Turn on thread page Beta

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

Announcements
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaKeuning)
    Nothing should be done! You have to learn to deal with people, to not expect everything to be perfect and sterile.



    What I'm saying is, nothing further should be done. People who really do have detrimental impact on students education are punished. You'll just have to learn to deal with those who are merely annoying because they chat and may be inclined to pissing about.
    My future should be hindered by some inbred jackass who can't sit still because of incompetent parents who should have been made sterile?
    How the **** is that going to help anyone ?

    With that wet liberal attitude, people are just going to **** you over in life.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reml)
    Expulsion - no need to educate people who don't want to be, its a waste of time and is detrimental to others learning
    (Original post by im so academic)
    Yes I am. Education is about yourself. You are given an education; use it. Why the **** should society respect them if they don't respect society?


    Pay for their education, then kick them out of school -> Pay for their benfits instead.
    They dont magically disappear.. Your just setting the precedence for the rest of their lives. poverty.

    Your choice. Out of sight, out of mind?
    The system will never work, there is no final solution :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Train teachers to deal with them or toughen up disciplinary procedures which aim to rehabilitate those pupils. That's the most an education establishment can do.

    A change in their home environment is the only real thing that can change the conduct of these disruptive pupils. But that will cost money. And there are a range of factors which may cause children to be disruptive (some which seem to be overlooked), so really you can't truly ever stop them.
    The idea that those pupils should be chucked out, no questions asked, just represents the elitist value system by those who propone that idea.

    So if you can't eliminate disruptive pupils, more opportunities should be given to the dedicated pupils such as the availability of homework clubs.


    Just permanently excluding disruptive pupils will only generate controversy, especially if the majority of those pupils happen to come from the lower socio-economic groups; the elitist thinking that we should chuck out the 'weak' - disruptive - pupils whom hold back progress would doubtlessly generate that controversy.


    So I'd side with more opportunities for brighter children, especially since tougher school disciplinary systems will hardly do anything for schools or colleges in 'bad areas'.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Baula)
    You can hardly send half a class outside.
    my french teacher did this once :')
    she told everyone to get out if they hadnt done their homework, i think there was maximum of 5 people left IN the room. our year head happened to walk past at that moment in time, and asked why we were all stood outside.
    pretty classic really!

    but it doesnt work...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Knowledgemofo)
    Train teachers to deal with them or toughen up disciplinary procedures which aim to rehabilitate those pupils. That's the most an education establishment can do.

    A change in their home environment is the only real thing that can change the conduct of these disruptive pupils. But that will cost money. And there are a range of factors which may cause children to be disruptive (some which seem to be overlooked), so really you can't truly ever stop them.
    The idea that those pupils should be chucked out, no questions asked, just represents the elitist value system by those who propone that idea.

    So if you can't eliminate disruptive pupils, more opportunities should be given to the dedicated pupils such as the availability of homework clubs.


    Just permanently excluding disruptive pupils will only generate controversy, especially if the majority of those pupils happen to come from the lower socio-economic groups; the elitist thinking that we should chuck out the 'weak' - disruptive - pupils whom hold back progress would doubtlessly generate that controversy.


    So I'd side with more opportunities for brighter children, especially since tougher school disciplinary systems will hardly do anything for schools or colleges in 'bad areas'.
    ^^ My point exactly
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jimbo1234)
    My future should be hindered by some inbred jackass who can't sit still because of incompetent parents who should have been made sterile?
    How the **** is that going to help anyone ?

    With that wet liberal attitude, people are just going to **** you over in life.
    No. It's more wet to think 'woe to me, some kids are chatting and I CANT LEARN!', it's pathetic if you suffer because some kids are talking (and that's all they'd be doing; the real distruptive kids are dealt with. ) Wake up, that's real life. Not all sunshine and loveliness, you can't remove everything you dislike. Little goes your way, deal with it. People on this forum are so conservative, it's hilarious. You act like some stern backward school master from a Dickens novel.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    THE CANE!
    Muahahhahahahaah :P
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by patientology)
    You clearly never had an asperger child in your class. There is no way you can deal with them. They interrupt the classes and annoy everyone. Why should they allowed to do this?
    Aspergers kids have issues, it's not they're fault. And besides, if it bothers you so much- work hard so you're not put in the class with numpties.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    This just shows that you haven't read my points at all.
    Yes, you send them out of the classroom... then someone else deals with them, both in a diciplinary way, and in a way that helps them change if necessary. After this they will be allowed back in to behave. If they begin to misbehave again, they will be sent out again.
    This causes next to no disruption of the other children's education.
    Yes but the somebody else needs paying, this in my opinion is one of the issues, why should the government pay out to have someone supervising ill behaved children when that money would be better spent teacheing those who actually want to learn; at my school if a child was sent to time out (as it was called) many boasted about how much they enjoyed being able to mess around with other naughty pupils. This in itself is not a problem (As they are not in the class disrupting lessons), but what is a problem is the fact that the school was paying someone to look after them whilst they were out of the classroom.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PendulumBoB)
    Yes but the somebody else needs paying, this in my opinion is one of the issues, why should the government pay out to have someone supervising ill behaved children when that money would be better spent teacheing those who actually want to learn; at my school if a child was sent to time out (as it was called) many boasted about how much they enjoyed being able to mess around with other naughty pupils. This in itself is not a problem (As they are not in the class disrupting lessons), but what is a problem is the fact that the school was paying someone to look after them whilst they were out of the classroom.
    Because looking after them, punishing them, and then giving them the opportunity to better themselves is worth the money, and is what schools are FOR.
    The money can be better spent teaching those who want to learn? It's already being spent on that. There's already a good teacher in that classroom talking to the class about Romeo and Juliette, and paying someone (and I actually meant someone like head of groups who already exist) to deal with and sort out the naughty kids means that teacher can carry on AND you don't necessarily have to have another failure who's a hindrance to society when they leave.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Knowledgemofo)
    Train teachers to deal with them or toughen up disciplinary procedures which aim to rehabilitate those pupils. That's the most an education establishment can do.

