NationStates Jolt Archive

I don't believe I've seen this one done here.

Assuming that the school in question is a primary or secondary school, and the student has commited a serious infraction (such as stealing, truancy, or assault), what degree of punishment should the teachers be allowed to give out?

Other qustions of related interest:
What infractions should be punished more or less seriously?
Should teachers, adminitrators, or someone else punish misbehaving students?

Real detentions. Not one hour after school but sometime cutting into social life.

Physical punishment for detention-dodgers.

I don't believe I've seen this one done here.

Assuming that the school in question is a primary or secondary school, and the student has commited a serious infraction (such as stealing, truancy, or assault), what degree of punishment should the teachers be allowed to give out?

Other qustions of related interest:
What infractions should be punished more or less seriously?
Should teachers, adminitrators, or someone else punish misbehaving students?

Well considering I got suspended in s1 (age 11-13) last year for defending myself... how much further can they go...

I don't believe I've seen this one done here.

Assuming that the school in question is a primary or secondary school, and the student has commited a serious infraction (such as stealing, truancy, or assault), what degree of punishment should the teachers be allowed to give out?

Other qustions of related interest:
What infractions should be punished more or less seriously?
Should teachers, adminitrators, or someone else punish misbehaving students?

Pretty much anything except corperal punishment. I've just left secondary school. Some people in a few classes made it impossible to do any work and that was in the top-set of a 'beacon' school. I hate to think what it's like in other schools...

When we were young and went to school, there were certain teachers, who, would hurt the children anyway they could.
By pouring thier derision on anything we did, exsposing every weakness, however carefully hidden, by the kids.

But when they got home at night, thier fat and pyschopathic wives would thrash them within inches of thier lives.

bring back corporal punishment in schools..>.> <.<

I don't believe I've seen this one done here.

Assuming that the school in question is a primary or secondary school, and the student has commited a serious infraction (such as stealing, truancy, or assault), what degree of punishment should the teachers be allowed to give out?

Other qustions of related interest:
What infractions should be punished more or less seriously?
Should teachers, adminitrators, or someone else punish misbehaving students?

I think the punishment should be more focused on helping the person realizing what he/she has done and why it is wrong. Revenge shouldn't really be a factor, so I don't think physical harm would do anything more than re-affirm the notion that voilence is acceptable in certain situations.

Well considering I got suspended in s1 (age 11-13) last year for defending myself... how much further can they go...

Much, much further than is currently acceptable in the US or most of Europe. Moderate to sever corporal punishment for example.

Teachers need more powers to disepline, I wouldnt be a teacher nowerdays.... kids as young as 12 can pretty much beat a grown person up and they just have to take the blows and not dare even block as it could bruise the little darlings feet as theyre kicking your kidneys into submission. I know I'd be jailed but if a kid did that to me, id make sure the whole class was there as I knock the little git across the room, whether they can get up on their own after wont be my problem, but I guarentee noone in that class woudl ever try that on me again.......

Teachers need more powers to disepline, I wouldnt be a teacher nowerdays.... kids as young as 12 can pretty much beat a grown person up and they just have to take the blows and not dare even block as it could bruise the little darlings feet as theyre kicking your kidneys into submission. I know I'd be jailed but if a kid did that to me, id make sure the whole class was there as I knock the little git across the room, whether they can get up on their own after wont be my problem, but I guarentee noone in that class woudl ever try that on me again.......

I couldn't agree more mate. well acctually i could, you see: i know its gotten out of hand with the over-protection of children, but we also need to make sure that it doesnt suddently go in the other direction and allowing teachers to abuse their power! its a very thin line to walk.

Why isn't isolation on the poll? Its a common punishment for serious misbehavior.

Why isn't isolation on the poll? Its a common punishment for serious misbehavior.

Do you mean aside from detention and extended detention? Because otherwise I'm not entierly sure what exactly you mean by isolation.

I disagree with any form of corporal punishment as it implies that violence is a proper way to enforce authority, thus resulting in all sorts of child abuse in the future. However I believe expulsion and suspension should be used far more widely. The fact of the matter is the repeat offenders in schools are generally A stupid and B apathetic towards education. They will not succeed, so why should we hold back those with intelligence and hard work just so a bunch of wasters can get an 'education' if thats what you can call scraping the odd GCSE.

Cybertia
I wouldnt be a teacher nowerdays.... kids as young as 12 can pretty much beat a grown person up and they just have to take the blows and not dare even block as it could bruise the little darlings feet as theyre kicking your kidneys into submission

Thats not exactly true, at my old school a student was expelled for hitting a teacher and the teacher received no repercussions for hitting him back. I wouldnt risk it however, and I will be a teacher in a few years hopefully.

Do you mean aside from detention and extended detention? Because otherwise I'm not entierly sure what exactly you mean by isolation.

Isolation occurs throughout school hours, they must work the rest of the day away from everyone else. I think it works fairly well as a lot of the disorder is just bravado that doesnt pay if no one is there to see it. You never see the little bastards work like they do in isolation! :D

chose capitol...

would the situation not be hilarious :p

Headmaster: I'm sorry Mr & Misses Smith. Timmy was late to classes again, so Mr Brown our Deputy Headmaster had to give him a lethal injection... We'll be holding a small ceremony on the cricket greens later where he's buried. :D

OR.

Teacher: that's it Timmy, for not paying attention your getting the CHAIR :D

something is missing from the poll

what about torture!
thumbscrews, whips, etc....

for repeated disruptions in class, Timmy had a few thousand volts applied to his nuts :p

Isolation occurs throughout school hours, they must work the rest of the day away from everyone else. I think it works fairly well as a lot of the disorder is just bravado that doesnt pay if no one is there to see it. You never see the little bastards work like they do in isolation! :D

Aha. Extended detention it is. At least that's what that was called when I was a student (different schools, different names). Students were sent to a separate section of campus (or even a different, centalized campus) during school hours, which operated something like a "lock down" in prison - no speaking, not allowed to leave the detention classroom, except from accompanied visits to the toilet, no non-class related materials allowed in the classroom, etc..

but what if Timmy enjoys that sort of thing?

Aha. Extended detention it is. At least that's what that was called when I was a student (different schools, different names). Students were sent to a separate section of campus (or even a different, centalized campus) during school hours, which operated something like a "lock down" in prison - no speaking, not allowed to leave the detention classroom, except from accompanied visits to the toilet, no non-class related materials allowed in the classroom, etc..

Fair enough, I guess its just terms for it then. I personally think instead of isolation/extended detention people should be put in jail :D that would shake them up a bit

but what if Timmy enjoys that sort of thing?

Then put the voltage in his eyes :D
Bad luck Timmy! This school isnt blind friendly

but what if Timmy enjoys that sort of thing?

:p good point!

torture covers so many options. Maybe listen to Britney spears for 8 consecutive hours? or strip him naked during assembly and have all the other kids + teachers laugh at him. :p

something is missing from the poll

what about torture!
thumbscrews, whips, etc....

for repeated disruptions in class, Timmy had a few thousand volts applied to his nuts :p

Nope. You missed the second to last option. And yes, capitol is a joke, although I suspect a certain number of posters would support that as a serious option.

Oh, and would you really consider disruption of classes or tardiness a serious infraction along the lines I listed in the OP?

chose capitol...

would the situation not be hilarious :p

Headmaster: I'm sorry Mr & Misses Smith. Timmy was late to classes again, so Mr Brown our Deputy Headmaster had to give him a lethal injection... We'll be holding a small ceremony on the cricket greens later where he's buried. :D

OR.

Teacher: that's it Timmy, for not paying attention your getting the CHAIR :D

That's far too expensive. A much easier solution would be a noose hanging from a tree out in the playground. Not only is it cheaper, but everyone else gets to see it "as a warning".

Better yet, you could leave it for days and it would attract the crows...*cackles*

Personally, I think a moderate amount of corporal punishment should be allowed, if not encouraged. Having seen first hand some of the little brats, I know that a good smack would settle a lot of them. Actually, my favourite plan is to have their Mum or Dad come in, put them over their knee and smack them in front of the whole school. That would teach them.

To be honest when it comes to serious assault, theft etc I think the police should deal with it, I don't support corporol punishment in schools, you can't hit a rapist, a peadophile, a serial killer as a form of punishment so why should you be able to do it to a child?

Nope. You missed the second to last option. And yes, capitol is a joke, although I suspect a certain number of posters would support that as a serious option.

Oh, and would you really consider disruption of classes or tardiness a serious infraction along the lines I listed in the OP?

On a serious note. Yes I would consider them punishable activities. Detention or extra homework.

That's far too expensive. A much easier solution would be a noose hanging from a tree out in the playground. Not only is it cheaper, but everyone else gets to see it "as a warning".

Better yet, you could leave it for days and it would attract the crows...*cackles*


good point. State Schools tend to be strapped for cash these days.

I don't believe I've seen this one done here.

Assuming that the school in question is a primary or secondary school, and the student has commited a serious infraction (such as stealing, truancy, or assault), what degree of punishment should the teachers be allowed to give out?

Other qustions of related interest:
What infractions should be punished more or less seriously?
Should teachers, adminitrators, or someone else punish misbehaving students?

20 lashes for first offenders, the guillotine for repeat offenders!

you can't hit a rapist, a peadophile, a serial killer as a form of punishment

You can't? Damn this country!!!!

something is missing from the poll

what about torture!
thumbscrews, whips, etc....

for repeated disruptions in class, Timmy had a few thousand volts applied to his nuts :p

I like the way you think! :)

I think the punishment should be more focused on helping the person realizing what he/she has done and why it is wrong. Revenge shouldn't really be a factor, so I don't think physical harm would do anything more than re-affirm the notion that voilence is acceptable in certain situations.

That is how they do it in grammar school. That is what they are trying to do now. I say bring back the nuns, and rulers, and allow capital punishment. Think about it, schools could also be juvenial courts, with lil jail cells, and then no more juvenial halls, and [you] save the state some money. If you don't like that, then allow some form of physical punishment.

On a side note, this should be an issue, and what I said could be a, choice. Maybe I will find a time when I am not too lazy. Maybe some one else will.

I don't believe I've seen this one done here.

Assuming that the school in question is a primary or secondary school, and the student has commited a serious infraction (such as stealing, truancy, or assault), what degree of punishment should the teachers be allowed to give out?

Other qustions of related interest:
What infractions should be punished more or less seriously?
Should teachers, adminitrators, or someone else punish misbehaving students?
Parents having largely abdicated their role as parents, the teachers are faced with having to, in effect, raise the bloody lil blighters! This is precisely the reason I reluctantly decided to not start a new career in teaching. The first time some bloody little twit told me to go f**k myself, I would have probably gone ballistic on him and not only have lost my job, but perhaps been incarcerated as well as being sued by the idiot parents.

