
Will new school rules help cut violence in the classroom?
In response to concerns from teachers, the Scottish government has now published guidance for schools on how to deal with violent and aggressive behaviour from pupils.However, the Conservatives dismissed it as "waffle", saying it gives no clear instructions on when and how to exclude violent or disruptive pupils.
What's the problem?
Karen Simpson taught in a primary school in Inverness for 14 years but in 2018 she quit to become a tutor.She said she loved the job but there was a "gradual" erosion of a teacher's ability to use boundaries that made it impossible to maintain discipline.Her story chimes with the stories of so many others.Teachers leaving the profession because the classroom behaviour has become too difficult, too overwhelming.
Parents too have told me their children are too nervous to go to school. They say their kids are traumatised by the disruptive behaviour of other pupils who have repeatedly got away with swearing or violence and faced no boundaries. Some call for a return to the days of corporal punishment in schools, when unruly children were disciplined by "the tawse".It was outlawed in the 1980s in Scotland, for very good reasons, but some think the pendulum has swung too far with many councils focusing on the principles of "nurture".
What does the new guidance say?
For low-level disruptive behaviour the guidance suggests a range of measures.These include offering children "an alternative activity to the rest of the class that allows the child to regulate their emotions or behaviour" or asking the pupil to "take a break for a short time". The guidance also suggests access to learning support for pupils struggling to regulate their behaviour. But teachers have told me there is already not enough learning support in schools.For different levels of difficult behaviour the appendix to the guidelines suggests different staged interventions.For children who are being violent one consequence is to give them a laminated piece of paper with bullet points reminding them how to behave and step away. Other inventions include keeping the child in school but taking them to a different area to allow them to calm down.
What about exclusions from school?
For years there has been a presumption against removing kids from school.Academics at Edinburgh University found that being expelled from school massively impacts young people's life chances in all the worst ways.Glasgow dramatically cut its exclusions as did many other local authorities.But in recent times teachers have been expressing growing concerns about some local authorities and schools misinterpreting the nurture principles by removing all or any consequences.In her foreword to the guidance, Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth said exclusion should only be used as a "last resort".The guidance says exclusion can be used in response to violence or anti-social behaviour, saying this measure can "allow matters to calm, time for planning, meeting with parents etc".
What was the reaction to the guidelines?
Teachers' unions have broadly welcomed the new guidelines but the EIS said they won't solve the behavioural problems in schools without significantly more resources and staff to support kids.Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth said they will empower teachers in the face of rising levels of disruption and emotional dysregulation. However, Tory education spokesman Miles Briggs said they were a pathetic response to the epidemic of violence in Scottish classrooms.He said: "Teachers are still being given no clear rules on when and how they can exclude violent or disruptive pupils."Jenny Gilruth only mentions it as a last resort. Instead teachers are being fed waffle about eye-contact, hand signals and merits."These are utterly insufficient for dealing with the extreme behaviour that we've seen recently in classrooms up and down the country."Rather than clear rules, this document is full of Holyrood blob buzzwords about multi-agency processes, positivity and inclusion."
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Record
2 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Humza Yousaf slams Tories and warns 'blaming asylum seekers doesn't make women safer'
The former first minister said women were more at risk from predatory men who come from "every background" than asylum seekers Humza Yousaf has accused the Tories of "stoking fear" after Robert Jenrick was pictured at an anti-asylum rally in Essex attended by a veteran far-right activist. The shadow justice secretary visited a protest outside the Bell hotel in Epping where police have been attacked and police vehicles vandalised. Eddy Butler, a key figure in the rise of the British National Party, can be seen in the background of a picture shared by the Tory MP. Jenrick later posted on social media: 'People are right to be fed up of illegal migration. And the crime and billions being wasted because of it." It comes after senior Tory MP Chris Philp claimed women and girls are facing a "public safety crisis" as a result of the number of migrants crossing the Channel. Yousaf, a frequent victim of online attacks from those on the far-right, today slammed the Conservatives and insisted women were instead at risk from predatory men who come from "every background". In a video shared on social media, the SNP MSP - who will quit Holyrood at next year's election, accused the Tories of "purposefully singling out asylum seekers". Yousaf said: "The Tories are telling us we have to protect our children from asylum seekers. Well as a father of three girls, let me tell you that it is not asylum seekers I'm worried about when it comes to my daughters' safety - it's men. Predatory men, who come in every colour, every religion, or from every background. "Of course, those who do commit heinous crimes against women - be they asylum seekers, or those who lived in the UK for 10 generations, they should and must feel the full force of the law. "But when you purposefully single out asylum seekers, as the Tories are now doing, you're not interested in protecting women, you're deliberately trying to fuel hatred. You're reviving the old colonial lie that people from the east are somehow dangerous savages. "This isn't just rhetoric, we've seen exactly where it leads. It turns fear into mobs who are ready to set fire to hotels that are housing asylum seekers. It leads to bricks through windows. It leads to firebombs aimed at vulnerable families who've already fled war and perecution. "And here's the truth. Violence against women is committed by men from every walk of life. Blaming asylum seekers doesn't make women safer. It just makes society more divided, more suspicious, more willing to turn on the most vulnerable. "What the Tories are doing isn't about women's safety. It's about stoking fear. It's the oldest populist trick in the book. Let's make sure we don't fall for it."


