long term strategy. Rewards operate at their best when they have to be earned.

 When working with challenging children they may appear to have an antipathy in respect of receiving awards. To do so might mean a loss of face amongst their peers or just that they do not know how to ‘deal’ with positive feedback and so they may refuse a reward rather than have the embarrassment of being made a public spectacle. In this situation a non verbal recognition or a quiet acknowledgement should suffice.

 “I feel numb and sick when someone says well done.” (13 year old girl)

 Celebrating success can manifest itself in many ways. Teachers may place exemplary work on the wall or the successful might be congratulated publicly, in class or in a school assembly. Often an element of competition is injected into the proceedings to further re-enforce positive behaviours. This is exemplified by tally charts on a classroom notice board. In the desire to promote good behaviour a teacher may, unwittingly, provide a disincentive to those children who generally don’t succeed at anything and with the challenging child reinforce stereotypes.

 Consider the child who scores the least on a tally chart. The motivated, the conscientious, the gregarious race ahead leaving behind the introvert, the reluctant worker and the insecure. Their self-esteem, already low, is further undermined, proving statistically their worthlessness. The evidence is writ large on the wall.

 Teachers may feel that they must choose between the carrot or the stick in order to keep ‘unruly’ children in check. In truth there is a third way. For many children achievement and the sense of satisfaction that it brings with it is often reward enough. Look at the face of a child that gets top mark in a test, or reads the first line of a page for the very first time. Do they need anything ‘extra’? If children are rewarded with a little ‘carrot’ when they do well they may come expect a little something ‘extra’ every time they do well. Likewise having to deal with failure is an important life skill and is acceptable as long as it does not undermine self confidence. It can be the driving force to try harder next time. In a supportive classroom atmosphere where children are encouraged and enthused there is likely to be little need to resort to any form of sanction or reward.

  This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book ‘Understanding behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). He is also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’.

�]�j

[understandingbehaviour]

Is raising achievement making children less intelligent?

The drive to raise achievement in schools has been a runaway train for many years. Successive governments have made much capital about the need to improve standards at all levels which has resulted in a free for all scramble. From teachers; to education emporiums; to whole countries, the situation has become competitive and at times personal. Good news for the consumer and a win-win situation for all concerned? As in any free market not everyone plays by the rules and if you can steal a march on your competitors then all well and good.

 Cheating used to be the prerogative of pupils but now some will go to great lengths to massage their examination results. From sanitising classrooms, to selecting which pupils actually take examinations. No stone is left unturned. Almost half the students are left on the shelf whilst the focus is put on the ‘gifted and talented’. Even the teachers are streamed. You cannot risk placing a dodgy teacher with a top set.

 The desperate are taken in by ‘Quack Science’. Healthy eating of course but omega-3 is no cure-all! It does not eradicate A.D.H.D, dyslexia and dyspraxia and a host of other cognitive and behavioural issues. I bet they have even considered ‘intelligence’ pills.  Students are increasing using ‘nootropics’ or ‘smart drugs’ to get ahead. If you are worried about the efficacy of pupils popping pills then just ply the little rascals with coffee, the caffeine will keep them alert.

 The kids are worked to within an inch of their lives. Teacher training is dumped with the focus placed only on what is important, passing exams. The easiest way is to use the Far-Eastern method: starter, main and plenary.  They copy notes and answer questions. Corrections are repeated, and repeated and repeated until they get it right. Then they are test incessantly until they can answer by rote. This is how they achieve. The results of the class are made public. Those at the bottom are shamed into making sure they are not there next time round. If they don’t like it, they can always find some other school. They are pressured, pushed and bullied to succeed. A fear of failure culture is established. And so many parents buy into this. How will they get a good job if they don’t pass? They don’t want to be seen as failures. They have to raise their aspirations. They all want to get university.....don’t they?

 A study carried out in 2015 by Professor Danny Dorling, of Oxford University, has shown that the US and the UK are the worst at teaching to examinations. With 16-24 year olds performing well below the average achieved by their 15 year old counterparts.

 The school is at the top of the league; the headteacher gets a knighthood; job done. Never mind if the teachers are burnt out and most of the pupils have anxiety issues they are no longer the school’s concern.

 What is the point?

Whatever happened to ‘nurture’?

 The political talk is of raising achievement but there is a world of difference between improving examination performance and raising educational standards. Be under no illusion, what is taking place in schools across many countries has more to do with political expediency than it has about trying to raise a child’s career opportunities. Politicians stand for nothing but re-election. There is a global, political, imperative to be seen at the top of international ‘performance’ leagues. It is akin to a country topping the medals table at the Olympics. Internationally, politicians believe that being the top, reflects the superior nature of their ideology. Nationally, the pursuit of ever improving performance targets seduces voters into believing that the government is actually raising attainment.

 Headteachers, post knighthood, stand at the helm and pontificate about raising aspirations of the underclass. These ‘first generation academics’ should have the opportunity to go to university like their betters from across the tracks but then they cannot just go to any university, certainly not the Russell Group collective. Most ex pupils would prefer to become skilled trades folk but then the funding has been cut for FE and apprenticeships are like gold. Better to send them to ‘Uni’ as this will bring in more capital into government coffers. It also means that those families that cannot afford the debt won’t let their children go to anyway. Is that a glass ceiling I can see? Even if they risk all and go and get that degree is there a job waiting for them? One commensurate with their proven level of academic achievement? Nope. I thought as much. So it’s back to stacking supermarket shelves whilst something better comes along.

 In their desire to ‘raise achievement’ schools have lost sight of what it is they are pursuing, and now just chase grades, deluding themselves and the general  public that educational standards are improving. To ensure accountability a whole circus of advisors and assessors have been drafted in, sucking out vital capital from the classroom. Along with this cancerous growth comes a mountain of paperwork and spreadsheets that chew up an in-ordinate amount of teacher preparation time.  

 The present educational model is unsustainable. You cannot expect a year on year improvement because capability in the population is not exponential. In any school, you will have a range of abilities and there will be those who will not be able to pass at the required level no matter how much time, effort and money you throw at them. Using a ‘learning by rote approach’, intelligence is one of a number limiting factors that will cause improvement to plateau at some point in time.  Making examinations harder just creates more failures.

 Long term it will cause more worrying issues and so we have to ask ourselves what it is we actually want from our education system? Focussing purely on ‘performance’ is a false economy, it does not provide a workforce that is skilled enough to meet the demands of a fast changing workplace this, in turn, will affect economic growth. In terms of social and emotional development this narrow approach to education is creating adults with significant mental health issues, people who do not have the resilience to cope with modern day life. Finally, far from being removing social barriers, focussing on performance alone is, in fact, re-enforcing social division.

