الاثنين، 13 سبتمبر 2010

Don't tell teachers how to act on Facebook, says union

New Welsh code for teachers using social networking sites is unnecessary, Nasuwt says, because we know what we're doing. Really?


Woman looks at facebook 
How far should you go? A
teacher ponders her Facebook page. Photograph: Chris Jackson/Getty Images
The teaching union Nasuwt is mightily fed up with an attempt to tell teachers how to behave themselves on Facebook, Twitter and other social networking sites.
The Welsh General Teaching Council has got right up Nasuwt's nose by issuing a code full of platitudes, telling teachers to "conduct their relationships with pupils professionally and appropriately both in school and out of school" and base their relationship with pupils on trust and respect.
The council says its new code, which will apply to nearly 40,000 registered teachers, follows consultation with members of the profession and outlines "for the benefit of parents, pupils, the wider public and the teaching profession itself, the high standards to which teachers in Wales adhere".
But Nasuwt's Wales organiser, Rex Phillips, said the code was being implemented "in the face of a consultation process that revealed overwhelming opposition to its introduction".
He said that "the GTCW has, once again, showed contempt for the views of the profession" and pointed out that fewer than 1% of registered teachers in Wales had come before the council of charges of professional misconduct.
"They don't need the code, people know how to act – that's why we believe it is unnecessary."
But there are teachers who haven't quite worked out that Facebook is not the best place to vent their frustrations. A Massachusetts teacher was forced to resign last month after parents spotted her descriptions of students as "germ bags" and parents as "snobby" and "arrogant". And there have been any number of stories of teachers posting pictures of themselves a bit squiffy or lacking sensible clothing.
On the whole though, teachers are terrified of getting it wrong. A poll conducted a year ago showed nearly half of teachers were worried that using social networking sites gave pupils access to their personal information. The poll, conducted by Teachers TV, found that 47% feared their personal life could be tapped into by their pupils via their Facebook profiles.
For many teachers, the issue is not their own behaviour but what their pupils are up to. Earlier this year, more than one in seven teachers said they or a colleague had been bullied by children spreading malicious rumours about them online.
One member of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers said a false Facebook account had been set up under the name of another teacher, claiming he enjoyed "underage sex with both boys and girls". A senior male teacher in a state secondary school said his Facebook page was hacked into by pupils who used it to send damaging messages to other children.
Mary Bousted, ATL's general secretary, said: "There have been some horrendous incidents of cyberbullying reported … which have made people's lives miserable.
"Schools and colleges need to have clear policies to deal with it, and make sure that pupils will face appropriate punishment."
So perhaps a code isn't such a bad idea after all – so long as it applies to both staff and students. What's your experience of the Facebook dilemma?

No problem pupils in my backyard

 



















Pupils at Continuum school, Canvey Island in Essex. The school, whose pupils have emotional and behavioural difficulties, sparked a furore when it opened last September. Photograph: Graham Turner

