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

Huh? What does this have to do with rape? I would blame the rapist to an extent, but I would also blame society for the fact that that person - who at 2 was probably the sweetest kid on earth - became something so horrid.

Like I said, it's a balancing act - helping messed up kids now so they don't cost us more in the future (and its humane), and being financially stable and able to help other kids too - but we shouldn't just give up on them.

Btw whether you blame society really depends a lot on the nature vss. nurture argument. I believe nurture counts for something like 90% of how we turn out, but obv. that's really just a matter of opinion.

People are shaped and created by their society. (The home life, and then their experiences elsewhere). You can very much blame the fact that there are **** people on society, it's how they are created.

Well, firstly, I think the idea that if a kid is acting up, you should simply exile them from education, is ridiculous. Your education is pretty damn important, and by doing that, you're pretty much condemning someone to a limited life. Ok, there's the argument that they don't want to be there, so it's fair to follow that path. At 18, that would be a valid argument, because you're an adult and you can make that decision, but at 16 and below, it's not. A child isn't qualified to make that decision and exert that much control over their life. I didn't want to eat my veg when I was growing up, and I wouldn't have given the choice, but rightly so, it wasn't my choice, so I did.

I think it's important too to recognise here that in secondary school, you're dealing with children. When you're a kid you act up, but that doesn't make it acceptable for a parent to up and leave. Between 11 and 16 every kid is gonna exhibit some unruly behaviour, and that includes at school, but that doesn't make them inherently bad. It just means they need some discipline, and with, perhaps they'd thrive, and even be beneficial parts of the class.

Having said all that, I don't at all think that other people should have to suffer, but it is important to accept that first and foremost difficult behaviour shouldn't mean someone being cast out. I think there needs to be a reassessment of how schools educate and discipline, and there needs to be reform in both those areas, particularly the last. I also think schools and teachers need to reconsider their roles and how they see themselves. There's the argument that being a teacher is ultimately just a job, and therefore teachers shouldn't be expected to do anything other then teach; discipline isn't part of the package. Whilst perhaps principally that may hold true, practically it doesn't, and never will be a reality. Every job involving working with human beings is going to demand the ability to work and deal with people, especially those involved with kids.

If they act up in class remove them.

They can either become an independant student or go to work

If they don't get a job, let them starve

If they turn to crime chain them up anf roce them to work-easy


If a teacher works after school hours they get paid overtime-I know, my twilight latin teacher told me.

They is not enough time in the school day to run 2 sets of lessons, one for everyone and one for only those who wish to learn.
Many students from poor backgrounds are not naughty as they see school as a way out, there are bad students from all walks of life-not just poor backgrounds (which you are clearly citing for the sympathy vote).

Why are people so obsessed with social mobility anyway? In life there are winners and losers, there are always going to be people are fail at life-accept it.

PS. Homeschooling does not need to be expensive:

Step 1. Buy the textbook

Step 2. Read it

Nature counts for far more than 90%.

Nature counts for far more than 90%-come on

If everyone recieved Newton's education it would not be the case that 90% would turn out to achive what Isaac Newton achieved.

So is it that some people from poor backgrounds, think right I have a chance to do well at school and make a better life for myself and my kids and some say I give a f*** so I may as well ruin it for others.

Some people are bad people and are not worth helping.

No it doesn't work like that. I don't think you understand psychology and sociology at all.
They don't think "i don't give a ****", it's not a concious decision. If they are raised in a working-class family and their parents don't care, then the state of mind rubs off. If their parents are always saying how they hate the government and other figures of authority because they "rip them off", then the children will learn that rebelling against authority (like teachers and schools) is the right thing to do because they're hard done by. If it's how the are brought up, they can't help it.
That's why in schools, we need to try to nip it in the bud, and help them change. It stops the cycle.

I know this isn't the pattern for ALL working-class children, (although it's a lot more common with boys, with their similar sub-culture), but it is a general cycle.
Children that go through this and work hard still are great... But it just means their minds coped with it all differently.
It's not a case of "that child is naturally bad".

This is why I said that you are an idealist; because you don't see that the effort and money put into straightening out these people just isn't worth when there is a class of 29 other people doing what they should be doing, who are losing out in terms os resources to one selfish kid-In an ideal world there would be enough money to help them, in fact in an ideal world there would be 1 to 1 tutition for those want it. The fact of the matter is there just isn't enough money.

Adults shouldn't need to tell kids why they should learn, the kid should know that by the age of 15/16.

I don't know, he put (his own personal) politics in front of the education of the children.

Being an adolescant male it is natural for me to want sex; doesn't give me the right to rape though.

If you don't want to learn, then don't - that's fair enough. But to infringe on other children trying to learn is criminal - the desire to learn should be cherished and encouraged to flourish, and anyone against that does not belong in a school.

oh dear.
how is it "criminal" then?
that means i shouldnt be doing the job im doing as i should have a criminal record :O
SHOCK.

We were mostly discussing children aged around 12 though. By 15/16, yeah they should know by them, probably hard to get them to change at that point, but 12 is still quite young.

It's their right to an education. They can waive it but can't infringe on others' rights.

What job do you do?

its everyones right to an education...

and im training to be a youth worker, im also part of girlguiding UK.

both of which i need a CRB.

and due to the statment, im a criminal which means id have a criminal record which would show up on BOTH my CRB's :')

So it's easy to just dismiss their behaviour because of some pathetic number?

Habits will develop. Best to iron them out as early as possible.

If a ****ing 5 year old can shut up, why can't a 12 year old?