smacking

[SS4]

Who on earth said anything about teachers looking through students phones?

How would the school exercise its responsibility to prevent cyber-bullying? Or the school does nothing of course. That was in reply to:

Oh and just to clarify, anybody bullying outside the school gates still came under the schools jurisdiction

 

[londiscape]

Who on earth said anything about teachers looking through students phones?

If they don't, they certainly should, for evidence of cyber-bullying which leads to suicide in some cases. Children should have no expectation of privacy until the point when they are no longer "dependents", they cannot be trusted enough.

For the same reason why any responsible parent should install a content filter on their home network, and not allow children to have computing devices in their bedrooms.

 

[TheKnightWho]

If they don't, they certainly should, for evidence of cyber-bullying which leads to suicide in some cases. Children should have no expectation of privacy until the point when they are no longer "dependents", they cannot be trusted enough.

For the same reason why any responsible parent should install a content filter on their home network, and not allow children to have computing devices in their bedrooms.

That's an extremely unhealthy attitude to promote in children. There is a balance, and monitoring phones is too far.

 

[Antman]

How would the school exercise its responsibility to prevent cyber-bullying? Or the school does nothing of course. That was in reply to:

Well quite obviously anybody who has been cyber bullied would show the evidence on their phone to a teacher or headmaster who would take appropriate action.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Well quite obviously anybody who has been cyber bullied would show the evidence on their phone to a teacher or headmaster who would take appropriate action.

That's assuming they are confident enough to come forward. There's always a massive incentive not to.

This isn't an easy balance to strike.

 

[SS4]

If they don't, they certainly should, for evidence of cyber-bullying which leads to suicide in some cases. Children should have no expectation of privacy until the point when they are no longer "dependents", they cannot be trusted enough.

For the same reason why any responsible parent should install a content filter on their home network, and not allow children to have computing devices in their bedrooms.

By giving your children no expectation of privacy the chances are you'll make them more secretive. I do agree that content filters should be a parent's responsibility.

That's assuming they are confident enough to come forward. There's always a massive incentive not to.

This isn't an easy balance to strike.

One that ultimately falls out of the boundaries of this thread.

 

[Geezertronic]

Having travelled on the Travel WM busses during rush hour a few years ago, I can safely say that there is a ?minority/majority? of youth today who are not respectful to one another and other people. The amount of kids playing music loud on their phone, shouting & screaming & swearing, constantly ringing the bell, and being generally disruptive amazed me to the extent that I ended up finding another form of transport (train as it goes).

My kids are nothing like those kids and I think where they grow up and the behaviour of their parents plays a big part. My kids used to attend a senior school near where we live and now attend a secondary school in a more affluent area and the difference in the kids is amazing to see. Yes they still cause mischief and shout & scream but there is a more respectful atmosphere. It is also visible to see that the kids parents in the main are a lot older than the parents at the previous school and that may have an impact as well

 

[Antman]

Having travelled on the Travel WM busses during rush hour a few years ago, I can safely say that there is a ?minority/majority? of youth today who are not respectful to one another and other people. The amount of kids playing music loud on their phone, shouting & screaming & swearing, constantly ringing the bell, and being generally disruptive amazed me to the extent that I ended up finding another form of transport (train as it goes).

My kids are nothing like those kids and I think where they grow up and the behaviour of their parents plays a big part. My kids used to attend a senior school near where we live and now attend a secondary school in a more affluent area and the difference in the kids is amazing to see. Yes they still cause mischief and shout & scream but there is a more respectful atmosphere. It is also visible to see that the kids parents in the main are a lot older than the parents at the previous school and that may have an impact as well

It's much the same on the buses in London after school. All a far cry from my school days when if you misbehaved you were off the bus and would probably be summonsed to the headmasters office the next morning to explain your behaviour.

 

[TheKnightWho]

It's much the same on the buses in London after school. All a far cry from my school days when if you misbehaved you were off the bus and would probably be summonsed to the headmasters office the next morning to explain your behaviour.

Which happens all the time these days as well. You know, there's not all that much misbehaving of the type you're talking about in the fancy private school near me, and I'm pretty sure they don't beat the kids there. It's proof you can instill good behaviour in kids regardless.

