Take a course in safeguarding and everything will be fine

A few days ago I received several promos for safeguarding*. I don't know what occasioned such a flurry, but the message was consistent. Take a course (or put your faculty through a course) and your worries / problems / risks will go away. Don't take a course and you are a neglectful / negligent / terrible human being. The thing is, courses do not safeguarding make. Instead, schools need to look at culture, and at staff and student supervision.

I was prompted to write by a report on the closure of Ballet West, a school in Taynuilt, Argyll, Scotland, after allegations of sexual misconduct against the Deputy Prinicipal. Financial viability perhaps a major factor in the school's closure, although such a report must inevitbaly affect enrollment which would in turn affect viability.

Several of the reports I read mentioned the need safeguarding and alluded to a lack of procedure. None mentioned the school culture and none mentioned staff or student supervision. I have written before about such a lack of focus, and about the church treasurer who pocketed a large part of each Sunday collection, while recent issues with the National Rifle Association (NRA), We Build the Wall and Trump Foundation underscore the point. A strong organizational culture, and robust evaluation processes will minimize or not prevent such transgressions.

Culture or "the way we do things round here" is an unwritten rulebook on what is and is not acceptable, on how to and how not do things, and above all on values. A school culture to put trash in the bin is more effective than a teacher on litter patro, and wanting to do the right thing is more effective than rewards and punishments.

Staff and student supervision does not mean lesson observations or behavior checklists. It means goal setting and self-reviews, or 360-reviews, or coaching and mentoring or collaborative lesson planning. Supervision is not management, which is of course necessary; supervision is involvement and such an involvement is an important foundation of a school's culture.

In my early years as a teacher, I worked at a bit o a hippy school which had a trendy coffee bar located next door. Senior students and faculty regularly went there for a coffee, quiche or tomato soup sitting in plain view at one of the outdoor tables or at one of the refectory-style tables inside. More than often than not, discussions related to the school's academic program, expecially literature, history or philosophy topics. On several occasions, I held what were in effect priavte or very small group tutorials over returned essays or things not understood in class. I never heard of any impropiety of any kind related to the coffee bar or to student / student or staff / student relationships in the school at large. The culture was one of openness, trust, collaboration and things were not hidden.

At the same school, teachers worked in horizontal (grade-level) and vertical (subject area) teams with collaborative planning and collaborative approaches to student discipline and welfare. Semester report cards were written by the advisor after meeting with every teacher of that student and pooling their comments. The principal met with every teacher at the begnning of the year to discuss his and the teacher's goals for the year and at the end of the year to review what happened against those goals. The faculty lounge become a staff club once a month where we all had a glass of wine or two together, The school's involvement with its teachers was one of openness, trust, collaboration and things were not hidden.

I know of another school where bullying and student cheating was rampant. The director was either isolated in his office or away at meetings or international conferences. The high school principal was known for sending out forms to be completed or formulaic lesson observations, and was widely regarded as mendacious and openly laughed at in faculty meetings. Teachers typically arrived at 7.55 and left at 4.05, and many were known for lessons based on scanned printouts of photocopies of dittoes. The school culture and lack of supervision led directly to the student behavior.

Another school was owned by a family, the father who had founded it and four children of whom the two eldest were allies against the two youngest, and each fof the three factions had its followers amongst the faculty. The culture of the school was one of intrigue, secret telephone calls, rumours and gossip. Typically, anything the principal tried to do was either supported or thwarted by faculty based on the views of the owner blocs. As a result of this toxic culture, staff and student turnover were very high - almost 100% elementary to middle school attrition amongst students, while staff had either two years or fewer or ten years or more in seniority.

When I read of things like the ballet school or the non-profit misdeeds, the same two things emerge : a lack of a positive organisational culture and/or a lack of supervision. A course in two in safeguarding will not be a bad thing, but on their own will not have any effect. To keep students (and staff) safe, a school needs to focus on its culture, "the way we do things around "here".

**Please leave your comments and questions below.**

Further reading

*  Safeuarding : "making sure your organisation is run in a way that actively prevents harm, harassment, bullying, abuse and neglect. It’s also about being ready to respond safely and well if there is a problem." https://knowhow.ncvo.org.uk/safeguarding/what-is-safeguarding

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/21/ballet-school-failed-properly-investigate-vice-principal-quit/

https://www.amazon.com/Corporate-Cultures-Rites-Rituals-Life/dp/0738203300