 Intelligence, like many other human traits is a combination of genetic and environmental influence. We can, improve a child’s basic intelligence over time but to do so they must get the right kind of stimulus and motivation. Learning by rote does little except create disaffection.

 The mantra in education used to be ‘broad and balanced’. Although more content has been added to the curriculum at all levels it cannot be said that it is either broad or balanced. Training children to pass examinations does not teach them to problem solve, apply knowledge, analyse, synthesise or evaluate. Students emerge lacking the capability to think independently! Our education system is actually deskilling the future workforce.

 Maybe this is a political ploy, to under educate the masses whilst raising the academic ceiling so that the majority can never really aspire to anything. To improve intelligence would be to create a wide ranging public with the capacity to reason and to question what is happening around them, and that might not be advantageous at election time.

 But the politicians need not worry, the signs are that our children are becoming less intelligent. Danny Dorling’s 2015 study is just the latest research to highlight this issue. In 2006 Professor Michael Shayer carried out an extensive study of primary school children which drew this exact conclusion with teaching to examinations as the main culprit. The Flynn effect, an adjustment that is made to standardise the IQ test every generation, is starting to level out.  End of school examinations show that still just under half the population cannot pass them and so many leave still unable to do the basics, not just in terms of literacy and numeracy but also unable to cook or change a plug.

 If there really is a desire to raise educational standards then educational policy should be looking at how it can improve the intelligence of all children. This can be done. The likes of Piaget, Vigotsky and Feuerstein have demonstrated how. It requires a change in how children are taught, the volume of information they are expected to work with, the quality of teaching and learning available and a broad and balanced curriculum with an emphasis on the development of thinking skills.

 The irony is that if we were to move in this direction performance in examinations would improve as a consequence. Pie in the sky? Just take a look at the Finnish education system, the proof is there for all to see.

 All governments know what the Finns can offer but they are dismissed on cultural grounds. If this is the case then how come countries are trying to shoehorn in the Far-Eastern model? Yes the Finnish education system is different. It’s based on egalitarianism and is altruistic. The teachers are well paid and empowered to do their job without interference, saving millions in administration. Theirs is not a culture that indulges in rampant consumerism, self-interest, competition and a free market economy within education. Theirs is one that puts the wellbeing of their children first.

This piece has been adapted from Colin Lever’s latest book ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the Pursuit of GDP’ which is available online. http://goo.gl/DfQB6E

[understandingbehaviour]

Less is More. Is the Finnish education model the answer to all our issues?

In the light of Ofsted’s annual report with its concern over a ‘deeply troubling divide’ in the UK’s education system we have to ask, once more, is the UK education system fit for purpose. We all know what the problems but what is the answer?

 We all want the best education for our children but what price would you pay to ensure they get quality? Many parents choose to educate their children privately in the belief that money talks. The O.E.C.D has repeatedly shown that if you are looking for grades alone you can do no better than look to the education systems of the Far-East. Countries like China, Japan and South Korea are always in the top six of the P.I.S.A charts for literacy and numeracy. Beware, the reason for their lofty status is as much about their culture as it is about education. Their children are made to study from a very early age and they have long school days as well as after school tuition, regularly amounting to twelve or more hours a day. The work is largely repetitious and the children are pushed, pressured and, at times, shamed into performing. They are tested incessantly and all are expected to meet the stringent targets set irrespective of ability. But then you look at the wellbeing of each nation’s youth. South Korea has the highest suicide rate in the world for teenagers. Jian Xueqin, a director at Peking University said;

 “Using tests to structure schooling is a mistake. Students lose their innate inquisitiveness and imagination, and become insecure and amoral in the pursuit of high scores....they’re merely producing competent mediocrity.”

 There is a global, political imperative to be seen at the top of the PISA league, akin to a country topping the medals table at the Olympics. Internationally, they believe that being the top, reflects the superior nature of their political ideology. Nationally the pursuit of ever improving performance targets seduces voters into believing that the government is raising attainment. Be under no illusion chasing performance targets in education is more about political expediency than it is about any altruistic desire to raise student aspirations.

 The US (28th) is eager to climb up the PISA league and everything the US does, the UK (20th) follows along with other developed nations and so we are seeing more testing, more content, more assessment, more monitoring, more meetings, longer school days, more after school clubs, more homework. The belief that ‘more begats more’ is a proven one. But then our children are more stressed, becoming more disaffected and anxious. The teachers are more disillusioned and burnt out, hence why 50,000 left the profession in the UK last year alone. 40% leave the profession within twelve months and is struggling to find quality teachers, especially in key subjects like maths and science and to retain those that are employed. The number of supply teachers presently in schools is high.

 What if we all had an education system that raised academic achievement for all beyond expectations, whilst ensuring our children’s mental health and wellbeing; one that would reduce overall costs by as much as 30%? Too good to be true? Well we could have our educational cake and eat it. Oddly the answer lies in an ethos where ‘less is more’.

 Finland, with a GDP in excess of the UK, lies 6th in the PISA league just a few points behind the draconian practices of the Far-Eastern countries and a long way ahead of the ‘wannabes’ below.  It has evolved an education system that many countries are beginning to take a serious look at, including those from the Far-East.  Class sizes in Finland are between 15 and 20, giving the teacher plenty of time to get around each pupil in the class. They have a short school day, generally four lessons a day, and 15-20 minute breaks between each. This reduces the jaded feeling that you get by concentrating for long periods of time. It allows the pupils (and teachers) to reflect and to refresh in between. The subject content is less allowing more time to engender understanding and to develop quality teaching methods.  Interestingly, children do not start full time schooling until they are 7 years of age and, crucially, receive only one formal test is administered, at the age of sixteen.  

 The, teachers are highly trained (Masters level or better) and are selected using personality profiling to ensure capability for the job. Only 10% of those that apply are successful. Teachers pay is on a par with doctors and lawyers, ensuring a highly motivated work force. Education administration is kept to a minimum, there is no competition between schools and teachers, no performance targets. The teachers are trusted to get on with the job.

 It is an education system based on equality and egalitarianism. It is inclusive. Pupils with special educational needs are brought up to pace using specially trained teachers. The difference between the lowest performing pupils and the highest is the lowest in the OECD rankings. Pupil achievement could be around 20% higher than the maximum 3% that the pupil premium appears to offer. The country’s education policymakers have a duty to put the wellbeing of each and every child before performance targets and this philosophy underpins the Finnish approach to education.

 Colin Lever is the author Children in Need; education, wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP

�����4)R�

[understandingbehaviour]

Teaching, a vocation or a career?

50,000 teachers left the profession in the UK, last year and around 40% new recruits leave within twelve months. In the US the latest study shows that almost 20% leave teaching within 5 years. So what is the reason for the exodus? Salary issues, pressures of the job, behaviour of the children, work-life balance, take your pick.

