Self defence or child abuse..you decide.

[L00b]

Texting maybe, playing games or listening to music surruptitiously. Sometimes this is allowed as a reward for the students completing their work early and to a good standard.

In a classroom, during a class? "Reward"? For just "doing their work"?

 

And then you wonder about them trying to take an arm, after you've given them a finger Talk about making a rod for your own back!

[six45ive]

A whopping fallacy. This assumes the kids all have such weak personalities they can simply be crushed by attending school for 7 hours a day and donning, gasp, a uniform. Let's look at the punks, the rockers, the beat groups and the rock n' rollers. All attended schools far more strict and militaristic than anything a modern kid would recognise. All of whom flourished, as did their considerable audiences who also attended 'old fashioned' schools.

 

This is classic liberal soft thinking, e.g. scrap boundaries and let kids run riot as it's cruel to do otherwise. When a generation of selfish demanding adults emerge so be it.

 

The traditional method created disciplined adults who knew to work hard and play hard as they inhabited two very different worlds. Nowadays the lines are blurred.

 

I attended a Sheffield comp in the late 80's and the behaviour you have described with the aggressive swearing schoolgirls simply would not have existed in my school. That response would have earned removal from the site. Things have obviously changed massively in just 20 years.

 

A whopping fallacy. You said it. In this case a complete and utter irrelevant piece which offers nothing of substance to the conversation.

[Mr Prime]

There seems to be an implication in what you say there, that you, personally, would risk violence over an issue of power - i.e. whether or not a pupil left the room without your permission?

 

Is that the case, or have I misunderstood?

 

Yes I would, I can only speak for myself, a 6ft male. I would block and restrain then remove, not engage in a boxing match. My brother does this at least once a week in the boys school he works in, it's not a big deal unless you make it so.

 

You seem to be saying that if a tough kid kicks off then authority should step aside for fear of violence. Once the kid is free of the classroom then someone else has to restrain him but that would be violence right? In the long term you would be teaching the kid that they can throw their weight around which does not put him in good stead for when he comes across the police. He'll be there in the cell in a state of shock.

[Mr Prime]

A whopping fallacy. You said it. In this case a complete and utter irrelevant piece which offers nothing of substance to the conversation.

 

Your arrogance is intriguing. You state casually as facts that hardline schools create robots. I provide examples of the millions who passed through such schools and did not and you dismiss it as irrelevant. Why is this?

[six45ive]

No they don't? Fair enough, you are Obi Wan on this topic after all.

 

He would have won because he would have simply walked out when that is not permitted. Yes he would be punished later and maybe that's alright for some. It's better not to let it get to that stage.

 

Which is what I've been saying all along. So now that we have an agreed point, and bearing in mind what the article had to say about how the incident started, what do you think the teacher could have done differently?

[Mr Prime]

Which is what I've been saying all along. So now that we have an agreed point, and bearing in mind what the article had to say about how the incident started, what do you think the teacher could have done differently?

 

Some pupils just can't be reasoned into submission as seems to be the case in your world. A teacher shouldn't have to play mind games to stop a kid kicking off. A simple order for silence should be enough but then again I attended the harsh Victorian world of a late 80's state school.

[Halibut]

Yes I would, I can only speak for myself, a 6ft male. I would block and restrain then remove, not engage in a boxing match. My brother does this at least once a week in the boys school he works in, it's not a big deal unless you make it so.

 

You seem to be saying that if a tough kid kicks off then authority should step aside for fear of violence. Once the kid is free of the classroom then someone else has to restrain him but that would be violence right? In the long term you would be teaching the kid that they can throw their weight around which does not put him in good stead for when he comes across the police. He'll be there in the cell in a state of shock.

 

Not at all - I'm suggesting that there are some issues in a classroom which absolutely don't demand the use of violence on the part of the teacher; in fact there's only one that does - which is if the violence is the only way to manage an immediate risk of serious harm to the teacher, or children.

[Mr Prime]

Not at all - I'm suggesting that there are some issues in a classroom which absolutely don't demand the use of violence on the part of the teacher; in fact there's only one that does - which is if the violence is the only way to manage an immediate risk of serious harm to the teacher, or children.

 

Well yes I wouldn't disagree with that at all. I see a video in which a woman is being threatened by a lunk and defends herself. To me that's fine. Had she hit him as he sat at his desk being insolent there would be a problem.

[six45ive]

Once the kid is free of the classroom then someone else has to restrain him but that would be violence right?

 

No because the kid calms down, quicker if he's away from the situation/environment that's been a catalyst to him kicking off. Nobody stays boiling mad forever unless they've been diagnosed with serious mental or emotional problems.

[Halibut]

Some pupils just can't be reasoned into submission as seems to be the case in your world. A teacher shouldn't have to play mind games to stop a kid kicking off. A simple order for silence should be enough but then again I attended the harsh Victorian world of a late 80's state school.

 

And what if it isn't, what then? Hit them?

 

Would you not agree with me that the only time a teacher should use violence is when it's the only way to manage an immediate risk of harm?