NationStates Jolt Archive

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

To teach everyone the same lesson? Or maybe he/she doesn't know who did the crime, and since no one fessed up, everyone is seen as suspect, and they get punished.

Did you have to flip a card? :p

To teach everyone the same lesson? Or maybe he/she doesn't know who did the crime, and since no one fessed up, everyone is seen as suspect, and they get punished.

Did you have to flip a card? :p

No, I mean the teacher KNOWS who did the crime, but she still feels the need to punish EVERYBODY, even the good kids!

Teachers, like parents, are not interested in justice, only in peace and quiet. Besides, punishing the entire class makes it fairly certain that if the perpetrator tries it again, the class will deal with him or her. Theoretically, anyway.

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

So if everyone knows who did it, they all take it out on the kid who did it, ensuring he doesnt do the same bad thing anytime soon?

But its still crap of course.

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

Apparently it's supposed to give a more effective (or greater) punishment to the one who was guilty.

Never worked at my middle school, though, and that piece of crap is notorious for it. I just wound up hating the school even more.

Teachers, like parents, are not interested in justice, only in peace and quiet. Besides, punishing the entire class makes it fairly certain that if the perpetrator tries it again, the class will deal with him or her. Theoretically, anyway.

Theorectically....

Actually though, it's ineffective and retarded.

No, I mean the teacher KNOWS who did the crime, but she still feels the need to punish EVERYBODY, even the good kids!


She is likely suffering from COBS, or Cranky Old Bitch Syndrome.

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

I think you have a persecution complex.

I think you have a persecution complex.

I'm glad that I am not only one that notices that.

I don't understand why schools use mass punishment. The military use mas punishment to pull squad closer together and unite them against a common enemy, and make then conscious that their own failures will effect more than just themselves.

So if I teacher wants to unite a whole class against them, then that's the way to go. No idea why they want to go that way though...

I think you have a persecution complex.

Yeah, little injustices can do that to someone. And by that, I mean I have one, too. :p

I don't understand why schools use mass punishment. The military use mas punishment to pull squad closer together and unite them against a common enemy, and make then conscious that their own failures will effect more than just themselves.

So if I teacher wants to unite a whole class against them, then that's the way to go. No idea why they want to go that way though...

Yeah, I thought of that, too. I think teachers who do that don't realize the effect. There's nothing like bringing a military force together like the time-honored tradition of Decimation.... *sighs with nostalgia*

This happened to you, didn't it? :p [/Department of Redundancy Department]

Anywho: My best answer is "meh". Welcome to the real world.

I think you have a persecution complex.

ya think?

Yeah, little injustices can do that to someone. And by that, I mean I have one, too. :p

FD! You've come back from Spam! :fluffle::fluffle::fluffle:

FD! You've come back from Spam! :fluffle::fluffle::fluffle:

Pfff! I am Spam. :cool: [/inordinately vain]

Actually, I haven't been posting there much, either. :(

Pfff! I am Spam. :cool: [/inordinately vain]

Actually, I haven't been posting there much, either. :(

:(

Ah well, we can spam here together! :fluffle:

thats like asking me why some teacher nevers help me and why one called me and others in front of the class dum

Pfff! I am Spam. :cool: [/inordinately vain]

Actually, I haven't been posting there much, either. :(

thats true and i have not seen TBD there lately too

:(

Ah well, we can spam here together! :fluffle:
I have to go to class in 8 minutes. :( :fluffle:
thats like asking me why some teacher nevers help me and why one called me and others in front of the class dum

No, inordinate cruelty is another matter altogether. :p

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?
No.

All I can say is that I'll be different. :)

thats true and i have not seen TBD there lately too

I've only chatted once with her in months. :( No wonder I left: this place is depressing. :p

I have to go to class in 8 minutes. :( :fluffle:

noes..... :(

:fluffle:

No, inordinate cruelty is another matter altogether. :p

thats true but i still never get it and that goes with what the OP asking too

No.

All I can say is that I'll be different. :)

That's what they all say....




.....It's the corruption of the system!:eek:
*flees*

noes..... :(

:fluffle:
I'll probably be back in a couple hours, though. :p
thats true but i still never get it and that goes with what the OP asking too

Ah, the inability of the student to understand. Well, the notion is that if the whole class is punished for the actions of one, they will suppress that one in the future, inhibiting bad behavior. But really it normally just unifies the class against the teacher.

I've only chatted once with her in months. :( No wonder I left: this place is depressing. :p

its been 7 day that she login inti her nation, i had to check as it feels longer :(

its been 7 day that she login inti her nation, i had to check as it feels longer :(

Everything feels longer on the internet. :p [/unitentional bad innuendo]

That's what they all say....
.....It's the corruption of the system!:eek:
*flees*
Yes, I'm planning to corrupt the system. Uh... I mean: Improve it!!!

In all honesty, I consider students individuals and thus treat them as such. That includes no prejudice and a fair and just treatment for everyone so that they know what they can expect - and what I expect of them.
Teaching is teamwork, you can only work with the class, not against it.

I imagine that the reason for the collective punishment is to not only shame the guilty student into reconsidering their actions, but also to serve as a warning to those who may have been considering committing the same offence. It acts as a punishment and deterrent at the same time.

Everything feels longer on the internet. :p [/unitentional bad innuendo]

:p

I imagine that the reason for the collective punishment is to not only shame the guilty student into reconsidering their actions, but also to serve as a warning to those who may have been considering committing the same offence. It acts as a punishment and deterrent at the same time.

Theoretically...

In real life though, it just unites the class against the teacher.

Yes, I'm planning to corrupt the system. Uh... I mean: Improve it!!!

In all honesty, I consider students individuals and thus treat them as such. That includes no prejudice and a fair and just treatment for everyone so that they know what they can expect - and what I expect of them.
Teaching is teamwork, you can only work with the class, not against it.
Well, if that is corruption, I'm all for the dark side. ;)
:p

Figures a woman (even a young one, as the case is) would appreciate that. ;):p

I'll probably be back in a couple hours, though. :p


Ah, the inability of the student to understand. Well, the notion is that if the whole class is punished for the actions of one, they will suppress that one in the future, inhibiting bad behavior. But really it normally just unifies the class against the teacher.

sounds like when i was in year 7 i got busted with some other boy who where
triping one another, they back me up in that i was not part of it but the teacher did not care

Everything feels longer on the internet. :p [/unitentional bad innuendo]
an thats a fact
:p
:rolleyes: i go with what FD said on that

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

It's because they all hate you and jump at every opportunity to make your life worse. And not you as in high school students in general, you as in you Ritlina V4.0

I imagine that the reason for the collective punishment is to not only shame the guilty student into reconsidering their actions, but also to serve as a warning to those who may have been considering committing the same offence. It acts as a punishment and deterrent at the same time.

Bingo. It's the line of "This is what happens if you do XYZ" reasoning. Works pretty well in terms of collective punishment, at least in theory...as for creating unity, in a classroom, it's pretty pointless. On a team, it might work.

As for getting the class riled up at the perpetrator, i'm pretty sure they look down on that. If some obnoxious kid puts manure in a teacher's desk drawer, she knows who did it, and she punishes the entire class, what happens if two of that obnoxious kid's classmates decide to stuff his backpack full of manure? Is it simple revenge and the kid deserved it? Hardly. The whole "Two wrongs don't make a right" line of reasoning is brought out, defeating the purpose of collective punishment.

Frankly, an unpleasant taste of punishment should be all that's issued to the entire class as a reminder of what happens when kids misbehave, but the worst of it must be saved for the perpetrator. And yes, some minor revenge should be allowed against the perpetrator from his/her classmates in proportion to the punishment handed out to the entire class.

Well, if that is corruption, I'm all for the dark side. ;)
Hahahahahaha. *evil chuckle followed by mechanized breathing*

You just might get to know the power of the Dark Side. :D

So if everyone knows who did it, they all take it out on the kid who did it, ensuring he doesnt do the same bad thing anytime soon?

But its still crap of course.

That is exactly why they do it. And i think that is the wrong aproach.
If you do it like that you ensure(cant find the right word) voilence ad school witch sometimes escalates. Some teachers could b smart but they dont all kno what they r doin.

I think you have a persecution complex.

Yet another vote for that thought.

But its still crap of course.
That is exactly why they do it. And i think that is the wrong aproach.
If you do it like that you ensure(cant find the right word) voilence ad school witch sometimes escalates. Some teachers could b smart but they dont all kno what they r doin.

Back to the dungeon for remedial English.

Hahahahahaha. *evil chuckle followed by mechanized breathing*

You just might get to know the power of the Dark Side. :D

*giggle*

Reminds me of some radio talk show I heard when I was heading up to Ohio with my dad and my sister. The DJs were talking abotu a bunch of crimes related to the release of a Star Wars movie, and then got onto the subject of a guy who was harassing some women in Malaysia while dressed in a Darth Vader costume "Luke... have you seen my Dark Side?"

:p

That is exactly why they do it. And i think that is the wrong aproach.
If you do it like that you ensure(cant find the right word) voilence ad school witch sometimes escalates. Some teachers could b smart but they dont all kno what they r doin.
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/GrammarTime.gif
*giggle*
Reminds me of some radio talk show I heard when I was heading up to Ohio with my dad and my sister. The DJs were talking abotu a bunch of crimes related to the release of a Star Wars movie, and then got onto the subject of a guy who was harassing some women in Malaysia while dressed in a Darth Vader costume "Luke... have you seen my Dark Side?"
:p
:eek:http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Wha.gif:eek:!!!
I wouldn't do anything like that. Besides, I'm already a little bit too short for a Storm Trooper - Vader is a whole different story! ;)

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?
it depends on the situation. the Teacher may KNOW who did what, but may not have proof. the Teacher may have asked other students to provide that proof, but none did. providing evidence of cooperation within those students. so One student is punished for the deed, the others for not speaking up/stopping that student and the rest are innocent.

Remember, the classroom is not a Democracy.

it depends on the situation. the Teacher may KNOW who did what, but may not have proof. the Teacher may have asked other students to provide that proof, but none did. providing evidence of cooperation within those students. so One student is punished for the deed, the others for not speaking up/stopping that student and the rest are innocent.

Remember, the classroom is not a Democracy.

It all reminds me of a scene in "Schindler's List" in which the general in the camp asks a group who stole a chicken, the group fails to answer and the general kills a random person from the group, in the hopes of finding out who it was by scaring the rest.

That's what a teacher should emulate?

That's what happens when the need for revenge outweighs the need for actual justice. Plain and simple. Many people advocate death penalty or unwarranted arrests of muslims precisely based on the same reason. The thought process here is: "I don't care if innocents get caught in as long as I get my revenge.".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQ5_EX-_Ymk

That's what a teacher should emulate?

what did the student do?

what was the punishment?

what did the student do?

what was the punishment?

Not the point. My point was about punishing the innocents for the actions of the guilty, or when one doesn't know WHO is guilty. In any way, shape or form.

That's what a teacher should emulate?
Do you consider that clip PG-13? For I sure don't!

How 'bout you edit that post and refrain from posting executions (and if only in a movie) in the future?

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

Because it's effetive. If the whole class gets punished because of something one person has done that person and other persons will most likelly not do that again because the class has to take the consequences.

Do you consider that clip PG-13? For I sure don't!

How 'bout you edit that post and refrain from posting executions (and if only in a movie) in the future?

Sorry, I don't know what PG-13 is, not a native here. Changed the post though.

Because it's effetive. If the whole class gets punished because of something one person has done that person and other persons will most likelly not do that again because the class has to take the consequences.

Yeah, right. Totally effective. Last year, my eighth-grade class got silent lunch for "inappropriate behavior". Everyone complained. The next week, we were on silent lunch again for "inapporpriate behavior".

Totally effective. :rolleyes:

We didn't learn anything from the punishment, except that the teachers were evil bastards.

Because it's effetive. If the whole class gets punished because of something one person has done that person and other persons will most likelly not do that again because the class has to take the consequences.

The problem is, not only it's ineffective - the class tends to unite against the teacher - it is immoral.

Not the point. My point was about punishing the innocents for the actions of the guilty, or when one doesn't know WHO is guilty. In any way, shape or form.

and my point is that a classroom isn't a democracy.

and my point is that a classroom isn't a democracy.

Shouldn't be a concentration camp, though.

The problem is, not only it's ineffective - the class tends to unite against the teacher - it is immoral.

not always.

not always.

When would it be morally acceptable to punish innocent people for the actions of guilty people???

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?
By punishing both the offender and his or her peers, the offender is given a social obligation not to re-offend.

Because it's effetive. If the whole class gets punished because of something one person has done that person and other persons will most likelly not do that again because the class has to take the consequences.

Is this a joke? What does a troublemaker care if others get the same punishment that they do? If anything it will be amusing to the individual, you act up and everyone gets punished? Collective punishment may work in the short term but it will only backfire in the end. Excluding the fact that it is totally wrong to punish someone for an act that another did.

Is this a joke? What does a troublemaker care if others get the same punishment that they do? If anything it will be amusing to the individual, you act up and everyone gets punished? Collective punishment may work in the short term but it will only backfire in the end. Excluding the fact that it is totally wrong to punish someone for an act that another did.
No, the teacher transfers the responsibility to the group to make the trouble maker realise that his actions have had an adverse affect - the group are then expected to make the trouble maker see the consequences of his actions, i.e. make it hell for him. Effectively, it is the teacher passing the buck and trying to encourage the class to keep their own in line. If this is done correctly, the trouble maker, to save face and relations with his or her classmates, will try not to push a teacher too far. It works better where students are more like sheep, I suppose.

By punishing both the offender and his or her peers, the offender is given a social obligation not to re-offend.

Well, ain't that cute...

But it's wrong!!!

The teacher becomes disliked by the class. Whoever defies his or her authority becomes a hero in their eyes. It thus gets more people willing to - to the cheers of the class - defy the teacher, and with good reason.

No, the teacher transfers the responsibility to the group to make the trouble maker realise that his actions have had an adverse affect - the group are then expected to make the trouble maker see the consequences of his actions, i.e. make it hell for him. Effectively, it is the teacher passing the buck and trying to encourage the class to keep their own in line. If this is done correctly, the trouble maker, to save face and relations with his or her classmates, will try not to push a teacher too far. It works better where students are more like sheep, I suppose.