Sorry. Not enough money for that sort of aggravation.

As to what sort of punishment teachers should be allowed to administer ... paddling with a huge paddle, at the very least. For some of these spoiled brats, capitol punishment is insufficient! :headbang:

Nope. You missed the second to last option. And yes, capitol is a joke, although I suspect a certain number of posters would support that as a serious option.

Oh, and would you really consider disruption of classes or tardiness a serious infraction along the lines I listed in the OP?

Turn them [schools] into juvenial halls, and allow children to suffer capital punishment. After the age of four, they know what they are doing, unless they have something wrong with them [mentally such as downsyndrome].

I think the punishment should be more focused on helping the person realizing what he/she has done and why it is wrong. Revenge shouldn't really be a factor, so I don't think physical harm would do anything more than re-affirm the notion that voilence is acceptable in certain situations.

Damn right violence is acceptable in certain situations. You don't follow the rules, bad things happen to you. The sooner kids learn this, the better behaved they'll be.

I can't belive how many people here think a sadistic punishment is the best way to go. If history has taught us anything, it's that voilence breeds voilence, and fear only works as a short term solution with long term implications.

Parents having largely abdicated their role as parents, the teachers are faced with having to, in effect, raise the bloody lil blighters! This is precisely the reason I reluctantly decided to not start a new career in teaching. The first time some bloody little twit told me to go f**k myself, I would have probably gone ballistic on him and not only have lost my job, but perhaps been incarcerated as well as being sued by the idiot parents.

Sorry. Not enough money for that sort of aggravation.

As to what sort of punishment teachers should be allowed to administer ... paddling with a huge paddle, at the very least. For some of these spoiled brats, capitol punishment is insufficient! :headbang:

How about capital punishment by torture for the worst cases? You know, disembowelling, being drawn and quartered, etc. It worked in the old days!

I can't belive how many people here think a sadistic punishment is the best way to go. If history has taught us anything, it's that voilence breeds voilence, and fear only works as a short term solution with long term implications.

Shut up, ya little pansy, before I smack ya a good one!

I can't belive how many people here think a sadistic punishment is the best way to go. If history has taught us anything, it's that voilence breeds voilence, and fear only works as a short term solution with long term implications.

Being nice, and helping defend a country [Afganistan], then they will take advantage of you and backstab you.

Trust me, I don't trust anyone. People are a whole lot of traitors, so ignore "Trust me,"-Jibea, this post.

Damn right violence is acceptable in certain situations. You don't follow the rules, bad things happen to you. The sooner kids learn this, the better behaved they'll be.

I call BS. Why do you think corporal punishment was banned in first place. Just because an succesful solution hasn't been found yet doesn't mean that voilence was right in the first place. It may seem like an obvious applicable solution, but it just doesn't help.

How about capital punishment by torture for the worst cases? You know, disembowelling, being drawn and quartered, etc. It worked in the old days!

Give 'em the boot (You know the boot made out of metal that you heat up...).

Being nice, and helping defend a country [Afganistan], then they will take advantage of you and backstab you.

Trust me, I don't trust anyone. People are a whole lot of traitors, so ignore "Trust me,"-Jibea, this post.

WTF are you on about? What has defending Afganistan got to do with the best way to stop kids doing 'bad' things?

I call BS. Why do you think corporal punishment was banned in first place. Just because an succesful solution hasn't been found yet doesn't mean that voilence was right in the first place. It may seem like an obvious applicable solution, but it just doesn't help.

Would you stop doing something that causes pain, or stop doing something that you get lectured about? I think the pain would stop you a lot faster, the lecturing may not do a thing. Children do not listen all the time, but they can all feel pain (well, almost all.).

WTF are you on about? What has defending Afganistan got to do with the best way to stop kids doing 'bad' things?

Think about it. What do countries, and schools both contain. People. People betray everyone, even those that help, or try to rehabilitate.

I can't belive how many people here think a sadistic punishment is the best way to go. If history has taught us anything, it's that voilence breeds voilence, and fear only works as a short term solution with long term implications.

agreed

But history has also shown that appeasement does not work. And unfortunately, when a child has not reason to fear a teacher they are unlikely to listen

I call BS. Why do you think corporal punishment was banned in first place. Just because an succesful solution hasn't been found yet doesn't mean that voilence was right in the first place. It may seem like an obvious applicable solution, but it just doesn't help.

It's due to your kind of thinking that we have so many damned unruly brats in this country. Kids need to be taught that there are consquences, DIRE consquences, for bad behavior. Otherwise, they think they can still get away with crap when they become adults, and then they act surprised when they are sent to prison for some infraction of the law. "Spare the rod and spoil the child" was the prevailing philosphy up to about the 1960s, but now people think that the political correctness of the last few dozen years overturns centuries of wisdom. That's why the county is going to hell in a handbasket. What we have is two generations of people desparately in need of a damned good spanking!

I call BS. Why do you think corporal punishment was banned in first place. Just because an succesful solution hasn't been found yet doesn't mean that voilence was right in the first place. It may seem like an obvious applicable solution, but it just doesn't help.

It was banned because a bunch of goody-goody politicians decided it was cruel. Whether it worked or not was immaterial.

A lot of these kids behave the way they do because they know they will not be punished in any meaningful way. They are mostly pansies who are totally afraid of any sort of physical pain (they're the ones crying about having to get a vaccination). They have got to this stage because their parents are incompetent at controlling them. Any sort of physical violence would do the trick nicely.

agreed

But history has also shown that appeasement does not work. And unfortunately, when a child has not reason to fear a teacher they are unlikely to listen

As the husband of a former teacher (and there are good reasons why she's a FORMER teacher), I can verify that.

Nurgh. I've always said if better discipline was placed in schools, most of the problems that happen with my generation would be avoided.

Being nice doesn't work. Detention doesn't work. Expulsion only leaves another school with the same problem. What's left?

The belt may be the only viable solution, bar slipping the kids drugs...

I believe if your child is so distributive to the class/school that the school has a right to suspend/expel a student. However they MUST offer an alternative schooling approach for your child. After all, I pay property taxes, thus I pay for education in my country. If they take my child out of school and would not except my child back into the school board, then stop charging me school taxes that are added to my property taxes. I'll teach my child from home, my children would probably get a better education anyway.

Second and most important, if a teacher/school employee ever laid a hand on my child, they would never lay that hand on anything ever again! I don't even spank my children, no freaking teacher is going to do it! Yay, way to go, teach our kids that violence is wrong by teaching them violence. I don't think so!

As the husband of a former teacher (and there are good reasons why she's a FORMER teacher), I can verify that.

Yeah, i mean even if the teacher is not aloud to hit a kid. What's sort of threat is "i'm calling your parents" when the parents are not going to do anything???

Maybe the parents should be fined if the kids do something wrong! :p
Bet the kids would not mess-up again after the parents had to pay a 200€ fine :p

Well since liberals in the US will never allow real punishment of students who disrupt classes for those who actually want an education, they should set up a detention system in which after several detentions, the student gets expelled, without any opportunities to return to the school.

For instance, if a student receives five detentions, they get expelled from the school permanently.

In a government with any civi rights at all, the government should be the only organization allowed to use violence unless the person uses it in self defense. I know some people here have a loathing for capitalism, butthis can be solved in a very capitalist way; disobediance to the rules means a denial of the services that were purchased (or given freely by the government, depending on the situation). Detention, suspension, expulsion, and some other punishments like isolation would be tolerated then, but violence unless the kid attacked first. Otherwise, the doors are opened for some very bad situations, with schools abusing their power and beating the s*** out of kids for no reason.
Don't get me wrong, schools need to crack down on disobediance, and figure out that our schools are falling apart from stupid rule-breakers. They need to be removed from school, though, not put back in the classroom for some stupid rehab theory.

Yeah, i mean even if the teacher is not aloud to hit a kid. What's sort of threat is "i'm calling your parents" when the parents are not going to do anything???

Maybe the parents should be fined if the kids do something wrong! :p
Bet the kids would not mess-up again after the parents had to pay a 200€ fine :p

No fine the child. The difference is the child would have to actually work to benefit the society he/she wronged.

Second and most important, if a teacher/school employee ever laid a hand on my child, they would never lay that hand on anything ever again! I don't even spank my children, no freaking teacher is going to do it! Yay, way to go, teach our kids that violence is wrong by teaching them violence. I don't think so!

That's the primary reason my wife left teaching: having to deal with a-hole parents like you!

That's the primary reason my wife left teaching: having to deal with a-hole parents like you!

Please, this is a civil discussion. There's no need for names, even if you don't agree with her views.

No fine the child. The difference is the child would have to actually work to benefit the society he/she wronged.

would not work. anyway child labour laws would apply. Simply fine the parents. Could you imaging coming home at night, and you give your parents a note saying that because you were late for classes, dad has to pay 400€ fine, if not the car get reposest. You would NEVER be late again.

For instance, if a student receives five detentions, they get expelled from the school permanently.

Hmm...no. In many schools, detention is given for minor infrigement of the rules. At mine, we can be given detention for failing to wear our ties! Should a kid be expelled for chronic forgetfulness? No.

would not work. anyway child labour laws would apply. Simply fine the parents. Could you imaging coming home at night, and you give your parents a note saying that because you were late for classes, dad has to pay 400€ fine, if not the car get reposest. You would NEVER be late again.

Take away the child labor laws then.

Take away the child labor laws then.

NO YOU CAN't DO THAT!!!!
next thing you know they'll form pre-teen unions! That's all we'd need the little bastards going on strike!

Take away the child labor laws then.

Which opens up the floodgates to child slavery, a la Victorian.

Please, this is a civil discussion. There's no need for names, even if you don't agree with her views.

Perhaps not, but I'm venting years of frustration here. Kids today have no respect for teachers, and it's because they know the teachers can't punish them in any meaningful way. If they attempt to, they're shot down by administrators or "my child couldn't possibly do anything wrong, it must be the teacher's fault" parents. The kids are bad enough, but the parents are even worse. When I went to school, if I got in trouble parents generally would side WITH the teacher. Not any more. The teacher is ALWAYS wrong, regardless of what a snivelling little brat the kid is. Hell, I want to do more than spank them, I want to knock their f***ing little smartass heads off, and their stupid, moronic parents even more so! And that's on a GOOD day!

Which opens up the floodgates to child slavery, a la Victorian.

[Please note; I'm playing devil's advocate here]

What's wrong with that? Look at what Britain was like under the Victorians! The most powerful country in the world!

