Female Teachers (Physical Abuse and Violence)
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the recent NASUWT survey, which recorded that 49 per cent of female teachers in Scotland had reported physical abuse or violence in the past 12 months. (S6T-02457)
Violence or abusive behaviour in our schools is completely unacceptable. We want our schools to be safe and consistent learning environments for all. Last year, the Scottish Government published guidance on responding to gender-based violence in schools, including in instances where staff members are affected. That guidance was developed in partnership with our professional teaching organisations, including the NASUWT.
The survey represents the views of 476 NASUWT members who responded in Scotland, who were absolutely right to state that schools cannot respond alone to these challenges. The horrifying increase in violence towards women is a broader societal challenge that will only be resolved when men and boys change their behaviour.
I agree with the cabinet secretary on that. I know that, for months, she has been trying various initiatives to improve pupil behaviour. However, quite frankly, virtually nothing seems to be working. The incidence of physical abuse against teachers is, rightly, a badge of shame for Scotland. Is it not time for radical interventions, including a review of the principle of mainstreaming? Mainstreaming is all very well in theory but, in practice, it is undermining discipline in far too many classrooms.
It is worth putting on the record that Scotland is not alone in responding to some of these challenges. Across the world, there has been a global shift in relation to behaviour and relationships in our schools. Across the United Kingdom, the Department for Education said only this week that it is
“committed to turning the tide on poor behaviour”
in schools. The Welsh Government is also following our lead in holding its own behaviour summit to identify what action is required to respond to challenges in Wales.
Liz Smith rightly talked about a range of different actions that I have taken to try to support better behaviour in our schools. I very much recognise the scale of the challenge. She will also be aware that, on Friday, we updated our published “Behaviour and Relationships in Schools” action plan in relation to a range of different measures. I also mentioned the framework for gender-based violence.
We need to work with local government on improving behaviour in our schools. Later this week, I will convene the first meeting of our education assurance board with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to talk about exactly this issue.
I go back to the point that, I am sorry to say, very little is changing, which is a badge of shame for Scotland. The cabinet secretary knows full well that there are statistics at the moment that show that pupil absences are increasing in our schools. Does she acknowledge that part of the problem is caused by some pupils being frightened by the poor discipline that they encounter at school? Is that not another reason to review mainstreaming?
The latest data showed a very slight improvement of 0.1 per cent in the number of absences. However, I accept the scale of the challenge.
I also draw Liz Smith’s mind back to the programme for international student assessment 2022 data set, which was published at the end of 2023 and which showed that pupils in Scotland were less likely to witness issues with behaviour in schools than pupils in other parts of the UK. For example, pupils in Scotland were less likely than the UK average to report having
“witnessed a fight on school property in which someone got hurt ... heard a student threaten to hurt another student,”
or experienced “any type of bullying” on a weekly basis. They were also less likely to report that they were “threatened by other students” or
“got hit or pushed around”,
or that “other students made fun” of them on a weekly basis. That UK-wide comparison is welcome.
Liz Smith asked a question about the presumption of mainstreaming. That is still the policy position that I and my party support. I think that there is still broad-based support for the policy in the chamber, although I hear the challenge that she is making.
More broadly, as we approach the 2026 election, all parties will have to reflect on the policy approaches that we take in this space, not least in relation to additional support needs.
On that point, I was particularly struck by a members’ business debate in the chamber on a motion on that very issue from Mr Alexander Stewart, who is not here just now—oh, I see him over there; I apologise, Presiding Officer. Although I will not stand against the presumption of mainstreaming, because I think that it is important, we need to look at how it is resourced on the ground.
Liz Smith will also be au fait with the Audit Scotland report that was published two weeks ago, which talked about the requirement for us to have better granularity in the funding. I can talk at the national level about reaching those in our schools who need that most, and I look forward to engaging with Audit Scotland on that report in the coming days.
We have a great deal of interest in asking questions. Concise questions and responses will enable more members to be involved.
I agree with the cabinet secretary that violence towards women is a wider societal issue that will be resolved only if men and boys change their behaviour. Will she outline what work the Scottish Government is doing to address gender-based violence in schools?
I am clear that violence is neither inevitable nor acceptable, which is why our equally safe strategy prioritises prevention. That preventative approach tackles and challenges attitudes that underpin violence against women and girls. The equally safe delivery plan also includes a range of actions to build a robust and joined-up approach to delivery in education settings, including in schools. That includes funding and support programmes to address gender-based violence and sexual harassment in our schools, such as the Equally Safe at School programme that was developed by Rape Crisis Scotland and Zero Tolerance. In addition, last year, I published “Preventing and Responding to Gender Based Violence: A Whole School Framework”.
The cabinet secretary mentioned the “Behaviour and Relationships in Schools” action plan, but I do not think that it is enough. Research by Zero Tolerance last November highlighted that boys are absorbing incel attitudes and are copying influencers such as Andrew Tate.