No, it works better when the students are more like zombies.

No, the teacher transfers the responsibility to the group to make the trouble maker realise that his actions have had an adverse affect - the group are then expected to make the trouble maker see the consequences of his actions, i.e. make it hell for him. Effectively, it is the teacher passing the buck and trying to encourage the class to keep their own in line. If this is done correctly, the trouble maker, to save face and relations with his or her classmates, will try not to push a teacher too far. It works better where students are more like sheep, I suppose.

And when I was in school this never worked. Usually the troublemaker couldn't care less about the others in the class, the person wouldn't care about others sharing the punishment. It DOES make the class resent the unruly student but also the teacher. It is of course unfair, and collective responsibility is something I despise. It is something that i would encourage parents to try to prevent, I certainly would be pissed if I had a kid and he had to pay for something some other loudmouth did.

Well, ain't that cute...

But it's wrong!!!

Isn't this something from that cartoon 2 Stupid Dogs? :p

I certainly would be pissed if I had a kid and he had to pay for something some other loudmouth did.

Meh. I'd demand ALL the teachers to stay with me in a 2-hours long reunion, in order to make sure that the teacher group kept the unruly teacher in check. :D

Because if the teachers can do it, so can I.

Well, ain't that cute...

But it's wrong!!!

The teacher becomes disliked by the class. Whoever defies his or her authority becomes a hero in their eyes. It thus gets more people willing to - to the cheers of the class - defy the teacher, and with good reason.
Singling out one or two pupils turns them into martyrs and is more prone to giving hero-status to offenders.

And yes, of course it is morally wrong...
No, it works better when the students are more like zombies.
The greater acknowledgement of a child's rights in school cause them to stand up for themselves in situations that are obviously morally 'wrong' for them to be subjected to (at least, I presume this to be the cause, in any case, something certainly has caused it). This makes discipline more difficult for some teachers... I suppose it is somewhat ironic that so much of the education system relies on people who do not ask questions.
And when I was in school this never worked. Usually the troublemaker couldn't care less about the others in the class, the person wouldn't care about others sharing the punishment. It DOES make the class resent the unruly student but also the teacher. It is of course unfair, and collective responsibility is something I despise. It is something that i would encourage parents to try to prevent, I certainly would be pissed if I had a kid and he had to pay for something some other loudmouth did.
*shrugs* It will vary from school to school, year to year.

Isn't this something from that cartoon 2 Stupid Dogs? :p

*Gives Utracia a cookie for reference recongition.*

sounds like when i was in year 7 i got busted with some other boy who where
triping one another, they back me up in that i was not part of it but the teacher did not care
Precisely. Or the time I was suspended for a day because the librarian confused a pop-up for a Flash game. :rolleyes:
an thats a fact

:rolleyes: i go with what FD said on that

ROFL! At least she appreciated the humor, though. :D

Singling out one or two pupils turns them into martyrs and is more prone to giving hero-status to offenders.

And yes, of course it is morally wrong...

The greater acknowledgement of a child's rights in school cause them to stand up for themselves in situations that are obviously morally 'wrong' for them to be subjected to (at least, I presume this to be the cause, in any case, something certainly has caused it). This makes discipline more difficult for some teachers... I suppose it is somewhat ironic that so much of the education system relies on people who do not ask questions.

*shrugs* It will vary from school to school, year to year.

Well, I don't know, you'd have to pick up either a class of very, very passive people - in which case the measure wouldn't be necessary as passive people don't tend to cause problems - or a class of very, very stupid people - in which case the measure wouldn't work, because they're too stupid to learn this.

It's because they all hate you and jump at every opportunity to make your life worse. And not you as in high school students in general, you as in you Ritlina V4.0
Not just the teachers, either. EVERYONE is in on the conspiracy against Ritlina.
Hahahahahaha. *evil chuckle followed by mechanized breathing*

You just might get to know the power of the Dark Side. :D
That's how I play all my Star Wars games, actually. Sith, FTW! :cool:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/GrammarTime.gif

:eek:http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Wha.gif:eek:!!!
I wouldn't do anything like that. Besides, I'm already a little bit too short for a Storm Trooper - Vader is a whole different story! ;)

If you're a little too short to be a Storm Trooper, then you're probably the perfect height for rescuing your twin princess sister. :p

it depends on the situation. the Teacher may KNOW who did what, but may not have proof. the Teacher may have asked other students to provide that proof, but none did. providing evidence of cooperation within those students. so One student is punished for the deed, the others for not speaking up/stopping that student and the rest are innocent.

Remember, the classroom is not a Democracy.

If it isn't a Democracy, then proof is irrelevant. The Teacher's knowledge suffices.

Precisely. Or the time I was suspended for a day because the librarian confused a pop-up for a Flash game. :rolleyes:


ROFL! At least she appreciated the humor, though. :D

i just recalled she never like me from day one when i move there form the other school


yes she did

It all reminds me of a scene in "Schindler's List" in which the general in the camp asks a group who stole a chicken, the group fails to answer and the general kills a random person from the group, in the hopes of finding out who it was by scaring the rest.

That's what a teacher should emulate?

If the students are worth less than the chicken, then yes, they should be shot. *nods emphatically*

i just recalled she never like me from day one when i move there form the other school


yes she did

My teachers always liked me. I was the model student many years ago. Now I'm an unmotivated slacker, and they're impressed with how much I still accomplish with so little effort. :p

Well, I don't know, you'd have to pick up either a class of very, very passive people - in which case the measure wouldn't be necessary as passive people don't tend to cause problems - or a class of very, very stupid people - in which case the measure wouldn't work, because they're too stupid to learn this.
"[V]ery, very passive people" probably wouldn't be concerned enough to 'give the blighter hell' anyway. In any class you'll have a mix. A couple of troublemakers, two-dozen or so 'average' pupils, your quota of cynics and civil rights whores, and 'tis good enough to be worth a shot.

Do you consider that clip PG-13? For I sure don't!

How 'bout you edit that post and refrain from posting executions (and if only in a movie) in the future?
It wasn't an execution; it was a murder.
Because it's effetive. If the whole class gets punished because of something one person has done that person and other persons will most likelly not do that again because the class has to take the consequences.
No, it isn't effective. You must have missed the rest of the thread. :rolleyes:
and my point is that a classroom isn't a democracy.
So justice is necessarily limited to a democracy?

If the students are worth less than the chicken, then yes, they should be shot. *nods emphatically*

Heh, I bet some can get this feeling, that the kid will simply become a drain on society so... :p

But I think that teachers are just lazy. Punishing everyone is simple and requires no effort.

"[V]ery, very passive people" probably wouldn't be concerned enough to 'give the blighter hell' anyway. In any class you'll have a mix. A couple of troublemakers, two-dozen or so 'average' pupils, your quota of cynics and civil rights whores, and 'tis good enough to be worth a shot.

Any normal student nowadays would react badly to the teacher that did this kind of thing, and with good reason. As a parent, I would personally make sure to give the teacher hell if he dared to do this to my kid.

That's how I play all my Star Wars games, actually. Sith, FTW! :cool:
:cool::p
If you're a little too short to be a Storm Trooper, then you're probably the perfect height for rescuing your twin princess sister. :p
...which I have neither met nor any knowledge of - yet.

(That sounds strangely familiar? Someone should make a movie about it but only reveal this in a sequal! :D)

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

We do it in the hopes that your classmates, being punished for something you've done, will turn on you and continue the punishment.

We're evil like that.

We do it in the hopes that your classmates, being punished for something you've done, will turn on you and continue the punishment.

We're evil like that.

That was my thought, Neesika. I swear I heard my parents laughing as I clicked "Submit Reply".

Any normal student nowadays would react badly to the teacher that did this kind of thing, and with good reason. As a parent, I would personally make sure to give the teacher hell if he dared to do this to my kid.
*shrugs* I don't think a class-wide detention is really something to get too worked up over.

No, the teacher transfers the responsibility to the group to make the trouble maker realise that his actions have had an adverse affect - the group are then expected to make the trouble maker see the consequences of his actions, i.e. make it hell for him. Effectively, it is the teacher passing the buck and trying to encourage the class to keep their own in line. If this is done correctly, the trouble maker, to save face and relations with his or her classmates, will try not to push a teacher too far. It works better where students are more like sheep, I suppose.
"I do not fear an army of lions led by a sheep, but I do fear an army of sheep led by a lion." ~ Alexander the Great
Singling out one or two pupils turns them into martyrs and is more prone to giving hero-status to offenders.

And yes, of course it is morally wrong...

The greater acknowledgement of a child's rights in school cause them to stand up for themselves in situations that are obviously morally 'wrong' for them to be subjected to (at least, I presume this to be the cause, in any case, something certainly has caused it). This makes discipline more difficult for some teachers... I suppose it is somewhat ironic that so much of the education system relies on people who do not ask questions.

*shrugs* It will vary from school to school, year to year.

The trick is to defeat them in such a way that they are not martyrs but sufficient examples of punishment. And that works best if the students are in favor of the teacher. The other offenders are irrelevant to the persuasion of the whole class. Better the fewer supporters than the whole of them.

And it's that sort of repression that weakens the individual and let's people like Bush achieve the Presidency.

*shrugs* I don't think a class-wide detention is really something to get too worked up over.

I would. And I would get other parents of the innocents to do the same. I would give the teacher the worst two days of their lives, and make sure to parade him as an example to his peers. I know how furious I felt when it happened to me.

It'd be especially nice if the teacher was going through some sort of crisis when I gathered all these parents to give the teacher hell. I'd be especially satisfied if I made the teacher, male or female, cry in front of his or her peers.

That was my thought, Neesika. I swear I heard my parents laughing as I clicked "Submit Reply".

Don't let the secret out. Or you know what will happen.

Don't let the secret out. Or you know what will happen.

I know.

By the way, I paraphrased the LG quote about violating a garden gnome on the lawn from your sig yesterday in a thread and it seemed to have a ... stimulating effect on DCD and Sumamba.

Heh, I bet some can get this feeling, that the kid will simply become a drain on society so... :p

But I think that teachers are just lazy. Punishing everyone is simple and requires no effort.
Most people are drain on society....hmm.... >.>
:cool::p

...which I have neither met nor any knowledge of - yet.

(That sounds strangely familiar? Someone should make a movie about it but only reveal this in a sequal! :D)
Brilliant idea!:D I'll get to work on the script 30 years ago. ;)
*shrugs* I don't think a class-wide detention is really something to get too worked up over.

Yes, it is. It's the State-level government of the young, to translate it into a relevant perspective.

I know.

By the way, I paraphrased the LG quote about violating a garden gnome on the lawn from your sig yesterday in a thread and it seemed to have a ... stimulating effect on DCD and Sumamba.

*DCD and Sumamba have a garden gnome fetish*
Check, good to know!

My teachers always liked me. I was the model student many years ago. Now I'm an unmotivated slacker, and they're impressed with how much I still accomplish with so little effort. :p

i just move in the back ground,oh she was just a all out bitch to all

I would. And I would get other parents of the innocents to do the same. I would give the teacher the worst two days of their lives, and make sure to parade him as an example to his peers. I know how furious I felt when it happened to me.

It'd be especially nice if the teacher was going through some sort of crisis when I gathered all these parents to give the teacher hell. I'd be especially satisfied if I made the teacher, male or female, cry in front of his or her peers.

*seconds this idea*

Really, punishing the entire class is a great way for the person at fault to evade responsibility. The kid will think that when trouble comes, it will be spread over many people. How will the kid learn how to step up and take responsibility for his/her own actions if they aren't punished alone?

*DCD and Sumamba have a garden gnome fetish*
Check, good to know!
Planning for this year's Christmas already? :p
i just move in the back ground,oh she was just a all out bitch to all

Ah, I had a teacher like that once. Well, maybe twice. I hear of one I had in first grade who was a real bitch to boys. She really didn't like them. But I never disliked her or anything. I was pretty much oblivious to it. Maybe I spent a little too much time reading. :D

*seconds this idea*

Really, punishing the entire class is a great way for the person at fault to evade responsibility. The kid will think that when trouble comes, it will be spread over many people. How will the kid learn how to step up and take responsibility for his/her own actions if they aren't punished alone?

And that's why many don't advocate the death penalty: they don't want to have to kill EVERYONE because one person couldn't resist serial killing. :p

And that's why many don't advocate the death penalty: they don't want to have to kill EVERYONE because one person couldn't resist serial killing. :p

NICE!

And that's why many don't advocate the death penalty: they don't want to have to kill EVERYONE because one person couldn't resist serial killing. :p

I suppose we could execute everyone living on the same block as the killer. Since we have to punish those around who should have "known" what was going on. Only fair I suppose.

*nods*

"[V]ery, very passive people" probably wouldn't be concerned enough to 'give the blighter hell' anyway. In any class you'll have a mix. A couple of troublemakers, two-dozen or so 'average' pupils, your quota of cynics and civil rights whores, and 'tis good enough to be worth a shot.

Accept that if they do give the other student "hell" they will be punished in turn for that. It's quite similar to how they will punish students when they are younger for tattling and then get indignant when having had the idea that tattling is wrong knocked into their heads when they are young they refuse o do it when they are older.

Accept that if they do give the other student "hell" they will be punished in turn for that.
Depends how they give them "hell".

NICE!
I do what I can. [/smug] And by that I mean I like to make myself laugh. :D
I suppose we could execute everyone living on the same block as the killer. Since we have to punish those around who should have "known" what was going on. Only fair I suppose.

*nods*
Better make it the whole city. I mean, surely someone in the city should have known. They're all right there together.
Accept that if they do give the other student "hell" they will be punished in turn for that. It's quite similar to how they will punish students when they are younger for tattling and then get indignant when having had the idea that tattling is wrong knocked into their heads when they are young they refuse o do it when they are older.

Oh noes! Inconsistency!!!elventyShifT0ne!!!#!@!1!:eek:

Depends how they give them "hell".

Oh, do relax. In my case, the teacher's example would be big enough for people to forget the punishment they got "because of" this or that other guy. Special freebies if I could make the teacher start up on prozac.