Perhaps not, but I'm venting years of frustration here. Kids today have no respect for teachers, and it's because they know the teachers can't punish them in any meaningful way. If they attempt to, they're shot down by administrators or "my child couldn't possibly do anything wrong, it must be the teacher's fault" parents. The kids are bad enough, but the parents are even worse. When I went to school, if I got in trouble parents generally would side WITH the teacher. Not any more. The teacher is ALWAYS wrong, regardless of what a snivelling little brat the kid is. Hell, I want to do more than spank them, I want to knock their f***ing little smartass heads off, and their stupid, moronic parents even more so! And that's on a GOOD day!

Hear hear!

I'll take the sword, you have the axe.

Ok I got it all you violence supporters, here's the solution:

The parent beats the child...The child goes to school angry, beats the teacher...the teacher beats the child...the parents beat the teacher...the principal beats the parents...the grandparents beat the principal...the principal kills the child....the parents shoot up everyone in the school...the teacher survives and manages to wrestle the guns out of the parents hands and shoots them...the teachers transfers schools...the teacher then beats another child...that child beats its younger sibling...the younger sibling beats a teacher when he/she enters school...that teacher beats the younger sibling...those parents beat the teacher...and well you guys get the picture!

That's the primary reason my wife left teaching: having to deal with a-hole parents like you!

Oh really? Parents like me? It's parents like me that pick up the slack for teachers. I am far more involved with my child's education than any parent I know. If the school has a problem with my child, call me! I don't care if I'm at work, I'll come down and solve it. If it wasn't for parents like me teachers work load would be even worse than it already is. We donate time, money and fundraising to our school. I don't mind running an after school program for the kids to play some sports that our teachers use to do when I was a kid. However, they no longer do it, because teachers only seem to care about their bottom line now, not our children. Not sure what country you live in, but trust me, here in Canada we as parents do a lot for our schools while teachers have adopted work to rule guidelines and do nothing but what is absolutely required of them.

Perhaps teaching just wasn't for your wife, because I've received nothing but praise by the school my son goes to for the donation of my time, money and working with the school for better after school programs that keep our children out of trouble.

I have no idea what kind of school your wife taught in, maybe it was some inner-city high school that she was afraid of, I really don't know. But without parents like me, schools would be in worse shape than they already are!

Or maybe your wife doesn't teach anymore because she shares your lack of decorum in calling people they don't know "a-hole" great role model for children, I'm sure.

[Please note; I'm playing devil's advocate here]

What's wrong with that? Look at what Britain was like under the Victorians! The most powerful country in the world!

It pissed me off then. Making the working class work most of the day recieving very few wages due to Ricardo's[I think thats David's last name] iron law of wages. No wonder why Karl Marx, and Friedrich Engles invented communism.

Perhaps not, but I'm venting years of frustration here. Kids today have no respect for teachers, and it's because they know the teachers can't punish them in any meaningful way. If they attempt to, they're shot down by administrators or "my child couldn't possibly do anything wrong, it must be the teacher's fault" parents. The kids are bad enough, but the parents are even worse. When I went to school, if I got in trouble parents generally would side WITH the teacher. Not any more. The teacher is ALWAYS wrong, regardless of what a snivelling little brat the kid is. Hell, I want to do more than spank them, I want to knock their f***ing little smartass heads off, and their stupid, moronic parents even more so! And that's on a GOOD day!

Preaching to the converted here. I agree with you completely. Just so you know, I'm not a teacher or anything like that. I'm one of the kids who here's the stories about why so-and-so hasn't been beaten to a bloody pulp, as he really should have. I can't believe some of the things that happens, and how incredibly incompetent the parents are. I see it a lot, unfortunately. At shopping centres and the like, too. I'm not saying that parents should just randomly beat their child up, but sometimes saying, "Don't do that" just DOESN'T WORK.

Anyway, while I can appreciate your fury, it's still not right to start name-calling. It simply destroys any sway your argument may hold.

[Please note; I'm playing devil's advocate here]

What's wrong with that? Look at what Britain was like under the Victorians! The most powerful country in the world!

Without decent plumbing or healthcare? In slum districts? Prudes deciding our censorship laws? No ta.

Killing is wrong. Always. Even if there is good reason, such as self defense or the defense of others, and you must kill, it is still wrong.
That said, less severe violence to use controlled levels of fear to influence a child might take that back-row, inbred, not-able-to-read person with ADHD into an absolute book smart genius. It sould also turn him into a psychotic killer when he grows up.
Teachers should be considered qualified to make such judgements in their line of work. If it is possible that it can help the child, then do it. No matter how many failures, or how many teachers abuse their power, if even one more child is helped and saved from an uneducated life living on welfare, it would be worth it.

Ok I got it all you violence supporters, here's the solution:

The parent beats the child...The child goes to school angry, beats the teacher...the teacher beats the child...the parents beat the teacher...the principal beats the parents...the grandparents beat the principal...the principal kills the child....the parents shoot up everyone in the school...the teacher survives and manages to wrestle the guns out of the parents hands and shoots them...the teachers transfers schools...the teacher then beats another child...that child beats its younger sibling...the younger sibling beats a teacher when he/she enters school...that teacher beats the younger sibling...those parents beat the teacher...and well you guys get the picture!

That makes no sense. If I was a teacher, and a child even attempted to beat me, then I would accidently "lose" the child during our desert field trip. Noble, I call the zweihänder.

Oh really? Parents like me? It's parents like me that pick up the slack for teachers.
. But without parents like me, schools would be in worse shape than they already are!

.

Without "my kid is always right" parents like you, we'd ALL live a lot longer. No, my wife never hit a student, nor did any of her coworkers that I'm aware, but believe me, they all WANTED to from time to time. That plus the low pay plus all the time and work you have to do OFF the clock, I'm amazed that anyone stays in teaching for long anymore.

Well my point is that yes violence worked in the past maybe, but then again our children today are more violent there's no denying it. Hello here in the US children are indeed shooting up their schools. I think that violent solutions cause more violent problems.
Fear= Hatred and resentment
Love= respect

Much, much further than is currently acceptable in the US or most of Europe. Moderate to sever corporal punishment for example.

What for defending yourself...

That makes no sense. If I was a teacher, and a child even attempted to beat me, then I would accidently "lose" the child during our desert field trip. Noble, I call the zweihänder.

Makes no sense: I agree.
Lose the brat: I agree.
I call the zweihänder: :confused:. What's a zweihänder?

EDIT: Wait, found out what a zweihänder is. Woah, that's a cool sword. I'll have the katana.

Anyway, while I can appreciate your fury, it's still not right to start name-calling. It simply destroys any sway your argument may hold.

Hey, I'm having fun here, and saying a lot of things I've WANTED to say for some time. There were times when my wife came home in tears because of some little s**thead's mother or father gave her a rough time because she dared to to say that the little smartass shouldn't behave that way in class. At those times, it was all I could do to keep from seeking that person out and blowing their head off. Basically, she had to quit teaching to keep from going crazy and to keep me out of jail.

Well my point is that yes violence worked in the past maybe, but then again our children today are more violent there's no denying it. Hello here in the US children are indeed shooting up their schools. I think that violent solutions cause more violent problems.

I think that is caused by the lack of punishment, bullies, and the media blowing everything out of proportion. Also some school shootings have completly unrelated causes [that made no sense as I was writing it, basically violence is not the only reason], such as relations to the Neo-Nazis [I believe Columbine was one or something, a recent one was related to the Neo-Nazi's {Such as people going on their site, and believing them}]. Other causes could be stress, or just because they feel like it.

Hey, I'm having fun here, and saying a lot of things I've WANTED to say for some time. There were times when my wife came home in tears because of some little s**thead's mother or father gave her a rough time because she dared to to say that the little smartass shouldn't behave that way in class. At those times, it was all I could do to keep from seeking that person out and blowing their head off. Basically, she had to quit teaching to keep from going crazy and to keep me out of jail.

Well, vent all the steam you want. Just don't drag me down with you.

*takes a few steps back*

*puts on sunglasses*

I'm not saying that violence is what caused the shootings I'm saying that those kids saw it as a solution. Simply put I think it was because in the case of Columbine it was the boy's father being in the military. Chances are the boy learned that if you have enemies it was ok to kill them. Basically. I mean kids learn from example and observation the most, everything else is second. I also think that schooling here in the US needs a total reformation. I mean whether or not to beat your kids should be a personal decision not the governments. I mean I don't want my kids to be hit by a teacher. Discplined yes, but not physcially punished.

I'm not saying that violence is what caused the shootings I'm saying that those kids saw it as a solution. Simply put I think it was because in the case of Columbine it was the boy's father being in the military. Chances are the boy learned that if you have enemies it was ok to kill them. Basically. I mean kids learn from example and observation the most, everything else is second. I also think that schooling here in the US needs a total reformation. I mean whether or not to beat your kids should be a personal decision not the governments. I mean I don't want my kids to be hit by a teacher. Discplined yes, but not physcially punished.

They were in highschool, and I didn't learn by example after third grade. After five/seven, children should already no the difference between right and wrong (unless they have something wrong with them [not insultingly said]), and should know killing=bad.

But thats my point that those kids knew the difference between right and wrong, but they thought killing was ok, by their father's example

Without "my kid is always right" parents like you, we'd ALL live a lot longer. No, my wife never hit a student, nor did any of her coworkers that I'm aware, but believe me, they all WANTED to from time to time. That plus the low pay plus all the time and work you have to do OFF the clock, I'm amazed that anyone stays in teaching for long anymore.


You obviously are a very angry person when it comes to this topic, it screams off the page. But you seem to have grouped me into a category I don't believe is right or fair. I never said "my kid is always right" In fact, he usually isn't and *I* deal with it. It is not the job of the teacher to solve any behaviour issues my child may or may not have. That is MY job. I'm the parent. It's the job of the teacher to teach my child math, English, etc, etc.. It is not the teachers job or right to hit my child. I don't even hit my children. Violence begets violence.

I'm a parent of two young kids, sure they can drive you up the wall.. and for a second or two sometimes you think "To the moon Alice" but you don't act upon it. Why? Because they're children. Children should have the same protection under the law as you and I do. If I walked up to you because you were disturbing the people in a restaurant and slapped you, or took off my belt and hit you with it, I'd be charged with assault. Any person would be! So why is it the feeling of some (severely physiologically under developed) people that it's okay to hit children? It's against the law! As it should always remain!

If I hit my children, exactly what am I teaching them? Nothing except that hitting is okay! And it's not.

