Teachers suspended

[Merry]

so you are saying teachers are justified in using force on children?
strange concept considering the first thing a teacher does is call 911 if they hear a parent tries to keep a child in line.
there is no excuse ever for a teacher to lay a hand on a child unless its truly for their safety or another childs (breaking up a fight).
making excuses for teachers assaulting children and watching porn in class etc is not the way to fix it.
they should have been fired on the spot with just cause meaning no severance pay or chance of teaching again.
its really a shame the union is so damn strong they can do anything more or less.
if they have a problem child they cant deal with expel him and see how the parents deal with it then.
choking a child is a criminal act and the police also should have charged the teacher.

Depending on the circumstance, and only as a last resort, sometimes limited force to restrain an unruly child MAY be necessary. What would YOU suggest if a child is kicking the sh*t out of another? Reasoned discussion???? Personally I'd reach down and forcefully remove the aggressor. And if it was MY kid being hurt, I'd expect any responsible adult to do whatever is necessary to protect my kid from his tormentor. Wouldn't you?

As for grabbing a kid by the hoodie, and inadvertently choking him for a second, I'd hardly equate that with beating a child or using some other kind of inappropriate force. You obviously missed the part where I asked if there had been any lasting consequence to the child as a result of the teachers action. I've seen kids do far worse to one another, than have a teacher use their hoodie to pull them away from a potentially dangerous or inappropriate situation. I'm sure the teacher meant no harm, and didn't realize the potential for choking such an action might cause; hence my feeling that a disciplinary talk from her boss would probably have been sufficient to avoid a repeat situation. Suspension was overkill IMO.

When it can be shown that a teacher disciplines a child in such a way as to cause physical or psychological harm, then I would be the first to say that teacher should be suspended. But in this particular case, I really doubt that being restrained by the hoodie cause either of those outcomes in the child. All that was necessary was to have the teacher be made to understand that grabbing a kid by the hoodie in that way was not appropriate. And the kid needs to be made to understand that he/she must listen to the teacher and do as he/she is told.

[keith1612]

Depending on the circumstance, and only as a last resort, sometimes limited force to restrain an unruly child MAY be necessary. What would YOU suggest if a child is kicking the sh*t out of another? Reasoned discussion???? Personally I'd reach down and forcefully remove the aggressor. And if it was MY kid being hurt, I'd expect any responsible adult to do whatever is necessary to protect my kid from his tormentor. Wouldn't you?

As for grabbing a kid by the hoodie, and inadvertently choking him for a second, I'd hardly equate that with beating a child or using some other kind of inappropriate force. You obviously missed the part where I asked if there had been any lasting consequence to the child as a result of the teachers action. I've seen kids do far worse to one another, than have a teacher use their hoodie to pull them away from a potentially dangerous or inappropriate situation. I'm sure the teacher meant no harm, and didn't realize the potential for choking such an action might cause; hence my feeling that a disciplinary talk from her boss would probably have been sufficient to avoid a repeat situation. Suspension was overkill IMO.

When it can be shown that a teacher disciplines a child in such a way as to cause physical or psychological harm, then I would be the first to say that teacher should be suspended. But in this particular case, I really doubt that being restrained by the hoodie cause either of those outcomes in the child. All that was necessary was to have the teacher be made to understand that grabbing a kid by the hoodie in that way was not appropriate. And the kid needs to be made to understand that he/she must listen to the teacher and do as he/she is told.

as i posted force is acceptable in safety situations only.
cut and paste: Lynna Darlene Schaldemose was suspended for 14 days after she dragged an 11-year-old student by his hoodie during an assembly, when the zipper jammed into the boy's throat and cut off his breathing. end cut

a zipper jammed into a boys throat hard enough to cut off his breathing is not acceptable unless public safety was at risk.
as the teacher was very lightly punished there was no justifiable excuse.
no teacher would be given a punishment for a reasonable cause, the joke is when it not reasonable they have such a strong union real punishment very seldom takes place.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

Who were you scared of when you were a teen?

Teachers, police ...