Depends how they give them "hell".

No, not really. The ones they would care about "giving them hell" wouldn't give them hell, so no real effect, and possibility of further punishment for other students.

Apparently it's supposed to give a more effective (or greater) punishment to the one who was guilty.

Never worked at my middle school, though, and that piece of crap is notorious for it. I just wound up hating the school even more.

The idea is a social conditioning technique. The concept is that the other group members will reinforce positive behavior to their rule breaking peer. The concept breaks down when that peer doesn't give a flying f about their peers or the group decides they are going o follow the rule breaker instead.

Why do whiny children bitch about school on NSG?

Too many teardrops for one heart to be cryin'
Too many teardrops for one heart
To carry on
You're gonna cry ninety-six tears
You're gonna cry ninety-six tears
You're gonna cry cry, cry, cry, now
You're gonna cry cry, cry, cry
Ninety-six tears c'mon and lemme hear you cry, now
Ninety-six tears (whoo!) I wanna hear you cry
Night and day, yeah, all night long
Uh-ninety-six tears cry cry cry
C'mon baby, let me hear you cry now, all night long
Uh-ninety-six tears! Yeah! C'mon now
Uh-ninety-six tears!

Ah, I had a teacher like that once. Well, maybe twice. I hear of one I had in first grade who was a real bitch to boys. She really didn't like them. But I never disliked her or anything. I was pretty much oblivious to it. Maybe I spent a little too much time reading. :D

don't know an did not care was my feeling as i was moving on to high school the next year

The idea is a social conditioning technique. The concept is that the other group members will reinforce positive behavior to their rule breaking peer. The concept breaks down when that peer doesn't give a flying f about their peers or the group decides they are going o follow the rule breaker instead.

Tyranny of the masses (and thereby democracy as a whole) has always had that problem.

The idea is a social conditioning technique. The concept is that the other group members will reinforce positive behavior to their rule breaking peer. The concept breaks down when that peer doesn't give a flying f about their peers or the group decides they are going o follow the rule breaker instead.

Which is why Big Al said:

“I am not afraid of an army of lions led by a sheep; I am afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion.”

Why do whiny children bitch about school on NSG?

Too many teardrops for one heart to be cryin'
Too many teardrops for one heart
To carry on
You're gonna cry ninety-six tears
You're gonna cry ninety-six tears
You're gonna cry cry, cry, cry, now
You're gonna cry cry, cry, cry
Ninety-six tears c'mon and lemme hear you cry, now
Ninety-six tears (whoo!) I wanna hear you cry
Night and day, yeah, all night long
Uh-ninety-six tears cry cry cry
C'mon baby, let me hear you cry now, all night long
Uh-ninety-six tears! Yeah! C'mon now
Uh-ninety-six tears!

Why are all trolls asshats?:rolleyes:

Why are all trolls asshats?:rolleyes:

in my street i just shot them dead on the spot

don't know an did not care was my feeling as i was moving on to high school the next year
Probably a wise policy.
Which is why Big Al said:

“I am not afraid of an army of lions led by a sheep; I am afraid of an army of sheep led by a lion.”

LOL "Big Al" made me think of Weird Al. :p

in my street i just shot them dead on the spot

Trolls or asshats? :p

Probably a wise policy.


LOL "Big Al" made me think of Weird Al. :p

No, no: Big Al. Y'know, the guy that gathered all the guys and went to conquer some guys. :p

Well, ain't that cute...

But it's wrong!!!

The teacher becomes disliked by the class. Whoever defies his or her authority becomes a hero in their eyes. It thus gets more people willing to - to the cheers of the class - defy the teacher, and with good reason.actually, no. When I was in school, such actions didn't yeld those results.

So justice is necessarily limited to a democracy?justice that has to be jusitified to the accused.

Not the point. My point was about punishing the innocents for the actions of the guilty, or when one doesn't know WHO is guilty. In any way, shape or form.it punished those that hide the wrongdoers, It punishes those that did the deed, and it makes sure that next time, when bad things are done, it gets reported.

Shouldn't be a concentration camp, though.was the class turned into a concentration camp?

we still don't know what was done, we don't know what the punishment was.

When would it be morally acceptable to punish innocent people for the actions of guilty people???How were they punished? a Pop Quiz? more homework? detention? how?

Trolls or asshats? :p

both if thats the case i like my NS street to be safe from them

No, no: Big Al. Y'know, the guy that gathered all the guys and went to conquer some guys. :p

Yeah, I gathered as much, but now I'm thinking of Weird Al in Greek armor leading a musical cavalry charge, followed by some sort of extravagant victory number in a Persian palace. Then a lovely scene atop an Indian wall. :D

actually, no. When I was in school, such actions didn't yeld those results.

justice that has to be jusitified to the accused.

it punished those that hide the wrongdoers, It punishes those that did the deed, and it makes sure that next time, when bad things are done, it gets reported.

was the class turned into a concentration camp?

we still don't know what was done, we don't know what the punishment was.

How were they punished? a Pop Quiz? more homework? detention? how?

What about the student that simply did NOT know who the perpetrators were? Acceptable loss? I do not accept that, and the teacher would pay for it.

OMG, that's a brilliant idea for his next album!:eek:

both if thats the case i like my NS street to be safe from them

Ah, good man. We need good guards here in NS to keep the peace. ;)

OMG, that's a brilliant idea for his next album!:eek:

Actually I thought after that whole Lynndie England thing of an album named "pleading stupidity". Al in a court room looking up to the judge. Al in a suit and underwear.

What about the student that simply did NOT know who the perpetrators were? Acceptable loss? I do not accept that, and the teacher would pay for it.so the guilt is solely on the teacher and not the students who did know but didn't say and who's actions (or inactions) lead to all being punished.

nevermind that one student broke the rules, nevermind that other students may or may not have known about it, or even helped, it's the teachers fault.

Yep, the students have no responsiblity for those innocent students also getting punished. they are Clean as a whistle when it comes to breaking rules and avoiding punishment.

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?
This thread isn't on topic anymore, is it?

(especially since FD's here)

But meh. I really don't care. Life throws at you unfair treatments. Shrug and move on.

justice that has to be jusitified to the accused.
No, not necessarily. Just depends on the ruler, in matters of dictatorship. Wise rulers had wise laws.

it punished those that hide the wrongdoers, It punishes those that did the deed, and it makes sure that next time, when bad things are done, it gets reported.

was the class turned into a concentration camp?

we still don't know what was done, we don't know what the punishment was.

How were they punished? a Pop Quiz? more homework? detention? how?

Ah, but the third group who fit in neither camp? And how can we expect them to have responsibility for their own actions if the punishment is always dealt to the group? They come to think they can do as they please in all matters because the group absorbs the blow. And sometimes it is that mass punishment that amuses them to begin with.

Actually I thought after that whole Lynndie England thing of an album named "pleading stupidity". Al in a court room looking up to the judge. Al in a suit and underwear.

LOL Brilliant!

so the guilt is solely on the teacher and not the students who did know but didn't say and who's actions (or inactions) lead to all being punished.

nevermind that one student broke the rules, nevermind that other students may or may not have known about it, or even helped, it's the teachers fault.

Yep, the students have no responsiblity for those innocent students also getting punished. they are Clean as a whistle when it comes to breaking rules and avoiding punishment.

If you didn't do anything or aren't an accomplice, you should not be punished. Period. How would you like the electric chair for your neighbor being a serial killer?

No, not necessarily. Just depends on the ruler, in matters of dictatorship. Wise rulers had wise laws.



Ah, but the third group who fit in neither camp? And how can we expect them to have responsibility for their own actions if the punishment is always dealt to the group? They come to think they can do as they please in all matters because the group absorbs the blow. And sometimes it is that mass punishment that amuses them to begin with.the group absorbs the blow, yes, but those that know who did it will hold that person the reason why they're being punished.

done often enough and they will turn on the troublemaker.

This thread isn't on topic anymore, is it?

(especially since FD's here)

But meh. I really don't care. Life throws at you unfair treatments. Shrug and move on.

It's half on topic. :p

So if Canadia decided you were no longer allowed to live anywhere but a dank, moldy basement and that you would be fed a slice of bread, some watery broth, and a weevel-infested potato daily, you'd just shrug it off?

the group absorbs the blow, yes, but those that know who did it will hold that person the reason why they're being punished.

done often enough and they will turn on the troublemaker.

Done often enough and the group would turn INTO troublemakers, with good reason. Done ONCE to a child of mine and I would turn the teacher's life into hell, ALSO with good reason.

Ah, good man. We need good guards here in NS to keep the peace. ;)

just tell the kids if there ball lands in my yard dont try and get it themself,go tell some one to call me in my bunker :p

Done often enough and the group would turn INTO troublemakers, with good reason. Done ONCE to a child of mine and I would turn the teacher's life into hell, ALSO with good reason.

no they won't. can you show proof that this has happened more often than not?

the group absorbs the blow, yes, but those that know who did it will hold that person the reason why they're being punished.

done often enough and they will turn on the troublemaker.
But that isn't the point. Punishing someone for something he didn't do is unjust. It's like false imprisonment, i.e. people who are falsely convicted of a murder someone else committed.

More likely they'll rally behind him. It isn't the '50's anymore.

no they won't. can you show proof that this has happened more often than not?

Will be glad to when you show me all the places in which this horrid practice ever worked.

just tell the kids if there ball lands in my yard dont try and get it themself,go tell some one to call me in my bunker :p

I wanna live in a bunker. :(

Will be glad to when you show me all the places in which this horrid practice ever worked.sure, but, between the two of us since you brought up the point first .
Post 53 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12275848&postcount=53)
The problem is, not only it's ineffective - the class tends to unite against the teacher - it is immoral.
you provide the proof first.

But that isn't the point. Punishing someone for something he didn't do is unjust. It's like false imprisonment, i.e. people who are falsely convicted of a murder someone else committed.

More likely they'll rally behind him. It isn't the '50's anymore.and were the students imprisioned?

What was the punishment?
What was the crime?

That's what they all say....




.....It's the corruption of the system!:eek:
*flees*

THIS WORLD IS CORRUPT!
Which is why we, the Idealogical Organization ACROSS, will fix it! EXCEL!

sure, but, between the two of us since you brought up the point first .
Post 53 (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12275848&postcount=53)

you provide the proof first.

http://teacher2b.com/discipline/discistr.htm

http://teacher2b.com/discipline/phildisc.htm

"Don't discipline an entire class for the misdeeds of a single student, or a group of students. For instance, often a teacher will hold an entire class after the dismissal bell rings to punish some general behavior. Part of the philosophy behind this action is that the entire class will bring the misbehaving students into compliance with the teacher's wishes so that they can leave on time and not be late to their next class, lunch, etc. However, the students committing the disapproved actions may be beyond any coercion power the rest of the class may bring to bear. So the teacher's actions of punishing the class may not bring the desired results. Instead the results may be mostly negative. When an entire class is punished, there are at least four or five innocent students that grow in resentment for being punished for the guilt of someone else, perhaps some that they dislike and or fear. These students are then forced into a grouping with the others. Also there will be those in the class that go along with the strongest, or the most interesting, or amusing force in the classroom. Punishing the entire class brings all of these groups into alliance against the teacher."

Now will you stop defending this?

http://teacher2b.com/discipline/discistr.htm

http://teacher2b.com/discipline/phildisc.htm

Please be aware that this article is not suggesting that all discipline problems are teacher caused.
ok...
"Don't discipline an entire class for the misdeeds of a single student, or a group of students. For instance, often a teacher will hold an entire class after the dismissal bell rings to punish some general behavior. Part of the philosophy behind this action is that the entire class will bring the misbehaving students into compliance with the teacher's wishes so that they can leave on time and not be late to their next class, lunch, etc. However, the students committing the disapproved actions may be beyond any coercion power the rest of the class may bring to bear. So the teacher's actions of punishing the class may not bring the desired results. Instead the results may be mostly negative. When an entire class is punished, there are at least four or five innocent students that grow in resentment for being punished for the guilt of someone else, perhaps some that they dislike and or fear. These students are then forced into a grouping with the others. Also there will be those in the class that go along with the strongest, or the most interesting, or amusing force in the classroom. Punishing the entire class brings all of these groups into alliance against the teacher."

Now will you stop defending this perversion?and this isn't a study but a guide for teachers. too many "May Be"'s for a study on the effects of group punishements

no statistics to prove your claim of uniting against the teacher shown.

http://teacher2b.com/discipline/phildisc.htm


ok...
and this isn't a study but a guide for teachers. too many "May Be"'s for a study on the effects of group punishements

no statistics to prove your claim of uniting against the teacher shown.

This is a teacher pointing out why you should not pull this kind of crap. Do YOU have any proof or you'll run away from my points by asking me for FURTHER proof while not providing any?

This is a teacher pointing out why you should not pull this kind of crap. Do YOU have any proof or you'll run away from my points by asking me for FURTHER proof while not providing any?

You're right.

But those "maybe's" should be changed to "probably will's".

You're right.

But those "maybe's" should be changed to "probably will's".

Not my text. And texts on humanities will always tend to be phrased as "may be". Which, in turn, allows for this kind of nitpicking that goes "oh, he said may be, so it's not proof".

This is a teacher pointing out why you should not pull this kind of crap. Do YOU have any proof or you'll run away from my points by asking me for FURTHER proof while not providing any?just like everyone says bike riders SHOULD wear helments, yet people say no.

this isn't proof, all it is, is a study guide the supposes that the opposing results MAY appear. I never denied that such actions won't cause the opposite.

Written guides also suggest wearing Helmets when riding bikes. Proper methods for studying. proper handling of certain equiptment and objects yet, Guidelines don't provide proof.

as a teacher, you should know the difference between facts and possiblities.

just like everyone says bike riders SHOULD wear helments, yet people say no.

this isn't proof, all it is, is a study guide the supposes that the opposing results MAY appear. I never denied that such actions won't cause the opposite.

Written guides also suggest wearing Helmets when riding bikes. Proper methods for studying. proper handling of certain equiptment and objects yet, Guidelines don't provide proof.

as a teacher, you should know the difference between facts and possiblities.

