The government needs to move on from the divisiveness of Tom Bennett

England's record on pupil engagement with school, and the Conservative government's behaviour adviser's social media profile, should give Labour pause for thought.

Tom Bennett, who was appointed the government’s lead adviser on school behaviour under the Conservatives, has said that he is applying for the role of “behaviour ambassador” to the Department for Education. How should ministers react?

To anyone not familiar with the details of England’s behaviour debate, Mr Bennett will seem the obvious candidate, having been in the position most closely corresponding to this role under the previous administration, and having often been presented in the media as a non-partisan expert commentator on classroom discipline. Because of the platform given to him by the previous government and the communication qualities he brought to the job, he is the most prominent person in the field.

However, with this government taking a more nuanced, less ideological approach to school reform than did its predecessors, there is a strong case for moving on, and appointing someone as a break from the past. And, to parents who have been concerned about the direction of school behaviour policies in recent years, this will be seen as desperately needed.

 

The policy record: in favour of continuity or change?

Arguments in favour of more of a continuity approach with Conservative education reform tend to rest on the notion that the previous government’s initiatives worked: England rose up the international league tables in subjects such as maths and reading, for example, and therefore any break from the past should be gradual, at most.

But, leaving aside the detail on the reality of that international test record – results in secondary science actually fell over the period 2009 to 2023, for example – a host of other indicators have been pointing in a much more concerning direction.

The “life satisfaction” scores of UK 15-year-olds fell drastically between 2015 and 2022, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s “PISA” study, with the Children’s Society reporting that, on these measures, our teenagers fared worst among 27 European countries. 

The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) has since shown that the proportion of English pupils saying they disliked school has doubled in eight years to 2023: from 24 to 48 per cent among 14-year-olds and from 14 to 28 per cent among 10-year-olds, with both the 2023 figures themselves and the rate of decline being far worse than the international average. 

Last month, Professor John Jerrim, of University College London, produced his own analysis of the TIMSS survey data. This showed that, at secondary school level, children’s “emotional engagement” with school has recently dropped significantly faster in England than in other countries. Between 2019, the proportion of English pupils strongly agreeing that they felt safe at school fell from 42 to 29 per cent, and that they belonged in school dropped from 37 to 24 per cent, while those strongly agreeing that they liked school reduced from 19 to 11 per cent. Sadly, and staggeringly, this study also reported that the proportion of English teenagers agreeing with the statement “teachers at this school care about me” falling over the period from primary school (year five) to secondary (year nine) more than in any other country: by 46 percentage points.

The proportion of pupils saying they felt safe in school has also dropped substantially, in English primary and especially in secondary schools, over the period 2015 to 2023, the TIMSS data also show.

Professor Jerrim’s research also produced stories last week, this time based on a survey of more than 100,000 children in English schools, showing how pupils’ average enjoyment of school drops dramatically following the transfer between primary and secondary school. 

Defenders of Tom Bennett will no doubt argue that this is not down to him: that there is no direct link between school behaviour policies and any negative indicators on pupils’ experiences at schools; and, even if current statistics on school behaviour are not particularly impressive, that is not down to him either. Yet it increasingly seems to me that the government should be looking seriously at what might be behind this string of concerning statistics on pupil wellbeing and satisfaction with school.  And that the detail of behaviour management, since it is often so central to the pupil experience, has to be in the scope of such investigation.

In addition, the issue of pupil mental health would appear to be a consideration within the new “ambassador” positions,* the official DfE notice about them stating that those appointed need to: “Support the aims of the DfE’s behaviour agenda which includes promoting a culture of belonging and safety in school for pupils and staff.” 

With statistics on “belonging” seemingly pointing in a concerning direction for English schools, despite the strict approach on behaviour presided over by Mr Bennett and the Conservatives in recent years, it is possible to wonder if the two are in tension.

And the issue of the impact on pupils’ mental health of education policy, including behaviour policy, seems not often to have been prominent in Mr Bennett’s thoughts, as his reactions to this story Education Uncovered carried about the impact of a strict regime in one Cambridgeshire secondary seemed to underscore. 

