Member's statement: Schools: Violence Against Staff
Member's statement by Mr Jon Burrows on .
- MLA
- Mr Jon Burrows
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 19 May 2026
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Schools: Violence Against Staff
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5549118
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Violence against our teachers has been described to me by those who work in schools as a taboo issue. It is one that we do not want to talk about or to address but that happens in schools day in, day out. I asked the Education Authority how many teachers were assaulted last year: the figures were 598 teachers and 1,974 classroom assistants. That is 2,500 people who work in our education establishments. When we talk about violence against women, we do not talk about the violence in our schools, but the vast majority of the people who are injured and assaulted there are female. Sometimes — I do not want to stigmatise anyone — the violence is to do with special educational needs pupils and is not an assault but about someone who is dysregulated, but, often, teachers and classroom assistants do not have the training and support that they need to manage difficult situations. However, there is a culture in schools of some pupils simply being unruly and abusive and engaging in intimidation of our teachers and classroom assistants, which is an entirely different thing. Those staff need to hear that they have our full support. I worry about the Alliance proposal to change the minimum age of criminal responsibility to 14. That would make things such as bullying, assaults and even upskirting or downblousing by anyone who is under 14 legal in our country, which would be very damaging. There is a wider culture here. I ask the Education Minister — I have written to him about it — to put in place an injury reduction plan for our schools and make sure that schools are empowered to deal swiftly with pupils who are disruptive. Such pupils disrupt the vast majority, who are well behaved. I will say things that other people do not want to say, such as that, while the vast majority of parents are good people who do the right thing, teachers have experience of parents who abuse them; when the parent's son or daughter is told off, teachers get abuse rather than support. We have to deal with these issues, because we have men and women — mostly women — who go to school to do their level best and work hard. When I visit a classroom and am suddenly told that a teacher next door has just been concussed or I speak to teachers with broken ribs or other broken bones, I will speak up for them, because they do not feel that they get the support that they need. The issue should be given more publicity and attention. We need to support our teachers, pupils and parents so that we have schools that are safe for everybody.
456 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.09 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.92).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.97).
- Subject area: Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.10 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.07 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.07 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.07 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.92 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.09 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.97 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.03 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.72 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.20 |
| Disability (including neurodivergence and mental health), disabled people and disability or sickness benefits | 0.04 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.03 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.01 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:41 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.