And rough schools have existed for a long time; just because you didn't go to one doesn't mean they didn't exist.

 

[fowler9]

It's much the same on the buses in London after school. All a far cry from my school days when if you misbehaved you were off the bus and would probably be summonsed to the headmasters office the next morning to explain your behaviour.

My god. Nonsense. It was much the same ten, twenty, thirty and forty years ago. You live in a fantasy realm if you think kids are any different now from a lack of smacking. The trouble makers all still come from violent backgrounds with poor discipline. You sound like one of Monty Pythons Yorkshiremen.

 

[Antman]

My god. Nonsense. It was much the same ten, twenty, thirty and forty years ago. You live in a fantasy realm if you think kids are any different now from a lack of smacking. The trouble makers all still come from violent backgrounds with poor discipline. You sound like one of Monty Pythons Yorkshiremen.

You're the one living in the fantasy world, I'm not even going to bother replying. I can accept different opinions but not claims that are simply ludicrous.

Meanwhile back in the real world the police were called to a mass brawl in Brentford in West London involving school girls!

 

[TheKnightWho]

You're the one living in the fantasy world, I'm not even going to bother replying. I can accept different opinions but not claims that are simply ludicrous.

Meanwhile back in the real world the police were called to a mass brawl in Brentford in West London involving school girls!

Violence existing in schools 40 years ago is ludicrous?

Have you ever heard of the term rose-tinted spectacles? You still haven't really addressed the point that smacking/physical violence isn't actually the best solution in any situation either.

Have you ever read Roald Dahl's Boy? If any teachers in that were around today they'd lose their jobs in a second. Things are getting better. Seriously.

 

[Oswyntail]

Antman,
So we should beat our children and deny them any privacy? Tell me, when are we going to treat them like humans? Why do you expect them to respect you (it is becoming very hard, I admit) when you show not an atom of respect for them?

 

[londiscape]

Which happens all the time these days as well. You know, there's not all that much misbehaving of the type you're talking about in the fancy private school near me, and I'm pretty sure they don't beat the kids there. It's proof you can instill good behaviour in kids regardless.

And rough schools have existed for a long time; just because you didn't go to one doesn't mean they didn't exist.

Most primary and secondary schools (state and private) will send letters home if the child is caught misbehaving, and if repeated, suspend or expel the child.

For private school kids the parents are paying several £k per annum for said child's education, would not want to risk the social shame of having their child expelled from a prestigious school, and therefore I suspect would be more likely to discipline the badly behaved little brat as a result (which may or may not include a beating). Thus, the threat of the "letter home" effectively curbs bad behaviour to an extent.

But how often do we hear about how the reverse is true in some state schools, whereby the parent turns up at the school and has a tantrum because the evil teacher dared to put her darling little angel in detention. Thus child learns that there are no consequences to bad behaviour, it gets worse, and they turn into the nasty, feral, yobby teenagers to which I referred in a previous post.

 

[SS4]

Most primary and secondary schools (state and private) will send letters home if the child is caught misbehaving, and if repeated, suspend or expel the child.

For private school kids the parents are paying several £k per annum for said child's education, would not want to risk the social shame of having their child expelled from a prestigious school, and therefore I suspect would be more likely to discipline the badly behaved little brat as a result (which may or may not include a beating). Thus, the threat of the "letter home" effectively curbs bad behaviour to an extent.

But how often do we hear about how the reverse is true in some state schools, whereby the parent turns up at the school and has a tantrum because the evil teacher dared to put her darling little angel in detention. Thus child learns that there are no consequences to bad behaviour, it gets worse, and they turn into the nasty, feral, yobby teenagers to which I referred in a previous post.

That says a lot more about inequality than parental behaviour

 

[londiscape]

Antman,
So we should beat our children and deny them any privacy? Tell me, when are we going to treat them like humans? Why do you expect them to respect you (it is becoming very hard, I admit) when you show not an atom of respect for them?

I think it was me, rather than Antman, who suggested that we should deny children privacy.

To clarify, I am referring mainly to computing and communications. I believe that no child should be permitted access to communications (internet, phone etc) without the ability to monitor and, where appropriate, filter the content of those communications. The prevalence of cyberbullying shows that the young cannot be trusted with the internet, especially social media, without an eye being kept on them.