The Continuum school, Canvey Island, is an anonymous-looking place, tucked away down a side street on a gently decaying bit of the Essex coast. Inside, pupils and staff are winding up their day with a little awards ceremony – a bag of sweets for youngsters who managed their best behaviour during the day.
Callum Stimson, 14, has just had a bag of Haribos and is fizzing with energy. "I got six points in one lesson!" he exclaims. "The teachers are nicer here than at my old school and the classes are smaller. So I don't cause any trouble."
A casual visitor might be surprised to learn that when this small special school opened its doors last September it sparked a furore. There were complaints to Ofsted, a poster campaign, a public meeting, even questions in parliament – all with the clear aim of having the unit closed down. Why? Because its pupils have emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD) and, therefore, according to local residents and their MP, they shouldn't be there. These teenagers, the protesters say, are not fit to be educated in a residential area.
Nationally, the number of young people classified as having behavioural problems is rising fast – there were 150,000 last year; a 25% increase in four years. So this local row raises questions that resonate well beyond the bridges that carry the traffic away from Canvey Island. Is it becoming increasingly common for people to refuse to live alongside these difficult pupils? Are we perhaps even experiencing a wave of nimbyism that extends not just to the sometimes unlovable "EBD" child but to other children and young people in general?
Around the country, similar disputes have been arising, though mostly on a less epic scale. In Somerset, a planning committee objected to the siting of a nursery in a residential area. In Gloucestershire, residents were up in arms when a secondary school applied to put in a new football pitch close to neighbouring homes. Down the road from Continuum, in Benfleet, Essex county council was forced to withdraw plans for a Sure Start centre at a local primary school because of complaints it would be too close to nearby homes.
The problem of where to put difficult teenagers is one that Bob Hall, the managing director of the Continuum group, which runs 12 independent special schools and 70 children's homes, grapples with daily.
"It is a growing issue," he says over a cup of tea in one of the Canvey school's tiny classrooms, where the 16 pupils work in groups of four with two staff. "You can't open a provision like this and not expect people to object – you never hear from the people who understand, but you always hear from the ones who are against you."
Hall says he was under no illusions when Essex county council asked him to provide a total of 80 places in three new special schools – he knew it wasn't going to be easy. He initially submitted an application to put the school on an industrial estate in Basildon, but in June last year – three months before the school was due to open – the local planning committee rejected the scheme. There'd be problems with access, it said – but Hall claims the underlying message was clear: teenagers with problems weren't welcome.
So Continuum's workmen moved in to this former doctors' surgery on Canvey Island, which had one major advantage – it didn't require permission for change of use because it was in the same category as a school for planning purposes.
Hall says he knew that when local residents got wind of the conversion, they were bound to be upset. But what happened next must have surpassed all his expectations – not least, he admits, because the school's pupils didn't begin by endearing themselves to their neighbours. There were complaints that in the first few days, some of them got on the roof and began throwing tiles; the local pharmacy reported youths barging their way behind its counter.
"Mistakes were made," Hall says. "There was rowdy behaviour. There was bad language. They would go into the shops and they would swear. But when you have young people like these you have a settling-in period whilst peer groups are established and they get to know one another. We haven't had a complaint now for weeks and weeks."
The rumpus might have died down as quickly as it arose had it not been for the involvement of the local Castle Point MP, Bob Spink, a former Conservative who is now independent. He made the issue a personal crusade, leafleting the area, calling a public meeting to protest at the school's presence and questioning ministers in the House of Commons, demanding its closure. Residential areas were not the right places to educate the wayward, he said.
At a public meeting in October, there were angry exchanges. Local education officials and even a community policewoman spoke up for the school, but Spink remained unconvinced.
"The officers who came to the meeting were totally offensive," he says. "They said I shouldn't call these out-of-control youths 'yobs'. They said I should seek to understand these children have had a difficult time. I said, 'No, they're yobs. We should confront bad behaviour and stop it, not tolerate it'."
Unimpressed by the response he got at the meeting, Spink continued his campaign, complaining to Ofsted that the school posed a safety hazard. An inspector duly arrived, unannounced, on a day when the pupils were due to go out. When they were told they couldn't because the inspector was there, they misbehaved and a critical report was posted on Ofsted's website. The school fired off a lengthy complaint; Ofsted withdrew the report and is investigating the incident.
Spink followed through in parliament, questioning education ministers at every opportunity and, finally, in January this year, Gordon Brown. "Teenage tearaways" were terrorising elderly residents, he said. Essex county council should be ashamed of its behaviour.
The prime minister responded, blandly, that no one should be expected to suffer from antisocial behaviour. But Spink's point had hit home.
Essex county council issued a statement saying it viewed the Canvey site as temporary, and that it was looking for alternatives. Spink remains determined to continue his campaign until the school is moved.
"We get difficult children and we must try to put them back on the right tracks, society has a duty, I totally accept that," he says. "But the area already had problems with antisocial behaviour. Fancy sending a group of bad lads to somewhere like that."
The saga of the beleaguered Canvey Island Continuum school does not come as a shock to the wider community of special needs experts. Claire Dorer, chief executive of the National Association of Independent Schools and Non-Maintained Special Schools, says local residents often react with alarm to the opening of new facilities. But, she says, in most cases their fears are allayed once they get used to their new neighbours.
"We do come across these issues in terms of anxiety from local communities about what having a school for children with emotional and behavioural difficulties might mean for them. If you ask people if they would like 50 difficult 15-year-old boys at the end of their garden, they will say no," she says.
"But our experience is when young people are given the chance to have their needs met, they don't display the same level of behaviour. And, generally, local communities end up being fairly welcoming."
Perhaps a case in point is the Grafham Grange Special Educational Trust at Bramley, Surrey, which met resistance from planners when it applied to put in a new football pitch – there were concerns that the floodlighting would cause a nuisance and would be inappropriate because the building was Grade 2 listed.
The trust's chief executive, Susan Tresman, decided to meet the issue head-on, and immediately set about wooing the decision-makers.
"We had a very forthright meeting on the site, she says. "I introduced them to some of our students. And it was brilliant. That was the beginning of what's become an extremely productive relationship."
Tresman says the key is to welcome in the local community, and to involve it. Now local football teams come every week to use her school's pitches.
"You do need to be resilient and creative, and to be prepared to challenge in a positive way," she says. "We don't want people to pass by at the end of the drive and say: 'We don't know who's in there'."
Back at the Continuum school, Hall remains unrepentant about his more bullish approach.
"These pupils just weren't getting an education," he says. "Our mistake, if it was a mistake, was bringing them quickly into a new facility. I don't apologise for that because the only other option was for them to be on the street – it was the right thing to do."

