What do you think should be done about disruptive students in lessons?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by lukas1051
You are absolutely right.
People find it hard to understand that kids are disruptive for a large number of reasons. It's not simply a case of not wanting to learn. Maybe this is true in the case of a 15 year old with GCSEs coming up, they're still being disruptive, they don't care about their exams , they think it's all a big laugh - these are people who aren't bothered about their education. These are the people who if you kicked them out it wouldn't make a difference to their lives.
A 12 year old on the other hand probably hasn't realised the relative importance of their education. A few months before GCSE is when people start to realise that what they're going to do matters, not in year 8. These kids are disruptive because people find it funny. It's important to disclipline them and teach them rather than to give up on them. I know people who a couple of years ago were really disruptive, class clowns, always in trouble... now they're doing their A-levels and planning to go to university. It's not fair just to give up on people after one offence.
I'm in sixth form and no-one is disruptive now. There's no point, we're all there by choice, we're there to get A-levels for whatever reason. If someone is disruptive, the teacher just tells them to get out, it's their education they are jeapordising, and we have realised this by the age of 17.
People find it hard to understand that kids are disruptive for a large number of reasons. It's not simply a case of not wanting to learn. Maybe this is true in the case of a 15 year old with GCSEs coming up, they're still being disruptive, they don't care about their exams , they think it's all a big laugh - these are people who aren't bothered about their education. These are the people who if you kicked them out it wouldn't make a difference to their lives.
A 12 year old on the other hand probably hasn't realised the relative importance of their education. A few months before GCSE is when people start to realise that what they're going to do matters, not in year 8. These kids are disruptive because people find it funny. It's important to disclipline them and teach them rather than to give up on them. I know people who a couple of years ago were really disruptive, class clowns, always in trouble... now they're doing their A-levels and planning to go to university. It's not fair just to give up on people after one offence.
I'm in sixth form and no-one is disruptive now. There's no point, we're all there by choice, we're there to get A-levels for whatever reason. If someone is disruptive, the teacher just tells them to get out, it's their education they are jeapordising, and we have realised this by the age of 17.
There is a word called "habits".
If behaviour like that is tolerated at 15, they will still persist at 15.
Like all students undergo a miraculous change at 15.
I want to see that happen.Original post by lukas1051
Tell ANY 8 year old that they don't have to go to school any more if they don't want, see what they say. Making school optional is a ridiculous idea. Education IS optional after the age of 16, people are old enough to make life decisions by that age. Lots of kids have parents who don't care because they didn't do well at school. Believe it or not, they are very few children who have their life set out, and are eager to learn and get qualifications and get a good job. Children are more interested in making their friends laugh. If school was optional from a young age, no-one would go.
The school leaving age is being raised.
Original post by im so academic
It is an excuse. Why should my education be disrupted because there are people within my class who cannot shut up and this is due to their "home issues"?
Take them out of the classroom then.
And if they don't co-operate?
And if they don't co-operate?
What if they don't want the help?
What if they misbehave again when they are allowed back in?
But if they don't co-operate?
What if they don't change their ways?
What if they refuse to co-operate?
Yes, but think about how their presence in the classroom has impacted on other people's education.
What if they don't want the guidance?
What if they refuse to co-operate?
OK, here's a situation for you: a 12 year old brings a knife into a classroom and threatens to stab other students?
And don't say things like that don't happen.
"An 11 year old boy had a knife at school and threatened two pupils. The head teacher permanently excluded him but he was reinstated by an independent appeals panel".
How in God's name could you suggest the boy did not know what he was doing?
Are you seriously going to use the "family background card" again?
Don't tell me you agree with the decision of the independent appeals panel.
Trust me, no kid who brings a knife to school should EVER go near a school again. I don't care if he has changed or not, *******s.
It's like paedophiles - would you like an ex-paedophile to teach your children?
And yes, they are comparable. That bastard kid knew FULL WELL what he was doing.
It's people like you who are ruining the education system in this country.
Take them out of the classroom then.
And if they don't co-operate?
And if they don't co-operate?
What if they don't want the help?
What if they misbehave again when they are allowed back in?
But if they don't co-operate?
What if they don't change their ways?
What if they refuse to co-operate?
Yes, but think about how their presence in the classroom has impacted on other people's education.
What if they don't want the guidance?