As for why teachers teach, it's a nobel profession. Sure there are bad teachers every where, but no one ever goes into the field of teaching for the money. That much is a given! I suppose if a teacher didn't know that going in, that says a lot about them right there! Teachers in Canada make $60,000 a year, get all stat holidays, get every holiday and two months in the summer, now while I make more than a teacher, I sure wish I had that kind of time off. Again, I don't know what country you're in, it may be different there. So please don't just jump to conclusions of what kind of parent I am!

The primary issue is rights versus responsibilities. In the US every child is legally required to complete either 12 years of education or remain in school until their 18th birthday. As far as I know, we're the only country to require this.

Students have the 'right' to be in class, and if they are expelled they have the 'right' to attend another school. The ultimate sanction in our current system is rendered useless by mandatory schooling.

Parents, in my view, are the ultimate enabler in a discipline situation. They can apply sanctions to the kid's life that a school can't, and have a greater probability of correcting behavior problems . When they refuse to correct the problem - or work with teachers to correct it - and rely on their 'right' to education, they deny their responsibility and infringe on the 'right' of other students to be educated in a disruption-free environment.

I think these 'rights' should cancel each other. The kid has a 'right' to be in school until he infringes on the 'rights' of other students to be taught. Expulsion (after warnings and due procedures) should be the consequence for class disruption. Parents get to send kid to private school or home school under government mandate.

Oliver Wendell Holmes said "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."

How about capital punishment by torture for the worst cases? You know, disembowelling, being drawn and quartered, etc. It worked in the old days!
Heh! I was being facetious and you know it! :p

It's due to your kind of thinking that we have so many damned unruly brats in this country. Kids need to be taught that there are consquences, DIRE consquences, for bad behavior. Otherwise, they think they can still get away with crap when they become adults, and then they act surprised when they are sent to prison for some infraction of the law. "Spare the rod and spoil the child" was the prevailing philosphy up to about the 1960s, but now people think that the political correctness of the last few dozen years overturns centuries of wisdom. That's why the county is going to hell in a handbasket. What we have is two generations of people desparately in need of a damned good spanking!
A ... men, brother! Aaaaamen! :)

First of all, STEPHISTAN:

1. Not ALL teachers make the salary figure you quoted. And even if they did, $60k in Canada is what, $43k in the US? Hardly exorbitant.

2. STOP WITH THE "TIME OFF" ARGUMENT, please. It's a load of horseshit and isn't even remotely accurate. MY time off for, say, President's Day 4-day weekend every year is spent in Yakima, Spokane, Vancouver, Tacoma or Seattle at a four-day conference of my professional organization. I hate conferences, but I need to go because I can get college credit for it, which I need to keep my certificate current. At MY expense, and credits aren't cheap. Those two months in the summer? I teach at a couple of music camps to keep my methods and materials current and make a little extra. On top of that, I'm a music teacher, so my "textbooks" change every year as I plan a program based on my enrollment, their talents, and what little money is in my inadequate music budget. Unless, of course the choir needs new robes or we need to repair that baritone sax or even buy a new one (price that for an eye-opener). Then there are festival and other outside performances to plan, fundraising events to coordinate, a department-wide retreat to set up, the sound system to maintain -- the list is not quite endless, but it is very long.

Forgive me if I seem a bit defensive, but I've dealt with that gross misconception whenever I've had conversations with people about teaching. I think some people use that tack just to set me off, and I'll cop to it, it works.

PUNISHMENT: My mother would be furious if she needed to come to the school to deal with me or my siblings. She explained to us that it cost the family money (therefore it cost US money, food, new clothes, birthday presents, et al.) whenever she had to take off from work. If that didn't guilt us into good behavior, her wooden spoon would add the final touch.

Of course violence isn't the answer, but a wholesome discipline with complete expectations and consequences laid out plainly for all to understand is crucial. Some kids aren't motivated my "the good of the whole". All I know is that every time I went inot Mr. Zinski's classroom and saw his aerodynamically-drilled hickory paddle hanging on the wall behind his desk, I knew I needed to concentrate on my behavior. He taught spelling. Consequently, barring typos, I'm a champion speller. No coincidence, that.

As in most human affairs, the key is moderation.

And the Columbine kids? Including many other factors, they saw violence as the only way they'd be heard. Sadly, they were right. When those who are forever under the thumb of a whole class of folks who never seem to get punished for their injustices, you tend to drift toward the drastic (9/11? But that's a whole 'nother thread).

A ... men, brother! Aaaaamen! :)


I find it hard to believe you subscribe to this Forrest? I've seen your beautiful grand-children.. I just can't see you hitting them, perhaps I had you pegged wrong? But I didn't think you were a child abuser. Anyone else would be charged and thrown in jail, so why is it "ok" to hit children and not adults?

I'm sorry, but if people need to hit their children to get them to listen and have respect, if they can't be more creative than that, I say they are not very good parents to begin with and may be they are the problem, not the child. You are after all a product of your environment.

Ok I got it all you violence supporters, here's the solution:

The parent beats the child...The child goes to school angry, beats the teacher...the teacher beats the child...the parents beat the teacher...the principal beats the parents...the grandparents beat the principal...the principal kills the child....the parents shoot up everyone in the school...the teacher survives and manages to wrestle the guns out of the parents hands and shoots them...the teachers transfers schools...the teacher then beats another child...that child beats its younger sibling...the younger sibling beats a teacher when he/she enters school...that teacher beats the younger sibling...those parents beat the teacher...and well you guys get the picture!
Oh, bullshit! I got spanked when I was in school, several times, yet I've never "beaten" my own children, my grandchildren, or anyone else, for that matter. And I know lots and lots of others who went through the same experiences in school and who turned out to be really good people.

Up to expulsion … The school does not have a right to corporal punishment (the parents in my opinion should have that option … within reason open) but the school is not and will never be a parent (who have the ultimate responsibility for the wellbeing of their child)

And for the major infractions you stated such as assault they should be reported to the authorities.

I find it hard to believe you subscribe to this Forrest? I've seen your beautiful grand-children.. I just can't see you hitting them, perhaps I had you pegged wrong? But I didn't think you were a child abuser. Anyone else would be charged and thrown in jail, so why is it "ok" to hit children and not adults?

I'm sorry, but if people need to hit their children to get them to listen and have respect, if they can't be more creative than that, I say they are not very good parents to begin with and may be they are the problem, not the child. You are after all a product of your environment.
Oh, come on, Steph! You know very well I don't advocate "beating" anyone, much less children. All I'm saying is that there are sometimes when some children are in dire need of a bit of incentive to behave themselves. Usually a couple of smacks on the rump with an open palm is sufficient. I simply think that this damend "politically correct" approach currently popular is totally ineffective when dealing with children who refuse to listen to reason.

Stern lecture
detention
extended detention
suspension
expulsion
mild corporal (swats with a paddle, ruler accross the knuckles)
moderate corporal (canning, flogging)
sever corporal (branding)
capitol (!)/other

I can take the student into the hall and speak to him/her there, call his/her parent, or call my supervisor or the deans to remove a student if the student is out of hand.

The deans/chairpeople/principal may decide on in-house suspension (you come to school and sit in a room where makeup work is given to you, and you must do it in absolute silence), Chancellor's suspension (you bring a weapon to school you go to suspension in a suspension center) or rarely, expulsion.

Corporal punishment in NYC is forbidden.

kids as young as 12 can pretty much beat a grown person up and they just have to take the blows and not dare even block as it could bruise the little darlings feet as theyre kicking your kidneys into submission

Bull. You can do what is necessary to subdue and hold a student if he or she is assaulting you. Obviously, this does not mean braining him with a chair, but you can take them down and physically restrain them.

Oh, come on, Steph! You know very well I don't advocate "beating" anyone, much less children. All I'm saying is that there are sometimes when some children are in dire need of a bit of incentive to behave themselves. Usually a couple of smacks on the rump with an open palm is sufficient. I simply think that this damend "politically correct" approach currently popular is totally ineffective when dealing with children who refuse to listen to reason.
Exactly … when you advocate spanking at least being an option people always assume that is the first option you use

I personally just think it is a tool (a last ditch use tool) that the parents should have in their inventory
If you are a good parent you should not have to (or very rarely have to) use that tool but it should still be an option

It was banned because a bunch of goody-goody politicians decided it was cruel.

It was banned because of lawsuits. Physical punishment also does nothing but escalate the problems you're trying to extinguish, anyhow.

Bull. You can do what is necessary to subdue and hold a student if he or she is assaulting you. Obviously, this does not mean braining him with a chair, but you can take them down and physically restrain them.
Seen it done … student went absolutely wild and threw one of those “desk chair” combo things at a teacher … had to have another teacher restrain him from hurting other students.(we had like 3 or 4 teachers in the school that took special training each year just in case physical restraint was ever necessary)

You know, judging by my past experiences, teachers should be punished by students.

I'm not shitting you.

Well if a school is to have corporal punishment then it should only be done with the parents present . When I was in school the very threat of it (go to the office for a paddling) was enough to scare us. Now the kids think they have all the rights and privilieges that adults enjoy and they smart off to everyone, dress like hookers and thugs, and everything is escalating because the authority has been taken away from educators and Im not just talking about corporal punishment. If junior gets an F time to sue the school, if he brings a knife and is expelled-AGAIn time to sue the school, it is always the school's fault if the student is acting like a barbarian,((which they probably learned from watching their PARENTS and if education isnt stressed in the household then they are not going to care about it in the classroom as well)). NOw I saw a news clip on a 7 year old who punched, kicked and bit all the teachers who were trying to remove her from the classroom because she was disrupting everyone's right to learn and they finally had to call the police because they couldnt do anything to stop her. MOmmy dearest cried boo hoo and is suing because her "baby" was mistreated -yet no apologies or punishment for the child- they videotaped it and she was doing the alleged activities. Educators need some way of controlling and discipling their pupils and too much leniency and mollycoddling if a student keeps acting out and wont obey the rules-expulsion is the only way. I like the inschool suspension and saturday school ideas as well-taking away privilieges and rights work well.

I find it hard to believe you subscribe to this Forrest? I've seen your beautiful grand-children.. I just can't see you hitting them, perhaps I had you pegged wrong? But I didn't think you were a child abuser. Anyone else would be charged and thrown in jail, so why is it "ok" to hit children and not adults?

I'm sorry, but if people need to hit their children to get them to listen and have respect, if they can't be more creative than that, I say they are not very good parents to begin with and may be they are the problem, not the child. You are after all a product of your environment.

There are different schools of child raising. I subscribe to the one that says you discipline your children because you love them and want to correct their behavior for their own good, not because you hate them.

This should not involve "beating" the child, but a swat or two never harmed a them. And not disciplining a child because people "love" them has harmed many a child later in life.