In school, to not monitor and filter children's internet access on school devices is tantamount to failure of duty of care. And children's own smartphones should be banned and confiscated if brought into school, in my opinion.

At home, it would help if parents kept computing devices out of the child's bedroom, where they can get up to goodness-knows-what, and in family areas of the house, where parent and child can "interact" with each other. And don't buy kids their own smartphone, they don't need one.

 

[rg177]

Children should have no expectation of privacy until the point when they are no longer "dependents", they cannot be trusted enough.

For the same reason why any responsible parent should install a content filter on their home network, and not allow children to have computing devices in their bedrooms.

So as a 16 year old high school student, you believe that I can't be trusted and should be constantly monitored simply because I'm still living with my parents?

You can't tar every young person with the same brush.

 

[fowler9]

You're the one living in the fantasy world, I'm not even going to bother replying. I can accept different opinions but not claims that are simply ludicrous.

Meanwhile back in the real world the police were called to a mass brawl in Brentford in West London involving school girls!

"I'm not even going to bother replying". You just did reply. Come on mate, have a word with yourself, in a country where loads of middle to older age politicians and celebs are finally being brought to book are you honestly saying that the way people were brought up back in the day was better?

 

[90019]

It's much the same on the buses in London after school. All a far cry from my school days when if you misbehaved you were off the bus and would probably be summonsed to the headmasters office the next morning to explain your behaviour.

Kids still get kicked off buses for misbehaving (as do adults).

For private school kids the parents are paying several £k per annum for said child's education, would not want to risk the social shame of having their child expelled from a prestigious school, and therefore I suspect would be more likely to discipline the badly behaved little brat as a result (which may or may not include a beating). Thus, the threat of the "letter home" effectively curbs bad behaviour to an extent.

The number of kids that get shunted between private schools after being expelled tells a different story.

 

[muz379]

There has to be some degree of punishment for kids in school, as you need a way to make them understand that the real-world doesn't tolerate certain types of behaviour. You obviously want to understand your kids and see why they behave in the ways that they do, but that only works to a certain point. The issue about embarrassing them is not mercilessly mocking them in front of their peers, which would be absolutely unacceptable; it's done in a way that is relatively light-hearted and makes them understand that actually you're on their side and want what's good for them, but also shows them that you're better than them at their own game than they are. So long as you aren't targetting one or two kids you can generally have a very positive effect on the class with it.

If you counter that with a strict attitude that you can draw out when necessary, they realise that the choice is between an easy-going, relatively fun teacher or a strict, boring and annoying teacher, and that it's their power to choose. That's the key thing here: you keep discipline in your class by punishing them when necessary, but you simply provide them with an incentive to not act up in the first place. That is absolutely doable with 99% of kids.

Now of course some right-wing people here will bring up cases of teachers being stabbed or abused in the classroom. Frankly, some of those kids need mental help, and a "good caning" or whatever wouldn't change a jot. If you're a kid and you think seriously injuring your teacher is a good idea then your problems are a lot bigger than what a school can normally deal with.

I still disagree that even mildly mocking them in front of their peers is no better than forms of physical punishment . What might seem like a trivial embarassment to you as a teacher might be miles worse to the pupil .

Lets put it this way Im sure if the headteacher came into the staffroom and trivially mocked a teacher in front of the other staff about poor exam results or a poor observation or something like that the Teacher would rightly feel aggrieved at that conversation aired in public .

I dont think you are going to come to terms to agree with me which is fine people are allowed to dissent . However I am not the one that may one day end up having to justify my actions to a headteacher , or the parents of a child that has alleged that I have bullied it .
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which happens all the time these days as well. You know, there's not all that much misbehaving of the type you're talking about in the fancy private school near me, and I'm pretty sure they don't beat the kids there. It's proof you can instill good behaviour in kids regardless.

And rough schools have existed for a long time; just because you didn't go to one doesn't mean they didn't exist.

Do you know for a fact that the parents of private school pupils dont beat their kids ? .
Any statistics to back that up ?

 

[WelshBluebird]

Meanwhile back in the real world the police were called to a mass brawl in Brentford in West London involving school girls!

And I have no doubt something similar probably happened in decades gone by too.