    A change in their home environment is the only real thing that can change the conduct of these disruptive pupils. But that will cost money. And there are a range of factors which may cause children to be disruptive (some which seem to be overlooked), so really you can't truly ever stop them.
    The idea that those pupils should be chucked out, no questions asked, just represents the elitist value system by those who propone that idea.

    So if you can't eliminate disruptive pupils, more opportunities should be given to the dedicated pupils such as the availability of homework clubs.


    Just permanently excluding disruptive pupils will only generate controversy, especially if the majority of those pupils happen to come from the lower socio-economic groups; the elitist thinking that we should chuck out the 'weak' - disruptive - pupils whom hold back progress would doubtlessly generate that controversy.


    So I'd side with more opportunities for brighter children, especially since tougher school disciplinary systems will hardly do anything for schools or colleges in 'bad areas'.
    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?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    There really is no easy answer.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    Because looking after them, punishing them, and then giving them the opportunity to better themselves is worth the money, and is what schools are FOR.
    The money can be better spent teaching those who want to learn? It's already being spent on that. There's already a good teacher in that classroom talking to the class about Romeo and Juliette, and paying someone (and I actually meant someone like head of groups who already exist) to deal with and sort out the naughty kids means that teacher can carry on AND you don't necessarily have to have another failure who's a hindrance to society when they leave.
    You have no evidence that it is good for society; if they are naughty they will probably get s*** results anyway, but will also ruin it for the rest of the class. Schools are there to teach not to babysit juvenile deliquents-Disce aut Discede. There are already a hinderence to society in that society is paying out for them to go to school where they ruin the experience for others.

    PS. Please clarify you point about head of groups who already exist
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    There really is no easy answer.
    Yes there is; expel them and force them to go straight into the world of work.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PendulumBoB)
    Yes there is; expel them and force them to go straight into the world of work.
    What, at 13 years old?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaKeuning)
    No. It's more wet to think 'woe to me, some kids are chatting and I CANT LEARN!', it's pathetic if you suffer because some kids are talking (and that's all they'd be doing; the real distruptive kids are dealt with. ) Wake up, that's real life. Not all sunshine and loveliness, you can't remove everything you dislike. Little goes your way, deal with it. People on this forum are so conservative, it's hilarious. You act like some stern backward school master from a Dickens novel.
    The real disruptions are not dealt with effectively; why because what can the teacher do when the pupil who is told to leave the classroom refuses to leave the classroom. You call the poster wet when he is the victim, not the little s*** who is wasting governement money and ruining other peoples education.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PendulumBoB)
    You have no evidence that it is good for society; if they are naughty they will probably get s*** results anyway, but will also ruin it for the rest of the class. Schools are there to teach not to babysit juvenile deliquents-Disce aut Discede. There are already a hinderence to society in that society is paying out for them to go to school where they ruin the experience for others.

    PS. Please clarify you point about head of groups who already exist
    As I've explained... Many "naughty" children won't STAY that way if you discipline them and teach them. Yes, schools are for teaching, and that include the children who resist at first because they don't UNDERSTAND the implications... I've explained all of this before.
    It makes perfect sociological sense.

    In our school we had "head of hall" or "head of faculty"... These people mostly sat around in their office doing stuff, and if someone was particularly naughty they would be sent to them for discipline and "a talk". It worked for a lot of them.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophiaKeuning)
    No. It's more wet to think 'woe to me, some kids are chatting and I CANT LEARN!', it's pathetic if you suffer because some kids are talking (and that's all they'd be doing; the real distruptive kids are dealt with. ) Wake up, that's real life. Not all sunshine and loveliness, you can't remove everything you dislike. Little goes your way, deal with it. People on this forum are so conservative, it's hilarious. You act like some stern backward school master from a Dickens novel.

    '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.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Emaemmaemily)
    As I've explained... Many "naughty" children won't STAY that way if you discipline them and teach them. Yes, schools are for teaching, and that include the children who resist at first because they don't UNDERSTAND the implications... I've explained all of this before.
    It makes perfect sociological sense.

    In our school we had "head of hall" or "head of faculty"... These people mostly sat around in their office doing stuff, and if someone was particularly naughty they would be sent to them for discipline and "a talk". It worked for a lot of them.
    It may make sociological sense but does it make economic sense; they are wasting government money in being at school-so expel them, if this leads to a life of crime then chain them up and force them to work on the road side for 16 hours a day until they learn their lesson.

    Why should a busy head of department have his/her schedule messed up just to take to some kid who has not quite mastered social regualtion?

    Provide me with evidence that bad behaved pupils do change-If someone is too stupid to understand the implications of doing badly at school, then they probably too stupid to be in school.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    What, at 13 years old?
    Why not? I've that small hands are often usefull in the cotton mills.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.