4 ms·
I don't agree with the notion that classroom discipline is the teacher's responsibility. If a child needs discipline, the child should be sent away to receive
by grannyg00se 16y ago
I don't agree with the notion that classroom discipline is the teacher's responsibility. If a child needs discipline, the child should be sent away to receive it. A teacher should be responsible for teaching, period.
Also, if a child commits a crime in school (vandalism, verbal assault, physical assault, disturbing the peace) and is found to be a threat to the learning environment then they should be suspended. It's simply a matter of giving some power back to the authorities. Right now the children know that the teachers are their bitches. Until that changes the fight can't be won. Especially in children who have a gang member mentality.
- michael_dorfman 16y agoI agree about the first part; a teacher should be responsible for teaching, and other administrative staff for disciplinary issues. However, this requires (naturally) that there be funding in place for the necessary staff positions. As long as school funding is tied to local property taxes, there are going to be huge variations in the amount of spending per pupil, and staffing follows suit. As for your second point, I think it is a gross simplification to say "It's simply a matter of giving some power back to the authorities." We do need to give some power back to the authorities, but there's nothing simple about it.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- kleinsch 16y agoDefinitely. When classroom discipline is solely the teacher's responsibility, the teacher ends up spending all their time enforcing discipline and no time teaching. My girlfriend did Teach for America in the bad parts of Washington, DC and there were veteran teachers there who didn't have as much trouble with discipline because they were basically glorified babysitters. They didn't really teach anything, but they made sure students showed up and didn't kill each other. Works great for keeping things under control, but the kids are completely screwed as far as their education goes. I don't think the commenters saying that discipline is the teacher's responsibility understand the circumstances involved in some of these schools. We're talking about kids pulling knives on each other or throwing desks, not passing notes in the back of the class. The teacher also has no control over how much the parents (or in many cases grandparents) will help. My girlfriend had one kid who had to be suspended for throwing a chair at her. When he came back, he said that while he was suspended his dad took him out on a boat and got him ice cream. Suspension was more fun than going to school, so is it surprising that his behavior never changed?
- ZachPruckowski 16y agoI blame the parental situation, for two reasons. First of all, if my parents got a message on their voicemail (and schools have parents' phone numbers) or on my report card comments saying so much as "Zach can be slightly disruptive sometimes", then they'd darn well make me behave myself. Which brings us to the second reason - a lot of parents seem unwilling to lay down the law and make their children respect their authority even slightly. I'm not suggesting we go back to beating kids with switches or anything, but I think there's a fundamental link between whether or not you make kids eat their vegetables and whether or not they'll listen to the teacher. Now I'm sure there are a lot of mitigating factors on the parental side, in terms of having to work long hours to put food on the table, but in the end, discipline and respect begin at home.