Things are getting worse, as we have seen from the latest data. Girls and women should feel safe at school, but it is not just a secondary school problem—it is also happening in primary school. In facing that, schools are being asked to respond without the tools that they need. The Government’s updated action plan says that it has not even defined the problem yet.
Without statutory backing for measures such as the gender-based violence guidance or the Equally Safe at School programme, schools cannot reach the people they need to reach, and the implementation of those measures is limited. What new, additional and concrete steps will the Government now take to ensure that every school is an equally safe environment for girls and young women?
The member mentioned a range of issues. I will try to touch on them, but I am cognisant of the time.
As of January, 133 schools were registered for the Equally Safe at School programme, which I spoke about in my previous answer. We are also working with the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland to increase uptake. I am meeting ADES later today, and I will raise the point with it directly.
I very much recognise the concern that Ms Duncan-Glancy has raised about misogyny in our schools. We know that that is an emerging challenge. She talked about the importance of online influencers, and some of the behaviour in Scottish schools research that the Government published in November 2023 highlighted those issues more broadly.
I was in Cathkin high school, which I think might be the member’s former school. I can see that she is shaking her head; I think she must have visited it recently, then. I was there to launch the new Digital Discourse Initiative, which has been led by the Time for Inclusive Education campaign. That resource really helps to support teaching staff to respond to these instances. It was a fantastic opportunity for me to meet teachers and to listen to the training that they have been provided with through the module, which has been done in conjunction with the TIE campaign and broader work that has been undertaken in Germany. I very much commend it to members if they are interested in engaging on the work that is being undertaken in our schools.
As I said, I look forward to engaging with ADES on these issues later today.
At last week’s Conveners Group meeting, the First Minister admitted to me that he has sleepless nights because of the rising level of violence in Scotland’s schools. Does the cabinet secretary share those concerns? Eighteen years after the Scottish National Party came to power, with education fully devolved in Scotland, does she also accept that SNP education ministers past and present must accept responsibility for the rising level of violence in our schools?
Mr Ross asks whether I share those concerns. Of course I share them. He knows, too, that I am a former teacher, so I recognise some of the challenge. He understands the national action plan that the Government has set out. A broader update on that was published last Friday and provided to Parliament.
When we talk about some of the causation factors, we need to look at the impact of the pandemic. That has been recognised by the United Nations and by a number of education secretaries from across the United Kingdom. However, the point that Mr Ross does not alight on is the impact of poverty in our classrooms. The NASUWT has said that
“a greater focus on exploring correlation between behaviour issues and poverty is required.”
Last month, the general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland said:
“since the onset of austerity, we have seen rising incidents of violent, aggressive, dysregulated, distressed behaviour in classrooms and growing incidents of additional support needs.”
I take my responsibilities on that extremely seriously, but I hope that Mr Ross can reflect on some of the policy decisions that his party took when in government that might also contribute to the challenges in our classrooms.
A primary school teacher in a neighbouring local authority told me that, after being sworn at and shouted at by a 10-year-old boy in front of the class, she had to respond—following guidance—by first apologising to him for saying something that might have caused offence. Does the cabinet secretary agree that overreliance on restorative approaches to physical and verbal abuse can exacerbate behavioural problems in our schools, undermining teachers and distressing staff and pupils alike? Will she advise us on what proven methods of behavioural control the Government recommends?
I would be keen to hear more detail from Mr Gibson regarding the guidance that he speaks of. Our schools across the country can, and do, use a range of strategies and programmes every day to help improve relationships and behaviour. They include good behaviour management and behaviour support teams, solution-orientated, restorative and nurture approaches, and programmes to help develop social, emotional and behavioural skills. It is important that those approaches to addressing behaviour focus on supporting a young person and addressing their needs in order to prevent recurrence.
We have a highly skilled teaching workforce, who know the children in their classrooms best. However, to support schools, we are working with the Scottish advisory group on relationships and behaviour in schools on new guidance on consequences, which will be published in the coming weeks.
The cabinet secretary says that behaviour in schools is better here. It must be atrocious elsewhere, because it is intolerable in this country, and we are asking teachers to put up with far too much.
The Government’s plan is clearly not working yet. Therefore, will the cabinet secretary support a thematic inspection, as recommended by the NASUWT and similar to what the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills has introduced in England, to look at violence against women and girls in our schools and ensure that the action plan that the cabinet secretary has set out is working?
Mr Rennie will be aware that, in 2023, I tasked our interim chief inspector of education with ensuring that inspections document the accurate picture of behaviour in schools. I spend time every week reading through school reports from across the country, and it is important that they capture the granular detail of what is occurring in our schools. That work has been helpful to that end. I am more than happy to put Mr Rennie’s suggestion to the chief inspector when I next meet her.
