What do you think should be done about disruptive students in lessons?

You're just being un-realistic now. Chaining them up? God.
Like I said, it's not all about the money. This is sustainable.
A life of crime makes it worse for the rest of us.

As I've said, lots of children mature and get over it. I don't see how you think none of them do.

'Little goes your way, deal with it'? Sure, I'll deal with it by making those idiots shut up.

Have you ever thought that kids can't learn because the teacher has to tell some stupid moron to shut up every few minutes? Back in yr 9 the class I was in was so disruptive with a teacher we only managed to cover an eighth of the work we were meant to. 'Real life' was when those little tits got a cane to the the neck and did not talk again. In the real world these morons would never get employed or would be fired.

My foster brother has learning difficulties and came to my old secondary school for a short stint (I was in year 11 at the time and he was in year 7). He found learning and behaving incredibly hard and just didn't turn up to lessons. It wouldn't be at all odd to look out the window in a maths lesson to see him crawling around under parked cars with 2 or 3 learning assistants desperately trying to find him. He got moved to a special school (they just seem to go bowling and to the cinema constantly) and he finds it much less stressful.

I don't think these kids should just be chucked out the education system, apart from anything else, later in life they'll be living at the tax payers expense. At the same time though, I used to hate the fact that the teachers in my classes often had to wait for some idiot in the back to behave, or pause halfway through what they were saying to tell them off, or listen to them talking during a test. It is off-putting and it isn't fair to those kids who really do want to learn.

Most disruptive kids already have 1-1's and extra learning support, I'm not sure what else the government could be doing. The system isn't perfect by any means but at the same time I can't see how they would improve it without negative counter-effects elsewhere.

My foster brother has learning difficulties and came to my old secondary school for a short stint (I was in year 11 at the time and he was in year 7). He found learning and behaving incredibly hard and just didn't turn up to lessons. It wouldn't be at all odd to look out the window in a maths lesson to see him crawling around under parked cars with 2 or 3 learning assistants desperately trying to find him. He got moved to a special school (they just seem to go bowling and to the cinema constantly) and he finds it much less stressful.

I don't think these kids should just be chucked out the education system, apart from anything else, later in life they'll be living at the tax payers expense. At the same time though, I used to hate the fact that the teachers in my classes often had to wait for some idiot in the back to behave, or pause halfway through what they were saying to tell them off, or listen to them talking during a test. It is off-putting and it isn't fair to those kids who really do want to learn.

Most disruptive kids already have 1-1's and extra learning support, I'm not sure what else the government could be doing. The system isn't perfect by any means but at the same time I can't see how they would improve it without negative counter-effects elsewhere.

I was just wondering what your opinions are on this issue, because I'm sure most of us have experienced students who plain and simple aren't interested in learning and so stop everyone else from learning. I mean personally I think if someone doesnt want to learn and has demonstrated this fact they should be taken out of education as they're a detriment to people who want to learn. Although I do see that there may be some issues with this.

Anyway I was wondering what other students opinions were.

He doesn't sound that bad, in that he clearly had something more that little s*** syndrome and he was not ruining class for everyone else by playing outside.

As I've already said your points are based on specualtion as you have no evidence that the majority of bad kids get over thir troublesome behaviour.

Why should it not be about money -A representation for resources

What's wrong with chaining up societies scum bags it's what they do in the state-Either that or the firing squad for the worst re-offenders, It's the ulitimate for of rehabilitation, tell me how many criminals who have been giving death re-offend? It makes perfect sociological sense.

I was just wondering what your opinions are on this issue, because I'm sure most of us have experienced students who plain and simple aren't interested in learning and so stop everyone else from learning. I mean personally I think if someone doesnt want to learn and has demonstrated this fact they should be taken out of education as they're a detriment to people who want to learn. Although I do see that there may be some issues with this.

Anyway I was wondering what other students opinions were.

Oh he did stuff in the classroom as well, I just rarely witnessed it firsthand. Twice he tried to jump out of a second floor window with a bin on his head (for the lulz apparently). He used to crawl round under desks and stuff as well, including the ones other students were sat at. Luckily at the school he's at now they have a 'team-teach' method which is where the teachers are allowed to practically sit on the students and then take them to a padded room. The staff:student ratio is like 3:5 as well.

He does have special needs so obviously this is a somewhat extreme case but the vast majority of students who have behave badly in schools do often have issues -whether it's learning difficulties or troubles at home.