Was it that fear that kept you in line?

Yup (more or less in line)

... , a child deserves the respect of the adults to teach without causing physical pain or psychological damage. That is how you gain respect and trust from a child or a teen.

Sounds great in theory. I think corporal punishment, in appropriate measure, worked better.

at what cost to the little people?

[steven lloyd]

at what cost to the little people?

the little people ?

[OnTheRoadAgain]

Having worked in the school system (not as a teacher) I have seen first hand how unruly some students can be, and how many teachers feel they have no "tools" at their disposal to discipline such students with. As a result, many teachers have simply given up when it comes to trying to discipline some kids, and that has had a negative effect on the entire student body.

Giving up? That is the fault of the teacher. The teacher's 'tool' is good classroom management, and gaining respect through showing it to students - role modelling it. The secondary tool is the principal - the boss of the school. The third tool is the parent, through good communications. The fourth tool is the school board. And the fifth tool which has been deleted is the school counsellors and psychologists.

Many kids have difficulty learning in the noisy, unruly environments caused by a few hard to control kids, and it is those whose ability to learn is negatively affected who are the true victims in this type of situation. Yet we never hear about that type of victim, only about the ones who got upset because they felt they received inappropriate discipline at some point.

I hear from these 'victims'. They have said straight out to me that those kids have no business in the school, if they don't want to learn they should be expelled. Expelled to parentless homes, to walk the streets looking for ways to entertain themselves. Playing video games at home, not learning to socialize better in group environments. They forget that these kids will also be joining theirs in the real world one day.

I don't know what the kid wearing the hoodie did, but I'm sure that when the teacher grabbed his hood rather than his hand or shoulder it was probably because that was the only part of him she could reach at the time (could it have been that he was deliberately trying to evade her?). How do we know he stopped breathing for 3 seconds? Did someone time it? Would that short interval of time even be noticeable? Was any real harm done? I don't know the answer to any of these questions, but I do know that as a society we're often more concerned with the perpetrator's "rights" than we are with the effect that perpetrator's behaviour was having on those around him. If this kid was exhibiting frequent "bad" behaviour that had a negative effect on the learning abilities on others in the class, what "tools" does today's teacher have at his or her disposal to deal with the situation?

I know the answers. By law, the teacher had no right to grab the kids' hoodie regardless of what behaviour he displayed. It doesn't matter if or how long he stopped breathing either. Yes, real harm was done, to the teacher, the student and the bystanders.

I'm not condoning how the teacher reacted to the situation, but I do think that suspending an otherwise "good" teacher for grabbing a kids' hoodie, when no real harm was done, is just as much of a disciplinary overeaction as was what the teacher did to the student. Maybe a word of advice from the Principal as to the inappropriatness of what she did would have been sufficient. And as for the kid, if he or she was hard to control prior to this incident, you can bet your bottom dollar he or she is IMPOSSIBLE to control now. Kids learn fast when the adults who are looking after them feel powerless to do anything about bad behaviour.

I think they need to suspend her to send the message to her and other teachers that they must abide by the law.
I don't think it was an overreaction comparable to the teacher's overreaction at all. It is a natural and logical consequence for breaking rules and trust. Teacher's hold huge trust with their students and parents. The principal doesn't really need to advise teachers of the law, they are quite aware. They even complain about it sometimes. And sometimes, as they are human, they will overstep their boundaries.

The worst way to try to cure bad behavior in chidlren is by displaying bad behaviour yourself.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

at what cost to the little people?

the little people ?

aka children.

[steven lloyd]

Ah, you mean the ones that grow up to be the undisciplined, something for nothing, actions do not have consequences, “I’m not responsible”, “the world owes me a living”, “give it to me now” people. Gotcha. Yes, that's been working real well.

[Merry]

at what cost to the little people?

I think you missed the part where Steven said "in appropriate measure". No-one is condoning the use of excessive force. But there ARE situations where physical intervention is both appropriate and necessary in order to deter kids from doing things that may cause harm to themselves or others.

