Is it true teachers can't write bad references? :confused:

No, that is not the reason the claimant in Spring was able to successfully sue. He sued because his reference was substantially inaccurate and based on unproven allegations of misconduct.

Normally when something is written about you which is not true, you can sue in defamation. However, references are protected by something called 'qualified privilege'. You cannot sue in defamation for a reference unless it you can prove that it was written 'maliciously' - i.e. deliberately to harm you, not merely carelessly. Spring could not prove that in this case. Spring therefore framed his claim in negligence, arguing that his old employer owed him a duty to provide an accurate reference, and that duty had been breached by their carelessness in providing it.

If the employer's reference had been accurate, there would have been no breach of the duty of care; and no matter how unfavourable to him the reference was, Spring would not have been able to successfully sue.

I've never read such rubbish as this thread in all my life. As a retired teacher I can assure you the only requirement on a reference is that bit has to be truthful and that it can be backed up with fact. If you are a bone idle wastrel who always handed homework in late I would say so, If you were a bad timekeeper I would say so. Both I could prove with data and there is nothing a student could do about it. My responsibility in a reference was to tell the truth about a candidate to a prospective employer/university. Indeed to net tell the truth is to invite litigation from an employer. I have even known job offers withdrawn once references were taken up. If I had an employee I could not find anything positive to say about I would decline to give them a reference. That's another urban myth by the way, that you have to be given a reference if you ask for one. There are ways of damning with faint praise. I used to enjoy "If you get John to work for you, you will be very lucky."

Why can't they say both? They are both true. In fact, the attendance being so low, in this hypothetical scenario, provides proof that John is lazy.

I think the whole idea of the role of being a teacher is to help a student achieve their goals through education, and if said student wants to go to university one of the ways in which a teacher can assist them is by writing them a good reference. The teacher whom wrote my reference didn't really know, hadn't taught me before, yet gave me a good reference (I assume), but personally, I have never heard of a bad reference being given

No teacher would write a bad reference for a student. There's no actual law stating you have to write a good reference. It's more an unspoken rule. In fact, I don't think anyone would write a bad reference for anyone if you the applicant has a choice as to who completes the reference. The reference is largely a mere formality. Everyone says the same rubbish in them. It's like when you see a customer testimonial on a website.

Our Geography teacher said he would be making a note on the reference if we missed any homeworks throughout the year.

Not very useful considering I haven't done many for him, and I'm applying for GEOGRAPHY

Your teachers are unlikely to say anything explicitly negative about you for your reference, however, it's what they don't say about you that will speak volumes to those on the uni admissions teams.

References accentuate the positive and ignore the negative.

Think about a reference that says someone is diligent and hard-working where achieved grades are CCD and predicted grades are CCC. What that reference is really saying is that there is no more petrol in the tank. The candidate is performing to the best of his ability.

They can't write a bad reference, but they can write a very short or generic reference, or refer to words such as "quiet", or miss out key attributes all together.

It is no different to employment references. The legal situation in regard to negative points is tricky. What is not included in the reference is the most the most powerful component.

The unwritten rules is that you either write a positive, but truthful reference or you refuse to write a reference. This holds for any type of personal reference. I think it is a bit of a skill to 'damn with faint praise' and most people can't manage it.

As far as i'm aware they're not allowed to give you a bad reference, but that doesn't mean they have to write a glowing one either...

They're allowed to do what ever they want within reason. Of course a bad reference isn't against the law. Provided it's their honest opinion and if they're being overly negative, they ideally provide some documentary evidence they can do what they want. Just like with any reference, anywhere.

However, pragmatically, think about it - it's within a teacher's interest (not to mention very much within the institutions) to ensure their pupils go to University. They're hardly going to 'flame' you as a chance to settle a score over a couple of missed homeworks are they?! It would take a very small person to start settling scores with, potentially, people's futures.

As a final note, I'd simply suggest the onus is on you to give them positive things to write about. If you're involved in sports, extra-curricular activities, mentoring younger kids, whatever - then there's more than enough material for the teacher to reference your positive skills, qualities, etc.

Anyone believing that teachers cannot give a bad reference is completely wrong; and the same comment applies to employment references. The referee has a legal duty to the receiver as well as to the subject. It is possible for the referee to be sued by the receiver if they make a decision based on a falsely positive reference.

