Editorial: Maximising student learning days
Queensland Teachers' Journal, Vol 128 No 4, 9 June 2023, page no.5
Teachers and school leaders dealing with violent students have been left feeling undermined and disrespected as a result of the department’s model of maximising student learning days and the proposed behaviour reviews.
School disciplinary absences (SDA), such as suspensions and exclusions, occur when all other strategies have been employed or when they are warranted due to the violent or illegal conduct of students. It is not a decision that school leaders make lightly without careful consideration.
However, members are feeling that the current approach taken by the department questions their professionalism. When an SDA has occurred, members have reported receiving phone calls from assistant regional directors (ARD) questioning whether it was necessary and suggesting that it should not be issued.
It is the Union’s view that the best way to reduce the number of SDAs in Queensland schools is not to remove them or to increase appeal rights, but to act in line with what the Union was advised was the original intention of Equity and Excellence; by providing proper support and resourcing to enable schools to respond to behaviour issues and student learning needs.
The QTU has informed the department of its view that a focus on the human rights of an individual student whose behaviour is outside the school’s agreed student code of behaviour fails to recognise the right of their fellow students to learn in a safe environment and teachers and school leaders’ right to a safe and healthy workplace.
It is the Union’s view that the focus on maximising student learning days should extend to all students in a school, not be quarantined to those whose behaviour may be questionable.
While the department does calculate the impact being subject to an SDA has on the learning of the student in question, the QTU has seen no evidence that it considers the impact of the behaviour on teacher and school leader wellbeing or the wellbeing of other students in the class.
For example, school leaders have advised that, as well as resulting in additional workload, the newly introduced “human rights consideration” focusses solely on the human rights of the individual student, not the right to an education of the other students within the class, year level, or school; or the right to a safe workplace for QTU members and other employees in schools.
Members are very clear: they do not accept an approach that places themselves or their students at risk.
QTU State Council believes that, rather than questioning the professional decision making of QTU members, the department should provide support for behaviour management, including resourcing. It has resolved to reject the notion of behaviour reviews for schools and to direct members not to participate in any reviews until such time as the department can present concrete, statewide approaches and best practice models of managing and resourcing behaviour in schools.
State Council has also called upon the department to include the physical and psychosocial health and safety of all students and employees as part of its proposed behaviour review framework.
If the department is unwilling to do this, the QTU will consider taking industrial action, including a ban on QTU cooperation with DoE behaviour reviews.
The QTU has previously suggested that, rather than calling for SDAs to be minimised or overturning SDA decisions, the department should work with schools on the resourcing and development of a re-entry program for students. This should consider the behaviours that have led to the SDA, as well as processes to mitigate any risk that the student’s behaviour presents to the health and safety of QTU members and students. It is our understanding that this “wrap around” approach is at the essence of Equity and Excellence, however it does not appear to be the current focus in the “maximising student learning days” agenda.
To address the concerns of QTU members, the QTU calls on the department to urgently cease its current approach of questioning school leader decision making and instead to work collaboratively with school leaders. This could include:
- working with schools to develop and resource re-entry programs for students subject to SDAs of five days or more
- developing and presenting concrete, statewide approaches and best practice models of managing and resourcing behaviour in schools
- considering the physical and psychosocial safety of all students and DoE employees in the proposed behaviour review framework and responses to behaviour management in schools
- providing appropriate resourcing and response to support members who have been subjected to occupational violence by students, parents, and community members.