For the record, I'm a parent of 2 (now grown) and only twice had to use a spanking - there are many ways to accomplish the discipline objective. I don't buy the concept that physical punishment is necessarily child abuse - though I concede that done wrongly it can be. The punishment needs to fit the 'crime' and the child, some need more than others. In my experience, people who won't consider a swat under any circumstances usually aren't effective at imposing discipline in general.

Oh, come on, Steph! You know very well I don't advocate "beating" anyone, much less children. All I'm saying is that there are sometimes when some children are in dire need of a bit of incentive to behave themselves. Usually a couple of smacks on the rump with an open palm is sufficient. I simply think that this damend "politically correct" approach currently popular is totally ineffective when dealing with children who refuse to listen to reason.

Ok, I suppose I could not get rabbit about that, but not by a freaking teacher! If a parent feels they must spank their child, it should be just that, the parent, not a teacher. First of all they have NO training in child psychology , at least most of them don't. You can't have a one size fits all punishment for children. Heck you raised a few of your own, you know that.

However, for myself and my children, they will never be hit, at least not by myself or my husband. If a teacher hit my child, I would have them charged. I think my parenting skills are good enough that I can be a little more creative than "spanking" it only teaches your kids to fear you I think.

So you might wonder, "how do you punish then Steph?" I find what their currency is, it's not the same for all kids. For my son it's his video games, you don't behave, you get no video game.. I could send him to his room, but that doesn't work for him. Not all things work for all kids. You have to find out what is most important to them. Teach them that hitting is wrong and there are rules for everyone, including yourself. Help them understand that is the way the world works.. and have them understand that for every action there is an equal reaction.. as in consequences of their actions. To think before they act! To use that brain in their head, it was put there for a reason! It works for me and my family. I just feel parents don't have time for their kids, and I know it's hard, work, household, kids, a lot more on our plates today than there was 30 years ago, but I believe you can be creative and find a way to discipline children without violence. Thus far it HAS worked for my children.

Ok, I suppose I could not get rabbit about that, but not by a freaking teacher! If a parent feels they must spank their child, it should be just that, the parent, not a teacher. First of all they have NO training in child psychology , at least most of them don't. You can't have a one size fits all punishment for children. Heck you raised a few of your own, you know that.


Absolutely it is in the end the parents responsibility. They should be the only ones that have the option to decide to go so far as corporal punishment.

Absolutely it is in the end the parents responsibility. They should be the only ones that have the option to decide to go so far as corporal punishment.
I have no problem with who administers the punishment - and if corporal punishment is too contentious an issue, leave it alone. But parents need to be accountable - if they won't let teachers correct discipline problems then they need to get their kids into learning mode - or risk having them expelled.

Parents are suing schools over bad grades and even the mildest forms of discipline. It's a matter of responsibility, and whom it belongs to - in a perfect world the teachers would not even need to consider the issue.

Parents are sending their kids to school in poor condition for learning and then removing any tools the teacher has to correct the problem - then leaning on their brat's 'right' to an education.

Absolutely it is in the end the parents responsibility. They should be the only ones that have the option to decide to go so far as corporal punishment.

Canada is very strict when it comes to this. I recall a few years back, a child who had been spanked with a belt. The police laid charges (it was big news here as it happened in my home-town) so anyway, it went to trial. The defense the father tried to use was his religion. Quoted from the bible "spare the rod and spoil the child" thing, the judge didn't buy it and he was found guilty.

The (CAS) Children's Aid Society of Canada took it all the way to SCOC (Supreme court of Canada) They lost, but they didn't walk away empty handed either. They wanted to ban all corporal punishment towards children no matter what. But they did get some concessions. Such as in Canada, if you spank your child, you can't use a "weapon" no belts, no wooden spoons, etc. It must only be on the bottom and with an open hand and you may NOT leave a mark. Those are the laws in Canada. Freedom of religion we have, freedom to use that religion to hurt your children we don't. Thankfully!

Absolutely it is in the end the parents responsibility. They should be the only ones that have the option to decide to go so far as corporal punishment.
I agree. It's not about child psychology qualifications or morality, it's about responsibility. Adults have a responsibility to train young humans to be good adults, and that will occasionally involve a smack (inflicting no lasting harm, but making a point). If the parents agree to place that responsibility on the teachers, then the teachers should be allowed to go that far; otherwise, by default, it should be only the parents or guardians of the child who do such.

I have no problem with who administers the punishment - and if corporal punishment is too contentious an issue, leave it alone. But parents need to be accountable - if they won't let teachers correct discipline problems then they need to get their kids into learning mode - or risk having them expelled.

Parents are suing schools over bad grades and even the mildest forms of discipline. It's a matter of responsibility, and whom it belongs to - in a perfect world the teachers would not even need to consider the issue.

Parents are sending their kids to school in poor condition for learning and then removing any tools the teacher has to correct the problem - then leaning on their brat's 'right' to an education.
The problem is its not just administering the punishment … they don’t usually consult parents on what punishment is appropriate (the inform them of the situation yes but the administration makes the decision in the end) It ends up being the teacher or administration making the punishment decision

I don’t think they have the right to make that decision (nor do I think it would be as likely to be effective as a parent administering the same punishment)

Physical punishment also does nothing but escalate the problems you're trying to extinguish, anyhow.

It worked on me. I've never been in trouble at school for anything worse than talking.

It worked on me. I've never been in trouble at school for anything worse than talking.
And how do you know that is because of corporal punishment … you COULD be an example of how otherwise good parenting works despite the harm caused by corporal punishment
(not saying that is necessarily that but there are too many factors here for such a simple proclamation)

The problem is its not just administering the punishment … they don’t usually consult parents on what punishment is appropriate (the inform them of the situation yes but the administration makes the decision in the end) It ends up being the teacher or administration making the punishment decision

I don’t think they have the right to make that decision (nor do I think it would be as likely to be effective as a parent administering the same punishment)

Ok, if there is no faith in the teacher's judgement as to what's appropriate punishment then let the parents have full responsibility. Your kid misbehaves he's out of school, come get him and then you discipline him. And he doesn't come back until he can behave - it's your responsibility to have him ready to learn - or at least not disrupt the class. Maybe a three-strikes rule.

Problem is now that nobody is happy, neither teacher nor parent, and the system is breaking. Class disruption is common. We need some new rules, then - but let's quit assuming the kids have a right to disrupt others. Either empower the teachers or force parents to handle it, I don't care.

I never said "my kid is always right" In fact, he usually isn't and *I* deal with it. It is not the job of the teacher to solve any behaviour issues my child may or may not have. That is MY job. I'm the parent. !

Unfortunately, too many parents abdicate their responsibilities in this area. Discipline should, ideally, be a joint effort of the parents and the schools. Instead, the two are usually in conflict with each other.

If you slapped me in a restaurant, well, maybe I deserved it, but it's not the same thing because I AM NOT in your charge or your responsibility. Your kids ARE.

As for the "what does this teach kids?" argument: it teaches them that bad behavior has bad consequences, so don't do it!

And how do you know that is because of corporal punishment … you COULD be an example of how otherwise good parenting works despite the harm caused by corporal punishment
(not saying that is necessarily that but there are too many factors here for such a simple proclamation)

I pretty much never got in trouble in school, and there wasn't corporal punishment; the problem is with the parents not caring, not the schools' lack of CP. We can't rely on the parents for enforcing discipline, and so the schools have to try and deal with it.

Personally, I would make the misbehaving students do community service (like picking up trash) or manual labor as punishment for serious infractions. For lesser, repeat infractions, 3 hour detentions in a "solitairy confinement" classroom with no contact with others.

Unfortunately, too many parents abdicate their responsibilities in this area.

I agree with you in this respect. I'm a very involved parent and one of my best friends is the V.P at my son's school. I work with the school. That is the type of parent I am.

You just got all angry at me because I was so against "spanking" kids or what not. You jumped to a lot of conclusions about what kind of parent I was. That wasn't fair nor was it true.

I don't know what school your wife taught at, but it must of been a really bad one for you to have all this pent up anger over it. Deep breaths dude. :)

I pretty much never got in trouble in school, and there wasn't corporal punishment; the problem is with the parents not caring, not the schools' lack of CP. We can't rely on the parents for enforcing discipline, and so the schools have to try and deal with it.

Personally, I would make the misbehaving students do community service (like picking up trash) or manual labor as punishment for serious infractions. For lesser, repeat infractions, 3 hour detentions in a "solitairy confinement" classroom with no contact with others.

And what if the kid absolutely refuses to do the community service? You can't force anyone to work, after all. As for "solitary confinement," it doesn't work on all kids. I know it never would have worked on me, as I never minded being alone. Still don't.

When I was in high school (1960s), boys were punished for minor infractions with a swift swat on the butt with a paddle. Some teachers even drilled holes in the paddle (they were called "boards of education," btw) to cut down on air resistance. No call was made to the parents in advance. If the parents found out (not likely, as most of us were ashamed to admit to our parents that we got in trouble at school), they almost always supported the teacher! And guess what? Most of us didn't turn out to be violent people. But we learned what bad behavior could lead to, and generally tried to avoid it after that (or at least avoid getting caught). The breakdown of discipline in the schools since that time shows that abandoning corporal punishment was a bad idea.

And how do you know that is because of corporal punishment … you COULD be an example of how otherwise good parenting works despite the harm caused by corporal punishment
(not saying that is necessarily that but there are too many factors here for such a simple proclamation)

The person I quoted (damn my short-term memory!) said that using violence caused more problems than it solved. As I've been smacked, and consider myself to have always been a very well-behaved child at school (according to teacher's reports) I was showing that his statement isn't necessarily true.

And what if the kid absolutely refuses to do the community service? You can't force anyone to work, after all. As for "solitary confinement," it doesn't work on all kids. I know it never would have worked on me, as I never minded being alone. Still don't.

When I was in high school (1960s), boys were punished for minor infractions with a swift swat on the butt with a paddle. Some teachers even drilled holes in the paddle (they were called "boards of education," btw) to cut down on air resistance. No call was made to the parents in advance. If the parents found out (not likely, as most of us were ashamed to admit to our parents that we got in trouble at school), they almost always supported the teacher! And guess what? Most of us didn't turn out to be violent people. But we learned what bad behavior could lead to, and generally tried to avoid it after that (or at least avoid getting caught). The breakdown of discipline in the schools since that time shows that abandoning corporal punishment was a bad idea.

Yes, you can. Threaten them with legal action and they'll do whatever you tell them to. Kids are great at bluffing and acting tough, but when you call them on it and take action, they back down. And, if you keep them in solitairy confinement long enough, and enough times, they'll break down. My goal is to break them down, not just punish them. You have to destroy the cause, not just punish the infraction.