 If you are a teacher ask yourself why you came into the profession in the first place. Was it to make a difference to young people’s lives, are you passionate about the subject you teach, or did you sign up because of the long holidays? Maybe there was not much else available when you graduated so you decided to give teaching shot in preference to stacking shelves in a supermarket?

 In recent years, in the UK, the academic bar has been raised in an attempt to raise the status of teaching. Teachers are encouraged to have a Master’s degree before applying. The majority of new recruits come from P.G.C.E courses, an add-on after having graduated in a specialist subject. It all sounds very scholarly. But does being highly qualified automatically make you a good teacher?

The statistics would indicate otherwise. With so many leaving teaching so soon, perhaps the supermarket option was not such a bad idea after all.

 Adverts in the press talk about having a ‘career’ in teaching but is that not misleading? Surely to enter the classroom is should be more of a vocation. What is the difference?

 A career is a personal journey, generally, but not always, motivated by self-interest and ambition, often fuelled by the promise of an improved salary.  Seeing a career as a vocation, changes the dynamic. You might be ‘career-minded’ but your ambition is not much personal gain but more a desire to help the children. Having a vocation is an act of selflessness.

 Teachers who view the job purely as a career opportunity are in the wrong business that is why so many leave so quickly. The experienced teacher will tell you that the ‘job’ is no easy option, despite the long holidays. Pursuing a career in the profession purely for personal gain is unethical because those that do are riding on the backs of children as they endeavour to climb up the ladder. There is little empathy or tolerance and it shows. The brave new world that is education today with its emphasis on targets and examination grades encourages the career oriented teacher but it is a false economy as pupils are not cattle and they can bite! Teaching is not a business, it will never be a business and no matter how much government policy tries to make it more efficient, it will never succeed.

 In this world of ‘pseudo-economics’ the challenging child (and there are increasing numbers of them) is an obstacle to the smooth rise up the managerial ladder and hence there is little sympathy or tolerance aimed in their direction.

 Having a vocation does not mean that a person is not ambitious, on the contrary. However, that ambition is tempered by a commitment to do right by the child. When difficult decisions are made, the needs of the child come first. A vocational ethic does not sit easy with present educational practice.

 Ironically it is the vocational teacher (along with a few hangers on desperate for the money) that stays longer than the rest because, despite the awful working conditions, they have a desire to do the best for the children. But even these stalwarts are having to reflect , playing with their conscience as their altruism is increasingly compromised as they see the heart and soul of the job that they gave their all to being destroyed. The broad and balanced curriculum they held so dear has been replaced by a narrow, one dimensional, approach, one which satisfies political expediency but does little for the wellbeing of the children. Worryingly for pupils across many countries is the sense of belonging, inherent in so many schools, being eroded, replaced with a sterile atmosphere of compliance and subservience.

 Those teachers with a strong vocation are becoming increasingly frustrated. Accumulating dissatisfaction at the injustices they witness on a daily basis is tipping the balance and this wealth of expertise is starting to leak out from the educational system. Whether the haemorrhage proves to be terminal only time will tell but it is an issue policy makers would do well to address.

 This article has been adapted from my book ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP’. I am also the author of the book ‘Understanding Challenging Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge).

  �m�,`���{

[understandingbehaviour]

Empathy...what all teachers need to succeed.

If a teacher is not able to build positive working relationships within the classroom then the children are likely to be disrespectful. What some fail to realise is that the personality of the teacher can have a major impact on whether they will be successful or not. Whether a teacher is a strict disciplinarian or a libertarian, the ability of a teacher to empathise with a class is going to influence the outcome of the lesson.

               Empathy is not about surrendering to child’s plaintiff pleas, teachers that are deemed a ‘soft touch’ are likely to be ruthlessly exploited. Likewise the teacher that is too harsh and unforgiving also commands little respect which will ultimately lead to their undoing.

Children are no different to adults. They are drawn to those who have good inter personal skills as much as they are put off by those that they do not have an empathy with. Teaching is as much about personality as it is about being organised and academically skilled and there are those in teaching for whom the profession is not suited. It is for each teacher to examine their own performance and be honest in their assessment. If they are not up to the job it would be better for them and for the children to seek alternative employment.

Building positive relationships with children is key to effecting good classroom management. Get it right and the children will be eating out of your hand, get it wrong a lesson is likely to unravel before your very eyes. The difference between a competent teacher and a struggling teacher has much to do with their commitment to the job in terms of planning and organisation. The difference between a successful teacher and a competent teacher has more to do with empathy even though they both share a commitment to the job. As with assertiveness, empathy is an innate quality but there are skills and techniques that can be acquired in order to make a teacher more empathic.

   “Good teachers make you think”

“A bad teacher is someone who gets frustrated with a student even when they have tried....”

“Bad teachers have no sense of humour”

“Good teachers don’t talk down to us”

“A good teacher is someone who is easy to talk to and generally happy”

“Good teachers are helpful, kind and understanding”

 Carl Rogers an eminent American Psychologist identified 3 core conditions that are required to bring to a relationship if it is to be a positive one. The conditions are:

a.       Acceptance of what a child is feeling at any moment in time, being non-judgemental.

b.      Congruence, being genuine, being yourself.

c.       Empathy, sensing accurately the feelings of the children, active listening.

 Your personality is shaped by nature and nurture. Your ability to develop relationships is linked to your personality but it is possible to improve your interpersonal skills at least within a classroom setting. The observations made by the children earlier give an indication of what they value in a teacher.

·         Children do like structure and routine.

·         Well planned and well organised lessons.

·         They respect a teacher with good classroom control.

·         Having good listening skills, eye contact, allowing children to air their views and being there for them when the need assistance (academically or emotionally).

·         Being able to depersonalise situations when a child is being challenging, focussing on the issue and being non-judgemental is a powerful tool.

 On the flip side, personalising situations when they are achieving helps to improves confidence and raise self-esteem. Children are keenly aware that they are often challenged when they do something wrong but are rarely praised when they do something right. Catching them being good is another skill that will engender a positive working relationship.

 Children warm to teachers;

·         That are approachable,

·         with whom they can confide in,

·         understand their needs

·         that are non-judgemental.

 There is a myth peddled that to be ‘professional’ a teacher must not engage at an emotional level with a child. It is nigh on impossible to work in an emotional vacuum and so relationships, either positive or negative develop. There is nothing sinister in this, it is a natural consequence of human beings being in close proximity. If a child chooses to bear their soul to a teacher it can be damaging to the child to ignore their emotions.