What if they refuse to co-operate?
OK, here's a situation for you: a 12 year old brings a knife into a classroom and threatens to stab other students?
And don't say things like that don't happen.
"An 11 year old boy had a knife at school and threatened two pupils. The head teacher permanently excluded him but he was reinstated by an independent appeals panel".
How in God's name could you suggest the boy did not know what he was doing?
Are you seriously going to use the "family background card" again?
Don't tell me you agree with the decision of the independent appeals panel.
Trust me, no kid who brings a knife to school should EVER go near a school again. I don't care if he has changed or not, *******s.
It's like paedophiles - would you like an ex-paedophile to teach your children?
And yes, they are comparable. That bastard kid knew FULL WELL what he was doing.
It's people like you who are ruining the education system in this country.
How can you compare a naive 12 year old child who is a bit loud... To a disturbed child who stabs someone, or paedophiles.
A child who threatens to hurt someone that seriously should be removed for everyone's SAFETY, paedophiles are adults so can't be compared.
You keep repeating "what if they don't co-operate?"... I explained. It's the school's responsibility to TRY, to give them a few chances, and to guide them. As I've already said, if they refuse to and continue regardless, there comes a point where they SHOULD be expelled. But not immediately.
Like I've said, I agree with removing them from the classroom so they don't distrupt others too much, but that doesn't mean giving up on them completely from there.
Original post by Emaemmaemily
Original post by Emaemmaemily
How can you compare a naive 12 year old child who is a bit loud... To a disturbed child who stabs someone, or paedophiles.
A child who threatens to hurt someone that seriously should be removed for everyone's SAFETY, paedophiles are adults so can't be compared.
A child who threatens to hurt someone that seriously should be removed for everyone's SAFETY, paedophiles are adults so can't be compared.
Not all 12 year olds are naive. They know what they are doing - so do paedophiles.
Exactly, you have advocated expulsion with regards to SAFETY, but what about at the EXPENSE OF OTHER PEOPLE'S EDUCATION?
How can you expect a teacher to teach when you've got a group of bastard kids at the back holding everyone up?
You keep repeating "what if they don't co-operate?"... I explained. It's the school's responsibility to TRY, to give them a few chances, and to guide them.
A few chances? What's a few? 3, 13, infinite?
The reason I keep repeating that sentence is because you ASSUME the children will co-operate with the school.
They do not. They can try, but they will not respond.
As I've already said, if they refuse to and continue regardless, there comes a point where they SHOULD be expelled. But not immediately.
At what point? After many years and during that time dozens of childrens' education have been disrupted?
Like I've said, I agree with removing them from the classroom so they don't distrupt others too much, but that doesn't mean giving up on them completely from there.
Depends on the child - if they are unwilling to co-operate.
Original post by im so academic
There is a word called "habits".
If behaviour like that is tolerated at 15, they will still persist at 15.
Like all students undergo a miraculous change at 15. I want to see that happen.
If behaviour like that is tolerated at 15, they will still persist at 15.
Like all students undergo a miraculous change at 15.
I want to see that happen.What I'm saying is that people change. Maybe not overnight, but if you can start to discipline disruptive children at the age of 12, you can change them by the time they're 15. I am aware that some people will never change, I've been to school, we all know the types... but you can't make the assumption that anyone who is disruptive is not useful to society, and kick them out onto the streets.
Original post by im so academic
The school leaving age is being raised.
Yes I am aware, and I never said I agree with it. Personally, I think forcing all students to stay on to the age of 18 is a ridiculous notion, because there are some kids will never care about their education. But some people on this thread are suggesting kicking kids out of school at the age of 10 for being disruptive, which is frankly ridiculous.
Kick them out of education? no.
Move them to another form of education? yes.
School comes too soon. There should be a break at the age of 14/15/16, there is then the option to come back and get minimal qualifications. This way people realize the improtance of education.
School is flawed however, the classroom environment doesnt work for everyone... The compulsory learning stint is abolsutely idiotic. The moment my teachers stopped caring about me is the moment I started caring about myself, and gained the respect of my piers and teachers.
The whole system needs a bit of an overhaul IMO.
But to those who think they should be excluded outright. Who the hell do you think you are. If you whine and get your way, you are doing nothing more than disrupting someone elses potential to be educated. Congratulations hypocrit.