Not a teacher here, but did have several classes on teaching in my grad course. And your examples are getting increasingly contrived: You should wear a helmet because of the likelyhood that, should you fall from the bike by hitting your head, it'd prevent you from dying. Just like more people would be statistically alive if they wore helmets, these guidelines will statistically improve a classroom.

And the FACT is it is unjust to punish the whole class for what individuals within it did.

The other FACT is there are better ways to deal with lack of discipline.

Situation: A student comes up to the teacher and says that their cell phone was stolen, they had it in the beginning of the class, and now it's gone (two student's verify that they did see him with his cell phone at the start of class.) The student does say that he turned his phone off when he came in.

Asking who took the cell phone doesn't work.

No one left the room (bathroom/water break) during class.

how do you go about finding the cell phone without punishing the innocents?

By asking the students to let me check their backpacks, in private, while keeping another teacher in the class to prevent them from hiding it among themselves. This would NOT be punishing unless you consider "let me see your backpack" punishment. It would be in private should any student feel ashamed of bringing anything to class.

That simple.

Not a teacher here, but did have several classes on teaching in my grad course. And your examples are getting increasingly contrived: You should wear a helmet because of the likelyhood that, should you fall from the bike by hitting your head, it'd prevent you from dying. Just like more people would be statistically alive if they wore helmets, these guidelines will statistically improve a classroom.

And the FACT is it is unjust to punish the whole class for what individuals within it did.

The other FACT is there are better ways to deal with lack of discipline.at least I'm providing examples, the OP doesn't.

read the thread about bike helmets. you'll find arguments against riding helmets with proof that Guides DON'T provide.

there's that word I bolded. can you back it up?

I agree that punishing the whole class is unfair. and may have the opposite effect, but I'm not saying that it happens with a certainty.

but for a situation here's one.

Situation: A student comes up to the teacher and says that their cell phone was stolen, they had it in the beginning of the class, and now it's gone (two student's verify that they did see him with his cell phone at the start of class.) The student does say that he turned his phone off when he came in.

Asking who took the cell phone doesn't work.

No one left the room (bathroom/water break) during class.

How do you go about finding the cell phone without punishing/persecuting the innocents?

Not my text. And texts on humanities will always tend to be phrased as "may be". Which, in turn, allows for this kind of nitpicking that goes "oh, he said may be, so it's not proof".

Darn. :(

By asking the students to let me check their backpacks, in private, while keeping another teacher in the class to prevent them from hiding it among themselves. This would NOT be punishing unless you consider "let me see your backpack" punishment. It would be in private should any student feel ashamed of bringing anything to class.

That simple.

and if the first two say "NO, I don't want to" and the rest follow suite, then what.

are you going to force them to show you what's in their backpack? will you forcebly violate their right to privacy?

Edit: and if you do this after the bell rings, you're holding them in after class... including the innocent ones.

I agree that punishing the whole class is unfair. and may have the opposite effect, but I'm not saying that it happens with a certainty.

If there's ONE student with a brain it'll result in said student being resentful of the teacher and in turn striving to make classes harder. Anyone with half that suffers an injustice will resent the perpetrator of the injustice - the teacher.

If there's no one with a brain it will result in them not "learning" to snitch on the others.

Furthermore, it could very well result in parents like myself turning the teacher's life into the dystopia they made of their classrooms.

and if the first two say "NO, I don't want to" and the rest follow suite, then what.

are you going to force them to show you what's in their backpack? will you forcebly violate their right to privacy?

Edit: and if you do this after the bell rings, you're holding them in after class... including the innocent ones.

In this one case it would be a legitimate order which students old enough to understand theft would understand. And I'd start by the ones I suspected. You yourself said a classroom isn't a democracy. And I'd make it up to them by letting them go sooner the next class.

If there's ONE student with a brain it'll result in said student being resentful of the teacher and in turn striving to make classes harder. Anyone with half that suffers an injustice will resent the perpetrator of the injustice - the teacher.

If there's no one with a brain it will result in them not "learning" to snitch on the others.

Furthermore, it could very well result in parents like myself turning the teacher's life into the dystopia they made of their classrooms.
or they will (especially if explained) turn that resentment on the one(s) that caused this injustice. Remember, situations are varied. the OP did not give any example so it's not so cut and dried as many think.

what if they are practicing for Graduation and pratice is being held up by one stupid individual who constantly makes a jackass of themselves because (s)he thinks it's funny. everyone is "Punished" by having to 1) stay late, 2) schedule more practice time, 3) get a crappy graduation. would you honestly blame the teachers for that or the jackass of a student?

In this one case it would be a legitimate order which students old enough to understand theft would understand. And I'd start by the ones I suspected. You yourself said a classroom isn't a democracy. And I'd make it up to them by letting them go sooner the next class.
and since you are guessing, you are subjecting the innocent ones to unlawful searches. (while I agree this is within your rights, it can be argued that this too is wrong.)

and since you are starting with the ones you suspect, do you let the others go? even if you have no real proof that those you suspect are infact guilty.

so holding them after class is still the same as punishing those that had no involvement.

or they will (especially if explained) turn that resentment on the one(s) that caused this injustice. Remember, situations are varied. the OP did not give any example so it's not so cut and dried as many think.

what if they are practicing for Graduation and pratice is being held up by one stupid individual who constantly makes a jackass of themselves because (s)he thinks it's funny. everyone is "Punished" by having to 1) stay late, 2) schedule more practice time, 3) get a crappy graduation. would you honestly blame the teachers for that or the jackass of a student?


and since you are guessing, you are subjecting the innocent ones to unlawful searches. (while I agree this is within your rights, it can be argued that this too is wrong.)

and since you are starting with the ones you suspect, do you let the others go? even if you have no real proof that those you suspect are infact guilty.

so holding them after class is still the same as punishing those that had no involvement.

It's still way less wrong than punishing them all for something one did when it is possible NOT to do so. What I'm talking about here is teachers that go "three students kept interrupting me so I'll punish everyone."

It's still way less wrong than punishing them all for something one did when it is possible NOT to do so. What I'm talking about here is teachers that go "three students kept interrupting me so I'll punish everyone."

But you are punishing them all, or are you only going to keep those you suspect (profiling btw,) so the thief may be one of those walking out the door. while you punish/grill innocent students. that's also a fine lession. "teach will suspect those guys anyway, so I can get away with anything."

you're still punishing the innocent. or are you now saying the NUMBER of innocents important. your Guidlines say you shouldn't punish any innocent student, not five, not one.

and for your example, yes, that is wrong, since they know who did it. but there are examples where the whole class has to be "punished" for the actions of the Unknown few.

a student in the front row is beaned in the head with a block eraser. no one says who did it, but someone did, so how to go about finding out who? sure you can ignore it, but that punishes the victim. you can punish the whole class untill the guilty person is found, but that still punishes the innocent, so how do you find the person who assaulted another student without violating their rights or punishing them?

But you are punishing them all, or are you only going to keep those you suspect (profiling btw,) so the thief may be one of those walking out the door. while you punish/grill innocent students. that's also a fine lession. "teach will suspect those guys anyway, so I can get away with anything."

you're still punishing the innocent. or are you now saying the NUMBER of innocents important. your Guidlines say you shouldn't punish any innocent student, not five, not one.

and for your example, yes, that is wrong, since they know who did it. but there are examples where the whole class has to be "punished" for the actions of the Unknown few.

a student in the front row is beaned in the head with a block eraser. no one says who did it, but someone did, so how to go about finding out who? sure you can ignore it, but that punishes the victim. you can punish the whole class untill the guilty person is found, but that still punishes the innocent, so how do you find the person who assaulted another student without violating their rights or punishing them?

I've been a victim of bullying (in fact I've been beamed with many objects up to and including a desk), and I stand by what I'm about to say:

I'd not punish anyone. I would, however, be more lenient towards the victim, either in grades or in allowing a comeuppance.

I've been a victim of bullying (in fact I've been beamed with many objects up to and including a desk), and I stand by what I'm about to say:

I'd not punish anyone. I would, however, be more lenient towards the victim, either in grades or in allowing a comeuppance.

so you would give the victim a bonus in grades, or allow for revenge? that can also send out the wrong lessions to the students.

so you would give the victim a bonus in grades, or allow for revenge? that can also send out the wrong lessions to the students.

Maybe so, but I'd not keep the victim disenfranchised. That may be a personal thing though. Well, it IS. I've been the victim, and too many times.

Maybe so, but I'd not keep the victim disenfranchised. That may be a personal thing though.

I agree, no victim should ever be ignored or disenfranchised. but sometimes toes need to be stepped on to find the guilty. What makes it unfair is if the stepping on is not 1) properly explained (as it always was in some of my classes that had to endure such things.) b) stopped when the person is found (ok, everyone BUT [lists students names] can go, I apologise to everyone else for this.) c) the situation is declared way in advance. (Good morning, I am Heikoku Sensei welcome to...[snipped welcome speech] now I will insist that homework be done, if 25% of the class fails to turn in their homework without giving me proper reason, and I determine what's proper, I will give the entire class a pop quiz... and don't think I won't have quizes ready at a moment's notice.)

Most students do understand why if explained. but the Teacher HAS to explain why. "X's Cell Phone is missing. I can either search everyone's bag before they leave, or we sit here till the phone is found. the choice is yours."

I agree, no victim should ever be ignored or disenfranchised. but sometimes toes need to be stepped on to find the guilty. What makes it unfair is if the stepping on is not 1) properly explained (as it always was in some of my classes that had to endure such things.) b) stopped when the person is found (ok, everyone BUT [lists students names] can go, I apologise to everyone else for this.) c) the situation is declared way in advance. (Good morning, I am Heikoku Sensei welcome to...[snipped welcome speech] now I will insist that homework be done, if 25% of the class fails to turn in their homework without giving me proper reason, and I determine what's proper, I will give the entire class a pop quiz... and don't think I won't have quizes ready at a moment's notice.)

Most students do understand why if explained. but the Teacher HAS to explain why. "X's Cell Phone is missing. I can either search everyone's bag before they leave, or we sit here till the phone is found. the choice is yours."

A and B okay, C no. Explaining an emergency and apologizing for the situation is fine and should be done, but not adding the possibility of punishment if SOMEONE ELSE doesn't bring homework - unless we're talking about a quiz that's of, at most, moderate difficulty and that gives a BONUS to students that know or that did the homework. For instance: Those that did the homework get the grades, those that didn't have to take the quiz in order to try and get them. In THIS case, a hard quiz.

School punishment systems are seriously frucked up.

Sir,

The Romans practiced decimation. Perhaps killing hapless youths would not be a good thing but whipping instead perhaps might instill some discipline...DISCIPLINE I say!!! To many of todays youth have had too easy! To the coal mines! With no canneries! NO CANNERIES! Just buckets and pick axes. AXES!!

Yours educationally,

Col Blimp

Tunbridge Wells

A and B okay, C no. Explaining an emergency and apologizing for the situation is fine and should be done, but not adding the possibility of punishment if SOMEONE ELSE doesn't bring homework - unless we're talking about a quiz that's of, at most, moderate difficulty and that gives a BONUS to students that know or that did the homework. For instance: Those that did the homework get the grades, those that didn't have to take the quiz in order to try and get them. In THIS case, a hard quiz.that's up to you.

true, but I was trying to remember wha... yes, my old English Lit teacher had that rule, and she declaired that at the beginning of the school year. some students still forgot their homework... but it was always under the 25%. when it hit the 25%, she pulled out the pop quiz punishment.

the quiz score was considered Extra Credit, so failing the quiz didn't have any real effect on the grade, but those that did their homework did get rewarded with higher extra credit while those that didn't... well... didn't.

after that one pop quiz, everyone turned in their homework... those were harder than the regular tests that she handed out.

When I TA'ed for her during my senior year, she still pulled that stunt, only that time she said, "anyone who doesn't believe me, just ask..." and she'd point to me.

No, I mean the teacher KNOWS who did the crime, but she still feels the need to punish EVERYBODY, even the good kids!

Then she is an asshole.

the group absorbs the blow, yes, but those that know who did it will hold that person the reason why they're being punished.

done often enough and they will turn on the troublemaker.

Or, done often enough, and the class turns on the teacher. That's what my class and I did in sixth grade to Ms. Goldstein.

Or, done often enough, and the class turns on the teacher. That's what my class and I did in sixth grade to Ms. Goldstein.did she live?
I did admit that it was a possiblitiy, but to assume that would happen each time...

oh and our teachers would make it known who's fault it was or what the event was that perpetuated the punishment.

I would. And I would get other parents of the innocents to do the same. I would give the teacher the worst two days of their lives, and make sure to parade him as an example to his peers. I know how furious I felt when it happened to me.

It'd be especially nice if the teacher was going through some sort of crisis when I gathered all these parents to give the teacher hell. I'd be especially satisfied if I made the teacher, male or female, cry in front of his or her peers.

Issues much?

THIS WORLD IS CORRUPT!
Which is why we, the Idealogical Organization ACROSS, will fix it! EXCEL!
Hail Lord Ilpalazzo!

Did we ever get a run down on what actually happened, or is this all due to the OP's say so that s/he was punished due to a mean teacher?

Hail Lord Ilpalazzo!
LOL! I can't believe it actually took me half a minute to get the reference...

:headbang:

Where's Menchi? :D

and no, I didn't get any details about the OP rant.

By asking the students to let me check their backpacks, in private, while keeping another teacher in the class to prevent them from hiding it among themselves. This would NOT be punishing unless you consider "let me see your backpack" punishment. It would be in private should any student feel ashamed of bringing anything to class.

That simple.

Also illegal. Unreasonable search. I'm surprised that you would want to violate the 4th amendment by searching all the students and be so violently against group punishment.

Where's Menchi? :D
At the supermarket, but my wife won't let me buy menchi to eat any more. ;)

did she live?
I did admit that it was a possiblitiy, but to assume that would happen each time...

oh and our teachers would make it known who's fault it was or what the event was that perpetuated the punishment.