 Where a relationship becomes unhealthy is when barriers are crossed and the teacher and/or child become too familiar. There is what is described as maintaining a ‘professional distance’ but this does not mean a teacher should not exhibit empathy. Without empathy the ability of a teacher to control a class is compromised. A professional distance is essential in order that a child does not become too dependent but this does not have to mean being clinical.

 There are those that say teaching is not a popularity contest but I defy any teacher to succeed in the professional in emotional vacuum. It is human nature to like and to want to be liked. It is natural to respond negatively to something (or to someone) that is disliked especially at a young age. Successful teaching has its foundations in mutual respect. Children will put their trust in a teacher that is empathic but who still retains a professional dignity. Children will externalise this by committing to work set and modifying their behaviour accordingly. A respectful teacher places a belief in a child’s capability to surmount obstacles that lie in their path. If doubts set in then trust is compromised. If respect and trust break down completely then quality teaching and learning will not take place.

 “The poor teacher struggles

The mediocre teacher tells

The good teacher explains

The superior teacher engages

The great teacher inspires”

(Adapted from a quote by William Arthur Ward)

 Which teacher are you?

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s  book ‘Understanding Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). . He is also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’

������޸�

[understandingbehaviour]

Intervention & challenging behaviour

How do you get a noisy class to settle? The answer lies in getting to the children before they have entered.  Be at the door to welcome them and have a simple, settling activity ready. If the lesson is active and interesting then there is every chance they will settle. The key to reducing noise in a class and maintaining a level of decorum is in being pro-active and establishing routines.

 If you are expecting a highly challenging class to sit in silence for long periods then you might become disillusioned very quickly. By the same token, if you do not impose a certain level of crowd control your ability to keep them in check will be severely compromised. The balance required must be a pragmatic one.

 Ø  Does the class need to be in silence for this activity?

Ø  What level of noise is acceptable for the given activity?

 Disruptions spoil the flow of a lesson. It is hard to focus on class work if somebody is being challenging.  The aim is to deal with disruption without it affecting the flow of a lesson. When an incident occurs the teacher is faced with a choice.  How they react is likely to determine what will happen next. The focus is as much on the teacher as it is on the child.

 The teacher could ignore the disruption but this might undermine their authority or the teacher could challenge the child but an argument might ensue and make the disruption worse.

 The solution lies in;

Ø  The timing of the teacher’s intervention

Ø  The context in which they intervene

Ø  The degree of self-control exhibited by the teacher

 “You can deliver the message in a large package, loud and in front of everyone or in a small package, quietly and unobtrusive one to one, the message is the same.”

 Deciding on the best course of action if a child transgresses is usually a decision that is taken quickly, there is an urgency to get on with the lesson as well as an underlying feeling that that the child has to be dealt with straight away. Experience brings with it the skills to know;

·         When to react

·         How to react,

·         And to what degree

 Giving the child a choice is another method of retaining control whist allowing the child to think that have not lost control. By offering a choice the child has options.

 It is important that the level of intervention matches the transgression. It would be unfair to suspend a child for chewing in class and it would be unwise to ignore a child who is physically assaulting another child.  Like changing gears in a car, the idea is to move through intervention strategies until the teacher reaches the appropriate one to match what is before them.

 How a teacher speaks to a child is as important as the timing and context. If the teacher reacts in a calm and self-controlled manner they are more likely to effect a positive outcome. If the teacher reacts aggressively the situation may become more inflamed. A child will mirror the emotion displayed by the teacher. It can also occur the other way! Rather than confront the teacher can elect to;

Ø Diffuse

Ø Deflect

Ø Confuse

Even in the face of a determined attempt to provoke it is important that the teacher maintains their composure. Some children are adept at knowing which buttons to press to get a reaction from a teacher. It is important to bear in mind that any personal attack or affront by a child towards the teacher is designed to get a reaction, by not ‘taking the bait’ the teacher disarms the child and forces them to rethink their strategy.

 If a child is proving difficult it is important that the teacher maintains control of the situation using assertiveness rather than aggression. Assertiveness is a method of conveying authority without causing rancour. The assertive teacher commands respect in the way that they conduct themselves.

 There are occasions when no matter how the teacher tries to control the situation the child is unable or unwilling to comply. In the event of this happening the teacher should have a well rehearsed exit strategy designed to remove the child without causing too much disruption. Schools should have their own agreed procedures for sending children out of a lesson for disciplinary reasons.

 A child may get angry and seek to get out of the room. If this occurs the teacher should step aside and let them leave. Blocking a child’s path is likely to lead to a serious situation, possibly a physical assault on the teacher.  When faced with a child that is intent on leaving, a teacher may feel that their authority has been compromised but this is more a case of timing and context. Once the child has left and cooled down they can then be summoned and the situation dealt with at a later time, preferably the same day.

 If a child refuses to leave the room then again the school should have a set procedure to deal with this event. In the UK there are laws that ‘enable staff to use such force as is reasonable....’.

 Whilst a teacher may be protected in law, laying hands on a child, especially an irate child, means that the teacher runs the serious risk of being physically assaulted and so it should be used only as a last resort. It would be helpful for a number of key staff in a school to be properly trained in physical intervention techniques to reduce the risk to staff and children if force is required. Grabbing hold of a child without knowing how to do so without causing harm may result in legal action against the teacher.

 It is rare that a teacher will find themselves in a challenging situation that they have not played a part in creating. If a teacher is poorly organised, if the work is repeatedly unstimulating, if the teacher is terse, aggressive and/or overtly sarcastic or patronising then disaffection and conflict are going to ensue. If a teacher is respectful of the children they are more than likely to reciprocate.

 This article has been adapted from ‘Understanding Challenging Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). . I am also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP’

[understandingbehaviour]

School Inclusion, a Solution Focused Approach

Just where does a teacher start with teaching the seemingly unteachable? Chances are that they have tried every sanction there is, including bribery. Children like this are just too challenging for the mainstream..... or are they?  

 It is the perception that creates the reality because the truth is that challenging children do not misbehave all the time. If a teacher can find out what it is that keeps their attention, even if it is only for a short while then maybe this can be useful in getting the child to settle down.

 A solution focussed approach recognises the problem but seeks a solution by finding what a child can do, what their strengths are and then building on these. Teachers cannot change history but they can affect the future and this is driving force behind a solution focussed approach.

 “A small change in any aspect of a problem or even a failed solution can initiate a solution”

(Solution Focussed)

 Our expectation is that challenging children should go from ‘zero to hero’ in an instant. If expectations are too prohibitive then change is unlikely to occur. A way around this is to construct a scale by which progress can be measured. Scaling is used a lot in therapy to gauge progress.

 Seeking a diagnosis for behavioural problems can take years and then you have to find the best strategy, if indeed there is one, meanwhile the child continues to disrupt.  A Solution Focussed approach tackles the problem in a different way. It focuses on the behaviour as the problem and not the child. By taking this view the child is not labelled or demonised.