The Independent
3 minutes ago
- The Independent
Kneecap rapper faces month-long wait over whether terror charge is thrown out
A member of rap trio Kneecap faces a month-long wait to find out whether his terrorism charge will be thrown out. Liam Og O hAnnaidh, who performs under the stage name Mo Chara, was once again greeted by hundreds of fans as he arrived at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday for a three-hour hearing. Prosecutors allege the 27-year-old displayed a flag in support of proscribed terror organisation Hezbollah at a gig at the O2 Forum in Kentish Town, north London, in November last year. During Wednesday's hearing, his defence team argued the case should be thrown out, citing a technical error in the way the charge against him was brought. Brenda Campbell KC told the court the Attorney General had not given permission for the case to be brought against the defendant when police informed him he was to face a terror charge on May 21. She said consent was given the following day, but that meant the charge falls outside of the six-month time frame in which criminal charges against a defendant can be brought. Prosecutor Michael Bisgrove said permission was not required until the defendant's first court appearance and that permission did not need to be sought in order to bring a criminal charge. Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring adjourned the case until September 26, when he will rule on whether he has the jurisdiction to try the case. Hundreds of Kneecap supporters waving flags and holding banners greeted O hAnnaidh as he arrived at court alongside fellow bandmates Naoise O Caireallain and JJ O Dochartaigh. Demonstrations in support of the rapper were organised outside the court building in London, as well as in Dublin. The Metropolitan Police imposed conditions limiting where the demonstration outside the court could take place, saying they were needed to 'prevent serious disruption'. A man was detained by police outside the court building because of a placard he was holding following the hearing. Surrounded by officers, he told reporters his hand-made sign made no reference to any proscribed organisations. O hAnnaidh was swamped by photographers as he arrived, with security officers taking more than a minute to usher him into the court building. Supporters greeted the Kneecap rapper with cheers as he made his way from a silver people carrier to the building. Fans held signs which read 'Free Mo Chara' while others waved Palestine and Irish flags before the rapper's arrival at court. Chants of 'Free, free, Mo Chara' could also be heard over a megaphone, which was repeated by the crowd. Mr O Caireallain and Mr O Dochartaigh sat at the back of the courtroom with three others as O hAnnaidh confirmed his name, date of birth and address to the court at the start of the hearing. In response to the Met imposing conditions on the protest, Kneecap described the move as a 'calculated political decision' that was 'designed to try and portray support for Kneecap as somehow troublesome'. The court previously heard the 27-year-old defendant is 'well within his rights' to voice his opinions on the Israel-Palestine conflict, but the alleged incident at the O2 Forum was a 'wholly different thing'. O hAnnaidh, of Belfast, is yet to enter a plea to the charge and is on unconditional bail.


The Independent
3 minutes ago
- The Independent
Reeves' ‘mansion tax' would stall home sales and fuel exodus of super-rich, experts warn
Property experts have warned that Rachel Reeves ' plans to levy a so-called 'mansion tax' on high-value properties would stall housing sales and add to the exodus of the super-rich from the UK. Mortgage brokers and financial planners have rounded on the chancellor after reports she is considering hitting the owners of expensive properties when they sell to plug a £40bn hole in the public purse. The mooted plans would see higher-rate taxpayers pay 24 per cent of any gain in the value of their home, while basic rate taxpayers would be hit with an 18 per cent levy. Currently, capital gains tax is not paid on the sale of primary residences. Proposals being considered for the autumn budget, the private residence relief would end for properties above a certain threshold, sources told The Times. The threshold is said to still be under consideration, but a £1.5 million starting point would hit around 120,000 homeowners who are higher-rate taxpayers with capital gains tax bills of £199,973. Financial adviser Scott Gallacher, director at Rowley Turton, said a level of £1.5m would prevent most older homeowners, particularly those who bought properties in the 80s and 90s, from selling houses. He added that the plans would 'kill off the upper end of the property market' and be difficult to implement. Mr Gallacher said: 'It would be insane if it creates a cliff edge in that properties over £1.5m are subject to Capital Gains Tax on the entire gain, as properties sold at £1.49m would incur no CGT whereas £1.5m might be a six-figure bill. If it's only on gains above £1.5m, then the CGT raised would be minimal, as potentially you'd be exempting six or even seven-figure gains.' He added: 'Homeowners, especially older ones, who perhaps bought their houses in the 1970s or 1980s, would be daft to sell and incur a huge CGT liability. Instead they would be incentivised to hold on to the home until they die and pay no CGT.' Meanwhile Simon Gerrard, chairman of Martyn Gerrard Estate Agents, warned the plans would leave families who bought homes in London more than a decade ago facing 'eye-watering' tax bills. 'Meanwhile, those who are actually wealthy know how to bypass these moves and won't pay it,' he said. He told The Independent: 'After the deadline passes people will simply not sell their homes. The property market above the threshold will die until Labour are voted out and the policy is repealed under a more sensible government.' Laith Khalaf, head of investment analysis at AJ Bell, said the tax-free nature of primary residences is 'deeply embedded in the psyche of homeowners'. He warned: 'A mansion tax set at high level would naturally cause people to worry it was just the thin end of the wedge, and the next time the government needs a bit of money they could just lower the threshold. 'It would also be an impediment to mobility in the housing market, as those with properties which might fall foul of the tax would be inclined to sit on them for longer, leaving a log jam in the housing ladder below them.' And critics warned the tax change would add to the reported exodus of super-rich individuals fleeing Britain. 'I can see a lot of families in London being caught with this higher tax bill, and it may push more wealthy tax contributors to exodus the UK, which is already a problem following the Chancellor 's last budget,' said Stephen Perkins, managing director of Yellow Brick Mortgages. The Treasury was asked to comment.