Added to this, the Behaviour Hubs initiative, which Mr Bennett oversaw for the Conservatives, produced disappointing results, an interim evaluation report published in November actually seeing pupils reporting a small negative worsening of behaviour. 

The “ambassador” side to the role

But aside from the overall position on schools reform – are pupils going through the system actually in a better place, overall, than they were before, say, 2010? – Mr Bennett’s public profile raises concern for many people.

Mr Bennett clearly has a host of fans, but also many critics, on twitter/x, as perhaps evidenced by the number of people he has blocked. He is certainly among the most polarising figures within the education field in England on social media, in my experience.

His profile on x/twitter has contained many incidences of Mr Bennett taking a combative approach to  what are inevitably complex, nuanced debates. There was, perhaps, an early clue to this in his 2010 book “The Behaviour Guru,” in which Mr Bennett, then making his name as a columnist for the TES, wrote that, for teacher readers who are “not comfortable with controlling others,” they should leave the classroom, adding: “Don’t you dare play loony teacher with someone else’s children because I will personally come round and chin you, you vile reptile.”

In February last year, against the words, “Has the teacher tried building a positive relationship and examined any antecedent incidents that triggered this behaviour? Perhaps they should have deescalated the situation…” he posted a picture of Neville Chamberlain with his famous piece of paper after meeting Hitler. 

Stories about the strictness of some schools’ behaviour policies, including one alleging that pupils were instructed always to smile, to maintain eye contact with teachers, not to go to the toilet between lessons and to respond to a whistle, and how parents and pupils have reacted, have been greeted with tweets, from the person who was the government’s key adviser on this subject of: “Breaking: School has rules. More as we get it.” 

In a 2018 post, he wrote: “Ladies if he

-Won’t let you see other people

-is where you go when you’re in trouble

-helps you do the right thing

-is controversial and misunderstood

That’s not your man. That’s an isolation booth.” 

In October 2023, he greeted with a cartoon media coverage of the Conservative government keeping track of teaching assistants’ and librarians’ internet activity, having tried to cancel a conference because two of its speakers had been critical of government policy.

In a tweet under his words “Why doesn’t the DfE want to engage with us?” the cartoon depicts someone saying to a man in a suit “Can I have a grant so I can finish my art?” next to a drawing featuring the man and the words “Fucking assho”. 

When a poster replied to Mr Bennett that this was “Not as funny or clever as you think it is,” the DfE’s then-behaviour adviser replied: “nOT aS fUNny Or cLEvEr aS yOu think” Another poster then asked if Mr Bennett had been hacked by a troll account.  

One source who had come afresh to Mr Bennett’s twitter stream, and had concerns about the way school behaviour policies in England have been developing, asked: “Do you ever look at [TB’s] twitter account. That someone this puerile has such a say in how we treat kids is scary.”

But the one exchange which stands out for me was one in 2022. In it was a video of a speech by a young woman who had recently been through England’s exams system, and who criticised this “never-ending conveyor belt of academic testing,” partly driven by education reforms of the 2010s, as detrimental to mental health. This was reposted and dismissed by the subject of this piece.

“Oh God this is terrible. I applaud the speaker’s moxie [courage] but this is the Biff and Chip guide to progressive instrumentalism,” wrote Mr Bennett. 

Izzy’s response was: “Hi Tom, thanks for your (not so constructive) criticism. Although I appreciate your OBE and blue tick, you are not a young person in our current system. This is our voice, our experience and you aren’t listening.”

Mr Bennett’s substantive comeback was: “Exams are the fairest way to assess learning. What’s your counter argument?” Izzy’s response was: “I’m not suggesting abandoning exams, simply reassessing how much emphasis is put on them over other aspects of education, especially post 2015.” This appeared to this observer, who has covered the exams system and its impact since the early 2000s, hands down a win for the teenager.

Does the government want to continue with the approach of recent years, given the patchy-at-best record on pupil engagement in school, and the social media evidence we can see? In seeking an “ambassador” for good behaviour, can the country do better than this? I think these questions answer themselves.

 

*There are actually two new ambassador positions, covering school behaviour and on attendance. The TES has reported them as separate roles, although it is not clear from the DfE document here that they will not be combined, across two posts.