Teachers suspended

[Merry]

Good classroom management is hard to attain when you have some kids who have NO respect for authority, and REFUSE to follow even the simplest of instructions.

Expulsion of such students should only be used as an absolute LAST resort. But, unfortunately, denying schools access to any and all other forms of discipline means that expulsion is often the only tool educators feel they have left.

The law allows teachers to use “reasonable” force when necessary to respond to bad behaviour, but only the courts can decide what is “reasonable” and what is not whenever there is a dispute between the parents and the school. That said is it a good use of both taxpayers’ money and the courts time, to use the legal system every time there is such a dispute? I think not.

Without knowing what the circumstances were that led to the teacher grabbing the child’s hood, it’s hard to say for certain whether or not the teacher’s action was appropriate. But even if we assume it was not, there was no lasting physical harm to the child. Therefore, a disciplinary talk from the Teacher’s boss (the Principal) as to the inappropriateness of her reaction, and a notation in her file, should have been sufficient to avoid a repeat of this particular behaviour.

As for the child, if being yanked by the hoodie is enough to cause some sort of mental trauma, that kid has far more psychological problems than we’ve been told about. Kids are a lot more resilient than many give them credit for, and I doubt this particular incident would have much of a long-lasting effect on the kid. IMO making a big fuss about a relatively minor incident may have a far more harmful effect on the kid’s psyche in the long run. Think about the guilt the kid may feel, particularly if others in the class pick on him, as a result of his role in what happened to a possibly much loved teacher.

The other concern is that often kids who feel they’ve been able to get the teacher in trouble like this, will be even LESS likely to obey that teacher in the future than they were before. A situation which often results in even less discipline in the classroom, and more disruptions in the future; and that is NOT conducive to a good learning environment for ANY of the kids in that particular class.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

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?

I would, but I would not use the same method that he used to be on top of your kid.
I would use the hold restraint technique if I was able, or call someone to assist. If I felt a child was in that much danger, of course I would jeopardize my employment to ensure his safety, and answer to the authorities.
Teachers have procedures to follow with regard to these behaviours, They need to be reviewed and followed.
There are good reasons for those policies, and lawsuits are one.

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.

That is inappropriate force. It would not be accepted behaviour for student to student, student to teacher, teacher to student or teacher to teacher. Lasting consequence is one thing, precedent is an additional consideration. Suspension was necessary, just as it is for children who pose danger to others in the school. If a teacher cannot hold her temper to handle things appropriately, she needs a break.

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.

They just can't take those chances anymore. Word against word. I see potential for both physical and psychological harm especially for behaviour disordered kids.

[steven lloyd]

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.

One fears the punks who will break into his car or house so keeps them locked and advocates tougher sentencing.

The other fears poisons falling from the sky and the descent of storm troopers on his community and advocates hiding in a basement room lined with tinfoil and facilitating an uprising among like minded teenagers who stay up all night on the internet.

Yup, ya got me there kompili

[steven lloyd]

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.

It's ironic that the kids from that generation are now raising undisciplined, unnappreciative, something for nothing, actions do not have consequences, “I’m not responsible”, “the world owes me a living”, “give it to me now” problem kids. You're right. Something tells me it didn't work as well as them kids thought it would, we are seeing the results of this now.

[sooperphreek]

funny how freerights only feels that rights are a oneway street. if it is not clear enough to you what is happening with kids today then you are part of the problem. you dont have solutions....you just stand on principles that create more disruption. the one teacher that dragged the kid out had no intention to strangle the kid at all....thats common sense. it happened and it was cause and effect. i guess we can go back to the old standby that the kid was only a youngster and could do what they want with impunity.

[keith1612]

Good classroom management is hard to attain when you have some kids who have NO respect for authority, and REFUSE to follow even the simplest of instructions.

Expulsion of such students should only be used as an absolute LAST resort. But, unfortunately, denying schools access to any and all other forms of discipline means that expulsion is often the only tool educators feel they have left.

The law allows teachers to use “reasonable” force when necessary to respond to bad behaviour, but only the courts can decide what is “reasonable” and what is not whenever there is a dispute between the parents and the school. That said is it a good use of both taxpayers’ money and the courts time, to use the legal system every time there is such a dispute? I think not.

Without knowing what the circumstances were that led to the teacher grabbing the child’s hood, it’s hard to say for certain whether or not the teacher’s action was appropriate. But even if we assume it was not, there was no lasting physical harm to the child. Therefore, a disciplinary talk from the Teacher’s boss (the Principal) as to the inappropriateness of her reaction, and a notation in her file, should have been sufficient to avoid a repeat of this particular behaviour.