If I tell a child not to perform such an act, and the child wilfully disobeys me, would I be wrong in your eyes if I physically removed the child from the situation? If so, what would your solution be?

Every day in our schools there are kids who behave in such a manner as to disrupt the ability of other kids to learn. These kids refuse to listen to their teachers, or to respect any kind of authority. Amazingly, many of them have been taught by their parents that it is perfectly acceptable to behave that way. And those same parents are the first to be banging on the school boards door if they percieve that their kids teacher has tried to exert ANY kind of discipline whatsoever, not just the physical kind. I have seen parents calling in to complain if their kid has been kept behind a few minutes after school, or has been denied a privilege that was granted to others. Parents have even complained when their kids were asked to write an essay outlining the reasons for their behaviour and why its wrong to behave that way. And we've all met the parents who insist their kid simply would not behave that way, so therefore the teacher must be picking on them!!!

Frankly, I suspect many of these parents had a bad experience when they were a kid with a teacher, and are now taking their revenge on the poor smuck who is currently teaching their kid. But such parents are not doing their kids any favours by allowing them to grow up thinking it is OK to continually defy authority. Just ask those who eventually employ such kids what they think of such behaviour; and ask how long they remained working for that employer!

[LoneWolf_53]

Who were you scared of when you were a teen?

Teachers, police, Dad, concerned citizens.

Was it that fear that kept you in line?

Darn toot'n.

[steven lloyd]

Who were you scared of when you were a teen?

Teachers, police, Dad, concerned citizens.

Now I'm scared of kids who aren't scared of teachers, police, dad, and concerned citizens.

[kompili]

Now I'm scared of kids who aren't scared of teachers, police, dad, and concerned citizens.

Always in fear aren't we lloyd, terrible way to go through life, fearing everything.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

Sounds great in theory. I think corporal punishment, in appropriate measure, worked better.

Isn't it ironic then, that the kids from that generation have turned out like this.
Something tells me it didn't work as well as we thought it did, we are seeing the results of this now.
Parents who were smacked around, abused with corporal punishment instead of gentle guidance and teaching with patience, have now decided they will not treat their children that way.
Some have been successful in finding other ways, while others take the easier route and turn the blind eye.
They don't want to beat their sons into submission because they are afraid that their sons will learn to beat their girlfriends, wives and kids into submission.
They don't want to beat their daughters into submit and obey, because that is the kind of man they would likely marry. They broke they cycle of abuse of power.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

The ones who land in the probation system.
Do you really believe corporal punishment would have changed who they turned out to be?
Do you see any youth in the system who were treated with corporal punishment?
Personally, I have seen both.
So which way is better?
The kinder way.

Why?

In the very words of Dorothy Law Nolte, PhD:

If children live with criticism, they learn to condemn.
If children live with hostility, they learn to fight.
If children live with fear, they learn to be apprehensive.
If children live with pity, they learn to feel sorry for themselves.
If children live with ridicule, they learn to feel shy.
If children live with jealousy, they learn to feel envy.
If children live with shame, they learn to feel guilty.
If children live with encouragement, they learn confidence.
If children live with tolerance, they learn patience.
If children live with praise, they learn appreciation.
If children live with acceptance, they learn to love.
If children live with approval, they learn to like themselves.
If children live with recognition, they learn it is good to have a goal.
If children live with sharing, they learn generosity.
If children live with honesty, they learn truthfulness.
If children live with fairness, they learn justice.
If children live with kindness and consideration, they learn respect.
If children live with security, they learn to have faith in themselves and in those about them.
If children live with friendliness, they learn the world is a nice place in which to live.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

A child never deserves punishment IMO, a child deserves the respect of the adults to teach without causing physical pain or psychological damage. That is how you gain respect and trust from a child or a teen.

Have you seen the inside of some of our schools lately? The behaviour of some of those kids is downright scary, and definitely NOT conducive to learning. Why should kids who are genuinely interested in learning have their ability to do so thwarted by the badly behaved few? What do you propose teachers and schools should be allowed to do about such behaviour?

