A new political policy proposed by ACT aims to allow teachers to use reasonable force to remove disruptive students, igniting a sharp debate over classroom behavior across the country, according to Breakfast and 1News reports.
ACT Policy Proposal on Classroom Behaviour and Parental Fines
The policy, announced on Sunday, would extend teachers’ powers under the Education and Training Act. It would also allow fines of up to $3,000 for parents who refuse to engage with schools over their child’s behavior, according to reporting from Breakfast. ACT leader David Seymour described the measure as a fix for what he called the country’s worst-in-the-developed-world classrooms.
Under the proposed changes, section 99 of the Education Act—which currently permits reasonable force only to stop a student from harming themselves or others—would be extended to cover damage to school property. Seymour told Breakfast that current rules force teachers to evacuate whole classes rather than restrain a single student. “Right now, and this actually happens, a student throws a wobbly, and they have to take all the other children out of the class, stop their learning, because they’re not allowed to restrain that child,” Seymour said.
Teacher Union Opposition and Sector Concerns
The New Zealand Post Primary Teachers’ Association (PPTA) strongly pushed back against the proposal. PPTA president Chris Abercrombie told Breakfast that teachers do not want powers to physically remove disruptive students, branding the policy “a solution looking for a problem.” Abercrombie stated that the law is already clear on when teachers can restrain students, adding that the extreme behavior described by politicians is rare. “In my 20 year career, I’ve had two students refuse to leave the classroom when asked, so it’s not the level that they’re talking about,” Abercrombie said, questioning why anyone would think “teachers manhandling a student out of the classroom is the solution.”
While some educators in the education sector told 1News they agreed that students can occasionally be disruptive, they did not agree with the specific methods proposed by ACT. Abercrombie argued that schools instead need more pastoral care, educational psychologists, social workers, and guidance counsellors.
Escalation Pathways, Safety Questions, and Next Steps
Seymour clarified that the policy focuses less on physical confrontation and more on creating a pathway for escalation. This approach includes automatic stand-downs for students who assault staff, mandatory parent meetings, and fines for parents who refuse to attend. “If you assault a teacher, immediate stand down,” Seymour said.
Both proponents and critics raised safety concerns regarding physical interventions. When asked how a teacher might remove a resisting 14-year-old boy, Seymour conceded that a teacher could potentially be hurt, but asked whether the status quo of falling student achievement should simply continue. Abercrombie raised the same risk of injury to teachers or students, while questioning how the policy would apply to neurodivergent students who cannot help their behavior.
Related reading