As for the child, if being yanked by the hoodie is enough to cause some sort of mental trauma, that kid has far more psychological problems than we’ve been told about. Kids are a lot more resilient than many give them credit for, and I doubt this particular incident would have much of a long-lasting effect on the kid. IMO making a big fuss about a relatively minor incident may have a far more harmful effect on the kid’s psyche in the long run. Think about the guilt the kid may feel, particularly if others in the class pick on him, as a result of his role in what happened to a possibly much loved teacher.

The other concern is that often kids who feel they’ve been able to get the teacher in trouble like this, will be even LESS likely to obey that teacher in the future than they were before. A situation which often results in even less discipline in the classroom, and more disruptions in the future; and that is NOT conducive to a good learning environment for ANY of the kids in that particular class.

please show me any single law that says teachers can use force to correct bad behavior.
parents are not allowed that so i hardly believe teachers have it.
it may be a union rule it sure as hell isnt a law.
last i heard in Canada putting your hands on ANYONE for reasons of other than self protection or protection of others was against the law.
you can not beat a child because its not conducive to a good learning environment.
thats assault.

[keith1612]

It's ironic that the kids from that generation are now raising undisciplined, unnappreciative, something for nothing, actions do not have consequences, “I’m not responsible”, “the world owes me a living”, “give it to me now” problem kids. You're right. Something tells me it didn't work as well as them kids thought it would, we are seeing the results of this now.

man i must be missing alot, all the kids i deal with are nothing like what you are saying.
sure they may not have learned to use the MR and MRS when addressing adults like we were taught but in general most are good kids and i remember when i was a punk 35 years ago there was many then also.
society has not become terrible in general.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

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.

please show me any single law that says teachers can use force to correct bad behavior.

Canadian Public Schools have a hands-off policy. It is never acceptable for a teacher or administrator to put his or her hands on a student, in safety situations or otherwise, according to those I know who teach in the system.

Even SEAs are not allowed to put their hands on a student's body or clothing.
They may only use their words, and body positioning in order to affect change.
In the midst of a fight where the kid on the bottom is at a clear disadvantage?
Teachers must use their body positioning and language to attempt to break it up. Indeed, the idea of supervision is to catch the conflict prior to physical altercations.

Even for special education kids who are bolting for the street about to be hit by a car, the SEA must not touch the child.
He may try to overtake him and block his way to the street with is own body and tell him to stop. That's it.
This information is from a friend who just completed the SEA course and has just starting working in the public school system with special needs kids, He had this very case with a 9 yo boy with DS who ran for home. My friend said he ran to overtake him down a wet grassy hill, slipped, got up, ran some more and stood in front of the child to block him just at the edge of the street.
Teachers are given reprimands for this. Reasonable cause is subjective and would be defined differently between parents, teachers, principals and the law, which is why the law and policies are initiated for clarity.
Now using a system of unbiased neutral investigation, teachers will be held to these standards more often.

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/child-rights/canada.php

Canada’s Constitution prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment.”[14] Whether this would apply to corporal punishment by teachers is not clear.[15] However, provincial school district associations have clearly banned corporal punishment. In Ontario, the guide to school district policies states as follows:

The use of corporal punishment in any form is strictly prohibited in the district. No student will be subject to the infliction of corporal punishment.

Corporal punishment is defined as the willful infliction of, or willfully causing the infliction of physical pain.

No teacher, administrator, other school personnel or school volunteer will subject a student to corporal punishment or condone the use of corporal punishment by any person under his/her supervision or control. Permission to administer corporal punishment will not be sought or accepted from any guardian/parent … .

A staff member is authorized to employ physical force when, in his/her professional judgment, the physical force is necessary to prevent a student from harming self, others or doing harm to district property. Physical force shall not be used to discipline or punish a student. The superintendent shall inform all staff members and volunteers of this policy.[16]

Leaving no room for ignorance, then, and only a small chance of judgement flaw, if a teacher is pulling on a kids' hoodie to make him behave, she is using physical force as discipline or punishment. Pretty clear to me.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

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?

I'm going out on a limb to say that grabbing a kid from behind by the hoodie until it chokes him to make him stop travelling forward is excessive force. And the definition of 'causing harm' is very broad.

You would absolutely be wrong to physically remove a child for disobeying your orders in a public school.
The solution is to use your words and body positioning to affect the desired change, according to the law.
I am happy about this, because teachers are human beings with baggage of their own who are not perfect and who can be affected negatively by the behaviours of others. If this thick line were not drawn on corporal punishment and physical abuse, even to the degree of potentially allowing harm to a child, it would be up to individual teachers and schools as to how they discipline their students. There are too many variables for the students as well, with brain disorders and special needs that are often not diagnosed until late elementary school or early high school. Plenty of special needs kids were physically punished in public schools in the fifties and sixties, and it did them no good at all with regard to change in unacceptable behaviour. Today, we provide them with support vs. punishment.