Psssst, eckchay ethey itewhay exttay. ;)

Psssst, eckchay ethey itewhay exttay. ;)
Psst... idday, eckchay myway iteway exttay! ;)

that's up to you.

true, but I was trying to remember wha... yes, my old English Lit teacher had that rule, and she declaired that at the beginning of the school year. some students still forgot their homework... but it was always under the 25%. when it hit the 25%, she pulled out the pop quiz punishment.

the quiz score was considered Extra Credit, so failing the quiz didn't have any real effect on the grade, but those that did their homework did get rewarded with higher extra credit while those that didn't... well... didn't.

after that one pop quiz, everyone turned in their homework... those were harder than the regular tests that she handed out.

When I TA'ed for her during my senior year, she still pulled that stunt, only that time she said, "anyone who doesn't believe me, just ask..." and she'd point to me.

Ah, extra credit. THEN okay.

Also illegal. Unreasonable search. I'm surprised that you would want to violate the 4th amendment by searching all the students and be so violently against group punishment.

Well, it'd still be less unfair than actively punishing everyone. Plus I'd explain the reasons and so on.

Issues much?

Just a little. The rest is all me, baby. :p

Hey, I didn't even mention taking a picture of the teacher reduced to an empty shell to send her as a christmas card later on! :D (Goes double if she's one of those people that get depressed due to being alone on holidays.).

I don't have kids, but if and when I do, I intend to protect them by making an example of whatever threatens or whoever treats them unfairly.

If MY KID was the one that did it, though, I'd support the teacher IF AND ONLY IF it was only MY kid being punished. If my kid indeed deserved the punishment, I'd personally talk to my kid in support of the actions of the teacher, provided the actions didn't include violence. Attempting to put the class against my kid by punishing the group, though, would result in me openly berating the teacher in front of the class in order to humiliate the teacher and to put the class against the teacher rather than against my kid. Of course, maybe including the picture thing.

I don't ever practice PHYSICAL violence. I'm pretty good at psychological one though. :D

Nemo me impune lacessit.

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

What exactly can they do to punish just one person?

They can't hit you. There's a certain futility in punishing someone who doesn't show up to class by telling them that they must also attend another class, which if they don't attend it will be just as bad as the class they're already not attending. Or if they don't do the homework that they're assigned they will be assigned more homework that they won't do. And if none of that works, the supreme punishment left available to be levied against one student alone is a two week vacation.

The only thing left is to try to make the whole class angry at that one student, because the scorn of their peers is likely to prove a stronger incentive.

The only thing left is to try to make the whole class angry at that one student, because the scorn of their peers is likely to prove a stronger incentive.

There are ways, up to and including taking away the person's grade, expulsion or detention.

Scenario:

Let's assume the class gets screwed over whenever Bob fails to deliver homework. Problem is, Bob NEVER does. One day, a fight begins in the class, due to exactly that. It gets heated. Mob mentality takes over, 20 people are beating the crap out of one, liberating their righteous fury upon Bob. However, when something snaps or breaks, they can't hear. After a while, Bob has stopped breathing.

The good teacher now has a dead student on her hands. Blood on her hands and on the other students' hands. Bob doesn't need to die, though. Maybe lose an eye, maybe become paraplegic, or, if they hit the head hard enough the right way, become a vegetable or mentally handicapped. Endless possibilities, really. Wow, he really, REALLY should have turned in that last homework, eh? Only, he doesn't get healed or raised, and now we're looking at 20 people and the teacher whose lives are forever marked with the word "murderer" in them.

Psst... idday, eckchay myway iteway exttay! ;)

LOL!

Yes, barely. We won the skirmishes entirely. She held us in detention three WEEKS because of one kid, who himself said, "Punish me -- no one else was involved," to which her answer was, "I'm punishing EVERYONE -- maybe they'll get you to behave."

Bad move.

Battle 1: The digital watches. They were brand spankin' new back then in the dawn of time. One kid in class said we should set all the alarms to go off at the same time. A future mod opined that we knew what order we sat in the class -- we should set them to go off three seconds apart. A sound version of the wave, so to speak.

Battle 2: Airforce. Every SINGLE student folded 10 paper airplanes at lunch. Every time she turned to write on the board, 35 airplanes launched. She was ankle deep in them before the period was over.

Battle 3: Statues. We all sat in class staring ahead, hand folded, without saying anything, moving from that position, or acknowledging that she existed in any way. After that one, she left the room and sent the dean in. When he asked why we were acting like such assholes, we explained that since we had been punished three weeks for doing nothing, we were going to earn every second of detention we'd got. He convinced us to call a truce and was good to his word of making sure we did NOT get any more detention from her for ANY reason. Of course, he said if we got out of line, HE was going to kick our asses -- and we knew he could and would, so we were polite for the rest of the term.

And now you know why I don't agree with punishing the whole class for one student.

There are ways, up to and including taking away the person's grade, expulsion or detention.

Scenario:

Let's assume the class gets screwed over whenever Bob fails to deliver homework. Problem is, Bob NEVER does. One day, a fight begins in the class, due to exactly that. It gets heated. Mob mentality takes over, 20 people are beating the crap out of one, liberating their righteous fury upon Bob. However, when something snaps or breaks, they can't hear. After a while, Bob has stopped breathing.

The good teacher now has a dead student on her hands. Blood on her hands and on the other students' hands. Bob doesn't need to die, though. Maybe lose an eye, maybe become paraplegic, or, if they hit the head hard enough the right way, become a vegetable or mentally handicapped. Endless possibilities, really. Wow, he really, REALLY should have turned in that last homework, eh? Only, he doesn't get healed or raised, and now we're looking at 20 people and the teacher whose lives are forever marked with the word "murderer" in them.
That's way extreme.

LOL!

Yes, barely. We won the skirmishes entirely. She held us in detention three WEEKS because of one kid, who himself said, "Punish me -- no one else was involved," to which her answer was, "I'm punishing EVERYONE -- maybe they'll get you to behave."

Bad move.

Battle 1: The digital watches. They were brand spankin' new back then in the dawn of time. One kid in class said we should set all the alarms to go off at the same time. A future mod opined that we knew what order we sat in the class -- we should set them to go off three seconds apart. A sound version of the wave, so to speak.

Battle 2: Airforce. Every SINGLE student folded 10 paper airplanes at lunch. Every time she turned to write on the board, 35 airplanes launched. She was ankle deep in them before the period was over.

Battle 3: Statues. We all sat in class staring ahead, hand folded, without saying anything, moving from that position, or acknowledging that she existed in any way. After that one, she left the room and sent the dean in. When he asked why we were acting like such assholes, we explained that since we had been punished three weeks for doing nothing, we were going to earn every second of detention we'd got. He convinced us to call a truce and was good to his word of making sure we did NOT get any more detention from her for ANY reason. Of course, he said if we got out of line, HE was going to kick our asses -- and we knew he could and would, so we were polite for the rest of the term.

LOL!

There are ways, up to and including taking away the person's grade, expulsion or detention.

Scenario:

Let's assume the class gets screwed over whenever Bob fails to deliver homework. Problem is, Bob NEVER does. One day, a fight begins in the class, due to exactly that. It gets heated. Mob mentality takes over, 20 people are beating the crap out of one, liberating their righteous fury upon Bob. However, when something snaps or breaks, they can't hear. After a while, Bob has stopped breathing.

The good teacher now has a dead student on her hands. Blood on her hands and on the other students' hands. Bob doesn't need to die, though. Maybe lose an eye, maybe become paraplegic, or, if they hit the head hard enough the right way, become a vegetable or mentally handicapped. Endless possibilities, really. Wow, he really, REALLY should have turned in that last homework, eh? Only, he doesn't get healed or raised, and now we're looking at 20 people and the teacher whose lives are forever marked with the word "murderer" in them.

...ok, but in the REAL world......

...ok, but in the REAL world......

Just a way to make a point.

Would make a GREAT CSI episode though.

And kudos on the way to deal with your teacher way back when.

Why do teachers and people in positions like them feel the need to punish THE ENTIRE class for something one person may have done? Why do they feel the need to punish someone who is innocent simply because they are of the same ranking as the person who was guilty? Why don't they feel the need to punish EXPLICITLY and ONLY the person who did wrong?

Can someone explain that idea to me?

[sarcasm] My phychic powers suggest you live in America[sarcasm/]

Actually I don't need to be phychic, you do, most European and Asian schools are reasonable.

[sarcasm] My phychic powers suggest you live in America[sarcasm/]

Actually I don't need to be phychic, you do, most European and Asian schools are reasonable.

In Brazil too, though I did see this "punish the group" once or twice happening to or around me, so I'd make sure to give whoever pulled this crap hell.

And trust me, nobody beats me at creepy.

That's way extreme.

I'll do almost anything to drive home a point.

You guys remember that scene in Full Metal jacket when they beat the guy with the soap bars? You'd be surprised at what a blanket party can do to a person's motivation.

Anyways, I don't know about school, seeing as the discipline system in American schools is laughable at best, but in occupations or areas where teamwork is key, universal punishment can be a very good tool.

You guys remember that scene in Full Metal jacket when they beat the guy with the soap bars? You'd be surprised at what a blanket party can do to a person's motivation.

Anyways, I don't know about school, seeing as the discipline system in American schools is laughable at best, but in occupations or areas where teamwork is key, universal punishment can be a very good tool.

Maybe, but school isn't teamwork, it's individual work.

Maybe, but school isn't teamwork, it's individual work.
Not always, trying to teach how to work together and get things done as a group is a goal in education.

The problem being that the US system is set up against that in the first place.

Hence, the 'I don't know about school.'

There are ways, up to and including taking away the person's grade, expulsion or detention.

Scenario:

Let's assume the class gets screwed over whenever Bob fails to deliver homework. Problem is, Bob NEVER does. One day, a fight begins in the class, due to exactly that. It gets heated. Mob mentality takes over, 20 people are beating the crap out of one, liberating their righteous fury upon Bob. However, when something snaps or breaks, they can't hear. After a while, Bob has stopped breathing.

The good teacher now has a dead student on her hands. Blood on her hands and on the other students' hands. Bob doesn't need to die, though. Maybe lose an eye, maybe become paraplegic, or, if they hit the head hard enough the right way, become a vegetable or mentally handicapped. Endless possibilities, really. Wow, he really, REALLY should have turned in that last homework, eh? Only, he doesn't get healed or raised, and now we're looking at 20 people and the teacher whose lives are forever marked with the word "murderer" in them.


Your scenario is absurd. As is the idea that a student who doesn't care enough about their grade to behave well in the first place will find demerits to be much of a disincentive for their current behavior.

*seconds this idea*

Really, punishing the entire class is a great way for the person at fault to evade responsibility. The kid will think that when trouble comes, it will be spread over many people. How will the kid learn how to step up and take responsibility for his/her own actions if they aren't punished alone?

Because if this person does not have the gonads to step up and take responsibility now they never will be, these are the same people who through their entire lives refuse to take responsibility. They are also loved by liberals and bleeding hearts because they back up this losers belief that they are not responsible for their actions it is societies fault. Basically it could pretty much be blamed on the parents I guess it is up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong and to accept responsibility. But today more and more parents are not being allowed to do that, would ruin the it's not my fault it is yours and societies excuse that these bleeding hearts prefer to push.

Your scenario is absurd. As is the idea that a student who doesn't care enough about their grade to behave well in the first place will find demerits to be much of a disincentive for their current behavior.

Detention it is, then. Something, in short, that doesn't force the innocents to pay for the guilty. Something, in short, that isn't JUST LIKE imprisoning you because you live in the same block as a serial killer.

Because if this person does not have the gonads to step up and take responsibility now they never will be, these are the same people who through their entire lives refuse to take responsibility. They are also loved by liberals and bleeding hearts because they back up this losers belief that they are not responsible for their actions it is societies fault. Basically it could pretty much be blamed on the parents I guess it is up to parents to teach their kids right from wrong and to accept responsibility. But today more and more parents are not being allowed to do that, would ruin the it's not my fault it is yours and societies excuse that these bleeding hearts prefer to push.

I have no idea what you're defending, as your post seems more like "teachers, students, something, I don't like librulz", but I, a liberal, and most liberal people, are against punishing the rest of the group for what one member did.

Nice threadjack, though, does it bite?

I spose to teach everyone in the class a lesson so as to not repeat the action of the individual for whom the punishment is for. Tis a cruel world.

I spose to teach everyone in the class a lesson so as to not repeat the action of the individual for whom the punishment is for. Tis a cruel world.

OR it teaches that the teacher is a jerk and that acting against him is honorable - two things which would be true for a teacher that punishes the whole class.

Watch Full Metal Jacket (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093058/)
It explains the concept pretty well.

Detention it is, then. Something, in short, that doesn't force the innocents to pay for the guilty. Something, in short, that isn't JUST LIKE imprisoning you because you live in the same block as a serial killer.
yeahhhh...because losing a few minutes of recess time is JUST LIKE being imprisoned.
Because someone being an arse in class (hey, that rhymes!) is JUST LIKE someone going on a killing spree.
http://www.iaw.on.ca/~ppchurch/strawman.gif
What's that, Mr Strawman, you got something else to say?
Well don't dilly-dally! spit it out, so we can all laugh at you.

I've been a victim of bullying (in fact I've been beamed with many objects up to and including a desk), and I stand by what I'm about to say:

I'd not punish anyone. I would, however, be more lenient towards the victim, either in grades or in allowing a comeuppance.
Great teaching strategy there:
Give a passing grade to someone not on their coursework but because you feel sorry for them.
Wonderful.
And what of the other sods who worked hard and still failed? Or even the ones who worked hard and just passed?
How do you think they'd feel knowing their classmate was given a pass simply cause you felt sorry for them?
Great way to ensure the 'victim' remains a focal point of other student's anger.

Or you'll allow them to attack back. Again, what awesome teaching skills you have. Standing back and watching a student assault another. Yep, that's going to really please the other students in the class, as well as their parents and the Principal.
An what if the 'bully' fights back? Will you step in and hold them down so your pet can get their kicks in? What if you then find out the person they attacked wasn't the culprit? Would you let it go, or now allow the 2nd victim free attacks on the 1st victim?


What an awesome teacher you'd make.

If you didn't do anything or aren't an accomplice, you should not be punished. Period. How would you like the electric chair for your neighbor being a serial killer?
Well, if you're going to be this contrived with your strawman logic here:
If you knew your neighbour was a serial killer, knew he was committing evil crimes, watched him do his murders and yet just sat back and ignored it - or worse, actually enjoyed watching him commit his crimes, you think it's just that you should escape all punishment simply because you didn't do the murdering yourself?