 “The problem is the problem not the child”

(Solution Focussed)

 By honing in on the problem, the issue is depersonalised whilst at the same time externalising the problem in the child’s eyes. Separating the behaviour from the child allows the child to begin to remove ‘the monkey on their back’.

               The solution to the problem is;

·         How to solve the problem

·         How to educate the child to deal with the problem

 “There are an infinite number of ways both positive and negative to solve a problem”

(Solution Focussed)

 It is a case of the teacher recognising when desired behaviours occur and noticing why and/or how the correct response has been elicited. Teacher’s responses are hard wired to react to misbehaviours so this is a skill that has to be nurtured.  Once a possible solution emerges it is a case of trying it again to see if the desired response is repeated.

 “If it works do more of it, if it does not work try something else”

(Solution Focussed)

  When searching for ‘what works’ it might help to try things from the opposite perspective. As a teacher you will be aware of what a challenging child ‘cannot do’ but;

·         Are you as aware of what they can do?

·         How do you acknowledge when a child is being good?

 “Catch them being good”

(Solution Focussed)

 When working with children the ideal ratio is 4 positives to 1 negative. If we recognise and reward children when they are being ‘good’ they are more likely to repeat that behaviour.

 Solution Focussed is as much a philosophy as it is a psychology of working. Its principles apply to all aspects within a school and as such they are as relevant to the teacher in the classroom as they are to senior management. A Solution Focussed approach recognises that there are issues but rather than dwelling on them it seeks to find a solution to the issues without looking outside the immediate environment (that is usually the person).

 “Children have unique ways of solving problems”

(Solution Focussed)

 “Children have the necessary resources to make change possible”

(Solution Focussed)

 A child may be adept at sport or drama, activities that require high levels of concentration, determination and self-discipline, yet when asked to sit quietly and get on with a task in the classroom these same skills are absent. Children, especially, do not transfer skills easily from one situation to another but a Solution Focused teacher would work with a child to enable them to transfer their skills.

 If change is going occur then the child is going to have to co-operate.  A child may agree to be better in the future, they may even sign a contract to that effect and promise that it will never happen again. No sooner have they stepped out of the door they are back to their old tricks.

 “No sign up, no change”

(Solution Focussed)

 For a long term, permanent change in challenging behaviour what is ‘on offer’ has to be better than what is happening at present. The teacher has to find a way to create the ‘want’ in a child. This is why difficult children with a difficult home life tend to come to school every day despite constantly getting into trouble. School offers them a safe haven, warmth and attention (albeit negative attention). Likewise children who truant find comfort in the friends they hang around with outside of school. Finding a solution to the problem may not be easy but unless the child is included in the process then the chances are that they will not sign up to change.

 “One foot in the pain and one in the possibility”

(Solution Focussed)

 It is important to hear a child’s story about what is troubling them. Having listened to what they have to say the teacher can then paint a picture of a time when things will be better. This offers the child hope and with hope comes motivation. Acknowledging a child’s distress creates an empathy that goes a long way to enhancing co-operation. Offering them choices with a positive outcome gives them the opportunity to feel that they are still in control.

 “A focus on future possibilities enhances change”

(Solution Focussed)

 “The possibilities are endless”

(Solution Focussed)

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book ‘Understanding Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). He is also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’.

  ~D��`�����

[understandingbehaviour]

Classroom logistics & behaviour management

The layout of a classroom is something many teachers take for granted yet its influence on behaviour can be profound. Children with autism may be affected by a flickering light, other children may be claustrophobic. Those with ADHD may be easily distracted by goings on around them. A teacher’s desk, cluttered shelves and faded children’s work on display sets an example that the teacher does not really care. It is often, only when things start to go awry that some teacher’s act but then it might be too late. It is important to be pro-active and look carefully at classroom logistics as part of any planning and preparation.

                 The creation of a seating plan utilises a divide and rule approach to the problem. Its success is subject to the number of ‘challenging children’ that there are in the group.  If the ratio is greater than around 1:10 then the success of any seating plan will be compromised. It could be argued that if the work in class is engaging and interesting that there would be no need for a seating plan but if a teacher is pro-active and arranges a class with behaviour (and other criteria such as ability) in mind then any possible problems are likely to be nipped in the bud. If creating a seating plan in respect of behaviour it can be advantageous to surround the ‘challenging’ child with positive role models.

 Seating plans can be an effective tool in reducing class noise but they are no panacea. Working in tandem with a seating plan is the actual arrangement of the children’s desks in the classroom. Altering the position of the desks along with a seating plan may help in settling a class down and creating an environment that is conducive to learning.

 What type of desk arrangement a teacher decides upon depends on what function it is intended for.  Traditional rows with everybody facing forward, combined with a seating plan, tend to reduce chat amongst students.  An island arrangement is useful for group work but the noise level is likely to go up as communication between children is easier. An active lesson might involve altering desk arrangements to suit the activity.

 Group work is part and partial of modern day teaching but like seating plans, the structure of a group can be crucial to the success or failure of a task. Group dynamics play a large part in the smooth running of such activities. Critical Skills approaches suggest pupil job roles but research has shown that a group size larger than 3 is likely to result in one or more children being marginalised.

 Getting children to work together can be challenge in itself. As with a seating plan if the children are given free reign friends will tend to gravitate to each other. It is also likely that the vulnerable in the class will be ostracised further reinforcing negative emotions. It is important therefore that the teacher pro-actively homogenise the make up of groups. As with creating a seating plan there is likely to be initial resistance but with time a class will get used to it and will eventually embrace it.

 If a room is cluttered by too much furniture then movement around the room is going to be compromised (there are health and safety rules for distances between desks etc).The more space there is to move around in the less potential there is for disruption. Some children will invariably seek to get up out of their chair for legitimate reasons or otherwise, endeavouring to keep ‘bums on seats’ can be a constant source of irritation and potential conflict. For this reason a teacher must decide on whether reasonable movement around the room is allowed or not.

 In many secondary schools, little attention is sometimes paid to the walls in a classroom. Displays remain static for months and are little better than wallpaper, their interest fading as fast as the colour in the sugar paper they are mounted on. Putting children’s work on the walls personalises the room and gives the children an association with their environment, as well having the kudos of their work displayed for all to see. However even this type of display is passive and its interest transitory. With a little creativity wall displays can become active and even interactive.

 A classroom should be designed with the needs of the children in mind, getting this right will make a difference to the dynamics.

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book ‘Understanding Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). He is also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’.