However, they must write what is true and be justified in what they write. If you haven't turned in an assignment in two years, don't attend classes, destroyed the school library or average only 23% in your work they are perfectly at liberty to say so, for instance.

In practice, most (but not all) referees will take a cautious approach and only say positive things, or praise trivialities, if they really want to be damning. The receiver will interpret it as he wishes.

I've never heard of a teacher giving a bad reference. However, if they choose to not say certain things it could give a bad impression to the university. E.g. by not commenting on how well the student works independently doesn't make a reference bad but what they don't say speaks for itself. It's not in a teacher's interests to give a student a bad reference but they could be more honest (in a negative way) I suppose.

It's a myth that you cannot legally write a bad reference. However, if someone wrote something bad that was untrue, it could be considered libel. This means, when people are writing a bad reference they will usually be strictly factual. So, they might write "John's attendance is 56%" but not "John is lazy".

With most schools though, they probably only write a poor reference if they think someone is completely unsuitable for university. It's beneficial for schools and colleges to have a good record of getting people into university. This means they'll try to write positive references. However, schools do build up reputations with universities they send a lot of students too, and they don't want that reputation to be for exaggerating on the reference, as this might harm future students' chances of getting into that university.

Why do you think your reference might be bad?

One of my mates teachers wrote in his reference, " x student is no good at practicals ". So I guess they can write bad aspects about you in your reference. However it depends on the teacher imo.

Despite the common thought, Final Fantasy is actually partially right - there is a recorded case (Spring v Guardian Assurance) where an employee was able to successfully sue his former employer for giving him a bad reference. So conceivably this might extend to university applications. However I believe that the issue allowing the claimant to sue in that case was that the reference in question was an unfair reflection on him.

So, I'd imagine that the answer would be that legally your referee would be allowed to write a negative reference, but only if it was accurate - if, for example, they'd said you had 'a poor attendance record' when you'd turned up to 90% of the lessons then you might be able to sue, but probably not if you'd turned up to 50%. Since there's only been one case on the topic, though, I wouldn't be surprised if this were to change one way or the other in the future.

Depends what you mean by 'bad' - it could include constructive criticism or potential weaknesses just as much as it could include the contrary. It has to be truthful just like an employment reference must be truthful, but this isn't always concentrated on opinion as a pose to facts.

Fair enough. What's the point really then? Seems like a useless formality, then. I think a more efficient system would for there to be Extenuating Circumstances/achievment Forms for teachers to write if the student experienced any hardships in their education that might account for a lack in performance and any notable achievements like 100UMS in modules.
That makes sense. I haven't really heard anything that suggests that there's an official thing preventing teachers from writing references.

It's more what isn't said that is bad.

For example on my reference I'm sure there will be no mention of my attendance and punctuality. I have got a detention tomorrow (I know, I'm 19 ffs) for being 1 minute late twice. Oh well.

Everything else on my reference will show how hard working etc. I am, but they will of course notice the obvious omission of my punctuality.

I see. Are you suggesting, thought, that being quiet is a bad thing? I guess it might be seen as a flaw for certain careers where extrovert exuberance is a must.

'Quiet' on a reference probably means never contributes to conversations, is hardly ever in the lessons, slightly anti social.

If the referee wants to mean 'Quiet hard worker,' they'll usually write 'Deep and diligent thinker, capable of processing complex concepts in her mind...'

I see. Hopefully it was an empty threat then!

Very true. There's an art to writing a reference, just as there is in writing estate agents' blurb. There are many ways of saying the equivalent of 'unlimited scope for the DIY enthusiast.'

Hehe I always remember tumbling to the realisation that "tastefully decorated", at a particular point in time in the midlands, meant "has polystyrene-tiled ceilings".

I've pondered over 'deceptively spacious' for many years.

Ah! The Tardis factor.

We actually bought a house with 'ranch style banisters', which meant that the previous owners had ripped out the lovely Victorian handrails and replaced them with 4 x 1" floorboards. It cost a fortune to replace them. On topic, I have known quite a few students of whom 'deceptively intelligent' could be used without breaking the school guidelines on supportive references.

Our house had those when we moved in. What a stupid concept in a family home! We could see our baby getting big enough and able enough to be able to climb onto the bottom one and lean over very soon, and a ten foot fall was inevitable. They had to go.

This makes no sense whatsoever. A bad student who does not pay attention in class, distracts others, and does not hand in homework should never be given a good reference!

Sorry not been here for a while yes, any reference must be truthful.