Teachers (and some professors) are generally really lazy and stupid because they dont get paid very much for their work, so they can afford to just hand out punishment willy-nilly, especially under the way things work now, where teachers get paid more just for being a teacher longer.

Doesn't the whole "pass all of the students regardless" thing sound a lil like No Child Left Behind?

I would. And I would get other parents of the innocents to do the same. I would give the teacher the worst two days of their lives, and make sure to parade him as an example to his peers. I know how furious I felt when it happened to me.

It'd be especially nice if the teacher was going through some sort of crisis when I gathered all these parents to give the teacher hell. I'd be especially satisfied if I made the teacher, male or female, cry in front of his or her peers.yeah.
Because the best way to deal with a problem you have with someone is to humiliate and bully them publicly until they have a complete breakdown.
Certainly is a fantastic example to set your children as to how to deal with conflict.
Don't like what someone is doing?
Forget mediation!
Forget compromise!
Just bully them and humiliate them!
That's the way to do it!

(And then just pray no-one ever does it to you)

Answer me these:
What will you do if the teacher remains unrepentant and laughs at your attempts to publicly humiliate them?
Attack them physically?

Also, how do you think the bullys in the class are going to start acting after all this public humiliation of their teacher, knowing that if said teacher reprimands them, they just need to come whining to you that they've been unfairly punished and you'll start up the good ol' lynch mob again to bully the teacher back into submission?
Think the class will be manageable after that?

How is your going out of your way to destroy a person's life somehow equivalent to your child losing a few minutes of recess?
How exactly do those two balance out?

You say you'd get a huge amount of satisfaction out of humiliating them and causing them to have a breakdown.
How does this level bullying make you any better than the teacher abusing their position by punishing the whole class?

Is this the message you want to send the class (and your child)?
That as long as you're stronger, bigger, or more powerful you can do whatever the hell you like to others?
That might means right?

What if, at the end of all this, you find it was in fact your child who was the guilty one - and thus deserved the punishment.
Would you then publicly humiliate your child?
Yourself?
Apologise to the teacher?
Or would you just self-justify that the teacher mightn't of done anything wrong this time, but you're absolutely certain they did deserve it.

Teachers (and some professors) are generally really lazy and stupid because they dont get paid very much for their work, so they can afford to just hand out punishment willy-nilly, especially under the way things work now, where teachers get paid more just for being a teacher longer.
Most teachers have a BA or higher (MS myself, soon to start on my PhD) and work well over 8 hours a day (What, you thought we went home at 3? I wish, I really would like that).

Try teaching for a bit and tell me that we're stupid and lazy.

Teachers (and some professors) are generally really lazy and stupid because they dont get paid very much for their work, so they can afford to just hand out punishment willy-nilly, especially under the way things work now, where teachers get paid more just for being a teacher longer.
How dare they get paid more according to seniority and experience!
No other industry pays it's employers more the longer they work there and the more experience they accumulate!
right?

And I'd make it up to them by letting them go sooner the next class.

...out of curiosity, would you plan on actually teaching your class at some point? Me, I think covering the material you had to skip in order to waste time searching for a cell phone is a bit more important than making sure the kids have the exact same total number of free minutes per week...

As for the original topic, while I agree that a teacher choosing to punish an entire class for something one known culprit did is stupid, I also think that there are circumstances when it is sensible to make behaving well popular. For example, I remember one day in my junior English class when most of the students were trying to have an intelligent discussion about As I Lay Dying, but a group of girls in the back felt like they were entitled to maintain their own personal conversation at a fairly high volume. Our teacher told them repeatedly to be quiet, but they were far too "cool" to obey teachers. After enduring several minutes of this crap, he explained that the class could either be quiet and have an interesting discussion, or we could spend the rest of the hour diagramming sentences. Now, I have no doubt those girls couldn't have cared less what they were ignoring, but the rest of us did, and the next time one of them started talking, the entire rest of the class turned and glared at her. That got through in a way that anything our teacher could say simply couldn't. "Shut up while other people are speaking, or the whole class diagrams sentences for an hour" became an established rule in that class, and because it was established, it never had to be used. "Shut up or I'll give you a chance to prove your extremely cool rebelliousness to your friends by kicking you out of class" would never have worked half as well.

No, I mean the teacher KNOWS who did the crime, but she still feels the need to punish EVERYBODY, even the good kids!

Uh, because teachers-- having had to study at least a little developmental psychology-- know something that their students tend not to actively be aware of. It's called peer pressure. Okay, so I'm the one trouble-maker in my class. I shoot a spitball. I get busted, and the *entire* class gets nailed for it. I just got the entire rest of the class pissed at me for making their lives miserable, and they're going to exert all the group pressure they can on me to keep me from doing it again. If I do it again, they may very well gang up on me after school and whup my ass. So, what means more to me tomorrow? Shooting another spitball, or not bringing the wrath of my entire class down on me?

Well, if you're going to be this contrived with your strawman logic here:
If you knew your neighbour was a serial killer, knew he was committing evil crimes, watched him do his murders and yet just sat back and ignored it - or worse, actually enjoyed watching him commit his crimes, you think it's just that you should escape all punishment simply because you didn't do the murdering yourself?

What if you DIDN'T know or HAD to ignore it lest he killed you? Still fair? No, people should not be punished for other people's crimes, period! Because if the teacher is allowed to do it, so is the judicial system!

Snip.

And you claim I was strawmanning. I'd not give a f*ck about a teacher punishing people for something they actually did, and I'd talk to the teacher in private if he did this to my son by mistake. However, applying collective punishments would result in me getting the other parents to complain to the teacher and give them hell, yes, because, no, I will not accept my kid suffering because of something OTHER KID did, and I will not accept the teacher essentially promoting bullying against my kid by punishing the CLASS for something my kid did in the hopes of, essentially, getting the group angry at my kid. My kid is not Tessie frickin' Hutchingson from Shirley Jackson's The Lottery. Push comes to shove, my city is the 53rd biggest one in the world, there are other schools. And I don't think I'd have much trouble at getting an apology out of the teacher - I'm not stupid, the principal or someone above the teacher would be there. I'd not need to raise my voice or insult the teacher (too much) to humiliate them.

Snip.

Because you think punishing the whole class WOULDN'T get the victim MORE victimized? I have yet to hear any brilliant ideas coming from you.

Uh, because teachers-- having had to study at least a little developmental psychology-- know something that their students tend not to actively be aware of. It's called peer pressure. Okay, so I'm the one trouble-maker in my class. I shoot a spitball. I get busted, and the *entire* class gets nailed for it. I just got the entire rest of the class pissed at me for making their lives miserable, and they're going to exert all the group pressure they can on me to keep me from doing it again. If I do it again, they may very well gang up on me after school and whup my ass. So, what means more to me tomorrow? Shooting another spitball, or not bringing the wrath of my entire class down on me?

I know what peer pressure is, I know and have seen how it works, and I know it not only doesn't work like this, but, in the rare cases it does, the student in question gets much more punishment than he should.

...out of curiosity, would you plan on actually teaching your class at some point? Me, I think covering the material you had to skip in order to waste time searching for a cell phone is a bit more important than making sure the kids have the exact same total number of free minutes per week...

As for the original topic, while I agree that a teacher choosing to punish an entire class for something one known culprit did is stupid, I also think that there are circumstances when it is sensible to make behaving well popular. For example, I remember one day in my junior English class when most of the students were trying to have an intelligent discussion about As I Lay Dying, but a group of girls in the back felt like they were entitled to maintain their own personal conversation at a fairly high volume. Our teacher told them repeatedly to be quiet, but they were far too "cool" to obey teachers. After enduring several minutes of this crap, he explained that the class could either be quiet and have an interesting discussion, or we could spend the rest of the hour diagramming sentences. Now, I have no doubt those girls couldn't have cared less what they were ignoring, but the rest of us did, and the next time one of them started talking, the entire rest of the class turned and glared at her. That got through in a way that anything our teacher could say simply couldn't. "Shut up while other people are speaking, or the whole class diagrams sentences for an hour" became an established rule in that class, and because it was established, it never had to be used. "Shut up or I'll give you a chance to prove your extremely cool rebelliousness to your friends by kicking you out of class" would never have worked half as well.

Simple: "Shut up or I'm handing you, (name), you, (name), you, (name), you, (name), and you, (name) detentions." Should that not work, it'd be "leave, but you'll stay here for detention, if you don't I'm taking away X from your grade". There are other punishments that don't include turning your class into Shirley Jackson's Lottery.

As for "searching for the cell phone", it'd take no more than 20 minutes. It's not hard to rush a bit for the time spent at this.

yeahhhh...because losing a few minutes of recess time is JUST LIKE being imprisoned.
Because someone being an arse in class (hey, that rhymes!) is JUST LIKE someone going on a killing spree.
http://www.iaw.on.ca/~ppchurch/strawman.gif
What's that, Mr Strawman, you got something else to say?
Well don't dilly-dally! spit it out, so we can all laugh at you.

The principle behind it is just about the same. Where do we draw the line, socially speaking? A person loses the right for compensation if they have been wrongly imprisoned for "only" a week? "Only" a month? Isn't classroom supposed to teach you about society? What does it teach when innocent people get punished for what the guilty ones did? Society doesn't, and shouldn't, work like that, and the classroom should, yes, be like society in this area.

Um, yeah, what Heikoku said. It's essentially the same principle. If you prefer to not use something as extreme as a serial killer, say you receive a parking fine for being parked on the same street as someone who parked illegally. You're not sending a good message when you teach students collective punishment is acceptable.

Um, yeah, what Heikoku said. It's essentially the same principle. If you prefer to not use something as extreme as a serial killer, say you receive a parking fine for being parked on the same street as someone who parked illegally. You're not sending a good message when you teach students collective punishment is acceptable.

Thank you.

Even more: These same students may become the police officers in that example later in life.

Because you think punishing the whole class WOULDN'T get the victim MORE victimized? I have yet to hear any brilliant ideas coming from you.
y'know. It's pretty difficult to know what you're replying to when:
1. you just deat my entire post and replace it with snip.
2. You answer none of the questions I pose you
3. You just continue to rant without forming coherrent sentences.


Care to point to which post of mine is that I say the entire class should be punished for one troublemaker?

y'know. It's pretty difficult to know what you're replying to when:
1. you just deat my entire post and replace it with snip.
2. You answer none of the questions I pose you
3. You just continue to rant without forming coherrent sentences.


Care to point to which post of mine is that I say the entire class should be punished for one troublemaker?

I said: I'd not punish the entire class for one troublemaker. The guy asked what would I do should there be no way to detect who the perpetrator was. I proposed making up to the victim somehow, since I can't, as I said, punish the entire class. If it were up to me though, there would be someone to discipline the students in the classroom, BESIDES the teacher. To watch them. Regardless, you said that wouldn't work. Okay, what would you do that didn't include punishing the whole class and - again - rallying them against the victim?

Anyone else see Full Metal Jacket? It didn't work very well when the drill instructor tried to force the rest of the platoon to motivate and/or punish Leonard. He just became angry and bitter and homocidal.

Not saying... well, yes, I am saying exactly that. I'm saying to alienate someone from -everyone- around them is psychological warfare, not a punishment. When you know you'll be going to the same class at the same time for an entire year, and you know every single person in that class is pissed off at you, every second of being in that class is a smack to the face and a kick in the ass. No class clown deserves that.

If you're such a terrible teacher to where you have to make the class do your job of keeping the kids in line for you, you need to be fired.

This is all assuming the class went along with it, by the way. Many classes will, instead of turning their vengeance towards the offending students, will be offended and generally pissed off that they would even be threatened because of what someone else is doing, and will therefore hate the teacher with a burning passion, referring to them as assholes and bitches and pricks and possibly making them the butt of many jokes and pranks to come.

So yeah. Don't make the kids do your dirty work for you.

Um, yeah, what Heikoku said. It's essentially the same principle. If you prefer to not use something as extreme as a serial killer, say you receive a parking fine for being parked on the same street as someone who parked illegally. You're not sending a good message when you teach students collective punishment is acceptable.
The principle of parking may be similar, but not serial killer. It's an absurd comparison and is a strawman.
Really, it's just ridiculous to make the comparison and makes the poster of such an analogy look foolish, irrational, incompetent and devoid of a sense of proportion.

And one could argue about the parking fine bit too, if one was so inclined.
The OP doesn't make it clear the cause of the class detention, other than whine that some were innocent.
Here's a scenario:
A student (or group) decide to delibrately antagonise the teacher through a variety of methods - say throwing spitballs, paper darts, making stupid noises etc etc when the teacher's back is turned.
The usual things that amuse tiny minds.
The rest of the class find this highly amusing to watch the teacher become increasingly frustrated, upset and angry and do nothing to stop the offender(s) despite the teachers demand for ceasement as well as names of the students involved.
The lesson is ruined, the class disrupted, the teacher ridiculed and bullied.

Only a few students actively took part, yes.
But the others who did not take part revelled in seeing the teacher bullied, did nothing to stop this happening, and did not report the offenders when given the chance.
Could you truly call them innocent in this particular scenario?

Without knowing who the main culprits are, what other action can a teacher take than hold the class in until they own up, or are outed?

Anyone else see Full Metal Jacket? It didn't work very well when the drill instructor tried to force the rest of the platoon to motivate and/or punish Leonard. He just became angry and bitter and homocidal.

Not saying... well, yes, I am saying exactly that. I'm saying to alienate someone from -everyone- around them is psychological warfare, not a punishment. When you know you'll be going to the same class at the same time for an entire year, and you know every single person in that class is pissed off at you, every second of being in that class is a smack to the face and a kick in the ass. No class clown deserves that.

If you're such a terrible teacher to where you have to make the class do your job of keeping the kids in line for you, you need to be fired.

This is all assuming the class went along with it, by the way. Many classes will, instead of turning their vengeance towards the offending students, will be offended and generally pissed off that they would even be threatened because of what someone else is doing, and will therefore hate the teacher with a burning passion, referring to them as assholes and bitches and pricks and possibly making them the butt of many jokes and pranks to come.