K�p�WY�(

[understandingbehaviour]

Active Learning

It is a simple cause and effect situation that if a child is actively engaged in the learning process then it is unlikely that they are misbehaving. Whilst motivation is the driving force that delivers engagement in a lesson, it is the work that is presented to the class that ‘prime’s the pump’.  The work in class should serve to stimulate as well as to educate. There are those that bleat “we are not here to entertain”, but the brutal truth is that if the work presented to a class is dull then discipline issues are likely to surface.

 Have you ever played the old party game ‘pass the orange’? The idea is that you have two rows of people and they have to pass an orange from one end of the row to the other using only their chins. They are not allowed to use their hands at all. Apply this to a lesson where pupils are given a sequencing task. The group has to create the correct sequence, get in line and then pass the orange front to back. Is this entertainment or education? Even the most mundane of tasks can be given an active makeover.

 Children are naturally inquisitive. They will explore by physically examining an object and/or by asking questions. This is where active learning begins. Passive learning ignores a child’s natural instincts whereas active learning stimulates them. If a class has had their natural inquisitiveness drummed out of them due to a perceived need for strict discipline or getting through the work, getting them ‘fired up’ once more can be difficult. Many will seek reassurance that an answer or action is right or wrong but given time most children will shake off the mantle and set about learning actively with enthusiasm.

 There are fewer exhilarating circumstances in teaching than seeing a child taking over their own learning and running with an idea, driving a lesson. Their enthusiasm is infectious as empowerment kicks in. The key is to ask the right questions to get the children motivated. This is the essence of problem solving. Problem solving gives heurism a context and direction.

 It is important to use questioning that probes understanding and requires thinking not just recall. This in itself can be construed as ‘active learning’, where as to an observer the children are all sitting and listening to the teacher but it is what the teacher is asking of the children that is key. Socratic questions are questions that help to develop thinking skills in children. If the activity is carefully structured then the teacher can manipulate the children’s thinking whilst allowing them to maintain (some) ownership of what they are actually doing.

 Critical skills is one method of engineering a balance between a truly open-ended challenge and a teacher led piece of work. In critical skills the teacher is described as a facilitator of children’s learning rather than an instructor.

 Whilst such an approach is not truly heuristic it is a more pragmatic way of educating, empowering the children to have ownership of their own learning. Using this method the children work within a framework constructed by the teacher yet still the children are allowed to explore and discover whilst reducing many of the blind alleys that bring with them frustration and confusion. Critical skills learning is a much more formalised method of providing active learning.

 With classes that are particularly unruly, the transition from a heavily structured, teacher led approach to student centred, open-ended affair can sometimes become a free for all. Children have to be schooled in developing the skills needed to work independently and so active learning might be introduced gradually.

 The perception that active teaching is merely ‘edutainment’ is incorrect. Those that subscribe to this view do so because they lack commitment to their teaching, The most successful teachers combine active teaching with high academic achievement.

 There is no doubt that active teaching demands much more of the class teacher than a passive approach. This is why some teachers opt for the easy life because to sustain an active philosophy in the classroom requires stamina. However, the rewards speak for themselves in terms of increased motivation (on the part of both teacher and children), improved academic performance and significant job satisfaction. There is ‘no gain without pain’ and it is upon this approach that the best teachers stand head and shoulders above the rest. Teachers should not be frightened by the demands of active teaching but rather should embrace.

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book ‘Understanding Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge). He is also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, wellbeing and the pursuit of GDP’.

[understandingbehaviour]

Differentiation, the key to inclusion

Explain the equation:

Ih d/dt Ψ(x,t)=HΨ(x,t)

Can’t do it?

Won’t do it?

Boring?

The same excuses are peddled by children, some of whom are prone to exhibiting challenging behaviour. Teacher smay dismiss them as avoidance tactics but how can they be certain that the child cannot actually do what has been presented?

Teaching by rote, makes no allowances for ability, is proving increasingly popular as teachers are pressured to get ‘results’. Any children that struggle are put down a group. Can there be anything more de-motivating to a child than to have failure reinforced?

The converse of a top down approach where children are filtered out on the basis of what they cannot do is a bottom up approach where the emphasis is on providing work that the children can do, stepping stones whereby children progress acquiring skills and knowledge as they progress. This is a more inclusive approach and is underpinned by the process of differentiation. Differentiation is very much a child-centred pedagogy because it takes into account each child’s individual, educational needs.

                  In any class there are likely to be a range of abilities. To get around this some teachers pitch their teaching somewhere in the middle of the assumed ability range. The problem with this is that those of a lower ability will still not be able to do the work and those of a higher ability will find the work too easy. This can lead to disruption from either cohort.

There are perceptions that differentiation involves vast amounts of individual worksheets but it need not. At its simplest differentiation can be a matter of outcome. In most cases differentiation is about setting a variety of graded tasks that increase in difficulty and complexity. What is key to all methods of differentiation is where the children start from. It is best to assume zero knowledge. This allows the teacher to assess where each child is in terms of pre-existing knowledge, it also serves as a useful reinforcement.

A Piagetian approach to differentiation is based on the principle of conceptual ‘readiness’, developing ‘thinking skills’ to facilitate cognitive development. It assumes that a child cannot progress from one level to another until they have successfully mastered the one below. The significance of grading work in this way is that all children can access the work and they will each find their own level, a useful measure of assessment. If teaching and learning is on a continuum then all children have the opportunity to progress. However even this model can cause frustrations if a child reaches their limit and cannot progress.  If the jumps between the levels are too high then the exercise becomes a de-motivating stress may lead to behavioural problems. It is important to get the balance right.

 When does a challenge becomes a stress?

 The role of the teacher is pivotal moving from heavily guided, teacher led, structured work at the start to open ended independent work later on.  Throwing children into an open ended task without the necessary skills, especially if they have been used to a lot of teacher support can be a recipe for challenging behaviour.

 Bloom’s Taxonomy is a classification model that presets thinking skills as a developmental process.  As with Piagetian classification, Bloom’s taxonomy suggests a bottom up approach whereby children cannot progress to a higher level until they have mastered the one below. Advocates of Bloom’s Taxonomy break each stage into two distinct areas, mastery & development, and suggest that work targeted at all levels of ability should include both;

 Using this approach to differentiation means that children visit more cognitively challenging work early on in their development but it is presented in a way that allows them to succeed and build experience before moving onto more demanding work. Rather than stepping stones this approach can be view more as a spiral, constantly returning to specific skills but in an ever more challenging situation. Within this type of differentiation, strategies from teacher led, guided work to more independent learning can be incorporated so that a child can begin to access levels above their original capability. If all these methodologies are integrated a differentiated approach by process emerges.