The breakdown in discipline is due to the decline of parental attention. Too many parents let their kids do whatever they want, don't enforce discipline or personal responsibility, and then try and shove the mess on schools and complain when things go to hell in their district. To improve the schools, we have to involve the parents. Perhaps some kind of penalty should be assigned to parents for repeat misbehavior by their children in schools?

I agree with you in this respect. I'm a very involved parent and one of my best friends is the V.P at my son's school. I work with the school. That is the type of parent I am.

You just got all angry at me because I was so against "spanking" kids or what not. You jumped to a lot of conclusions about what kind of parent I was. That wasn't fair nor was it true.

I don't know what school your wife taught at, but it must of been a really bad one for you to have all this pent up anger over it. Deep breaths dude. :)

Actually, it was a parochial school, where discipline is generally a bit stricter than in public schools. At least they could permanently expel persistant trouble makers. Don't kid yourself though. Teachers feel this way at ALL schools, and their spouses sometimes even more so. And it's NOT their fault!

Sorry if it appeared that I questioned your abilities as a parent. It's just that the "if a teacher ever hit my kid, I'd ... " attitude gets to me. You have no idea how close some kids come to having their teachers beat the crap out of them every day, or at least they WANT to. Most teachers exercise admirable restraint in the face of overwhelming odds. The few that don't get fired and occasionally put in jail, which is a shame because they are not the perpetrators.

The breakdown in discipline is due to the decline of parental attention. Too many parents let their kids do whatever they want, don't enforce discipline or personal responsibility, and then try and shove the mess on schools and complain when things go to hell in their district. To improve the schools, we have to involve the parents. Perhaps some kind of penalty should be assigned to parents for repeat misbehavior by their children in schools?

That's true, too. When discipline isn't enforced at home, and isn't allowed to be enforced in school, it makes for very unruly kids.

That's true, too. When discipline isn't enforced at home, and isn't allowed to be enforced in school, it makes for very unruly kids.

Exactly. That's where the problems begin. I didn't get in trouble in school even though there was no corporal punishment, because my parents taught me responsibility and discipline.

I get tired of hearing parents complain about school discipline while having an "anything goes" policy at home. It's not fair; the school's primary duty is to teach, not to babysit or discipline.

Sorry if it appeared that I questioned your abilities as a parent. It's just that the "if a teacher ever hit my kid, I'd ... " attitude gets to me.


Do you and your wife have children? If you do, then you have to understand the idea of anyone harming your child is unthinkable to most parents. I'm against spanking, yes, but if there ever came a time that I really believed my child would some how benefit from it, I should be the one to do it, not a stranger. Those are my babies, no stronger bond in this world than that.

That of course doesn't mean if my son misbehaves some day at school and I'm called that he is not thoroughly punished for it. At home as well as school. I just try to be more creative in my parenting then "spanking" I think it's the easy way out. I spend time with my kids, play with them, talk with them, hopefully instill values and morals in them. If you take the time as a parent (provided there is nothing mentally wrong) with your children, they will behave and they will show respect and you can honestly do it without ever laying a hand on them.

*Side note* Although get back to me in a few years, my children are not teenagers yet, I might change my mind.. LMAO. j/k. :)

Do you and your wife have children? If you do, then you have to understand the idea of anyone harming your child is unthinkable to most parents. I'm against spanking, yes, but if there ever came a time that I really believed my child would some how benefit from it, I should be the one to do it, not a stranger. Those are my babies, no stronger bond in this world than that.

That of course doesn't mean if my son misbehaves some day at school and I'm called that he is not thoroughly punished for it. At home as well as school. I just try to be more creative in my parenting then "spanking" I think it's the easy way out. I spend time with my kids, play with them, talk with them, hopefully instill values and morals in them. If you take the time as a parent (provided there is nothing mentally wrong) with your children, they will behave and they will show respect and you can honestly do it without ever laying a hand on them.

*Side note* Although get back to me in a few years, my children are not teenagers yet, I might change my mind.. LMAO. j/k. :)


Well, God bless you then. You're obviously one of the few good ones. :)
Actually, I think that if you discipline your kids thoroughly when they're young, you shouldn't have to worry too much about them when they become teenagers. But of course there are always those few .... ;)

Ok, if there is no faith in the teacher's judgement as to what's appropriate punishment then let the parents have full responsibility. Your kid misbehaves he's out of school, come get him and then you discipline him. And he doesn't come back until he can behave - it's your responsibility to have him ready to learn - or at least not disrupt the class. Maybe a three-strikes rule.

Problem is now that nobody is happy, neither teacher nor parent, and the system is breaking. Class disruption is common. We need some new rules, then - but let's quit assuming the kids have a right to disrupt others. Either empower the teachers or force parents to handle it, I don't care.
Then at least the person who is responsible is making the decision on corporal punishment not some employee (not saying that they cant be trusted but there are plenty of people that I know and like and trust to teach my kid that I would not want hitting him without my express opinion if at all)

Without "my kid is always right" parents like you,

When did the poster you are responding to EVER say their kid was always right?

Actually, it was a parochial school, where discipline is generally a bit stricter than in public schools. At least they could permanently expel persistant trouble makers. Don't kid yourself though. Teachers feel this way at ALL schools, and their spouses sometimes even more so. And it's NOT their fault!

Sorry if it appeared that I questioned your abilities as a parent. It's just that the "if a teacher ever hit my kid, I'd ... " attitude gets to me.

Y'know, I happen to work in the school system as a para-professional (a class room aid in other words) If a teacher or another para ever struck a child in my presence (barring self defence) then the adult would come away with a broken arm. Were I to hypotheticly have a child and a teacher were to hit him/her they would have my express permision to hit back in self defense and I would follow it up with an assualt charge against the teacher.

Funny story. Well, I found it funny:)

I was teaching in Inuvik, a class of 30 students, 27 of whom had mild to severe FASD (fetal alcohol spectrum disorders). They were behaviorally problematic. Some were routinely violent. Sometimes, the day was chaos. A volunteer from Kenya, a very slight, unassuming woman was spending the day in the room. Her eyes grew wider and wider as she watched the antics of the students. She sidled close to me at one point and whispered, "In Kenya, we cane students who behave this way." I just had to laugh! She was offering it as advice, and was genuine in her desire to help out. I had to let her know that aside from an occasional emergency restraint, we are not allowed to touch the students. In any way.

The majority of my students were immune to physical abuse. As in, they are so abused routinely, any sort of 'corrective physical punishment' on the part of an educator would not only be needlessly cruel, but completely ineffective.

'Punishment' is not the job of the school system. Discipline != punishment.

Parents having largely abdicated their role as parents, the teachers are faced with having to, in effect, raise the bloody lil blighters! This is precisely the reason I reluctantly decided to not start a new career in teaching. The first time some bloody little twit told me to go f**k myself, I would have probably gone ballistic on him and not only have lost my job, but perhaps been incarcerated as well as being sued by the idiot parents.


Well, thanks for not being a teacher then....because with that sort of response, you'd be showing the kid that 'going ballistic' when someone tells you to 'f*ck off' is a good choice.

You know who the most well-behaved chidren are? The ones who have really 'on' parents, who teach them proper behaviour, and have clear expectations in the home. And the ones who are severely abused. Kind of sad that.

Oh really? Parents like me? It's parents like me that pick up the slack for teachers. I am far more involved with my child's education than any parent I know. If the school has a problem with my child, call me! I don't care if I'm at work, I'll come down and solve it. If it wasn't for parents like me teachers work load would be even worse than it already is. We donate time, money and fundraising to our school. I don't mind running an after school program for the kids to play some sports that our teachers use to do when I was a kid. However, they no longer do it, because teachers only seem to care about their bottom line now, not our children. Not sure what country you live in, but trust me, here in Canada we as parents do a lot for our schools while teachers have adopted work to rule guidelines and do nothing but what is absolutely required of them.
Whoa Nelly. Back the hell up here.

Work to rule? Please. Work to rule is a tactic used during contract negotiations RATHER THAN STRIKING. It is NOT general practice.

My school was questioned by the board once about how much extra-curricular work teachers were doing, with the expectation that the amount would be low. Forty teachers added up each hour they spent coaching, running programs, doing interviews with students and parents, fundraising and so on. The average teacher did ten hours of unpaid work with students a week. That's work with students...not counting the marking and course development we do as a matter of course on our own time. Now let's count that up. That's 360 hours, on average, per teacher, per school year. That's 14, 4000 hours PER YEAR of unpaid work our school did. And this school is by no means an exception.

Teachers are forced to cram more and more into a day that stays the same length. We are forced to teach to standardized tests. We are forced to deal with mainstreaming, which means we have children with various education abilities and physical needs, all mixed together. Not like in the old days. We can't fail children anymore. They get passed up even if they didn't learn how to read. We have kids who have such severe learning disabilities, they need a full time aid. That's one adult, working with one child all day long. Twenty years ago, that kid wouldn't be in school, and too bad for her. We do the best we bloody can, with the meagre, and shrinking resources we have, and its no damn wonder the average career life for a teacher is now 5 years.

Parents and community are key. And often the first ingredient lacking in education. We treasure every single parent who takes time to help out, who is a partner in their child's education. But we also have to deal with the ones who think we aren't doing enough, and think we could be doing more...or the ones who are simply absent from the process altogether. I'd like to ask you, how? How can we possibly do more?

No one goes into this profession for the money. And no one stays in it if they don't love kids, and love education. What exactly do you consider to be the 'bottom' line?

<snip>

You know who the most well-behaved chidren are? The ones who have really 'on' parents, who teach them proper behaviour, and have clear expectations in the home. And the ones who are severely abused. Kind of sad that.

A teacher friend was telling me how serious the discipline problems in his school. It turns out they have some grant money and are actually thinking about paying parents, maybe $250, to attend a several day seminar on parenting skills.

The 'on' parents and good teachers are what keep the system working, but how to cope with those who send their problem kids to school and complain when the school tries to do their job for them? I should note that my posts on this topic are not intended to address discipline with students who have special needs.

First of all, STEPHISTAN:

1. Not ALL teachers make the salary figure you quoted. And even if they did, $60k in Canada is what, $43k in the US? Hardly exorbitant.

I must have missed that post by Steph, but I'll give some info too:

A first year teacher in Alberta, in most districts, makes $44,000 (with a four year BEd). A maxed-out teacher (six years of University, and 11 years teaching experience) will make $76,000. Forever. That's as much as they can ever make, barring a Masters Degree and salary indexed to cover inflation.

2. STOP WITH THE "TIME OFF" ARGUMENT, please. It's a load of horseshit and isn't even remotely accurate.

A common misconception.