So yeah. Don't make the kids do your dirty work for you.

Well, in case you were having problems seeing my point, Szanth just made it clearer.

The principle of parking may be similar, but not serial killer. It's an absurd comparison and is a strawman.
Really, it's just ridiculous to make the comparison and makes the poster of such an analogy look foolish, irrational, incompetent and devoid of a sense of proportion.

And one could argue about the parking fine bit too, if one was so inclined.
The OP doesn't make it clear the cause of the class detention, other than whine that some were innocent.
Here's a scenario:
A student (or group) decide to delibrately antagonise the teacher through a variety of methods - say throwing spitballs, paper darts, making stupid noises etc etc when the teacher's back is turned.
The usual things that amuse tiny minds.
The rest of the class find this highly amusing to watch the teacher become increasingly frustrated, upset and angry and do nothing to stop the offender(s) despite the teachers demand for ceasement as well as names of the students involved.
The lesson is ruined, the class disrupted, the teacher ridiculed and bullied.

Only a few students actively took part, yes.
But the others who did not take part revelled in seeing the teacher bullied, did nothing to stop this happening, and did not report the offenders when given the chance.
Could you truly call them innocent in this particular scenario?

Without knowing who the main culprits are, what other action can a teacher take than hold the class in until they own up, or are outed?

It's different when the teacher is a direct victim. In that case, there are pretty much two things you can do:

1. Punish everyone until they fess up.

2. (The GTO method) Shoot spitballs back at the kids in the class until they tell you who did it.

2 will probably get you named the cool teacher, because you're now seen as one of them. Though this will possibly get you in trouble.

Only a few students actively took part, yes.
But the others who did not take part revelled in seeing the teacher bullied, did nothing to stop this happening, and did not report the offenders when given the chance.
Could you truly call them innocent in this particular scenario?

Without knowing who the main culprits are, what other action can a teacher take than hold the class in until they own up, or are outed?

1- If a teacher doesn't have the ability to uphold their own authority, they have no deal teaching in the first place.

2- If a student disagrees with them but can't afford to do anything due to the fact that he'd get beaten up if he did, yes, he's innocent, and nothing you say will change that.

3- No, a teacher can't hold the class in this scenario. Even assuming that would be effective, the effect would be psychological warfare, not punishment. And I, were I a parent, would reserve the right to wage psychological warfare on a teacher that wages it on my kid. Only I'm MUCH better at psychological warfare than most.

4- The kids are there to study and learn. The teacher is there to manage the class. Unless you're suggesting the kids get part of the teacher's salary, the students have no obligation whatsoever to manage the class. Especially at the risk of being ostracized by the other students due to snitching.

5- You're assuming the teacher wouldn't EVER see who did it throughout the whole class. Big assumption.

6- Before you ask, I was a substitute teacher. I became known as the "cool" one, and my methods to ensure, for instance, talkers would get quiet worked very well, and didn't even involve punishment or reward.

I said: I'd not punish the entire class for one troublemaker. The guy asked what would I do should there be no way to detect who the perpetrator was. I proposed making up to the victim somehow, since I can't, as I said, punish the entire class. If it were up to me though, there would be someone to discipline the students in the classroom, BESIDES the teacher. To watch them. Regardless, you said that wouldn't work. Okay, what would you do that didn't include punishing the whole class and - again - rallying them against the victim?
Now we're getting somewhere. Thank you for answering my post.
What you're suggesting just wouldn't work. You can't arbitrarily assign grades based on your feelings towards a student - regardless of whether they've been bullied or not.
Students of all ages, but especially teenagers, have very black and white worlds when it comes to the concepts of fairness and equity. And they're very quick to jump onto anything that they perceive as 'unfair'.

And this would include seeing you, as the teacher, favouring one student and giving them better marks. They wouldn't see it the way you're suggesting (of "s/he was bullied, so s/he deserves some form of reimbursement for her/his pain").
They would (especially the bullies, but also nearly everyone else) see it simply as favouritism.
And indeed it is.
This will just lead to even futher problems, as it doesn't address anything.

As for letting the victim get their own back, again that would just look totally unfair to the other students and reinforce the victim's position as a Teacher's Pet. Also you're putting your own job at risk taking this course of action - a complaint from a parent about this would most likely lose you your job.
And again, it doesn't solve the real problem.

What would I do?
What I do every year.
The first lesson of the year I spend setting a list of class rules that both me and the students could agree on, including the levels of punishments for various indiscretions. Further I have the students copy them into their books so they all know exactly what to expect. (As well, we decide on what rewards we can have and what we need to do to achieve them)
Everything is explicitly stated in black and white terms so they know exactly what to expect.
Including the fact that the classroom is not a democracy. At the same time, if any student does feel hard done by they're very welcome to contact me outside of class time to tell me why they feel that way and we will work something out.
I give them the scenario I mentioned above and ask them what they think should happen.
Invariably the consensus is that the entire class be kept in during recess. Because they've come up with this punishment, you know what? The situation almost never arises.
When it has, I've kept them in for a a couple of minutes to remind them of the rules and punishments we'd agreed on. I then told them that I want to only punish the ones responsible no-one else, so they have until the next lesson to either come forward themselves or the other students can point them out to me - either by seeing me later, or even by emailing me (since they have my school email address).
I then let them go.
Because they know that if neither happens, the entire class will be held in at the next lesson.


Punishments only work if you're consistant and have them take responsibility for their actions.

and were the students imprisioned?

What was the punishment?
What was the crime?
That isn't the point. It's a time in their lives when they are very impressionable. Sending conflicting signals makes a lifetime of difference. And then some, as they pass on the misguided notions in concert with the schools to their progeny. The laws function such that each accepts the consequences of his actions. The school system functions such to allow teachers to punish all as a consequence of a few. But no, they weren't imprisoned. Because the laws don't provide for imprisonment in such cases. But the response was appropriate to the offence, just as the laws work, but it was not appropriate to the classroom community, if you really want to scale this differently by bringing extreme punishments into it. Bear in mind I said it was like false imprisonment, not that it was false imprisonment.
THIS WORLD IS CORRUPT!
Which is why we, the Idealogical Organization ACROSS, will fix it! EXCEL!
Who are you?:confused:
You're right.

But those "maybe's" should be changed to "probably will's".

That's what "may be" means in grown-up writing. :p

Now we're getting somewhere. Thank you for answering my post.
What you're suggesting just wouldn't work. You can't arbitrarily assign grades based on your feelings towards a student - regardless of whether they've been bullied or not.
Students of all ages, but especially teenagers, have very black and white worlds when it comes to the concepts of fairness and equity. And they're very quick to jump onto anything that they perceive as 'unfair'.

And this would include seeing you, as the teacher, favouring one student and giving them better marks. They wouldn't see it the way you're suggesting (of "s/he was bullied, so s/he deserves some form of reimbursement for her/his pain").
They would (especially the bullies, but also nearly everyone else) see it simply as favouritism.
And indeed it is.
This will just lead to even futher problems, as it doesn't address anything.

As for letting the victim get their own back, again that would just look totally unfair to the other students and reinforce the victim's position as a Teacher's Pet. Also you're putting your own job at risk taking this course of action - a complaint from a parent about this would most likely lose you your job.
And again, it doesn't solve the real problem.

What would I do?
What I do every year.
The first lesson of the year I spend setting a list of class rules that both me and the students could agree on, including the levels of punishments for various indiscretions. Further I have the students copy them into their books so they all know exactly what to expect. (As well, we decide on what rewards we can have and what we need to do to achieve them)
Everything is explicitly stated in black and white terms so they know exactly what to expect.
Including the fact that the classroom is not a democracy. At the same time, if any student does feel hard done by they're very welcome to contact me outside of class time to tell me why they feel that way and we will work something out.
I give them the scenario I mentioned above and ask them what they think should happen.
Invariably the consensus is that the entire class be kept in during recess. Because they've come up with this punishment, you know what? The situation almost never arises.
When it has, I've kept them in for a a couple of minutes to remind them of the rules and punishments we'd agreed on. I then told them that I want to only punish the ones responsible no-one else, so they have until the next lesson to either come forward themselves or the other students can point them out to me - either by seeing me later, or even by emailing me (since they have my school email address).
I then let them go.
Because they know that if neither happens, the entire class will be held in at the next lesson.


Punishments only work if you're consistant and have them take responsibility for their actions.

Define "a few minutes" and you may or not sell it. As a student, though, I learned first hand that actually applying the ACTUAL punishment doesn't work for the victim. Why? Because the first reaction of one of my bullies was an attempt to rally the class against ME.

That's what "may be" means in grown-up writing. :p

*Hands FD a cookie.*

If you're such a terrible teacher to where you have to make the class do your job of keeping the kids in line for you, you need to be fired.
4- The kids are there to study and learn. The teacher is there to manage the class. Unless you're suggesting the kids get part of the teacher's salary, the students have no obligation whatsoever to manage the class. Especially at the risk of being ostracized by the other students due to snitching.
So you're both saying that students should never take responsibility for their own actions?
great way to teach there. awesome.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but weren't you saying something about empowerment earlier?

btw, not wanting to sound patronising but a substitute teacher is the easiest job in the world. There's no comparison between that and real teaching. You're always the 'cool' guy.
Why?
You (almost subconciously) never enforce strict rules because not doing so just makes the lesson pass a lot quicker. This does make the students more relaxed and amiable initially because you're not demanding them to work as hard as their real teacher. And because you're not there long, their behaviour doesn't deteriorate into chaos needing severe punishments being dealt out.

No strenuous demands of work + letting them get away with more = 'cool' guy.

Even if you do get lumbered with the class for Hell, it's ok. The fact you don't have them for the rest of the year means you just let them get away with it, cause you're out of there soon. Avoid confrotation, count the minutes and think of your paycheck. It's what every subby does (including me I might add).

And that's what makes you the 'cool' guy.
Not your teaching skills.
Not your class management skills.
Simply because you're much more lenient on them than the teacher who has them for a year is.

Sir,

The Romans practiced decimation. Perhaps killing hapless youths would not be a good thing but whipping instead perhaps might instill some discipline...DISCIPLINE I say!!! To many of todays youth have had too easy! To the coal mines! With no canneries! NO CANNERIES! Just buckets and pick axes. AXES!!

Yours educationally,

Col Blimp

Tunbridge Wells
Pretty sure I mentioned something like that. :p
LOL!

Yes, barely. We won the skirmishes entirely. She held us in detention three WEEKS because of one kid, who himself said, "Punish me -- no one else was involved," to which her answer was, "I'm punishing EVERYONE -- maybe they'll get you to behave."

Bad move.

Battle 1: The digital watches. They were brand spankin' new back then in the dawn of time. One kid in class said we should set all the alarms to go off at the same time. A future mod opined that we knew what order we sat in the class -- we should set them to go off three seconds apart. A sound version of the wave, so to speak.

Battle 2: Airforce. Every SINGLE student folded 10 paper airplanes at lunch. Every time she turned to write on the board, 35 airplanes launched. She was ankle deep in them before the period was over.

Battle 3: Statues. We all sat in class staring ahead, hand folded, without saying anything, moving from that position, or acknowledging that she existed in any way. After that one, she left the room and sent the dean in. When he asked why we were acting like such assholes, we explained that since we had been punished three weeks for doing nothing, we were going to earn every second of detention we'd got. He convinced us to call a truce and was good to his word of making sure we did NOT get any more detention from her for ANY reason. Of course, he said if we got out of line, HE was going to kick our asses -- and we knew he could and would, so we were polite for the rest of the term.

And now you know why I don't agree with punishing the whole class for one student.

ROFLMFAO! You are my idol. :fluffle:

*Hands FD a cookie.*

*snatches cookie, then flees to exam*

That's what "may be" means in grown-up writing. :p

In my experience, when a "grown-up" says maybe, it means "hopefully saying this will make you shut up, and if I'm lucky you'll forget about it later".

So you're both saying that students should never take responsibility for their own actions?
great way to teach there. awesome.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but weren't you saying something about empowerment earlier?

btw, not wanting to sound patronising but a substitute teacher is the easiest job in the world. There's no comparison between that and real teaching. You're always the 'cool' guy.
Why?
You (almost subconciously) never enforce strict rules because not doing so just makes the lesson pass a lot quicker. This does make the students more relaxed and amiable initially because you're not demanding them to work as hard as their real teacher. And because you're not there long, their behaviour doesn't deteriorate into chaos needing severe punishments being dealt out.

No strenuous demands of work + letting them get away with more = 'cool' guy.

Even if you do get lumbered with the class for Hell, it's ok. The fact you don't have them for the rest of the year means you just let them get away with it, cause you're out of there soon. Avoid confrotation, count the minutes and think of your paycheck. It's what every subby does (including me I might add).

And that's what makes you the 'cool' guy.
Not your teaching skills.
Not your class management skills.
Simply because you're much more lenient on them than the teacher who has them for a year is.

Never claimed otherwise.

Plus, yes, I'm all in favor of one taking responsibility for THEIR OWN actions, but not the actions of OTHERS. That's what this whole debate is about. Empowerment is taking responsibility for your own actions. Disempowerment is taking responsibilities for the actions of others.

In my experience, when a "grown-up" says maybe, it means "hopefully saying this will make you shut up, and if I'm lucky you'll forget about it later".

Yeah, but in WRITING it's something else. :p

So you're both saying that students should never take responsibility for their own actions?
great way to teach there. awesome.

They should never take responsibility for the actions of other students.

Not always, trying to teach how to work together and get things done as a group is a goal in education.

The problem being that the US system is set up against that in the first place.
Education should teach to function in both group settings and individually.
I have no idea what you're defending, as your post seems more like "teachers, students, something, I don't like librulz", but I, a liberal, and most liberal people, are against punishing the rest of the group for what one member did.

Nice threadjack, though, does it bite?

ROFLMFAO!

How dare they get paid more according to seniority and experience!
No other industry pays it's employers more the longer they work there and the more experience they accumulate!
right?
Good point, but there's more to being a teacher than doing it for years. I've known bad teachers who had been doing their jobs for 25 years.
...out of curiosity, would you plan on actually teaching your class at some point? Me, I think covering the material you had to skip in order to waste time searching for a cell phone is a bit more important than making sure the kids have the exact same total number of free minutes per week...

