Searching Pupils at school - any teachers know the law

[davewebbsbrain]

They have confirmed to you they just searched everyone just out of routine then and not because they were looking for something?

Thats slightly different, but I still wouldnt have a big issue with it myself.

If they didnt nothing and you found out some kid had been taking a knife to school and the school had never taken any measures you wouldnt be happy.

Surely if there was a belief that certain child had a knife, you would search that child, not the whole class

Yes, they confirmed this last night via email. Routine check. All year 7 we were told yet we know other classes weren't searched

 

[Jam_Man]

Surely if there was a belief that certain child had a knife, you would search that child, not the whole class

Yes, they confirmed this last night via email. Routine check. All year 7 we were told yet we know other classes weren't searched

What if the information was someone in class 7C has a knife?

What if they suspected the kid in question but he has 5 friends in the class and could have passed it on?

No I think Id be happier they were thorough myself.

Id also be happy if they felt that a routine search was necessary, they are doing it for the good of the kids, theres no other motivation for them.

 

[Firestorm]

Establishing grounds for a search
 Teachers can only undertake a search without consent if they have reasonable grounds for suspecting that a pupil may have in his or her possession a prohibited item. The teacher must decide in each particular case what constitutes reasonable grounds for suspicion. For example, they may have heard other pupils talking about the item or they might notice a pupil behaving in a way that causes them to be suspicious.

The doc you linked is what I have been looking at and the above extract is taken from it. The whole class was searched without consent.As per above, there needs to be grounds for the search. I can't for one minute believe there were grounds to believe EVERY child in that class was searched.

Todays post is the first indication of a routine random search.

I resume at the commencement of your sons time at the school, you signed various forms , some of which would have been regarding various consents, did any of them refer to searching ?

Also was it a bag search , with the pupils requested to empty pockets , or a pat down ?, because if it was a contact search, by Male teachers on female pupils I would imagine that there will be parents with far more significant grievances queuing up at the school.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Todays post is the first indication of a routine random search.I resume at the commencement of your sons time at the school, you signed various forms , some of which would have been regarding various consents, did any of them refer to searching ?

Also was it a bag search , with the pupils requested to empty pockets , or a pat down ?, because if it was a contact search, by Male teachers on female pupils I would imagine that there will be parents with far more significant grievances queuing up at the school.

Up until last night when we got a reply from house head, we didn't know it was a random search. We will be asking the correct contact at achool for the policy on searches on pupils at teh school, though they should be following the guidlines set out by the DofE.

The search included bags, takin gof off blazers, checking pockets, pulling up trousers and checking in socks etc. There were 3 male teachers in the calss, no female teachers and all the girls were searched. I make you right that the parents of the female pupils have a far bigger grievance than me and point still stands, even more so that having flouted the laws about male teachers checking female pupils, what other rules/laws etc do the school flout?

As I've said before, it's not all bad, Taylor has progressed well in Sport, but the whole underlying attitude of the school doesn't sit right with me.

Someone my wife knows has even sold her house and moved to avoid her children going to Eastwood, it's not just me that feels this way about the school

 

[united we stand]

Establishing grounds for a search
 Teachers can only undertake a search without consent if they have reasonable grounds for suspecting that a pupil may have in his or her possession a prohibited item. The teacher must decide in each particular case what constitutes reasonable grounds for suspicion. For example, they may have heard other pupils talking about the item or they might notice a pupil behaving in a way that causes them to be suspicious.

The doc you linked is what I have been looking at and the above extract is taken from it. The whole class was searched without consent.As per above, there needs to be grounds for the search. I can't for one minute believe there were grounds to believe EVERY child in that class was searched.

• You don't know what the grounds were - you are making assumptions and putting them up as FACT
• You don't appear to think the rule I attached was relevant- - so again you are making assumptions and putting them up as FACT

Did your son say no to the search or refuse - if not he gave consent - therefore the rulee you keep referring to is not applicable --- IMO .


If my interpretation is correct,I don't know and am happy to state that; but if it is correct and you go in all guns blazing there you are going to look a right tit when they they highlight to you that you are totally wrong. Again I believe the relevant piece is below.

Indecently my son was interviewed by the police at school and I was not informed - which is far worse IMO than what you are describing . But I phoned up the school and explained politely that I was somewhat unhappy this had happened but I gave them an opportunity to explain .When they did it all made complete sense (he wasn't remotely in any trouble and the police were going through the motions) although I explained to them why a parent would want to know and that they should change their policy .However I would have looked an idiot if I had gone in with a different attitude.


