Also agree that tokenistic engagement is not good, though I wouldn’t write off efforts to do it just because some do it badly because the aim should be for all to it well, not to not do it at all. I don’t agree its ok if you make it clear its a ‘model exercise’ – thats just laziness and a wasted opportunity.

I saw an interview with a headteacher talking about violence she’d experienced as part of a news report about this and she explained how she’d been hit while splitting up (primary aged) children. Now who’d have thought you might get caught while splitting up scrapping kids?! I know very well that there are teachers who have faced very serious threats, abuse and assaults, but using that example doesn’t help with credibility of what kind of ‘violence’ is being reported.

If I sound disparaging about pupil engagement it is because it is so very rarely genuine. I think you might be very surprised, for example, to hear the conversations that I suspect take place between staff after your Academy’s council meets. Ironically, ‘research’ into ‘pupil voice’ has pointed this out quite recently. It is a bit like telling an English class to write a letter which they don’t ever mail, or a business studies class to write a business case for something they will never manufacture. It’s OK, as long as you explain clearly to the children that it is a model exercise, but the value to the child just isn’t very high.

What the article fails to speak about in any depth is the link between this issue of parental support/challenge and genuine aspirational poverty. Anyone who has taught in schools deemed ‘challenging’ can talk a lot about the families considered poor who have a lot of material resources. The issue for so long has not been a lack of wealth, but a lack of real aspiration. This is inter-generational, attitudinal, and finds its expression in all types of anti-social behaviour from low level disruption in classrooms to student/parent violence towards teachers and schools.

There are schools nationally that do a tremendous amount to effectively engage parents – but the rigour of that conversation is significantly lessened by a few factors. There is a genuine gap in understanding of what education can offer and what is required for success. There is also a need to consolidate the key standards and norms required for socialisation. That is – what is good behaviour? What is unacceptable interaction in a school? The key to bridging the deprivation gap lies within ensuring heightened expectations – and aligning social and behavioural skills more concretely with all other areas of school improvement.

There’s no easy answer – but if there is one I think we can assume it won’t be found in the Observer.