 This article has been adapted from ‘Understanding Challenging Behaviour in the inclusive classroom’ (Routledge).  I am also the author of ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP’

  J�G�wD

[understandingbehaviour]

Family matters and the death of social democracy

One in two marriages end in divorce(ONS 2013). The average life of a marriage is eleven years (ONS 2012). There are 1.9 million single parent families with dependent children(ONS 2013). The average household debt in the UK stands at fifty four thousand pounds and has doubled in ten years (Centre for Social Justice 2013). 78% of children attend a childminder. Many children spend around six hours a day, on average in front of a television of computer screen (Childwise 2009). Nicky Morgan, the present Education Secretary said in an interview on BBC television in 2014;

 “Some parents struggle to find just ten minutes a day to read to sons and daughters because of the demands of work.”

  The statistics paint a picture of families in turmoil, reliant on debt and working as many hours as they can to manage that debt. This would appear to put pressure on relationships in the home with those most affected being the children.  How reflective is this of family life today and what values underpin modern family life? Family values do change over time but to what degree and how quickly? It is difficult to define core family values because they differ, depending on issues such as religion, culture, demographics etcetera.

 Families that experience persistent problems are often described as dysfunctional and so, if a family is to function, it must be able to satisfy the needs of each individual, be they parent or offspring or relative. As with values, needs vary widely but ‘Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs’ covers most bases.  The significance of the Hierarchy is that it is arranged so that the needs above cannot be fully realised if the ones below have not been met and the, ultimate, aim is to produce a person with the physical and emotional capabilities to realise their potential.

 The most basic of human needs are physiological, to be fed and watered and to have adequate health and hygiene. This also covers issues such as diet and exercise. But it is not just the impoverished that struggle to maintain a healthy lifestyle. One in three children are now categorised as being clinically obese (Kings College , 2015) and 50% of children under the age of eight have serious, tooth decay (Public Health England, 2015). If these, the most basic of needs are not met, physiological and psychological problems may develop.

 People should feel safe and secure in their home. A family should be protective of its members and provide emotional stability. Where physical or emotional abuse is evident, one or more members may feel insecure.  In England, 48,000 children are in need of protection and 68,000 are in care. Physical abuse is all too obvious but emotional abuse is much harder to detect. This may take the form of bullying and/or emotional neglect.

 A child may be ‘cared for’ in having their physiological and safety needs met but if there is a lack of affection and love in the home then this may affect their wellbeing. Parents may be ‘too busy’ to show their emotions through hugs and kisses or the atmosphere in the home might be too austere.  Showering a person with expensive gifts and/or pampering them by giving in to their demands does not foster a sense of belonging.

 Lack of belonging is cited as one of the reasons why some children are susceptible to being groomed, whether by paedophiles or extremists. They are made to feel wanted by those that stalk them and gain a greater sense of belonging than what is on offer at home. If a person is loved and that affection is unequivocal then family members are less likely to be tempted to ‘wander’.

 Strong relationships within the family help to build self-esteem and confidence. The aim is to create an environment in order to nurture an individual that has a high emotional intelligence, one that can deal with whatever life throws at them. This type of person is more likely to develop secure attachments with others that they meet and to be empathic. This is the case whether you are an adult or a child.

 Insecure attachments caused by relationship issues may to lead to feelings of inferiority and/or depression. Alternatively, a person may build an inflated opinion of themselves, leading them to become a bully that could manifest itself as a racist or misogynist.

 Insecure attachments usually lead to difficulties in forming long-term relationships, directing the individual along a path where self and ego are the priority. Relationships are brittle and may be brutal. Mental Health problems such as ADHD, ADD, oppositional defiance disorder and post traumatic stress disorder are examples of problems caused by insecure attachments.

 Children placed in a boarding school may have their physiological needs met but issues of personal security (bullying) and a lack of belonging to the family unit at home are common in these establishments so children often develop insecure attachments. Outwardly they are confident and independent but they fail to develop emotionally and are less empathic. Many go on to be successful in business and politics where being ‘hard-nosed’ is seen an asset (Nick Duffell’s book ‘Wounded Leaders: British Leaders and the Entitlement Illusion-a Psychohistory’ explains it all).

 There is a parallel here with child-minding. The chance of developing insecure attachments if a child is placed with a child-minder is dependent on the time spent there and also with the quality of provision. It is well documented that children who attend child minders are often confident and they learn to compete with others but what of their emotional development? In any competition there are winners and losers.

 If the family can help meet all the earlier needs, then that person is likely to realise their full potential. Even though they become independent within society they will keep their family close whilst contributing to a wider society on many levels. Maslow describes this as self-actualisation. He added another tier later on, ‘self-transcendence’. Once a person has achieved their ambitions or career goals may they look to use their skills for the greater good, exhibiting altruism and/or philanthropy.

 Self actualisation can manifest itself as individualism or collectivism. If basic needs are not met then a person is unlikely to achieve their full potential and what is achieved is likely to be self-centred, putting personal goals in front of anything else. This might be career, ambition, assets etc. Some parents convince themselves that they are ‘providing’ for their children by going out to work but the reality is that they are using this as an excuse to satisfy their own, selfish, needs. A collectivist perspective is likely to weigh up the need to earn with ensuring that family members receive the right kind of attention and support. Getting the balance correct is not always an easy one. Compromise is inevitable but if the intrinsic family values are sound they will act as a stabiliser to reduce the chances of bias. Parenting styles shape the child and become self-perpetuating.

 I was brought up in a working class environment, my father was a coal miner and my mother stayed at home to raise three children. My father fought in World War 2 and they were both part of the society that voted for a National Health Service and a Welfare State. These were ideals supported by a strong sense of collectivism on the part of the nation as a whole, a new beginning after the ravages of Two World Wars. Churchill was swept aside despite his popularity (82%), his Conservative government refusing to adopt major social reform.

As a child growing up in the fifties, sixties and early seventies, the sense of community was still strong with family values such as living within one’s means, respect for others and being neighbourly to the fore. There was aspiration and encouragement to ‘better yourself’ but not at any cost and certainly not at the expense of others. It is apparent that, today, many immigrant families exhibit these same family values, ones that have been lost to those in the West.  Maybe it is this sense of family and community that some find threatening as it clashes with their individualistic approach to living. And you cannot help but see the irony as the children of Islam who try and uphold traditional family values are drawn to the religious extremism that is ISIS. Perhaps therein lies both the problem and the solution.

 These ‘ideals’ were shaped largely by the religions within the community. My father was a Roman Catholic and my mother a Scottish Presbyterian. The idea of being God fearing was instilled into us and another family value, discipline tempered any thought of excess. Rightly or wrongly this shaped they way we acted. It gave us a moral compass. I am largely agnostic these days but if parents are not with their children for any length of time from whom do they acquire this moral compass? Childminders? Teachers?  Is it not a parent’s responsibility to develop moral ‘values’ in their children?

