It has taken years for government, employers, inspectors and even some parents to accept the simple, self-evident truth that teachers cannot teach, and pupils cannot learn, in an environment where there is disruption and violence.
Furthermore, such behaviour cannot be explained away simply by accusing teachers of being uninspiring, or failing to plan lessons appropriately. Thanks to the hard work of teachers, support staff and headteachers, the vast majority of schools remain relative havens of peace, security and good order.
Teachers captivate and educate successfully every day those youngsters who members of the public cross the road to avoid later in the evening, or at weekends.
However, maintaining these high standards of behaviour is increasingly difficult. This is not due to the impact of the growing weapon-carrying culture among young people spilling over into schools which is causing concern. Such incidents are still, thankfully, rare.
Nor is it serious, widespread violence and disruption - this is still confined to a tiny minority of pupils in an equally small number of schools.
The main concern for staff in all types of schools, and in all areas, is the growing pressure from what is now the most common form of poor behaviour, so-called "low level disruption".
Constant challenges to authority, a persistent refusal to obey school rules and frequent, regular verbal abuse of staff are the hallmarks of this behaviour.
Its effects, if unchallenged, are corrosive and when sustained over a long period can have a devastating impact on the health and welfare of teachers. Hundreds of teaching hours are being lost dealing with this behaviour.
Although this is now belatedly recognised by the Government as a serious problem requiring a zero tolerance approach, too many governing bodies and independent appeals panels still overturn the professional judgment of teachers and heads and make perverse decisions to inappropriately reinstate a pupil who has been recommended for permanent exclusion.
The challenge for teachers and headteachers is now not just confined to addressing the nature of the indiscipline, but the new tools at the disposal of the youngsters to aid and support their poor behaviour.
Mobile phones capture inappropriate videos and pictures of teachers at work and are transferred to the phones of other pupils within the class, across the school or uploaded on to the internet. Emails are used to abuse and insult, either directly or indirectly.
However, the most invidious use of technology is the introduction of websites such as Youtube, BeBo and Ratemyteachers. These not only extend the opportunities for pupils to humiliate teachers by providing the facility for them to post insults and false accusations, but they actively encourage the abuse of school staff.
The self-esteem and sometimes health of the victims is seriously affected and their career can suffer irreparable damage. A false allegation can lead to police investigation under child protection procedures.
These websites serve no useful purpose. Regulating them would be impossible. Schools, therefore, must be backed in applying the most serious of sanctions against those who misuse them.
The Government, in its new powers to discipline, has acknowledged and taken a strong stand on this behaviour, which has been dubbed "cyber-bullying".
If there was ever any doubt that teachers and headteachers had the right to discipline pupils, these new provisions remove them. The legislation and regulations send a powerful message to those pupils and parents inclined to challenge the authority of schools to issue disciplinary sanctions.
Schools will find particularly welcome the introduction of the provision to discipline pupils for incidents off-site. They can now be confident of their right to challenge youngsters who bully others on the journey to and from school, behave inappropriately on public transport or use technology in the comfort of their own home to abuse staff.
There is also well-intentioned guidance which seeks to give confidence to schools that reasonable restraint of pupils is acceptable. However, as it still remains the prerogative of the courts to define what constitutes reasonable restraint, the NASUWT will continue to advise members that such actions must remain as a last resort, only to be used when a teacher's own or others' personal safety is at risk.
The new guidance also emphasises the need for schools to have clear, consistently applied behaviour policies. This is critically important. The NASUWT welcomes the fact that its representations to Government to have specific reference in behaviour policies to disciplinary sanctions for those who make false and malicious allegations against staff have been adopted.
Not all of the provisions are, however, particularly helpful. The proposals relating to detention are ill conceived in a number of respects. Many schools find detention of limited use, often causing more problems and inconvenience for the staff than the pupils. Although there can be no doubt that the guidance clarifies the position of notice to parents and carers, the new provision for weekend detention is likely to cause more difficulties than it solves.
Apart from critical issues such as extending the working week for staff, which is unacceptable, and the logistics of opening and ensuring the building is safe and secure at weekends, enforcement will be an issue. Weekend detentions are likely to be met with resistance from pupils and parents, generating rather than resolving problems.
There is no doubt that the high profile now being given nationally to supporting schools in tackling behaviour will be helpful, but we know from extensive experience and expertise that there is no magic solution available to relieve the problems of pupil indiscipline overnight.
What is evident, however, is that at the heart of the solution must be a recognition that the responsibility of parents for their child's behaviour does not end at the school gates.
Teachers captivate and educate successfully every day those youngsters who members of the public cross the road to avoid later in the evening, or at weekends.
Acknowledgement:
Yorkshire Post. Chris Keats,
NASUWT