Niggling question about S&S !!!

evolving_doors

Anyone here do before and/or after school supervision?

If so... I'm just wondering why?

Why do we have to mind kids before/after our teaching day begins?

Is it the same in Primary? (It's not a dig at primary but when I drop my child off there aren't any teachers on patrol, the child either goes in and waits with friends (if they are older!) or else the parent waits with them. )

Is there a set time where duty of care begins and ends in secondary?

gaiscioch

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Anyone here do before and/or after school supervision?

If so... I'm just wondering why?

Why do we have to mind kids before/after our teaching day begins?

Is it the same in Primary? (It's not a dig at primary but when I drop my child off there aren't any teachers on patrol, the child either goes in and waits with friends (if they are older!) or else the parent waits with them. )

Is there a set time where duty of care begins and ends in secondary?

Good question about when duty of care exactly begins/ends. I had previously surmised that this supervision comes down to insurance: if the student is on school property within a reasonable time before/after school the school has liability in the event of an incident and this liability would be mitigated somewhat if the school could show it did all in its power to supervise etc?

evolving_doors

Why should you have a duty of care before work begins though, isn't it more incumbent on parents to take (abdicate!) responsibility for when their kids are dropped at the gate?

So what if school starts at say 9am, and a teacher is doing Supervision from 8:30 to 9, If a student has an accident at 8:15 then who is liable. Why does it suddenly switch at 8:29 over to the schools responsibility at 8:30?

Maybe this is more a question for a legal education expert (there's probably legal cases out there but my resolve for indepth research is low lately).

So what are folk doing before and after, 15/20/30/40 mins? Maybe don't be too specific, actually don't answer that I'll throw up a poll.

dory

Gebgbegb wrote: »

So what if school starts at say 9am, and a teacher is doing Supervision from 8:30 to 9, If a student has an accident at 8:15 then who is liable. Why does it suddenly switch at 8:29 over to the schools responsibility at 8:30?

I think it comes down to what is reasonable. If an accident happens at 8.15, it isn't reasonable to expect supervision. But if it happens at 8.50, it's reasonable to expect there would be someone watching them. But probably is all dictated by insurance companies. We do 15 minutes before school, have never heard of supervision after school.

r93kaey5p2izun

The doors open 10 minutes before school starts and they are supervised from then in classrooms. This is just for practical reasons because we couldn't start on time if they weren't already in and seated. No other supervision is provided outside school hours and we have no issues with students arriving too early or leaving late.

joebloggs32

In rural areas buses may have to do double runs, therefore requiring some students to arrive early or stay late. I know of a school that had to have supervision for 40 minutes before and after as a result.

mirrorwall14

15 mins before and after school here (if you get that slot)

Corkgirl18

School opens at 8. Kids start coming in at 8.
We have 45 minutes of supervision before class starts.

implausible

dory wrote: »

We do 15 minutes before school, have never heard of supervision after school.

Some buses don't arrive until 20 minutes after school finishes, so we have after-school supervision as there are students still on the grounds. The alternative is locking up the school and the front gate at home time.

evolving_doors

implausible wrote: »

Some buses don't arrive until 20 minutes after school finishes, so we have after-school supervision as there are students still on the grounds. The alternative is locking up the school and the front gate at home time.

But why is it a teacher's responsibility to account for a buses failure to be on time?

implausible

Gebgbegb wrote: »

But why is it a teacher's responsibility to account for a buses failure to be on time?

It's not a failure to be on time; it's an issue with the turnaround with the primary schools.

We have a duty of care to students on the premises. When I was at school, our bus brought us ridiculously early, but there was usually someone there to let us into the building. I would not have appreciated having to stand out in bad conditions waiting for the building to open. I'd imagine most parents would feel the same. In addition to this, there is no doubt that we have become a more litigious society since those days. If there are teachers on duty, the school's ass is covered.

evolving_doors

implausible wrote: »

It's not a failure to be on time; it's an issue with the turnaround with the primary schools.

We have a duty of care to students on the premises. When I was at school, our bus brought us ridiculously early, but there was usually someone there to let us into the building. I would not have appreciated having to stand out in bad conditions waiting for the building to open. I'd imagine most parents would feel the same. In addition to this, there is no doubt that we have become a more litigious society since those days. If there are teachers on duty, the school's ass is covered.

From what time up to when classes start ?

implausible

Gebgbegb wrote: »

From what time up to when classes start ?

Well in our place, we have a canteen and students who avail of a free breakfast, so half an hour before school starts. In other schools, it could depend on when buses arrive. Even without the threat of litigation, it's not a good idea to have a large amount of unsupervised children in an area.

evolving_doors

implausible wrote: »

Well in our place, we have a canteen and students who avail of a free breakfast, so half an hour before school starts. In other schools, it could depend on when buses arrive. Even without the threat of litigation, it's not a good idea to have a large amount of unsupervised children in an area.

Aye but what i'm wondering is... what is the law?

Is it a case of a judge deciding on a litigation on a case by case basis. So to cover themselves schools have a look at when a critical mass arrives in a school, and provide supervision to cover this busy period.

Taking your last point above.... if a large majority of parents decided to drop the kids off at 7:30am and the school doesn't start till 9 then should there be teachers on duty for 1:30mins before school? (Leaving busses aside!)