Teachers work up to a maximum of 200 days a year. Again, those are WORKING DAYS. That's what your salary is based on. Yes, we have time off, but it is not PAID time. Meaning, those that get summer holidays, have their salary stretched over 12 months so they have a paycheck during those months. We are paid the stat holidays, but those are not working days. And Christmas holidays or Easter Break are not paid holidays (other than the stat holidays contained within them) either. So, we have a maximum of 52 days, unpaid 'time off'. Many teachers have a summer job. And working a salary means you never, ever, get overtime.

To the rest of you:

I can not believe that in all these pages, no one has brought up the fact that punishment is not pedagogically sound. Meaning...punishment does not TEACH. It is not even a sound method of deterrence.

Discipline is lacking in schools, and a part of the problem is the high turnover of staff (due in most part to stress, leading to higher turnover, more stress, and even HIGHER turnover). Administration and teaching staff, as well as parents and community members need to have a clear set of expectations, methods of ensuring them, and a focused, and consistent way of dealing with problems. Schools that have this are successful, and have very low instances of the kind of behaviour that is being discussed here.

A school can be strict, but not abusive. It can have effective discipline, but it can not have effective punishment. Discipline means: clear expectations and clear consequences. It's harder than it sounds, but it's the same basic principle as in parenting. When kids have parents who model good discipline, it's a lot easier on teachers...but the fact is, regardless of the kid's background, discipline needs to be taught. Taught to kids, taught to teachers. Taught and used.

A teacher friend was telling me how serious the discipline problems in his school. It turns out they have some grant money and are actually thinking about paying parents, maybe $250, to attend a several day seminar on parenting skills.

The 'on' parents and good teachers are what keep the system working, but how to cope with those who send their problem kids to school and complain when the school tries to do their job for them? I should note that my posts on this topic are not intended to address discipline with students who have special needs.

It's tough to address the problem of discipline without talking about students with special needs. Kids who act out like that don't do it in a vacuum.

Take for example, the kid who is ALWAYS late for class. Always. Never fails. It's disruptive when she comes in late, because it breaks the focus of the class. It becomes a problem. And then you find out, she's late because she works after school, and in the morning, has to drop her brothers off at the elementary school, after dressing and feeding them, because Dad is off to work by 5, and mom works night shifts at the hospital. This is a student with special needs. Is punishment warranted? Would it solve the problems? Would it stop her from being late?

Special needs don't just mean disabilities.

Hellooooooooooo....????

It's tough to address the problem of discipline without talking about students with special needs. Kids who act out like that don't do it in a vacuum.

Take for example, the kid who is ALWAYS late for class. Always. Never fails. It's disruptive when she comes in late, because it breaks the focus of the class. It becomes a problem. And then you find out, she's late because she works after school, and in the morning, has to drop her brothers off at the elementary school, after dressing and feeding them, because Dad is off to work by 5, and mom works night shifts at the hospital. This is a student with special needs. Is punishment warranted? Would it solve the problems? Would it stop her from being late?

Special needs don't just mean disabilities.

I agree. I realized that in my previous posts where I essentially said "if the parents won't work with the school then expell the students" that that's a hard-assed view if it encompasses special needs students - and I never made it clear that they weren't included. Maybe it's a hard-assed opinion anyway, I don't know.

I take your point though. My frustration is that solutions are implemented slowly, if at all, and only at a local level. We should be further ahead by now. Why are we letting 5% of the students hold back the majority who deserve an opportunity to learn?

I have every reason to think we're training good teachers, what policy changes do we need to make to help them? My inclination is to place legally some responsibility on the parent of the problem student - responsibility that a good parent brings naturally.

What I suggest should have all manner of safeguards built in to protect students (the details matter, but assume they can be worked out), but essentially would require that chronic offenders be expelled. If the law requires schooling, then it would be the parent's responsibility to send them to private school or to home school.

Why do we punish the majority of students for the behavior of a few?

I'd rather be given bloodied knuckles than be expelled and have to face my parents.

I agree. I realized that in my previous posts where I essentially said "if the parents won't work with the school then expell the students" that that's a hard-assed view if it encompasses special needs students - and I never made it clear that they weren't included. Maybe it's a hard-assed opinion anyway, I don't know.

I take your point though. My frustration is that solutions are implemented slowly, if at all, and only at a local level. We should be further ahead by now. Why are we letting 5% of the students hold back the majority who deserve an opportunity to learn?Money.
We 'mainstreamed' kids (put kids with special needs into the regular class) and made programming for these kids the responsibility of the teacher. Many school districts don't fail children if they don't learn the proper skills, so we can have children working at a grade 1 level in a grade 4 class. Again, that takes some serious program planning on part of the teacher. There are aides (if funding allows) and some special ed programs, but it is largely in the teacher's domain. We try, but can not be, seven people at once. Budgets are constantly being slashed. Almost every time there is a pay raise for teachers, there are massive layoffs to free up money to pay those salaries. Yet, can you expect those that are left to just take a pay cut so that more people can be employed? Would you?


I have every reason to think we're training good teachers, what policy changes do we need to make to help them? My inclination is to place legally some responsibility on the parent of the problem student - responsibility that a good parent brings naturally.

What I suggest should have all manner of safeguards built in to protect students (the details matter, but assume they can be worked out), but essentially would require that chronic offenders be expelled. If the law requires schooling, then it would be the parent's responsibility to send them to private school or to home school.

Why do we punish the majority of students for the behavior of a few?

There are so many factors consider, it's hard to know where to start.

For one, kids that would have been 'weeded out' before, are kept in school. This includes students with disabilities, but also students with little aptitude. Twenty or thirty years ago, students who didn't 'take to school' entered the workforce, quite often before they were legally allowed to drop out. Both my parents left school before Grade 8 to work. Neither of them are stupid people, but they hated school, and likely would've made that fact known quite disruptively had they remained.

Kids come to school undernourished, tired, hopped up on sugar-covered frosty-bomb cereal, suffering from abuse or neglect, unmotivated, unhappy, or just plain tired of it all. The old school systems didn't give a shit about that. I went to school when the principal could still strap your hand for any infraction. Kids were no less little shits then either...they just got kicked out of school...driven out when teachers got tired of dealing with them. We can't drive them out anymore, but we haven't yet developed a method of dealing with them. We try to get them to drop out on their own now. Hope they'll turn 16 and leave us alone. Sad, but true.

Schools and school districts don't take it seriously enough. School boards set policy, but they are politicians, who don't necessarily know squat about educations. Schools that WORK do so because an effective, consistent discipline policy has been put in and used for a number of years. It takes about three years for a good policy to really work. School board trustees are elected yearly. It's a top-down profession. Teachers and teach aides are on the receiving end of the orders.

What is it going to take? I don't know. I really don't, aside from some serious activism and risk taking on the part of teachers (risk taking in terms of risking your job) and on the part of parents. Grassroots involvement.

Isolation occurs throughout school hours, they must work the rest of the day away from everyone else. I think it works fairly well as a lot of the disorder is just bravado that doesnt pay if no one is there to see it. You never see the little bastards work like they do in isolation! :D

At my high school this is what they do for in school suspension. It is a large room where all the desks are spaced far apart and you are not allowed to talk to anyone else all day. They like to call it the "Learning Adjustment Center"

<snip>



Thanks for your perspective - it is similar to what my teacher friends say. You have a frustrating (hopefully rewarding) job. And before I say any more I think we should un-mainstream some of the kids. I hear ridiculous stories of barely functional children who need a lot of individual attention thrown into the general population. That's not right for either population, and we should cough up the money to do this right.

Overall it will take grassroots involvement, but I continue to wonder if the fundamental view, the big picture, is not suited to our needs. Let's start with defining the objective. Is it to get every kid through 12 years of school, and if so why? Particularly if they don't want to be there? Should we be using a European model (I'm sorry, I don't have the terminology) of having different exit levels? Code the kids, have the less gifted learn a trade and get out in the 8th grade, next level at 10th, academically gifted stay for 12-13 years?

More importantly, would new objectives translate into better results, better use of money? Would this solve some discipline problems?

The big picture again: why do we insist that kids who don't want to be there as exhibited by their behavior, get 12 years? Sure, they may end up in the street some day if they don't get past 8th grade, but maybe it's offset economically by the many students who are now able to get a superior education. Maybe we should view this as society giving the parents and children an opportunity. Take it or leave it. I expect you'll disagree, but is that not a fair offer?

Big picture: current policy in the US leans away from significant punishment as an option. Why not give the parents the option to provide more significant punishment, working with the teachers, as an alternative. In other words, we can punish them or you can - we don't care which. The objective is to modify behavior, not to punish. FORCE the parents of problem students to recognize that they have joint responsibility with the school to educate the student. I don't see that as happening, it would require a significant change in policy and liberal educators tend to stick with status quo.

My impression is that neither the good parent nor the bad parent are happy with the educational system. More money is required for improvements, that's clear, but would more money be forthcoming if changes were made? As the involved parent of 2 good students, I would have questioned my tax bill less if I saw positive changes made that would benefit my kids.

Regarding the breakfast diet issue - our school has been serving breakfast as needed, and I understand that helps a lot.

Ok, last post of the day:
Thanks for your perspective - it is similar to what my teacher friends say. You have a frustrating (hopefully rewarding) job. And before I say any more I think we should un-mainstream some of the kids. I hear ridiculous stories of barely functional children who need a lot of individual attention thrown into the general population. That's not right for either population, and we should cough up the money to do this right.
Every child has a right to an education, even those with severe disabilities. The idea of mainstreaming was to provide these students with that opportunity and give them good role models, as well as normalizing the other students to their presence. It's a good idea that hasn't necessarily translated well...not all the way...but when you see how a down syndrome child is treated when they've grown up with a group of regular kids, compared to how they are treated when they're kept in the special ed room, you see that this kind of exposure is necessary. It's not necessarily educationally sound, but schools are about socialising children, almost as much as they are about 'teaching' them.

Overall it will take grassroots involvement, but I continue to wonder if the fundamental view, the big picture, is not suited to our needs. Let's start with defining the objective. Is it to get every kid through 12 years of school, and if so why? Particularly if they don't want to be there? Should we be using a European model (I'm sorry, I don't have the terminology) of having different exit levels? Code the kids, have the less gifted learn a trade and get out in the 8th grade, next level at 10th, academically gifted stay for 12-13 years? I think that my parents generation had a lot of people who never completed school. They see a high school diploma as a sure way for their children to be employable. In these days, a high school diploma isn't enough...now parents are pushing their kids to go to university so they have that 'edge'. This won't solve things. Not all kids want to go, or are capable of going to post-secondary...or finishing their secondary for that matter.