 The rise of Thatcherism in the 1980’s let loose the principle of a Free Market Economy, encouraging debt in order to drive the nation’s G.D.P. New Labour’s slightly left of centre ideology did much the same, driving up personal and national debt into the bargain. The more socially cohesive Keynsian economics has been devoured by a voracious appetite for consumerism, encouraged by expedient government policy that measures progress purely in terms of G.D.P.

 As a consequence and largely unnoticed has been the seismic shift in family values. The altruistic ideals that created our National Health System and a ‘cradle to grave’ Welfare State have changed. Family Values are now, largely, individualistic. They are about raising capital to fund a debt ridden lifestyle. Raising children is no longer holistic. Progress is measured largely in terms of attaining educational targets and getting into the ‘best’ schools. It is more about image and comparison rather than wellbeing. Those that aspire to go to university are saddled with debt before they get a job and they are unlikely to own their own house because of buy-to-let is the latest ‘must do’ item on many peoples’ agenda.

 Parents put the emphasis on their careers, some even have children as a ‘to do’ item on that checklist, disregarding the commitment required to raise a child. These are not just middle class ideals. The so called ‘working class’ have been invited to the party and they too are similarly aspirational. Encouraged to take on unsustainable debt they have borrowed to buy into an increasingly consumerist society, one in which self comes before anyone else.

 Following the financial crash of 2007/8, austerity has chipped away at the institutions created by our forebears. The vulnerable in society are squeezed, the elderly, the disabled and the poor. They are the ones who are forced to make sacrifices caused by those individuals who put self before anything else. Society’s leaders once spoke of a ‘big society’ but, because of their upbringing they, lack the empathy and understanding to make it a reality. They do not comprehend the human cost of their decisions on the needy. They are adept at having carefully engineered family ‘photo-shots’ but then their children are passed across to the ‘au pair’ while they get on with their careers. The total lack of understanding of the migrant crisis reflects their lack of humanity.

 There is a distinct deficiency of empathy running through all levels of society as people now display individualism rather collectivism. As a nation we are exhibiting significant,  anxious-avoidant insecure attachment symptoms. How often is the maxim ‘charity begins at home’ used an excuse for xenophobic leanings?  Our country used to be one based on tolerance, not any more. N.I.M.B.Yism is the norm along, once communal streets.

 Whilst the most vulnerable in society suffer, the rich get richer and the majority  endeavour to emulate ‘the haves’ rather than trying to help the ‘have-nots’.  Modern politics is shaping present day family values, values which altered the political landscape of our parents. It is a classic chicken and egg situation. At present there is no room for social democracy until it can change basic family values. The populist the right strengthens its grip seducing the electorate, even in traditional socialist, heartlands. Left of centre politics will have to rely on the support of rebellious teenagers whose rite of passage has always been to challenge parental authority by doing the exact opposite of what they are told. There is no doubt that Family matters.

 This article has been adapted from Colin Lever’s book; ‘Children in Need: education, wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP. Read more of Colin Lever’s blogs at: http://understandingbehaviour.com/

�

[understandingbehaviour]

Education, Wellbeing & the Pursuit of GDP

What toll are the pressures of modern society having on our children? They are being exploited yet we stand by and let it happen. 78% of all children attend a childminder as parents pursue career goals and seek to maintain a debt ridden lifestyle. This feeds a nation’s GDP and is encouraged by government. Official inspections focus only on ensuring that the child grasps the basics in preparation for schooling, there is little assessment of how childminding affects wellbeing. The spectre of attachment haunts every crèche. Could this be why poor behaviour in school is increasing? From whom do our children receive their moral compass? At school, children are increasingly fed on a diet of prescriptive teaching because teachers are hidebound by having to meet performance related targets. No quarter is given and no mercy is shown as pupils are led into the examination room. The 50% deemed ‘not gifted nor talented’ are usually discarded long before any exams are taken. “Exam stress leads to a 62% rise in calls to ChildLine.” (Schools Improvment.net 2013) The rise of Academies in the UK is creating division in society as schools use fair means  or foul to try and make sure that they have the ‘best’ pupils. If you have ever been the child that is last to be picked, you will have some idea of the damage rejection has on many children. “Competition among schools is related to greater socio-economic segregation among students.” (OECD/PISA 2014) Schools are compared with each other, despite the obvious, unfair advantage some have over the rest. So damaging is this disparity that some schools are now only interested in what the child can do for the school. Our children are part of the rat race that their parents are desperate to escape. Made examples of in the media, they are sacrificed on the altar of consumerism, a commodity, not valued for who they are. Education does not take a holistic approach to the child.  “Stressed GCSE individuals get lower results.” (BBC 2013) This is not just a problem peculiar to Jersey. Whole nations compete to show that their ideological brand is the best, reflected by the country’s ranking in the P.I.S.A league table. In South Korea, which boasts a top ranking internationally, suicide rates among teenagers has increased by 57% in ten years. “43% of 15 year olds say that they self-harm at least once a month.” (Centreforum Commission 2014) In the UK, cuts in benefits, rises in performance related targets, pulling the plug on charitable organisations like Kids Company and a lack of attention towards wellbeing when Ofsted comes to town are all indicators that our children are more at risk than ever before.  Knowingly or inadvertently we sit on our hands and do nothing or, worse still, we actively push our offspring towards the precipice, raising anxieties and creating long standing mental health issues as they peer, nervously over the edge. With the number of avoidable, deaths involving young people on Jersey over the last couple of years, the island as a community perhaps needs to look closely at what it is demanding of its children. “There has been a threefold increase in the number of teenagers who self-harm in England in the last decade.” (W.H.O 2015) Not all adults are guilty but government, parents, teachers and associated bodies need to examine their consciences. Our silence is deafening.  ‘.....half of the adults who are mentally ill experience the onset of their mental health problems by the age of fifteen.’ (World happiness report 2013) What is happening is tantamount to child abuse and I do not use the term lightly. There is a furore when ‘professionals’ do not read the signs but are we not doing exactly the same by letting it all happen in the name of ‘raising achievement’’? Mental health organisations are being  overwhelmed by the number of cases landing in their collective lap.  The answer however is simple. Put the needs of the child first. The wellbeing of the child should be the priority on everyone’s agenda, before educational targets. Teaching should be free of competition.  Accountability can be achieved in ways that are not as divisive and damaging.  Our children need support and protection. They require nurturing in an environment that is conducive to their long term mental health and wellbeing. Governments and business leaders take note;  “70 million working days lost to mental illness last year at a cost of £100 billion to the UK economy.” (CMO report 2015)  

This piece has been adapted from Colin Lever’s latest book ‘Children in Need: Education, Wellbeing & the pursuit of GDP’ which is available online.tion, Wellbeing and the Pursuit of GDP

[understandingbehaviour]