Moving pupils: some teacher testimony

Another issue which was prominent in discussions about managing classrooms was whether or not moving pupils within the classroom was a useful strategy for limiting interference with pupils' learning, and whether seating plans were a good idea for assisting the teacher's control of the lesson.

As with waiting for pupils to be quiet, there was no clear consensus of opinion over the effectiveness of moving pupils within the class. Even within the same school, it was felt to work better with some classes than others:

‘With some classes it works really well… brilliant, a really good safety valve. With others they will just shout across the room to each other, it won't make any difference.'

(NQT)

‘In this school, moving kids generally works. They will generally comply. I've only had refusal to move once. But they don't always behave perfectly once moved… often you have to take consequences a step further by sending them out or keeping them behind or putting them in a detention.'

(Third year of teaching)

‘Sometimes it does work, and it's definitely one of the strategies that trainees should experiment with. Sometimes I would plan where pupils sat so I could have some pupils as “barriers” between others who they might combust with, but it doesn't work all the time… with some groups you will just get the pupils you have separated shouting at each other across the room rather than being able to just talk quietly to their mate in a less disruptive manner.'

(Teacher Educator who had worked at a school ‘in special measures')

At some schools, moving pupils was thought to be of limited value; perhaps a step that had to be gone through on the route to removing someone from the classroom altogether, but a gambit likely to provoke hostility, argument, and possibly refusal:

‘ It's a hassle to do it... you have at least try it sometimes as one of the steps that might come before sending them out altogether but our kids know their rights and can be quick to get stroppy. The problem is that they often protest against being asked to move and that stretches things out.. it can take up lesson time as you get dragged into persuading them… threatening them.'

(NQT)

‘Yes, it's one of the sensible stages you go through. It will sometimes stop a group of two or three from getting each other into trouble… sometimes they can't stop themselves. Sometimes it works. Sometimes they complain and resist… “move someone else, it's not fair” etc… and it escalates. You've got to be polite, patient and firm… not make big deal out of it.. steer them towards to low level choice.. give them a way out. choice A… not bit deal, choice B.. you get in bigger trouble.. think about it… you know it makes sense. Try and keep it light hearted and low key but once you've asked them to move, do everything you can to get them to do it even if in the last resort you do have to take serious measures at a later stage for the refusal.'

(Experienced Teacher)

One answer to the problem of wrangles over which pupil should be moved was to move both pupils:

‘A common problem with moving kids is that the one you move says “Not fair… why me, why not him…”, so I move both of them to separate corners of the room. It just speeds things up sometimes, cuts down the potential for bickering and dragging things out. Of course, sometimes you just get both of them complaining. The main thing is that you don't want it to get in a protracted argument that stops the lesson from continuing so you've got to sort it quickly whatever you do. You don't want an eight minute stand-off with other kids observing with interest and some kids who would quite like to get on with learning getting cheesed off. So if you get refusal to move, give them a quick option, this or something more serious…. consequences, and if they keep it up, impose the detention or whatever it is.'

(Experienced teacher)

One tentative hypothesis which might be advanced is that moving pupils would be more likely to work in an unproblematic way in schools with very strong systems for managing pupil behaviour and strong ‘consequences' for pupils who might go beyond being moved to being ejected from the room, or who might get in much more trouble for not complying with the request to move immediately (see Chapter 6). The teacher responses chimed with Rogers ' (1990) advice about ignoring ‘secondary behaviour' (in this case, the moans and whinges about having to move), as long as the primary goal of separating two troublesome individuals was met. The biggest danger appeared to be that if the negotiations over the move were protracted, learning for the whole class would be put on hold, and all the other pupils in the class would have nothing to do other than observe the show, get on with their work quietly, or decide to mess about themselves. There is sometimes a tension between sorting out a problem and maintaining the learning momentum of the lesson. Also, in some cases, insisting on a move led to escalation in the form of refusal to move.

Different tensions arose in the area of seating plans. Several teachers spoke positively of the use of seating plans:

‘It made a massive difference at the start of my second year. It sent a message… you are not in the playground now… it's not the messing about chatting to your mates zone, it's the learning zone, we are here to learn and I'm responsible for making this happen on behalf of the group.'

(Third year of teaching)

‘At our place, I've found that seating plans work really well. It's nearly always worked… I'm always amazed at how much better it makes things and wonder why I didn't try it before.'

(NQT)

‘Prevention is better than cure - it's all in the seating plan. If a kid is sitting next to two people that he doesn't like enough to talk to, but doesn't hate enough to wind up, the most interesting thing around should be your lesson.'

(Second year of teaching)

However, this was felt to be a strategy which was much easier for established teachers to use, from the start of the year. It was felt to be much harder for trainees who were coming into the class at some point during the year, when it was likely to lead to ‘we were here first' resentment, or for NQTs who decided to move towards the use of seating plans half way through the year. In the words of two respondents:

‘It's always best when you start straightaway with it rather than bringing it in later, then they can get resentful about it rather than just accepting it.'

(NQT)

‘Seating plans from day one – much easier than bringing it in later as a response to problems.'

(Experienced teacher)

There is also the issue of how the seating plan is presented to pupils. Brighouse (2001) makes the case for ‘non-provocative' ways of initiating seating plans, planned to coincide with new learning experiences rather than being explicitly imposed to assert control.

Some teachers felt uncomfortable about seating plans for other reasons, which related more to what sort of teacher they wanted to be. As noted earlier in this chapter, there are some continuums in terms of teaching ‘style' and one of them is between being controlling and relaxed in approach. The following extracts are examples of teachers explaining why they didn't use seating plans:

‘Teachers have different styles and you've got to choose the one you're comfortable with. I usually let them sit in friendship groups and then move them if they mess around… I let them move back with their mates next lesson, I don't keep them apart... Sometimes being easy going and relaxed works as long as you do take action appropriately if they do start to go too far… Our kids respond well to this on the whole.

(Experienced teacher)

‘I feel uncomfortable making them sit to a plan. It feels mean and punitive, as if it assumes the worst of pupils, it sends negative messages. Perhaps it's more efficient in a horrible sort of Victorian way but a lot of pupils have little enough fun in school and being able to sit next to your friends as long as you behave doesn't seem a lot to ask. I prefer to have a default position that you can sit where you want as long as you don't mess about.'

(Experienced teacher)

Pupils' views on seating plans were unequivocally negative (see Chapter 5): one of the biggest causes of resentment against school and against being in classrooms was not being able to sit with friends.

There is a possible tension here between classrooms as ‘democratic spaces', which respect pupil friendships and autonomy, and teachers exercising ‘leadership' in the classroom ‘for the pupils' own good', and so that they will find it easier to control the lessons. As in so many areas, there is a judgement call to be made here by new teachers, which will depend on school culture (to what extent are pupils used to being told where to sit?), the custom and practice of the preceding teacher in the subject, the personality and educational philosophy of the teacher concerned, the nature of the individual class, and the time of year when the seating plan is imposed. Suggestions for consideration here are that new teachers contemplating imposing a seating plan might ask for advice from teachers who have been in situ, and that they might at some point explore both methods of working and see which works best for them.

From Haydn, T. (2007) Managing pupil behaviour: key issues in teaching and learning , London , Routledge: 84-7.

Back to Classroom Management home

Back to History PGCE home