. Schools are not required to have formal written consent from the pupil for this sort ofsearch – it is enough for the teacher to ask the pupil to turn out his or her pockets or ifthe teacher can look in the pupil’s bag or locker and for the pupil to agree.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

You don't know what the grounds were - you are making assumptions and putting them up as FACT
You haven't read the piece on 'consent' that I posted up - so again you are making assumptions - that reading the rules seem entirely incorrect and putting them up as fact. Did your son say no to the search or refuse - if not he gave consent - therefore the piece you keep referring to is not applicable .

If my interpretation is correct,I don't know and am happy to state that; but if it is correct and you go in all guns blazing there you are going to look a right tit when they they highlight to you that you are totally wrong. Agaion I beleive the relevant piece is below.

Incedently my son was interviewed by the police at school and I was not informed - which is far worse IMO than what you are describing . But I phoned up the school and explained politely that I was somewhat unhappy this had happened but I gave them an opportunity to explain .When they did it all made complete sense (he wasn't remotely in any trouble and the police were going through the motions) although I explained to them why a parent would want to know and that they should change their policy IMO

. Schools are not required to have formal written consent from the pupil for this sort ofsearch – it is enough for the teacher to ask the pupil to turn out his or her pockets or ifthe teacher can look in the pupil’s bag or locker and for the pupil to agree.

I may rant about it on here (and other stuff at times) but believe me, I haven't gone in all guns blazing, my sent an email requesting the full details and why it happened. This is how we now know it was a random search. There a quite a few anomilies between what the teacher said in the email and what Taylor says happened so we have some more detective work to do. It wasn't a consent search, Taylor didn't say he agreed, he didn't get a chance, the class were told it was happening and that was it.

There's something deeper to this and I need to find out exactly what occured and why.

 

[londonblue]

We have actually said to Taylor it's just something to learn from.

I had my doubts on the school from the first time we went to an open evening. All about results, results, results and nothing about the pastoral care of the children. Taylor didn't want to go there, we didn't want him to go there but that's the school we were given.

My thoughts were that maybe going to a school where he has to deal with things rather than having pastoral care would be a good thing, stand him in good stead for future life, but it hasn't worked that way.

Too many incidents where the pupils are guilty until proven innocent. The case of Taylor winning a tablet in a raffle for 100% attendance then having it taken away, detention because a book got wet, no fault of his own...the list goes on.

On the plus side, Taylor has flourished in the sports dept, represented the school in the district and Regional sports for 100m and Shot Putt, which I was very proud of. All this while having a severely ingrowing toenail and swollen toe. The only downside being he was shouted at for not beating his personal best at one event. Also picked for the Basketball team, swam in the gala and is now trying out for the cricket team. Hopeflully more of this to come next year.

Maybe next year will be better, maybe teachers will get the full facts before dishing out punishment, maybe there will be more pastoral care and a willingness to put the pupils care over results...maybe, but I really don't hold out much hope.

The biggest thing with the search wasn't that he was searched, but that it was outside of the DofE guidelines. As I said before, if the school are breaching on that, what else are they breaching on?

And therein lies the issue. You don't like the school and are happy to pick fault in it, although I do accept you have praised it to a certain extent as well.

As I said before, question the school, but do it in a constructive way. Until you do you won't know the whole story. If you go in there all guns blazing you probably won't get a positive outcome, and you'll just lose credibility for any future complaints you may have. You may find, that after speaking to the school and getting to the bottom of why they did this, that you actually agree with them.

 

[Jam_Man]

I have to say we have a few friends with kids in year 7 at Eastwood and they are all happy with the school.

 

[EastStandBlue]

i may rant about it on here (and other stuff at times) but believe me, i haven't gone in all guns blazing, my sent an email requesting the full details and why it happened. This is how we now know it was a random search. There a quite a few anomilies between what the teacher said in the email and what taylor says happened so we have some more detective work to do. It wasn't a consent search, taylor didn't say he agreed, he didn't get a chance, the class were told it was happening and that was it.

There's something deeper to this and i need to find out exactly what occured and why.

True Detective season 3

 

[Pubey]

True Detective season 3

:smile:

I might phone in an anonymous tip-off just to see if they've improved their adherence to their policies...

 

[Gt Yarmouth Shrimper]

Wouldn't happen if Jack Skinner was still head.