We should thank the NASUWT for the survey, which should act as a wake-up call for ministers. One of my greatest concerns relates to violence that was reported to the police, where 100 per cent of female teachers and 57 per cent of male teachers said that no action was taken against the pupil or parents. The quote says:
“‘The police told me it would not be worth taking it further as nothing would happen due to their age. They also said ... it could make things worse for me in school once the individual knows there are no consequences. So I decided against making an official complaint to the police’”.
What is the Scottish Government doing in relation to that policy? The police must be involved when extreme acts of violence happen in our schools. What is the Scottish Government’s position on what should happen?
I echo Mr Briggs’s thanks to the NASUWT for its report. I met with it very recently and I engage with it regularly on the topic.
The member talked about incidents involving the police. It would be difficult for me, as the cabinet secretary, to comment on specific incidents, because any issues that relate to criminality are a matter for the police.
The member alighted on the challenges in relation to consequences—that was a key feature of the summits on behaviour that I held last year. As I said in a previous response, we will be publishing updated guidance on consequences. It is worth stating that there are consequences for our children and young people in classrooms every day—teachers use them regularly.
It is difficult for me to comment on criminality aspects, but I will take away from the question issues around how the police engage with our schools, because that is important, as and when such incidents take place.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that we need a cross-campus strategy to address violence and abuse against women and girls in schools and that we need more education to ensure a better understanding of why abuse and violence are unacceptable? What more does she believe can be done to support staff in schools? Given what she just said about criminality, does she agree that there is a role in this for the police and the criminal justice system?
The member spoke about a cross-campus strategy, and my understanding is that that would mean cross-school community support. One of the challenging issues that has been raised by, I think, the NASUWT—it might not have been in the most recent report, but I have certainly discussed it with Mike Corbett—is teachers’ understanding when there is a behaviour action plan in their schools. What seems to shine through from the NASUWT report is the challenge of translating our work at a national level into action in our schools. We need that to be translated into action in our schools.
Strong behaviour action plans or strong behaviour management plans in schools always have the buy-in of parents and carers. Ms Clark talks about the buy-in of the whole school community, and I think that having the buy-in of parents and carers for how that approach works in schools is absolutely key. I very much agree with her on that.
In response to Ms Duncan-Glancy, I spoke about the work on misogyny, but I very much agree with the sentiment behind Ms Clark’s question. There is undoubtedly a need for further education, and I look forward to working with members on a cross-party basis to address the issue, which is not going away. We need to educate our boys about such issues, but we also need to educate our girls and provide our teachers with the skills and support that they need to respond to the challenges.
A culture of disrespect and violence is clearly developing across society—there is almost a dehumanisation of women and girls—so it is no surprise that we are seeing that more and more in our schools. It is clear that some of the Government’s policies and choices, both in wider society and in school grounds, are contributing negatively to promoting that negative culture. Will the Government realise its role and work towards improving the culture so that it upholds women’s boundaries and promotes respect for women and girls?
I am cognisant of my role in that regard, and I have set out the action that the Scottish Government will be taking. More broadly, on the issues that Ms Regan raises about misogyny, some of the issues in our classrooms are overspill issues from broader challenges that we face in relation to the role of women and girls in society. I include in that the role of women and girls in politics, where we see an increase in violent terminology online and in violent communication being directed at female politicians. That is spilling into our classrooms, and we should all be cognisant of that.
The issue deserves a ministerial statement or, indeed, a full debate in Government time. I see that the Minister for Parliamentary Business is in the chamber, and I hope that he will consider that as a serious request from me.
Pam Duncan-Glancy was absolutely right when she talked about the lack of definition of the problem. The cabinet secretary will be well aware of the serious disquiet among teachers and school staff in general about the lack of a common reporting standard. There is still no national common reporting standard. Will the cabinet secretary commit today to bringing forward, without any further delay, a national reporting standard for violent attacks on school staff?
In communication with business managers, I have been open to making a further statement on the issue. As I think I said in response to a previous question, through the update to the behaviour action plan, we will have more to share with Parliament in the coming weeks, particularly in relation to consequences. We debated that topic about two years ago, when Mr Kerr brought the issue to the chamber, so I recognise the issues. I want to give Parliament a fulsome update, and I am happy to give a statement or to consider debating the issue more broadly in Government time, as we have done previously.
Mr Kerr asked about a common reporting standard. As he well understands, the challenge that I have as cabinet secretary is that the statutory responsibility for delivering education rests with our local authorities. As the member knows, local authorities do different things on reporting. However, I accept the point that he has made. As I mentioned in response to a previous question, later this week, I will convene the first meeting of the education assurance board with COSLA. I will raise at that meeting the issue that Mr Kerr has raised, because it is important that there is a consistent approach to reporting.
One challenge that we often see in this space is a reticence among teachers to report. We want to encourage more reporting—as cabinet secretary, I certainly do—because we want a granular understanding of the real picture of what is happening in our schools. I hope that Mr Kerr will take some comfort from the action that I have outlined today.
That concludes topical question time.
Air ais
Business MotionAir adhart
Fuel Poverty