Yesterday, I wrote about the government of New South Wales’s plan to hire a behaviour adviser and the criticism this has provoked. Some of that criticism focused on drawing parallels with the UK’s behaviour adviser, a role that Dr David Roy described as a ‘failure’. This role is currently held by Tom Bennett OBE.
Since I published that post, Dr Jenna Price, a journalist and columnist, has launched an extraordinary personal attack on Tom Bennett in the pages of the Sydney Morning Herald:
In the UK, Tom Bennett, former nightclub bouncer and sometime teacher of religion and philosophy, was appointed to the role and nicknamed Tory Tom for his ideas around discipline, more suited to the Middle Ages but without the beheadings. Apparently eye rolling is punishable by death. He burnishes zero tolerance and suspensions, even though we know they don’t work. They just alienate kids from schoolmore than they already are alienated.
Firstly, as far as I am aware, Bennett has never been a nightclub bouncer. He was a nightclub manager in a former career, but that’s not quite the same.
So, why the need to construct him as a ‘bouncer’? I cannot help thinking this is partly an attempt to impose a class hierarchy, with gentile academics up one end and gruff bouncers down the other.
Secondly, Bennett has unfortunately suffered a lot of abuse in the past from those with who do not believe in behaviour management, but even so, I cannot recall his abusers labelling him ‘Tory Tom’. This is an epithet that has been used rarely, if at all, and is hardly a well-known ‘nickname’. Why assert this? A conservative government has been in power in the UK since 2010 and even though creating safe school environments where all students can learn is a professional rather than political issue, if critics can link Bennett to the politics of the government he works for then this can be used to discredit him in the eyes of a left leaning profession.
This is part of a wider strategy where progressive education, despite its focus on hyperindividualism and its origins in elite private schools, is constructed as a left-wing project that all those concerned with social justice should subscribe to. It’s a tactic that neatly side-steps the complete dearth of empirical evidence to support its main claims.
What next? Well, Bennett is also not an advocate of ‘zero tolerance’:
If you search Bennett’s tweets, like I did, you will find plenty where he patiently explains why he does not like this term and its implication that no allowances should ever be made for students in challenging circumstances. Branding him with it is therefore lazy and disingenuous.
Given the inaccuracies, why and how was such a piece written and published?
I am not familiar with Dr Price and so she probably does not comment all that much on education. However, I am familiar with the two education academics she chose to interview — they never interview actual teachers, do they? One of these, Dr Linda Graham, has a history of making hyperbolic and inaccurate claims about people, so maybe she is the source.
What does this tell us about the New South Wales government’s announcement? Not much. If the government are prepared to put the level of investment behind the behaviour advisor role that the UK has with its roll-out of behaviour hubs then it could make a difference. If not, or if they appoint the wrong person, it’s likely to achieve little.
However, if proof were ever needed that teachers must wrestle back control of our profession from these ideologues, the extreme reaction to this plan would be Exhibit A.
Over the past few years, I have come to appreciate your perspective on the inner workings of the classroom, especially in relation to the poltics that ultimately constrain the teaching and learning (I orginally wanted to write "constrain/liberate" but that seemed too optimistic). As a classroom teacher in Ontario, Canada, I have seen general changes in behaviour, particularly around socializing and conflict resolution. Whether we can attribute such changes to a pandemic or part of a larger societal trend is unclear; nonetheless, it is apparent to me is that some kids are really struggling to manage themselves in productive, constructive ways.
As you have noted in other articles, there is little to no teaching and learning in classrooms where problematic behaviours are consistently disruptive, destructive, and/or widespread. From my experiences, forming genuine rapport and relationships have been far more helpful turning around challenging students and classrooms than punitive measures. But that takes time and a willingness to accept that 'tough kids' are normally unfazed by routine punishments, as well as a willingness to frame academics as a secondary concern (at least, for some students). I would be interested to know your thoughts on teacher-student relationships in developing your own practice, especially in light of the situation in Australia you are presenting here.
Additionally, I think we're in agreement regarding typical approaches to problematic behaviour and academics. Teachers often feel enormous pressure, sometimes self-imposed, to cover curriculum and deliver results. I suspect this results in significant numbers of IEPs (Individualized Education Plans) for what might be deemed as average or below average students, as well as the inclusion of behavioural nusiances as something that needs to be dealth with outside the classroom. I see this as a sign that a significant number of teachers are struggling to deal with behaviours and (a neverending) workload. Subsequently, I often imagine there must be a better way to address actual learner needs without saddling teachers with several lengthy and overwhelming formal documents that eventually get minimized or ignored in the classroom (for sake of sanity). I fear inclusivity and democratic teaching values are becoming synonymous with excessive documentation.
Finally, I would like to know more about your understanding of progressive education. I think as educators we ought to all aim to be progressive in our teaching practices but you seem to have an axe to grind with "progressivists" (I hope I've got that right). On the surface, it seems like an attempt to paint anything you don't like in education with a derisive label, much like what we see on social media, i.e. "that's socialist, communist, fascist, liberal, leftist, etc." However, in my mind, such a conclusion doesn't jibe with the typical quality of your writing nor does it seem consistent with your frequent calls for evidence-based teaching practices. Is there a specific group or movement in Australia or elsewhere you associate with the "progressivists" or is this an academic term related to a particular school of thought, like behaviourism or constructivism?
Regardless of your reply, I've enjoyed your recent run of articles. Cheers!
Sadly, I am unable to read Tom Bennett’s tweets. I am blocked - for disagreeing with him on behaviour management.