Nonetheless, it is generally agreed upon that any more, you can hardly get a job as a gas station attendant unless you at least have your high school diploma. I think this is where the push to complete is coming from. Even the trades encourage you to finish school, or enter an apprenticeship while you're finishing up. Unless jobs start relaxing those requirements, the need to complete will continue to drive people.

More importantly, would new objectives translate into better results, better use of money? Would this solve some discipline problems?

The big picture again: why do we insist that kids who don't want to be there as exhibited by their behavior, get 12 years? Sure, they may end up in the street some day if they don't get past 8th grade, but maybe it's offset economically by the many students who are now able to get a superior education. Maybe we should view this as society giving the parents and children an opportunity. Take it or leave it. I expect you'll disagree, but is that not a fair offer?
I would say that all countries realise that the key to their future is in their education system. The more educated a person, the more money they are able to earn and so on. However, we aren't completely certain how we want to run the system. Education has become a political toy to manipulate. Money is slashed from the budget, new initiatives are pushed through, then repealed, then renamed and pushed through again. It's a great place to point a blaming finger, or to introduce a policy that makes a politician look like he or she gives a shit. Through all the changes, the teachers remain...but we are being bombarded on so many sides, we don't have time to draw a breath and search for priorities. Nor do we have the power to get those priorities looked at...especially when its not an election year. The people with the power...the parents...are timid for the most part. They feel intimidated by principals or teachers, mostly because of the power structure of schools that they grew up in. They bitch and complain, and damn rightly so...but not to the right people. We hear it...but we already know it. Trust me....all the teachers in a school can complain about an issue and be ignored...but you get a few parents together to make the same complaints, and action is taken. Remember that.

This issue isn't about punishment or lack thereof. It's about changing needs in education, changing times, and a difficulty in enacting any sort of real program to address this. It's about political machinations, and a lack of popular understanding or support. If more people gave a shit about the schools in their community, we could really shake things up. But that takes time...and people are strapped for time as it is. Where do you fit one more thing that needs doing into your life, when we all feel too stretched as it is?

And unfortunately, when a child has not reason to fear a teacher they are unlikely to listen

OMG. Are you for real? I'm only 22, school is a relatively recent memory and trust me when I say that the teachers I actually learned the most from I was most definately NOT afraid of!

The ones with short tempers who dished out punishments I thought were arseholes and resolutely ignored throughout secondary school. In primary school they made me cry and not want to go to school at all.

The teachers who were decent human beings, who were firm but fair got my attention and I listened to them readily. My best exam results came from classes with those teachers and to this day I'm thankful to them and remember their classes and what they taught me. It was the teachers that I knew would be genuinely disappointed in me, for my own sake, if I didn't do the homework that I made sure I always handed it on time for. The teachers who nagged and shouted and threw kids out of the room for misbehaving just earned my resentment. True I never got caught misbehaving because I was scared, but I didn't retain any knowledge from them either! And I just learned how to misbehave without getting caught :-p

OMG. Are you for real? I'm only 22, school is a relatively recent memory and trust me when I say that the teachers I actually learned the most from I was most definately NOT afraid of!

The ones with short tempers who dished out punishments I thought were arseholes and resolutely ignored throughout secondary school. In primary school they made me cry and not want to go to school at all.

The teachers who were decent human beings, who were firm but fair got my attention and I listened to them readily. My best exam results came from classes with those teachers and to this day I'm thankful to them and remember their classes and what they taught me. It was the teachers that I knew would be genuinely disappointed in me, for my own sake, if I didn't do the homework that I made sure I always handed it on time for. The teachers who nagged and shouted and threw kids out of the room for misbehaving just earned my resentment. True I never got caught misbehaving because I was scared, but I didn't retain any knowledge from them either! And I just learned how to misbehave without getting caught :-p

Interesting, that. Arguably the greatest teacher at my old school was the one that every last person was totally petrified of. He didn't give out many punishments at all; he didn't have to. EVERYONE admits he is a good teacher and EVERYONE learns from him - not only is he a tyrant, but he knows how to teach. The only interesting thing is how he hasn't been sacked yet. He once told our class that he'd be better off getting a bunch of monkeys in to do the work.

Beat the little savages within an inch of their lives. After all, it's a school, we have rulers to ensure accurate measurements.

As the daughter of two good teachers it is my opinion that teachers do not need the threat of corporal punishment to keep students behaving well. But a teacher has to hve the right personallity for the job(if you like born for it) A teacher who is unable to keeep a class quiet no matter what they do is not doing their own self essteem or sanity any good nor are the doing teir students any good. With regard to students attacking teachers nearly all students will not cross this line as students have a much higher rate of self control than poeple realise. Even if they do they will be charged with assult and a teacher will not be punished for using RESONABLE FORCE to defend themselves.

I'd just like to say that I really, really would not like corporal punishment. I've come across a couple of shite teachers before, one of whom I wouldn't trust with a belt, let alone a cane. It'd end up being the shitty teachers who use them most… the best teachers are the ones who don't need to use punishments much.

But harsher punishments? Certainly. Little mothersodders disrupting lessons, sorry, you're infringing on others' rights so we're going to infringe on yours… I reckon long isolation and things like that. I'm not a teacher btw, nor am I a parent, unlike half the bloody teenagers in this (becoming) fecked-up country (UK).

As the daughter of two good teachers it is my opinion that teachers do not need the threat of corporal punishment to keep students behaving well. But a teacher has to hve the right personallity for the job(if you like born for it) A teacher who is unable to keeep a class quiet no matter what they do is not doing their own self essteem or sanity any good nor are the doing teir students any good. With regard to students attacking teachers nearly all students will not cross this line as students have a much higher rate of self control than poeple realise. Even if they do they will be charged with assult and a teacher will not be punished for using RESONABLE FORCE to defend themselves.

Well said. Kids know when a teacher is weak. I've never seen a teacher being physically attacked, and all the stories I've heard of it have resulted in severe punishment for the student. As I said, voilence may work in the short run, but society will once again grow up to believe that the best way to control a situation is through voilence. If a kid has a rough upbringing, and is beaten by his parents, and due to these problems misbehaves at school, and is then beaten further, can you really see this kid growing up normally?

I think disruptive kids need to be taught by skilled personel. People who know how a childs mind works and are able to control them. You do occasionaly get really good teachers who can do this. Fear of punishment can only do so much.

Ok, I suppose I could not get rabbit about that, but not by a freaking teacher! If a parent feels they must spank their child, it should be just that, the parent, not a teacher. First of all they have NO training in child psychology , at least most of them don't. You can't have a one size fits all punishment for children. Heck you raised a few of your own, you know that.

However, for myself and my children, they will never be hit, at least not by myself or my husband. If a teacher hit my child, I would have them charged. I think my parenting skills are good enough that I can be a little more creative than "spanking" it only teaches your kids to fear you I think.

So you might wonder, "how do you punish then Steph?" I find what their currency is, it's not the same for all kids. For my son it's his video games, you don't behave, you get no video game.. I could send him to his room, but that doesn't work for him. Not all things work for all kids. You have to find out what is most important to them. Teach them that hitting is wrong and there are rules for everyone, including yourself. Help them understand that is the way the world works.. and have them understand that for every action there is an equal reaction.. as in consequences of their actions. To think before they act! To use that brain in their head, it was put there for a reason! It works for me and my family. I just feel parents don't have time for their kids, and I know it's hard, work, household, kids, a lot more on our plates today than there was 30 years ago, but I believe you can be creative and find a way to discipline children without violence. Thus far it HAS worked for my children.
I was fond of telling my children repeatedly to "use your head for something besides a hatrack." Spanking a child is hardly "violence." It drives home the point ( when absolutely necessary ) that there are limits beyond which they cannot go without consequences. Most children never need to be spanked, by anyone. My youngest daughter is a case in point. If I even looked like I was mad at her, she would get so upset she would start crying. As I recall, I gave her one spanking her entire life, and that was for something really serious which could have endangered her.

You are correct in saying that many parents are too focused on things other than their children. This is not only to the child's detriment, but will be the source of much regret and pain later on for the parents. Raising kind, compassionate, responsible children who have permission to think is the single most important job any of us will ever have.

If a teacher spanked one of my children when they were little ( although I don't remember this ever happening ), I would have asked my child what they did to deserve it. If I couldn't get a satisfactory answer, I would contact the teacher. Only in the case of a completely unjustified spanking would I intervene. Teachers don't need to be spending inordinate amounts of time trying to come up with "creative ways" to make some of the almost incredible brats being raised by irresponsible parents behave. Teachers should be teaching, not standing en loco parentis.

I have been a substitute many times and can personally attest to the existence of almost unbelievably disruptive and violent children in the classroom. There is no call whatsoever for this. If the school system forbids teachers to administer even mild corporate punishment when it's needed to control this unacceptable behavior, they should resign and work somewhere else.

Ok, I'm not a parent or a teacher, so I can't offer any personal experience from that perspective. Sometimes when I remember my childhood I think I must have been a naughty child because I remember doing things that I got told off for. But my parents never hit me or even grounded me, I don't remember ever being punished. And when I ask them, they remember me being a wonderful child.

Now I know that when I have kids of my own I will use the same techniques my parents used, they taught me why things were wrong and the consequences were outside of myself (eg. when I drew on a wall it was my dad who had to repaint it). They taught me to understand my actions and reasons for them. It wasn't a case of "Ugg, child do wrong, child get smack", personally I don't think that hitting a child to prove that bad things happen to people who do bad things is a very enlightened way of getting them not to misbehave. If people only behave a certain way out of fear for violent consequences then you breed a society that doesn't understand itself, its humanity.

Children need to understand on a deeper level if their behaviour is to improve long term. As others on this thread have said, it is wrong to hit another adult, so it must be wrong to hit a child who cannot defend themselves and who does not have a thorough understanding of what violence is and what it means in society. It's all very well to say that an adult isn't in your care/authority or whatever, but how do you communicate that difference to your child? And aren't you basically saying that it is ok to hurt the people you care about, if they deserve it? I don't agree with that, sorry. And if you then say that a smack doesn't hurt the child, then what, may I ask, is the point of doing it?

I really don't know what to say about extreme cases, where children are being violent in the classroom, I've never heard of it happening from anyone I know. But I would expect that behaviour like that is a result of either a significant mental problem (not just disabilities, but depression etc.) or in response to violence witnessed by the child leading them to believe that violence is acceptable. Good parenting and teaching from the outset along with better diagnosis of serious problems should prevent incidents like this ever happening. If they still do? I don't know.

Steph, since you're back online, I was hoping you could respond to the following posts:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9316544&postcount=122

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9316660&postcount=124

Please, and thank you!