|
The Herald
March 19 2003
New look at no-touch teaching
by Theresa Garner
A
teachers' policy of avoiding physical contact with children is under review
after new research found a vicious circle of self-surveillance and anxiety.
University of Auckland education lecturer Alison Jones
interviewed 55 primary school teachers and principals on their reluctance to
touch children because of widespread social anxiety about sexual abuse.
The teachers reported wet and naked children wandering out of pool changing
rooms looking for help in getting dressed, and girls lying prone on sports
fields while male teachers sent children to find a female to help.
"In many instances, female teachers have had to be called away from
their own groups to assist male colleagues afraid to touch or be alone with a
child," Dr Jones said.
"Their self-policing feeds into the social anxiety and it goes round in
a vicious circle."
Her research paper, Touching Children: Policy, Social Anxiety and the
"Safe" Teacher, looks at how anxiety over something so rare -
sexual abuse of children by teachers - has become embedded in the school
system.
Dr Jones said a policy developed by the teachers' union, the New Zealand
Educational Institute, in response to the Christchurch Civic Creche case 10
years ago reinforced public anxiety instead of addressing it.
The NZEI physical conduct code of practice says any physical contact with
students presents a risk of being viewed as assault. Teachers are advised to
avoid physical contact and being alone with children.
Dr Jones said most parents would agree that teachers are largely
"safe", but teachers' behaviour was dictated by the ever-present
threat of accusation, and the policy did not reduce teacher anxiety.
"Teachers know, for instance, that the court case in New Zealand
which galvanised the code of conduct was widely seen as an example of social
hysteria rather than sexual abuse."
Dr Jones said convicted childcare worker Peter Ellis was seen as more than
sick or dangerous.
"He came to symbolise the shocking possibility of a general danger
inhabiting the school or childcare centre."
Male and female teachers had told her that actions they might once have seen
as pleasant, sensible or helpful are now uncomfortable, distressing and
unpleasant.
These included getting a distracted child's attention, and being mobbed by
enthusiastic hangers-on in the playground.
Not all teachers avoid touching children.
"Nevertheless, the rare teachers who unselfconsciously cuddle and kiss
children, and allow them on their knee seem markedly oldfashioned," Dr
Jones said.
She said the NZEI had had a copy of her research for two months and she
understood it was rethinking its policy.
An NZEI representative confirmed this.
The research did not look at the effect the policy had on children.
But evidence from some teachers suggested children were often hurt and
confused by the lack of affection.
"These staff say they regularly encounter young children who do not get
physical affection at home, especially from males, and seem to crave it at
school."
American research last year suggested New Zealand was a "low
touch" culture with corresponding health and social problems.
Touch deprivation was considered to produce depressive, violent or aggressive
behaviour, difficulty empathising with others, trouble expressing feelings,
impaired social maturity and delays in development.
|