 

[Tetchytyke]

For private school kids the parents are paying several £k per annum for said child's education, would not want to risk the social shame of having their child expelled from a prestigious school, and therefore I suspect would be more likely to discipline the badly behaved little brat as a result (which may or may not include a beating). Thus, the threat of the "letter home" effectively curbs bad behaviour to an extent.

I used to work in a pastoral role at a very prestigious university, and in my experience the exact opposite was the case. Some of the worst behaviour I've ever seen has come from the ex-public schoolboys in the rugby teams.

It's amazing how bad behaviour from poor pupils is "yobbery" requiring an ASBO, yet the same behaviour from wealthy pupils is seen as "high jinks".

 

[TheKnightWho]

Most primary and secondary schools (state and private) will send letters home if the child is caught misbehaving, and if repeated, suspend or expel the child.

For private school kids the parents are paying several £k per annum for said child's education, would not want to risk the social shame of having their child expelled from a prestigious school, and therefore I suspect would be more likely to discipline the badly behaved little brat as a result (which may or may not include a beating). Thus, the threat of the "letter home" effectively curbs bad behaviour to an extent.

But how often do we hear about how the reverse is true in some state schools, whereby the parent turns up at the school and has a tantrum because the evil teacher dared to put her darling little angel in detention. Thus child learns that there are no consequences to bad behaviour, it gets worse, and they turn into the nasty, feral, yobby teenagers to which I referred in a previous post.

I entirely respect all of those points, and it shows that the problem is far more fundamental than something a simple smacking/caning could ever solve.

 

[Antman]

And I have no doubt something similar probably happened in decades gone by too.

Yes of course it did...........anybody behaving like that on the way home from my school would have been summoned to the headmasters office the next morning.

After school round my way you hear kids in school uniform effing and blinding and quite openly smoking, at least we went behind the bike sheds! It's not the kids fault, I'd have probably have behaved like that myself if I'd been allowed to get away with it.................what's the old saying about cruel to be kind?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Yes of course it did...........anybody behaving like that on the way home from my school would have been summoned to the headmasters office the next morning.

After school round my way you hear kids in school uniform effing and blinding and quite openly smoking, at least we went behind the bike sheds! It's not the kids fault, I'd have probably have behaved like that myself if I'd been allowed to get away with it.................what's the old saying about cruel to be kind?

And you would have heard that 40 years ago as well!

All you're doing is telling everyone that you were privileged for going to a good school. It says nothing about society as a whole or literally anything other than your perception of something that happened decades ago.

I just need to find good kids today (of which there are many) to "prove" that they're all perfect to go by your reasoning.

 

[fowler9]

Yes of course it did...........anybody behaving like that on the way home from my school would have been summoned to the headmasters office the next morning.

After school round my way you hear kids in school uniform effing and blinding and quite openly smoking, at least we went behind the bike sheds! It's not the kids fault, I'd have probably have behaved like that myself if I'd been allowed to get away with it.................what's the old saying about cruel to be kind?

I went to a very good school and went on to a good university and now have a good job. I used to smoke on the top deck of the bus in my uniform (When it was legal to smoke on the top deck of the bus) and I swore as well. Such a rebel, ha ha. This was over 20 years ago. I am friends with several of my old teachers and am not a trouble maker in any criminal sense of the word, perhaps mischievous. The world is not going to hell in a handcart, it is pretty much as it always has been.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Point of order:

My views are neither right or wrong............they are just my views!!

Point of order:

Your views are wrong. And more worryingly, you don't realise they are wrong. Unconscious incompetence is what I believe Maslow would have called it.

 

[Antman]

Point of order:

Your views are wrong. And more worryingly, you don't realise they are wrong. Unconscious incompetence is what I believe Maslow would have called it.

Views cannot be wrong, they are a matter of opinion. Surely that is obvious?

 

[TheKnightWho]

Views cannot be wrong, they are a matter of opinion. Surely that is obvious?

"Views cannot be wrong"

That's it guys, time to shut up shop! Debate is pointless, apparently. Have you listened to yourself?

I get the impression this stems from "everyone is entitled to their opinion", which is perfectly true. That doesn't mean they can't be challenged, and it certainly doesn't mean they're automatically not wrong.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Views cannot be wrong

Yes they can. If you can't (or won't) see that then there's little point continuing.