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!!!

It is a parent's job to advocate for their children in public schools. I have done some of those things you mentioned in advocating for a special needs student. And some teachers and principals do pick on students, there is no doubt about that.
One need only observe in a public school to witness it.

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!

Frankly, I agree with you that parents had bad experiences when they were kids especially if they went through public school when corporal punishment was legal, and promoted as a way to 'make 'em mind'. Some of those parents did a great thing teaching their kids that it is not right for anybody to hit you or hurt you to make you obey their demands or commands, because you made a mistake, or because they don't like you, and making law to ensure that adults used their time and words to teach, rather than inflicting pain as a punishment.
If you really think about it, we teach our kids to question authority, especially with regard to potential pedophiles and abusive adults in community and school. We are teaching our children they have rights. Now we need to teach them better about their responsibilities hat coincide with those rights.
However, it is not right or legal to take away a child's rights because they are not meeting their responsibilities. It is not right to physically punish them for it either. As a society, we have made this decision and put it in writing. It is right to teach them to do better and provide them with the support they need to learn that.
"The last resort" is human support, not physical punishment.
.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

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

And THAT is a problem when the adults are scared of the kids.
Could this be contributing to the problem?

Take the statements above and reverse them:

Who were you afraid of when you were an adult?
The children who who do not fear teachers police, dad and concerned citizens.

Fear control is as temporary as the fear itself. That fear is usually lost around the age of puberty onset.
That's when it is important to have learned other controls on our behavours other than fear from others who are bigger in size, wiser in thought, and in authority positions.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

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.

Do you still fear these people in your adult life? Instructors, police, your father, and concerned citizens?

[OnTheRoadAgain]

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.

Respect: definition: Esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability: I have great respect for her judgment.
Deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges; proper acceptance or courtesy; acknowledgment: respect for a suspect's right to counsel; to show respect for the flag; respect for
the elderly.

We can see by definition that respect must be taught and learned. It is in the method of teaching where the true lessons on respect is learned. We do not need to reverse this trend, we need to teach children respect by example, and by treating them with respect, not by demanding it. It doesn't work with children and it most certainly doesn't work with teenagers.

[keith1612]

im in full agreement with proper care and control of children.
used when needed is acceptable.
the problem is the only real watchdog is themselves.
a teacher sitting in class with students searching porn is 100% unacceptable and he should have been fired on the spot, but any employee doing that on company time and computors should be.
to say well we are paying you 70k a year to teach kids and watch porn is straight BS.
why are teachers who are BC govt employees allowed special rights to totally abuse the system and kids, and i do know its only a select few.
but as the boy scouts are now learning as are the churches covering up abuse with unions or whatever will in the end cost more.
weed out the bad apples and make a good system.
to fire a employee for theft but give a 14 day holiday for assault on a child to me is corrupt.
open and transparent is the words they all try and use now and i find the more i hear it the less its true.

[OnTheRoadAgain]

perhaps its time to fire teachers that havent learned the ability to control children in a non violent manor.

Funnily enough, I don't agree with that.
I think they should be treated just as the children are, fairly and justly.
They should first be removed from the school and given a break away.
They should write an essay on how to discipline without physical punishment or verbal abuse, and why that is now written in law.
They should have to hand this essay into the school board and principal for their review and acceptance.
Then, they should be carefully watched on a probationary period where they are monitored and intercepted if they go off track again. And if they cannot learn to follow their essay, and refuse to follow the law, then they should be let go so they can find a more appropriate job.

Physical abuse and sexual abuse or sexual interference are the only reasons I know of where a teacher can be fired.

[keith1612]

Funnily enough, I don't agree with that.
I think they should be treated just as the children are, fairly and justly.
They should first be removed from the school and given a break away.
They should write an essay on how to discipline without physical punishment or verbal abuse, and why that is now written in law.
They should have to hand this essay into the school board and principal for their review and acceptance.
Then, they should be carefully watched on a probationary period where they are monitored and intercepted if they go off track again. And if they cannot learn to follow their essay, and refuse to follow the law, then they should be let go so they can find a more appropriate job.

Physical abuse and sexual abuse or sexual interference are the only reasons I know of where a teacher can be fired.

well i also think violent kids should be taken from school for good, 100% no chance of return.
there are places they can be taught other than public school, say prison.
its a 2 way street and thats the same as the bullying issue, they catch a real bully and suspend them for 6 days after the bully beats a kid violently,
thats a failure by the school system to provide a safe enviroment.
its a joke the school board preaches anti bullying and then does nothing serious to violent offenders.
there is no place in schools for violence from kids or teachers, its supposed to be a safe place.