Move them to another form of education? yes.
School comes too soon. There should be a break at the age of 14/15/16, there is then the option to come back and get minimal qualifications. This way people realize the improtance of education.
School is flawed however, the classroom environment doesnt work for everyone... The compulsory learning stint is abolsutely idiotic. The moment my teachers stopped caring about me is the moment I started caring about myself, and gained the respect of my piers and teachers.
The whole system needs a bit of an overhaul IMO.
But to those who think they should be excluded outright. Who the hell do you think you are. If you whine and get your way, you are doing nothing more than disrupting someone elses potential to be educated. Congratulations hypocrit.
Original post by im so academic
It is an excuse. Why should my education be disrupted because there are people within my class who cannot shut up and this is due to their "home issues"?
Take them out of the classroom then.
Take them out of the classroom then.
it isnt an excuse, it is an actual reason. some people cant deal with things, and as a release of anger/hatred they let it out by disrupting. its a known fact. in my school i had a look at the names on the files in our exclusion department, and i bet you about 99% of those names had issues at home...
so you gonna tell me now its an excuse?
Original post by im so academic
And if they don't co-operate?
And if they don't co-operate?
And if they don't co-operate?
And if they don't co-operate?
your actually starting to sound like a broken record.
people DO cooperate, even the people that are the worst.
someone in my year was a known dealer (in school) he was in trouble with the police nearly every weekend, since leaving school hes actually been in prison.
BUT he listened to the advice teachers gave him, he tried his best, i think he even got GCSEs. does that make him a bad person for trying??
about your story about the knife. this happened in my school, and yes the girl was excluded, BUT she was still working with the school when she was excluded. yeah she might have known what she was doing. but again she was known to have issues at home, and friendship issues, and lots more underlying things going on...
you anger me greatly!
Original post by im so academic
Not all 12 year olds are naive. They know what they are doing - so do paedophiles.
Exactly, you have advocated expulsion with regards to SAFETY, but what about at the EXPENSE OF OTHER PEOPLE'S EDUCATION?
How can you expect a teacher to teach when you've got a group of bastard kids at the back holding everyone up?
A few chances? What's a few? 3, 13, infinite?
The reason I keep repeating that sentence is because you ASSUME the children will co-operate with the school.
They do not. They can try, but they will not respond.
At what point? After many years and during that time dozens of childrens' education have been disrupted?
Depends on the child - if they are unwilling to co-operate.
Exactly, you have advocated expulsion with regards to SAFETY, but what about at the EXPENSE OF OTHER PEOPLE'S EDUCATION?
How can you expect a teacher to teach when you've got a group of bastard kids at the back holding everyone up?
A few chances? What's a few? 3, 13, infinite?
The reason I keep repeating that sentence is because you ASSUME the children will co-operate with the school.
They do not. They can try, but they will not respond.
At what point? After many years and during that time dozens of childrens' education have been disrupted?
Depends on the child - if they are unwilling to co-operate.
You don't listen at all, and it's starting to grate on my patience.
12 year olds don't understand the implications of that they are doing completely (as I've explained, some of them don't understand the importance of education yet) It's our job to help them see this.
I don't expect a teacher to teach with a group of kids disrupting... Didn't you read what I said? I said they should be removed from the room.
also, I haven't assumed they will co-operate... I already said if they continue to not co-operate there comes a point where you give up.
I just don't think you read my posts at all.
Original post by lukas1051
What I'm saying is that people change. Maybe not overnight, but if you can start to discipline disruptive children at the age of 12, you can change them by the time they're 15. I am aware that some people will never change, I've been to school, we all know the types... but you can't make the assumption that anyone who is disruptive is not useful to society, and kick them out onto the streets.
During those three years, what happens? Oh, they endanger other students' education.
Yes I am aware, and I never said I agree with it. Personally, I think forcing all students to stay on to the age of 18 is a ridiculous notion, because there are some kids will never care about their education. But some people on this thread are suggesting kicking kids out of school at the age of 10 for being disruptive, which is frankly ridiculous.
If the 10 year old was highly violent, then yes, the kid should be taken out of school.
Original post by im so academic
During those three years, what happens? Oh, they endanger other students' education.
.
.
But they won't, because they will be removed from the classroom when they are disruptive.