As for the original topic, while I agree that a teacher choosing to punish an entire class for something one known culprit did is stupid, I also think that there are circumstances when it is sensible to make behaving well popular. For example, I remember one day in my junior English class when most of the students were trying to have an intelligent discussion about As I Lay Dying, but a group of girls in the back felt like they were entitled to maintain their own personal conversation at a fairly high volume. Our teacher told them repeatedly to be quiet, but they were far too "cool" to obey teachers. After enduring several minutes of this crap, he explained that the class could either be quiet and have an interesting discussion, or we could spend the rest of the hour diagramming sentences. Now, I have no doubt those girls couldn't have cared less what they were ignoring, but the rest of us did, and the next time one of them started talking, the entire rest of the class turned and glared at her. That got through in a way that anything our teacher could say simply couldn't. "Shut up while other people are speaking, or the whole class diagrams sentences for an hour" became an established rule in that class, and because it was established, it never had to be used. "Shut up or I'll give you a chance to prove your extremely cool rebelliousness to your friends by kicking you out of class" would never have worked half as well.

That's assuming the students care. Try a class in which none of the students want to be there.

I've known bad teachers who had been doing their jobs for 25 years.

The worst professor of my faculty is about 60. She teaches English Literature-related courses, is terrible at doing so and can't even pronounce the words correctly in English. Detail, she gave the classes in English. Well, HER English. (We used to chat among themselves that "ziz iz how she speekz"...). No, she's not French.

Simple: "Shut up or I'm handing you, (name), you, (name), you, (name), you, (name), and you, (name) detentions." Should that not work, it'd be "leave, but you'll stay here for detention, if you don't I'm taking away X from your grade". There are other punishments that don't include turning your class into Shirley Jackson's Lottery.


I don't know what Shirley Jackson's "Lottery" is, but you seem to be ignoring something rather important - this threat worked. Neither I nor the other students felt the teacher was being unfair; it's damn hard to have a coherent discussion when the person behind you is rattling on at full volume about exactly how drunk she intends to get this weekend, after all. As for your alternatives, getting kicked out of class is "cool," while having everyone in class think you're acting like a selfish ass isn't so much. As for your "I'll knock points off your grade" option, exactly what will you take points from? Will the student suddenly have gotten a C on an essay where she earned a B? A 70% on a quiz where she answered 85% of the questions correctly? Because, to me, that's a hell of a lot more unfair than simply stating that unless the class as a whole manages to obey classroom rules, the class as a whole will no longer be able to do things they enjoy.


As for "searching for the cell phone", it'd take no more than 20 minutes. It's not hard to rush a bit for the time spent at this.

So, okay, you waste 20 minutes of class time on that, and then presumably waste 5 or 10 minutes "letting them go early" the next day. Apparently, you feel that, as a teacher, you had nothing useful to teach them during those 30 minutes. I have not met very many competent teachers who would willingly skip over 30 minutes worth of material.

That's assuming the students care. Try a class in which none of the students want to be there.

Not exactly "assuming," since I'm talking about a real class. ;) Obviously, a good teacher uses different methods with different students and classes. One wouldn't instruct a group of third-graders the same way one instructs a class of grad students, nor a class in "remedial English for people who were busy throwing things at each other the first time they took the class" the same way as, oh, say, an advanced American Lit course for students who mostly really like discussing Faulkner and Melville. :)

I don't know what Shirley Jackson's "Lottery" is, but you seem to be ignoring something rather important - this threat worked. Neither I nor the other students felt the teacher was being unfair; it's damn hard to have a coherent discussion when the person behind you is rattling on at full volume about exactly how drunk she intends to get this weekend, after all. As for your alternatives, getting kicked out of class is "cool," while having everyone in class think you're acting like a selfish ass isn't so much. As for your "I'll knock points off your grade" option, exactly what will you take points from? Will the student suddenly have gotten a C on an essay where she earned a B? A 70% on a quiz where she answered 85% of the questions correctly? Because, to me, that's a hell of a lot more unfair than simply stating that unless the class as a whole manages to obey classroom rules, the class as a whole will no longer be able to do things they enjoy.

Isn't there such a thing as participation marks in the US? Regardless, there are other means - even because punishing the class will get a smarter class angry at the teacher. I would AT LEAST make it so the students stood to GAIN something from it.

And "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson is a gothic work. Jackson is said by some to have been influenced by Faulkner. Well, search for it. You might like the material, and want to use it in your class.

Linkie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shirley_Jackson

And the text: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lottery

I know, Wikipedia isn't a "credible" source, but I don't feel like scanning my notes on her. :p

Education should teach to function in both group settings and individually.
Indeed, and something Heikoku, in his rightous ranting, is forgetting. Group punishment is a real life event.

Forget the stupid over-the-top events of a serial killer or consentration camp and think on this, if you're assigned to part of a group for an office project (whatever that project is) and you don't do it, the group is usually one who gets punished somehow.

Part of the idea of group work is to teach this to children, often times because they haven't had to work though things in a group before.

I will say that since we STILL don't know what happened with the OP, I can't say if punishing the class was aceptable or not, but I will say that, yes, as a teacher there are times when doing so works, if done under certain events and not just because I got fed up with the class.

Indeed, and something Heikoku, in his rightous ranting, is forgetting. Group punishment is a real life event.

Forget the stupid over-the-top events of a serial killer or consentration camp and think on this, if you're assigned to part of a group for an office project (whatever that project is) and you don't do it, the group is usually one who gets punished somehow.

Part of the idea of group work is to teach this to children, often times because they haven't had to work though things in a group before.

I will say that since we STILL don't know what happened with the OP, I can't say if punishing the class was aceptable or not, but I will say that, yes, as a teacher there are times when doing so works, if done under certain events and not just because I got fed up with the class.

There's a difference between giving a low grade because a group worked poorly even if one or two within it tried their best, which is acceptable because the WORK didn't get done, and this HAPPENS in real life, and "punishing everyone because X was annoying" - much like the difference between demoting an entire group because it, as a whole, failed to achieve something in a company and firing four people because one of them committed sexual harassment. The first happens in the real world, the second doesn't, or at least shouldn't. We are taught in society that, if we're dealt unfair punishment, we get monetary damages. School should not teach that unfair punishment is acceptable.

And, again, the serial killer idea works under the same principle. But, if that's too over-the-top for you, use the example of getting a ticket because your car is parked in the same street as someone that parked illegally.

There's a difference between giving a low grade because a group worked poorly even if one or two within it tried their best, which is acceptable because the WORK didn't get done, and this HAPPENS in real life, and "punishing everyone because X was annoying" - much like the difference between demoting an entire group because it, as a whole, failed to achieve something in a company and firing four people because one of them committed sexual harassment. The first happens in the real world, the second doesn't, or at least shouldn't. We are taught in society that, if we're dealt unfair punishment, we get monetary damages. School should not teach that unfair punishment is acceptable.

And, again, the serial killer idea works under the same principle. But, if that's too over-the-top for you, use the example of getting a ticket because your car is parked in the same street as someone that parked illegally.
Go re-read what I said, the notion of group punishment works when used under certain circumstances, NOT just because I'm fed up with my class (Tempting, but no). This would be situations were the group SHOULD be the one to enforce the rules because, scarrily enough, that's what they're going to be doing later on in their lives. Closer to helping a criminal or bearing false witness than your notion of randomingly punishing a group of students.

Simple: "Shut up or I'm handing you, (name), you, (name), you, (name), you, (name), and you, (name) detentions." Should that not work, it'd be "leave, but you'll stay here for detention, if you don't I'm taking away X from your grade". There are other punishments that don't include turning your class into Shirley Jackson's Lottery.

As for "searching for the cell phone", it'd take no more than 20 minutes. It's not hard to rush a bit for the time spent at this.

Also. Illegal. Search.

A classmate of mine told me about something that happened on her school bus lately, and this thread made me think about it, even though this didn't happen in a classroom. A few students on her bus consistently misbehave, and the bus driver snapped and drove them all the way back to school and dropped everyone off there. I think it was one of the busses that goes the furthest away from the school, too. That just doesn't sound fair to me, but it's probably slightly different from what's being described in this thread.

I think it would be unfair if by searching innocent students (in one of the examples, I think it was the cell phone one. I'm not sure, but I read it this morning and didn't get a chance) you held them in class long enough to make them late to their next class and didn't give them a pass. Then they would get a detention and that would be really unfair.

Anyone else see Full Metal Jacket? It didn't work very well when the drill instructor tried to force the rest of the platoon to motivate and/or punish Leonard. He just became angry and bitter and homocidal.
Because nothing quite backs your argument up than using a fictional account about fictional characters from a fictional movie.
Far better than using...oh, I don't know...facts and real-life examples.

ROFLMFAO! You are my idol. :fluffle:

Remember though: I went over to the Dark Side and BECAME a teacher.

Go re-read what I said, the notion of group punishment works when used under certain circumstances, NOT just because I'm fed up with my class (Tempting, but no). This would be situations were the group SHOULD be the one to enforce the rules because, scarrily enough, that's what they're going to be doing later on in their lives. Closer to helping a criminal or bearing false witness than your notion of randomingly punishing a group of students.

In that case, not only I never disagreed with you, you never disagreed with me. :p

But, if that's too over-the-top for you, use the example of getting a ticket because your car is parked in the same street as someone that parked illegally.

If you're on the same street as someone who's parked illegally....

Also. Illegal. Search.

I had no idea law was this involved in schools in the USA. Well, okay, I'd tell the students to either own up or I'd call 911 - because then it'd not be MY matter to deal with, but an ACTUAL LAW being broken. It'd not be me dispensing punishment, and if the police inconvenienced anyone, the parents could sue.

If you're on the same street as someone who's parked illegally....

He could be in front of an unpaid parking meter and I could be in front of a paid one. He could be in front of a fire hydrant and I could be in front of nothing. And so on.

Remember though: I went over to the Dark Side and BECAME a teacher.

But I'm sure you never practiced blanket punishments - even because you learned that teachers can be beaten. :p

Because nothing quite backs your argument up than using a fictional account about fictional characters from a fictional movie.
Far better than using...oh, I don't know...facts and real-life examples.

Fact: When I was the victim of one thing, when I was 14, and the teacher gave the class a blanket punishment, one of my bullies attempted to rally the class against me.

Fact: When Kat was on high school, her teacher learned a valuable lesson.

And so on.

A classmate of mine told me about something that happened on her school bus lately, and this thread made me think about it, even though this didn't happen in a classroom. A few students on her bus consistently misbehave, and the bus driver snapped and drove them all the way back to school and dropped everyone off there. I think it was one of the busses that goes the furthest away from the school, too. That just doesn't sound fair to me, but it's probably slightly different from what's being described in this thread.

And that's why this moron is a bus driver, not a teacher. And no, it's not different.

What prevented the well-behaved ones from simply not LEAVING the bus? Did they never hear of civil disobedience?

I had no idea law was this involved in schools in the USA. Well, okay, I'd tell the students to either own up or I'd call 911 - because then it'd not be MY matter to deal with, but an ACTUAL LAW being broken. It'd not be me dispensing punishment, and if the police inconvenienced anyone, the parents could sue.
"Students don't leave their rights at the schoolyard gate" - US Supreme Court.

It's complicated, there are times when teachers have to call the police, there are things we can do that normally we cannot, and a whole host of rules and regulations.

"Students don't leave their rights at the schoolyard gate" - US Supreme Court.

It's complicated, there are times when teachers have to call the police, there are things we can do that normally we cannot, and a whole host of rules and regulations.

Well, yes, but still, in this case, calling the police would leave the notion of "punishing the group" in the hands of the policemen. If they felt like they were treated unfairly, parents can sue the state. Basically, not the teacher's problem anymore. Sore de owari da.

And that's why this moron is a bus driver, not a teacher. And no, it's not different.

What prevented the well-behaved ones from simply not LEAVING the bus? Did they never hear of civil disobedience?

Ok, I wasn't sure.

I don't know. I guess the bus driver wouldn't have taken them anywhere, or would have suspended them or given them a referral or something.

Ok, I wasn't sure.

I don't know. I guess the bus driver wouldn't have taken them anywhere, or would have suspended them or given them a referral or something.

I don't know, school bus drivers aren't that empowered here. Maybe to prevent that exact kind of jackassery.

Well, yes, but still, in this case, calling the police would leave the notion of "punishing the group" in the hands of the policemen. If they felt like they were treated unfairly, parents can sue the state. Basically, not the teacher's problem anymore. Sore de owari da.
Sadly, no. Because A. Teachers are supposed to act in loco parentas (In place of the parent) and B. Calling the police elevates what could be a 5 minute "I'm going to keep you here till the one what did it owns up" detention after school into a much more serious affair with much more drastic consiquenses. That's the responcibility of the teacher in the classroom. I'd rather not send one of my students into the criminal correction system unless I am forced to.

Sadly, no. Because A. Teachers are supposed to act in loco parentas (In place of the parent) and B. Calling the police elevates what could be a 5 minute "I'm going to keep you here till the one what did it owns up" detention after school into a much more serious affair with much more drastic consiquenses. That's the responcibility of the teacher in the classroom. I'd rather not send one of my students into the criminal correction system unless I am forced to.

Which is why I'd say "either whoever did owns up to it, therefore making it a 5-minute problem, or I up the ante by calling the police and THEIR disciplinary action is a tad worse than whatever I could throw at you.". Not in such terms, but... As for keeping the whole class 5 extra minutes, I'd make it up to them later on.

Which is why I'd say "either whoever did owns up to it, therefore making it a 5-minute problem, or I up the ante by calling the police and THEIR disciplinary action is a tad worse than whatever I could throw at you.". Not in such terms, but... As for keeping the whole class 5 extra minutes, I'd make it up to them later on.
I wouldn't. The threat of the police is a very serious one, and one I don't want to use unless it is a very serious situation. I'd also be more worried about the message that sends to my kids; namely one of 'If you don't do what I say when I say it, I'll have you thrown in jail'. I'd say that message is a bit worse than the kids feeling unfairly treated by a group punishment, ne?