I spent plenty of time in schools, elementary and secondary, also not as a teacher. Community schools, inner city schools. Schools already know what they should do with such behaviour. This is not an example of that. I propose teachers follow the law, rules and regulations and school board policies, along with the criminal code. I propose they never ever ever bring thenselves down to the level of the misbehaving child or youth.

Obviously no-one wants to see kids disciplined in a way that causes physical pain or psychological damage, and everyone should always be treated with respect. But to say that a child never deserves punishment is being a tad unrealistic IMO.

It's a admirable goal IMO. We (parents and teachers) need to role model how to handle these kids so they can better handle their own kids. And discipline and punishment are two very different things with very different results. One uses force and power the other uses kindly teaching.

How do you propose the teacher handle it when a teenage boy who is a foot taller than her, and very well built physically, tries to use body language to intimidate said teacher by standing so close he infringes on her personal space? (I've personally seen that tactic). Or what about the kid who tells the teacher to "f**k off" when asked to please sit down and be quiet? Or how about the one who simply will not do as asked, and tells the teacher to his/her face that "there's nothing you can do to make me". And the list of such bad behaviour goes on. Are you seriously suggesting that kids that behave in this way should never be punished?

I absolutely suggest she not try to overpower him by grabbing his body or clothing. She gives a warning to get out of my personal space, and if it doesn't happen immediately, she calls in the authority - the principal, vice principal, etc. When a student uses that kind of language the principal is called. You say if I can't make you, the principal can. Adults also need to know that there is something we can to do make them mind, and that is through teaching respect. I am suggesting that kids who behave this way should never be punished - they should be taught not only what not to do but what to do instead.

Respect is a two way street, and children must be taught to always treat others the way they themselves would like to be treated. Ideally this process should start at their mother's knee, and then be reinforced throughout the school years. But as we do not live in an "ideal" world far too many kids are entering the school system demanding respect from their elders while providing none in return. And society needs to find a way to reverse that trend. Simply focusing on the teachers' behaviour while ignoring the behaviour of the students is not a solution.

When you turn abuse into a fight, one is no better than the other. Someone has to be the leader, the teacher, the bigger person, the wiser one. This focus in on the teacher who handled things badly, and faced the consequence. The consequence to the student would be private and confidential.

[keith1612]

at what cost to the little people?

I think you missed the part where Steven said "in appropriate measure". No-one is condoning the use of excessive force. But there ARE situations where physical intervention is both appropriate and necessary in order to deter kids from doing things that may cause harm to themselves or others.

If I tell a child not to perform such an act, and the child wilfully disobeys me, would I be wrong in your eyes if I physically removed the child from the situation? If so, what would your solution be?

Every day in our schools there are kids who behave in such a manner as to disrupt the ability of other kids to learn. These kids refuse to listen to their teachers, or to respect any kind of authority. Amazingly, many of them have been taught by their parents that it is perfectly acceptable to behave that way. And those same parents are the first to be banging on the school boards door if they percieve that their kids teacher has tried to exert ANY kind of discipline whatsoever, not just the physical kind. I have seen parents calling in to complain if their kid has been kept behind a few minutes after school, or has been denied a privilege that was granted to others. Parents have even complained when their kids were asked to write an essay outlining the reasons for their behaviour and why its wrong to behave that way. And we've all met the parents who insist their kid simply would not behave that way, so therefore the teacher must be picking on them!!!

Frankly, I suspect many of these parents had a bad experience when they were a kid with a teacher, and are now taking their revenge on the poor smuck who is currently teaching their kid. But such parents are not doing their kids any favours by allowing them to grow up thinking it is OK to continually defy authority. Just ask those who eventually employ such kids what they think of such behaviour; and ask how long they remained working for that employer!

nobody is saying physical force isnt needed to control kids in a fight.
this is not that situation above.
just because a student becomes unruly and can detract from teaching is far from a reason for physical abuse.
i have many friends with kids still in school and they are far from a wild unruly bunch.
perhaps its time to fire teachers that havent learned the ability to control children in a non violent manor.