hHalf of special needs children misdiagnosed

Special needs child trying to write
Half of special needs children have been misdiagnosed, according to an Ofsted report. Photograph: Don Tonge/Alamy
As many as half of all the children identified as having special educational needs are wrongly diagnosed and simply need better teaching or pastoral care instead, a report published today finds.
About 1.7 million schoolchildren in England are regarded as having some form of special needs, ranging from physical disability to emotional problems.
While the number with the most severe challenges has gone down since 2003, the number identified as having milder problems has risen from 14% to 18% of all pupils in England in the past seven years.
The Ofsted review of special needs provision recommended that schools should stop identifying children as having special educational needs (SEN) when they simply needed better teaching and pastoral support.
In one primary school visited by inspectors, where a large number of service families had children, Ofsted said pupils were "inappropriately" identified as having special needs because their fathers had been deployed to Afghanistan.
The report said: "This group was … vulnerable to underachievement because their fathers were all serving in Afghanistan. However, although these pupils had additional needs for a period of time, this should not have required special educational needs to have been identified."
Ofsted also visited a high school which identified all year 11 students – 15-16-year-olds – who were at risk of falling short of their expected GCSE grades as having special educational needs. All the students got additional mentoring from senior staff.
"This led to a doubling of the numbers of such pupils between years 10 and 11," the report said. While the additional support was valuable for many of them, the identification of special educational needs was "inappropriate".
Ofsted found that about half the schools and nursery providers visited used low attainment and relatively slow progress as their principal indicators of SEN. In nearly a fifth of these cases very little further assessment took place.
Inspectors also saw some schools that identified pupils as having special needs when their requirements were no different from those of most others.
They were underachieving, but this was sometimes simply because the school's mainstream provision was not good enough, and expectations for them were too low.
The report said: "Some pupils are being wrongly identified as having special educational needs and … relatively expensive additional provision is being used to make up for poor day-to-day teaching and pastoral support. This can dilute the focus on overall school improvement and divert attention from those who do need a range of specialist support."
In areas where school funding was linked to the proportion of children with special needs, this provided an "obvious motivation for schools to identify more such children", the review said.
Some schools Ofsted visited believed that identifying more pupils with SEN could boost a school's contextual value-added score, a measure of how much pupils are improving which takes into account the challenges they face.
Pupils with special needs or a disability are disproportionately from disadvantaged backgrounds, much more likely to be absent or excluded from school and achieve less than other children both at a given age and in terms of their progress over time, the report noted.
The number of pupils with a statement, given to those children who require intensive support, has declined slightly from 3% to 2.7% since 2003. But the proportion of those identified as requiring "school action", which means they get extra help such as tuition in small groups, has risen.
Christine Gilbert, the chief inspector, said: "With over one in five children of school age in England identified as having SEN, it is vitally important that both the way they are identified, and the support they receive, work in the best interests of the children involved.
"Higher expectations of all children, and better teaching and learning, would lead to fewer children being identified as having special educational needs."
Parents told inspectors that under the current system they needed to "fight for the rights" of their children.
Often they saw an SEN statement as a guarantee of additional support for their child. But inspectors found that the identification of a special need or disability did not reliably lead to appropriate support for the child concerned. The review team found that children with similar needs were not being treated similarly and appropriately, and parents' perception of inconsistency was well-founded.
Claire Ryan, a mother of three children with autism, said she had fought for her children to be properly diagnosed and supported in school. "[My daughter] has got a specific learning difficulty, although she is very bright. I have been telling the school since she was in the infants, I think she is dyslexic.
"It was not until she was in year five – 10 years old – that she was diagnosed. The report says parents are fighting for statements to ensure their child's future – that is exactly what I've done. If teaching was better and schools understood and were willing to work with parents, we could get these things into place at such an early age."
Across education, health services and social care, assessments were different and the thresholds for securing additional support were at widely varying levels. In some cases, repeated and different assessments of a child threw up a time-consuming obstacle to progress rather than a way for effective support to be provided, the report said.
Ministers launched a review of special needs provision last week to look at how to ensure parents can send a child with SEN to their preferred choice of school. A green paper to be published in autumn will aim to overhaul the system and look at early assessment, funding and family support as well as school choice.
The children's minister, Sarah Teather, said yesterday: "Children with SEN and disabilities should have the provision they need to succeed and parents should not feel they have to battle the system to get help. Improving diagnosis and assessment will be central to our commitment to overhaul the system to ensure families get the appropriate support."
Jolanta Lasota, chief executive of TreeHouse, the autism education charity, said families often faced "immense barriers" when trying to access services and support. "One of these barriers is getting that initial statement of SEN. But a statement alone is not enough and at TreeHouse we are calling for a greater understanding of special needs such as autism and more collaboration with young people and their families to deliver effective services which really support the family involved."Ed Balls, the shadow education secretary, said: "The key to success is investment in good teaching and support. So I hope the present government will maintain the same level of funding and support for training teachers and support staff to ensure that children with SEN continue to remain a priority and that the focus on how best to maximise children's development and learning is maintained."