Aspergers kids have issues, it's not their fault. And besides, if it bothers you so much- work hard so you're not put in the class with numpties.

No no no no no, your idea of homework clubs for dedicated pupils is absurd; why should the school have to hire teachers to teach lessons for those who want to learn outside school hours. Do you realise how expensive that would be? What's wrong with controversy? If a pupil is ruining there own education and that of someone else; for the benefit of the majority remove him/her from the class. If they mess around they will probably fail anyway so why delay the inevitable when other people's future is at stake?

Well I'm a TA so I see it happen all of the time.
Some schools are ****, and don't deal with it properly... This is what needs to be addressed, not the rules.

Even if they do turn out (somewhat) alright in the end; do they ever end up with outstanding GCSE result? Probably not-Which begs the question, was it all worth it perhaps the effort spend reforming them would have been better focused on furthering the abilities of better behaved students. Think about not just the financial cost, but the cost to the other students in forcing them to try to learn around such distractions.

If 5 people want to learn and the rest don't, let the others go and allow the teacher to focus his/her time on those who want to get somewhere in life.

Everyone doesn't need outstanding results. If they get decent ones, they can go to college and learn a trade at least. Better than nothing, we need people in those industries too.
The other students shouldn't have been subject to too much, if the schools do as they should and remove them when necessary. But, a little distraction (a little) helps children learn how to work in an environment that isn't perfectly silent, because the working world isn't like that.

I feel your vigour from here.

Firstly it isn't that bad, those students whom are truly dedicated will go to the homework clubs after school. The only other option is going to see your teacher during your break, which is probably more absurd in a student's perspective.
Plus the halls will be pretty cleared up after school hours so, homework club may not be that bad. Especially since in 'worse off' areas most of the 'riff-raffs' will be... out.

Secondly not all teachers need to do it, some teachers may have days when they attend the club and some when they don't; teachers don't usually mind taking out their free time when arranging revision sessions for their pupils close to exam time, so why not apply that for dedicated students?
Especially since simply chucking out bad students won't solve the problem; they'll still be there and they'll still be bad.

Thirdly, what's wrong with controversy? Well with the type I'm talking about, a lot. A school can be deemed prejudice if it constantly excludes children from a particular social class.
Your idea is fine when put into practice with more elite schools (notably grammar, private or pubic) but what about your generic state schools where you'll be bound to get a lot more disruptive pupils? Especially when it is law for children to say in education till the age of 16, last I checked.

So my idea of homework clubs is absurd when you try to apply it to elite schools such as grammar schools, private schools or even public schools.
But with state schools? No, sir, my idea does not seem as daft when you apply it to a state school context.
In a state school, as you'll likely have more people that will "mess around [and] will [likely] fail"... the bright students of those schools will have their future at stake.

Overall: the idea of simply chucking out pupils that misbehave is fine then you apply it to more elite schools. But not for state schools, however. With that in mind that is where an idea such as mine comes in without looking so absurd.

noone in our class wanted to do french anyway, hence why we were 3rd set out of 4...
we had to do it because it was compulsary between year 7 and 9...
the people that did do their homework, did everything they could to lick the teachers arses in school.

the rest of us wernt interested in learning french, we turned up because it was compulsary...

thats what happens in lower school...
when you get to GCSE most of the trouble makers are out of your lessons, as people choose other subjects. the worst lessons then are maths english and science...

then at a level we didnt get any trouble makers really, me and my friend disrupted each other in health and social and IT, but thats because IT bored us. and health and social the teachers tailored the lessons to look at nursing, and they knew me and my mate wouldnt be interested as they knew we didnt want to go into nursing, but the majority of the class did...

so they let us sit in the back corner and get on with what we wanted to do...

to back you up, noone needs "outstanding results"
the best teacher in my old school got a U in general studies in 6th form, and has something like 2Cs and a D i think it was at alevel. and hes one of the few teachers EVERYONE looks up to!

at GCSE i dont have an A or a B to my name...
i got into 6th form...

at AS i have a C and a D
and A2 i have a D and an E

im not at uni not only studying to get a degree, but i also get a professional qualification, which in the line of work i want to do, you cant do much without it.

do like you said, you dont need outstanding grades [=

Compulsory sterilisation... Wether that means sterilising the people themselves, or sterilising the classroom from them... Is up to you