Original post by PonchoKid
it isnt an excuse, it is an actual reason. some people cant deal with things, and as a release of anger/hatred they let it out by disrupting. its a known fact. in my school i had a look at the names on the files in our exclusion department, and i bet you about 99% of those names had issues at home...
so you gonna tell me now its an excuse?
so you gonna tell me now its an excuse?
Correlation does not equal causation.
There are people from bad backgrounds who can actually shut up.
your actually starting to sound like a broken record.
people DO cooperate, even the people that are the worst.
someone in my year was a known dealer (in school) he was in trouble with the police nearly every weekend, since leaving school hes actually been in prison.
BUT he listened to the advice teachers gave him, he tried his best, i think he even got GCSEs. does that make him a bad person for trying??
people DO cooperate, even the people that are the worst.
someone in my year was a known dealer (in school) he was in trouble with the police nearly every weekend, since leaving school hes actually been in prison.
BUT he listened to the advice teachers gave him, he tried his best, i think he even got GCSEs. does that make him a bad person for trying??
No, but think about the time when he was dealing drugs and how many lives he has hindered during that process. Oh well done he got his GCSEs - should've done that earlier.
about your story about the knife. this happened in my school, and yes the girl was excluded, BUT she was still working with the school when she was excluded. yeah she might have known what she was doing. but again she was known to have issues at home, and friendship issues, and lots more underlying things going on...
In other words you are tolerating her actions?
I don't give a **** about the "underlying things that go on" - in what way is it acceptable to bring a knife to school, let alone to attempt to use it?
you anger me greatly!
So do you too.
Original post by Emaemmaemily
You don't listen at all, and it's starting to grate on my patience.
I agree with that statement as well.
12 year olds don't understand the implications of that they are doing completely (as I've explained, some of them don't understand the importance of education yet) It's our job to help them see this.
Oh yes they bloody do! Don't speak on behalf of all 12 year olds. They know how to act; they choose not to.
I don't expect a teacher to teach with a group of kids disrupting... Didn't you read what I said? I said they should be removed from the room.
OK, they're removed - but after that? Do they get back in? What happens?
also, I haven't assumed they will co-operate... I already said if they continue to not co-operate there comes a point where you give up.
AT WHAT POINT? After 6 years and during those 6 years that kid has bastarded up the lives of others?
I just don't think you read my posts at all.
Agreed.
Original post by Emaemmaemily
But they won't, because they will be removed from the classroom when they are disruptive.
What if the teacher has to stop multiple times within a lesson, not because of A disruption, but multiple disruptions?
What if the student refuses to go out?
Original post by im so academic
During those three years, what happens? Oh, they endanger other students' education.
Let's be realistic though... it's not going to change your life. I certainly wouldn't say anything before year 10 is unimportant, but it's not like every lesson is absolutely vital. I understand what you are trying to say, and maybe it is the case in really bad schools (and I'm only speaking from experience, the school I did my GCSEs at while a state school isn't particularly bad), where the kids learn nothing every lesson, but in most cases it's not the end of the world. So we didn't do the plenary once in a year 8 German lesson because someone was playing up, oh well. In my school at least, I think enough is done, ability sets really help, once it started getting really important, none of the disruptive kids were in my classes anyway.
Original post by im so academic
If the 10 year old was highly violent, then yes, the kid should be taken out of school.
If the 10 year old was highly violent, then yes, the kid should be taken out of school.
Well yes, clearly, but there's a big difference between someone 'disruptive' and someone being highly violent.
Original post by im so academic
I agree with that statement as well.
Oh yes they bloody do! Don't speak on behalf of all 12 year olds. They know how to act; they choose not to.
OK, they're removed - but after that? Do they get back in? What happens?
AT WHAT POINT? After 6 years and during those 6 years that kid has bastarded up the lives of others?
Agreed.
Oh yes they bloody do! Don't speak on behalf of all 12 year olds. They know how to act; they choose not to.
OK, they're removed - but after that? Do they get back in? What happens?
AT WHAT POINT? After 6 years and during those 6 years that kid has bastarded up the lives of others?
Agreed.
Don't speak on behalf of 12 year olds? Jesus. How can you not understand that 12 year old children don't really know the implications of chatting and being silly in class? They don't understand exactly what it means to their future, let alone other's.
After they are removed, they go to specific people who "help" these children. They are both disaplined (detention possibly) and encouraged to do better. They are returned to class when it seems they understand... This usually works. Maybe not perminantly, but if they misbehave again they are removed immediately and the process continues.
This gives just about no disruption to other children's education, and it gives the disruptive pupils the opportunity to learn from their mistakes.
Eventually (I don't know EXACTLY when), the school should give up.
I've read all of your posts and actually responded to each question. You reply with the same question that I've already answered.
Original post by im so academic
What if the teacher has to stop multiple times within a lesson, not because of A disruption, but multiple disruptions?
What if the student refuses to go out?
What if the student refuses to go out?
Students tend to be easy to get to leave when you threaten them with something that will piss them off.
Original post by im so academic
The only one destroying the 12 year old's education is the 12 year old itself.
So you're saying the education system has to tolerate bastards who disrupt in lesson, and the rest have to work at home?
So you're saying the education system has to tolerate bastards who disrupt in lesson, and the rest have to work at home?
They're 12 years old, no 12 year old person thinks about the fact that talking in class is even disrupting, never mind planning out their future.
You should be able to relate anyway, near enough to your own age, right?
Original post by PonchoKid
it isnt an excuse, it is an actual reason. some people cant deal with things, and as a release of anger/hatred they let it out by disrupting. its a known fact. in my school i had a look at the names on the files in our exclusion department, and i bet you about 99% of those names had issues at home...
so you gonna tell me now its an excuse?
your actually starting to sound like a broken record.
people DO cooperate, even the people that are the worst.
someone in my year was a known dealer (in school) he was in trouble with the police nearly every weekend, since leaving school hes actually been in prison.
BUT he listened to the advice teachers gave him, he tried his best, i think he even got GCSEs. does that make him a bad person for trying??
about your story about the knife. this happened in my school, and yes the girl was excluded, BUT she was still working with the school when she was excluded. yeah she might have known what she was doing. but again she was known to have issues at home, and friendship issues, and lots more underlying things going on...
you anger me greatly!
so you gonna tell me now its an excuse?
your actually starting to sound like a broken record.
people DO cooperate, even the people that are the worst.
someone in my year was a known dealer (in school) he was in trouble with the police nearly every weekend, since leaving school hes actually been in prison.
BUT he listened to the advice teachers gave him, he tried his best, i think he even got GCSEs. does that make him a bad person for trying??
about your story about the knife. this happened in my school, and yes the girl was excluded, BUT she was still working with the school when she was excluded. yeah she might have known what she was doing. but again she was known to have issues at home, and friendship issues, and lots more underlying things going on...
you anger me greatly!
1. You can't say that 99% of those who behave poorly have "home issues" and it is an insult to those who have home issues but quietly get on and try to better their situation. The majority of badly behaved students care more about getting a few laughs than about getting GCSEs; loads of people have problems many of whom do not use them as an excuse to mess up other peoples lives.
2. People really don't cooperate; you come out with the extreme example of a drug dealer, who manged to get a few GCSEs and hail it as some kind of success story for the education system. What good did those GCSEs do him; surely he should have been removed from the school for the benefit of the rest of the students. If anything school made the situation worse as it gave him a "patch" on which to sell his wares.
3. Loads of people have issues; most of them don't go round stabbing people because of them; as for your little friendship issues mention, give me a break-A bunch of naughty school girls start squabbling so one of them turns to knife crime, it's pathetic.
Original post by lukas1051
Tell ANY 8 year old that they don't have to go to school any more if they don't want, see what they say. Making school optional is a ridiculous idea. Education IS optional after the age of 16, people are old enough to make life decisions by that age. Lots of kids have parents who don't care because they didn't do well at school. Believe it or not, they are very few children who have their life set out, and are eager to learn and get qualifications and get a good job. Children are more interested in making their friends laugh. If school was optional from a young age, no-one would go.
I understood the implications of academic failure at 8; many great scientists from the past were self taught anyway so what's the problem with school being optional?
Original post by PendulumBoB
I understood the implications of academic failure at 8; many great scientists from the past were self taught anyway so what's the problem with school being optional?
Well good for you, but most kids don't see the implications at the age of 8, and most kids can't self teach. Yeah there'll be the occasional child prodigy who is doing calculus before they've learnt to walk or whatever, but that doesn't mean every misunderstood 8 year old is useless to society.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