TheDriver

Some teachers prefer to do those slots because they arrive that early anyways and it's done. Duty of care depends on location, school, buses etc.

implausible

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Aye but what i'm wondering is... what is the law?

Is it a case of a judge deciding on a litigation on a case by case basis. So to cover themselves schools have a look at when a critical mass arrives in a school, and provide supervision to cover this busy period.

Taking your last point above.... if a large majority of parents decided to drop the kids off at 7:30am and the school doesn't start till 9 then should there be teachers on duty for 1:30mins before school? (Leaving busses aside!)

I would imagine that if a child was injured on the grounds and there was proven to be inadequate supervision that the school could be sued for negligence e.g. a fight.

Choosing to drop kids off at 7:30 is unreasonable and a school can specify in its policies the earliest dropping off time. Failure to adhere to this would put the onus back on the parent, not the school.

You can't leave busses aside, as they are a key external factor over which a school has no control.

On personal note, I much prefer to do after school than a lunch. I have never heard objections in our school about morning or evening supervision, probably because, as The Driver says, it suits many teachers.

evolving_doors

Getting a preference doesn't really happen where we are though... And morning or evening doesn't suit me because of childcare!
So I suppose I resent having to do it and am beginning to question if we 'should'.

solerina

Gebgbegb wrote: »

Getting a preference doesn't really happen where we are though... And morning or evening doesn't suit me because of childcare!
So I suppose I resent having to do it and am beginning to question if we 'should'.

I thought you were allowed give your preferences....we always do anyway !!
We supervise 15 mins before and 15 mins after school every day.

implausible

Gebgbegb wrote:

Getting a preference doesn't really happen where we are though... And morning or evening doesn't suit me because of childcare! So I suppose I resent having to do it and am beginning to question if we 'should'.

We don't get a preference either, but people swap amongst themselves.

I'm in the same boat with childcare, but have to pay someone to leave and pick up my own kids to school.

derb12

This never comes up in my school though it has occurred to me a few times. At break and lunchtime we bolt out into the corridor to make sure we are covered in case of any students getting injured or generally acting the maggot, yet we leave the students to their own devices for the 30 mins or so before classes start.
The poll at the top of the thread doesn't really include an option for me ... maybe my school is just weird.

Notorious

We only have supervision at break periods, none before or after school. This year we moved to stop parents dropping students at the gate for 7.30 when the school day begins at 9. So now our SNAs supervise the canteen for the 15 mins the students are on the premises before the day begins.

evolving_doors

solerina wrote: »

I thought you were allowed give your preferences....we always do anyway !!

Giving preferences and getting preferences are very different things

Ya its mad I have to pay extra money to drop off my kids so that I can go and supervise other kids for pittance/free!

Like I know the S&S is paid (to some!)... But as someone worked out earlier on a different thread it's worth about €15-€20 PER week! And as we see, the time/period requirement varies wildly between schools.

TheDriver

Are the SNAs supervising as part of their contract as I dont think they are supposed to supervise general population.
One poster made a great point about being where you should be- I see teachers doing other things than being where they should be abd if anything happened, its hard to defend a teacher who is in a photocopying room when they should be somewhere supervising.

implausible

TheDriver wrote: »

Are the SNAs supervising as part of their contract as I dont think they are supposed to supervise general population.
One poster made a great point about being where you should be- I see teachers doing other things than being where they should be abd if anything happened, its hard to defend a teacher who is in a photocopying room when they should be somewhere supervising.

I think that is really dodgy. SNAs are employed specifically for the child in their care and that child is their first priority if anything happens. I doubt a court would look favourably on an SNA being the only adult in a situation, not having someone with a duty of care towards all of the students could be negligent.

We have those teachers too - sitting eating lunch in the canteen when they're supposed to be on corridors.

evolving_doors

implausible wrote: »

I think that is really dodgy. SNAs are employed specifically for the child in their care and that child is their first priority if anything happens. I doubt a court would look favourably on an SNA being the only adult in a situation, not having someone with a duty of care towards all of the students could be negligent.

We have those teachers too - sitting eating lunch in the canteen when they're supposed to be on corridors.

SNA's can be assigned to other duties 'as the school sees fit' (it's in a circular) when not caring for a student. There are some cases where a SENO decides that students have only partial access to an SNA, and they also recommend that SNA's shadowing is gradually reduced (if possible!) as the student gets older (to encourage independence!). Hence why SNA's might be at a 'loose end' during the day.

Dunno about being put in charge of the gen.pop. though!

evolving_doors

implausible wrote: »

I think that is really dodgy. SNAs are employed specifically for the child in their care and that child is their first priority if anything happens. I doubt a court would look favourably on an SNA being the only adult in a situation, not having someone with a duty of care towards all of the students could be negligent.

We have those teachers too - sitting eating lunch in the canteen when they're supposed to be on corridors.

I think then maybe they are leaving themselves open to a case (rather than a school) as it's the same as deciding not to go to class.

r93kaey5p2izun

Gebgbegb wrote: »

I think then maybe they are leaving themselves open to a case (rather than a school) as it's the same as deciding not to go to class.

Yes. And if management the Principal or DP knows they're at it and doesn't deal with it effectively then they're probably culpable too. Thankfully nobody takes the p1ss in my place. It's taken very seriously and if anyone took liberties it would definitely be sorted quickly. Management in my school get a lot wrong but this sort of thing would never be allowed continue. Our students/families are very litigious and you would be found out very fast on this.