on 12-01-2014 12:25 PM
Teacher sacked for putting a student in a head lock despite being punched by the youth says staff are powerless
TEACHER who was sacked for misconduct including putting a student in a headlock after the youth punched him said the NSW education system left teachers "powerless to discipline kids".
Science and agriculture teacher Stephen Krix was fired from Riverstone High School when he fought back against a year-10 student who refused to work and punched him in the face during a class.
Mr Krix - a "squarely built" 51-year-old who had worked in various public and private teaching roles since 1989 - told The Sunday Telegraph he acted in self-defence when he put the "slight" student in a headlock during a science class in May 2011.
The incident came after the student refused to take off his headphones, told Mr Krix to f*** off several times and punched the teacher when he stood close to him with a worksheet and refused to move
.
The incident was outlined in the NSW Industrial Relations Commission last Wednesday where Mr Krix lost an appeal against the sacking he claimed was "harsh, unreasonable and unjust".
In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Mr Krix, who now works in the security industry, said the public system was failing kids because teachers feared being sacked if they disciplined students.
He said students were leaving public schools without the self-restraint required to cope with post-school life.
It's a joke - that's why people are running to private schools," Mr Krix said.
"Eighty per cent of kids are screwed over by the state system because of a lack of discipline given to a minority of bad kids who disrupt classes," he said.
"You have to have zero tolerance … if a kid is behaving badly in the classroom he needs to be extracted and all the kids that are behaving themselves need to be able to get educated."
In relation to the student, Mr Krix said: "It's not like he's some sort of pathological killer … he's just a kid who needed discipline and wasn't getting it. If he's given the guidelines then he knows where the boundary is".
A NSW Department of Education and Communities representative told the commission Mr Krix should have stood down from any physical confrontation.
The representative said the Teaching Service Act meant that teachers had to respond to situations with the safety of students being the top priority.
A very true comment from a poster on that page....
The day will come when no one will want to become a high school teacher...it has been getting worse for years now.
Education will be via the internet for a teacher's safety .T
he students hold the power .
Has anyone got the guts to swing this around...I doubt it.
Then again, anyone who wants to become a secondary teacher in the public system ,I guess, deserves all that is coming their way if they haven't heeded the warning signals by now to AVOID this once great profession!
Solved! Go to Solution.
14-01-2014 02:41 PM - edited 14-01-2014 02:42 PM
@chuk_77 wrote:
I did check out his FB page but not the ACA report yet, but will now just because of what the boy wrote on one of his photos
"Lie on national television
Good $%^ing job"
ACA did lie. On the ACA report Mr Krix described the incident as if he was king hit and fearful of his life. The facts found in the Tribunal hearing indicate there was an escalation with provocation on both sides. The description of the fight published by ACA was on sided and untruthful. But consistent with ACA's chosen narrative. The narrative was designed to inflame the kind of debate currently being had on this forum.
No one denies that kids were better behaved 30 years ago. However, I don't know that corporal punishment has much to do with it.
I was beaten as a child many times. Sometimes fairly (that is I had done something wrong) and sometimes unfarily (like being caned for sloppy hand writing). None of the beatings engendered in me a feeling of respect for the perpetrator of the beatings. In fact, quite the opposite. I viewed the beater as a bully: one who may dispose of me at will because he or she had power over me. It taught me to hate bullies and teachers who manhandle students are bullies. They may be feared by their students but they are not respected.
So, how do you engender respect in an unrully student. I don't know, but I suspect you could start by giving the child better parents.
on 14-01-2014 02:41 PM
@ptb333 wrote:You are wrong and cynical to call ACA liars in this. What about the Principal being there just before the burning incident occurred? What about the teacer getting smashed in the face and reacting as he saw fit? Wat about some empathy for the situation of boys egging him on by utter disrespectful attitude walking into class? You judge Mr Krix too harshly.
there is protocal to tell him how to react.
on 14-01-2014 02:44 PM
@aftanas wrote:
Mr Krix could have have chosen to retreat which would have been consistent with Departmental policy and with the written direction given to him. However, he chose to engage with the student and as a result breached school policy and the written direction.
Retreat and then what? Wait til the kid comes after you?
Stand by and let the boy unleash his rage on the furniture?
Run out of the classroom and lose the respect of all his students?
I understand what you're saying about complying with written directions, but written directions are not always helpful in a physical confrontation.
The teacher immobilised the student and stopped him from doing further harm and the school should have taken this into consideration.
Sacking a teacher for controlling a pupil simply sends a message to students that they can behave anyway they like in the classroom and if the teacher tries to stop them they can get him/her sacked.
What a lark!
on 14-01-2014 02:45 PM
Totally agree with the sentiment of the questions. Maybe Mr Krix was offered this support, but I doubt it was effective as he seems to want to fight the matter by being on ACA. The biggest issue is how the students are allowed to be so rude to ignore a reasonable request from a teacher, turn up in class late, backchat a lawful instruction, etc etc and then no valid discipline strategy by a teacher can occur. CCTV in classrooms is the only way to go, then the kids (and some teachers and parents) can face a tribunal where punishment is severe and fair. Public shame is a good one from the bible.
on 14-01-2014 02:54 PM
on 14-01-2014 02:58 PM
wow, i didnt know there were so many of you there when it happened
on 14-01-2014 03:03 PM
on 14-01-2014 03:14 PM
@ronronny1970 wrote:
Yes I thought this was a discussion forum? I suppose I will give up now as the student is clearly a model student, and Mr Krix should have just taken a few punches for the team. I am a teacher and have been bullied by students physically and mentally. Never punched one yet but I feel really bad that I can't do anything.
No, we all accept that the kid is a terror, but that is not the point. As you can see most peple here have sympathy for Stephen Krix, but he acted against specific instructions given to him with warnings for previous problems. Actually, I surprised that he was not stood down, and the school sued when the kids got burned.
on 14-01-2014 03:15 PM
@icyfroth wrote:
@aftanas wrote:
Mr Krix could have have chosen to retreat which would have been consistent with Departmental policy and with the written direction given to him. However, he chose to engage with the student and as a result breached school policy and the written direction.Retreat and then what? Wait til the kid comes after you?
Stand by and let the boy unleash his rage on the furniture?
Run out of the classroom and lose the respect of all his students?
I understand what you're saying about complying with written directions, but written directions are not always helpful in a physical confrontation.
The teacher immobilised the student and stopped him from doing further harm and the school should have taken this into consideration.
Sacking a teacher for controlling a pupil simply sends a message to students that they can behave anyway they like in the classroom and if the teacher tries to stop them they can get him/her sacked.
What a lark!
Exactly, he should have retreated. More to the point, he should not have put himself is a position that allowed the student to punch him. If the teacher was jumped from behind I think it would have been understandable. However, the sequence of events was that the student was unruly, Mr Krix made or may not have played with the student's hat, Mr Krix made fun of him on the blackboard, Mr Krix got in his face, refused to move away when he was pushed in the chest and grappled with the student after he was punched. That showed bad decision making on the part of Mr Krix.
I think the thing that is being missed here is that the student's behaviour is not relevant to the question of whether Mr Krix acted appropriately. Obviously the kid was grossly misbehaving and crying out for some tough love. But Mr Krix did what he was told by his employer not to do. He failed to follow a written direction. You may argue that the direction was wrong. That Mr Krix should have been directed to dispense justice as he saw fit. But he is an employee and he did what he was told not to do. He got fired and his sacking was justified in the circumstances that he breached the written direction on at least two occasions. Plus three of his students caught on fire.
on 14-01-2014 03:18 PM
Stephen Krix looks like somebody who would not step back from confrontation: