Discipline

Whether it was yesterday, or 100 years ago, we were disciplined and got an education. Now our children can't read or write. They are idiots...

The data in this figure is described in the surrounding text.
 
Whether it was yesterday, or 100 years ago, we were disciplined and got an education. Now our children can't read or write. They are idiots...
"Now"? When was the last time you were in a classroom observing with your own two eyes what is going on "now"?
 
Unkotare this is an important issue. I have much disagreement with the words in the article and some with your words that follow.

However, since I cannot debate the writer of the article, I'll not comment on it. But I will respectfully comment on your words.

I Used to Be One of Those Teachers​

I get it—I really do. I used to be one of those teachers who thought removing “problem kids” was the answer. Early in my career, I believed that getting rid of disruptions would make my class run smoothly.
In a typical class, there is a small number - often around ten percent, but with a wide range of possibilities - of students who are polite, enjoy learning, and pick up material taught quickly, often as if they already knew it, or understand it merely be being introduced to the topic, or shown the algorythm once. Sometimes called "smart kids."

Also in that typical class are a small number of students who not only do not want to be there, but are not disciplined by parents any further than making them go to school. They do not get "in trouble," if their parent is called over their behavior, and they are unaffected by any consequence the school can give them. Sometimes called "bad kids."

About 80% are there because that's what one does at that age, and they do what they need to do to get by, pass classes, and not get in trouble. They show interest in lessons that interest them, and wade though those that don't.

Those ten percent of "bad kids" can indeed cause a class to break down. They will distract the middle 80 percenters, who will not be upset much if the teacher cannot teach, so long as it isn't their fault, and will likely pay attention to the attention seekers.

The outlier "bad kids" will leave the class at the end of the period having learned nothing. The outlier "smart kids" will leave the class having learned something they basically already knew, or learned something they could have taught themselves if simply handed a set of instructions or an instructional video.

Who loses? The majority, the many, the mainstream, the typical, however you describe these kids. They leave the class having learned much less than they could have in a more focused classroom.

The solution is for the "smart kids" to go into advanced classes and the "bad kids" to be instructed in small groups, such as alternative campuses, where they will have a better chance of learning, and if they don't, at least they will not have stolen other children's educations.


And yes, for a day or two, it was quiet. But you know what happened next? Those same kids came back angrier, more frustrated, and more determined to push back.
My solution would not have them come back in a day or two. Disrupting a class is a serious act. It has serious consequences to the class members, so it should have serious consequences for the disrupter.
And the rest of the class?

They learned that if you mess up enough, you just get kicked out. No growth. No learning. Just punishment.
They learn the very important lesson that people don't want to be around you, or you around them, when you act a fool. Failure to learn that lesson has created a generation that can best be described as jerks.

The 80 percenters will not want to be just kicked out, because Mom. The "Smart kids" already understand that the class clowns and anger issue kids will be mounting new tires for them, or sweeping the school hallways in fifteen years. So they ignore them.
It took me years to realize that the real work isn’t in removing students; it’s in creating a classroom culture that makes removal unnecessary in the first place."


This is where we part company significantly. Those don't sound like the words of a teacher. They sound like indoctrination at a 'Professional Development' by a highly paid presenter chosen by the Superintendent and the Director of Instruction, neither of whom has been responsible for a classroom in a couple of decades.

When kids disrespect the teacher, bully their fellow students, make jokes that are laughed at for the disruption rather than the humor, and distract students who are trying to make an effort, the fault does not lie in any culture created by the teacher.

The fault is with the parents for not preventing this behavior, and with administration for allowing it to go on. Administrators can create a culture that focuses on learning by removing those who refuse to do so.

Some teachers are more talented than others, and some are able to maintain discipline with groups of students where other teachers cannot. I know some teachers like that and they are awesome.

But the majority are average teachers, as the math says that they will be.

The average teacher cannot cope with a class in which 3 out of 30 are acting for their own entertainment or out of rage, with no concern for what they are supposed to be doing.

It makes no sense to leave disruptive students in failing classrooms while we wait for average teachers to create this culture you speak of.
 
Last edited:
....

However, since I cannot debate the writer of the article, I'll not comment on it. But I will respectfully comment on your words.

...
None of them were my words, as I stated in the OP.
 
"Now"? When was the last time you were in a classroom observing with your own two eyes what is going on "now"?
They don't even know how to write. In fact, they don't even have to go to school anymore. We have let our children down.
 
...

In a typical class, there is a small number - often around ten percent, but with a wide range of possibilities - of students who are polite, enjoy learning, and pick up material taught quickly...
From whence did you pull that percentage?
 
They don't even know how to write. In fact, they don't even have to go to school anymore. We have let our children down.
"Now"? When was the last time you were in a classroom observing with your own two eyes what is going on "now"?
 
None of them were my words, as I stated in the OP.
LoL!

There was a break before the part I quoted, which I thought were your comments on the article.

Oh, well, I said my piece.

Walmart has School Supplies already displayed in front!

Whoop!
 
Unkotare this is an important issue. I have much disagreement with the words in the article and some with your words that follow.

However, since I cannot debate the writer of the article, I'll not comment on it. But I will respectfully comment on your words.

In a typical class, there is a small number - often around ten percent, but with a wide range of possibilities - of students who are polite, enjoy learning, and pick up material taught quickly, often as if they already knew it, or understand it merely be being introduced to the topic, or shown the algorythm once. Sometimes called "smart kids."

Also in that typical class are a small number of students who not only do not want to be there, but are not disciplined by parents any further than making them go to school. They do not get "in trouble," if their parent is called over their behavior, and they are unaffected by any consequence the school can give them. Sometimes called "bad kids."

About 80% are there because that's what one does at that age, and they do what they need to do to get by, pass classes, and not get in trouble. They show interest in lessons that interest them, and wade though those that don't.

Those ten percent of "bad kids" can indeed cause a class to break down. They will distract the middle 80 percenters, who will not be upset much if the teacher cannot teach, so long as it isn't their fault, and will likely pay attention to the attention seekers.

The outlier "bad kids" will leave the class at the end of the period having learned nothing. The outlier "smart kids" will leave the class having learned something they basically already knew, or learned something they could have taught themselves if simply handed a set of instructions or an instructional video.

Who loses? The majority, the many, the mainstream, the typical, however you describe these kids. They leave the class having learned much less than they could have in a more focused classroom.

The solution is for the "smart kids" to go into advanced classes and the "bad kids" to be instructed in small groups, such as alternative campuses, where they will have a better chance of learning, and if they don't, at least they will not have stolen other children's educations.



My solution would not have them come back in a day or two. Disrupting a class is a serious act. It has serious consequences to the class members, so it should have serious consequences for the disrupter.

They learn the very important lesson that people don't want to be around you, or you around them, when you act a fool. Failure to learn that lesson has created a generation that can best be described as jerks.

The 80 percenters will not want to be just kicked out, because Mom. The "Smart kids" already understand that the class clowns and anger issue kids will be mounting new tires for them, or sweeping the school hallways in fifteen years. So they ignore them.

This is where we part company significantly. Those don't sound like the words of a teacher. They sound like indoctrination at a 'Professional Development' by a highly paid presenter chosen by the Superintendent and the Director of Instruction, neither of whom has been responsible for a classroom in a couple of decades.

When kids disrespect the teacher, bully their fellow students, make jokes that are laughed at for the disruption rather than the humor, and distract students who are trying to make an effort, the fault does not lie in any culture created by the teacher.

The fault is with the parents for not preventing this behavior, and with administration for allowing it to go on. Administrators can create a culture that focuses on learning by removing those who refuse to do so.

Some teachers are more talented than others, and some are able to maintain discipline with groups of students where other teachers cannot. I know some teachers like that and they are awesome.

But the majority are average teachers, as the math says that they will be.

The average teacher cannot cope with a class in which 3 out of 30 are acting for their own entertainment or out of rage, with no concern for what they are supposed to be doing.

It makes no sense to leave disruptive students in failing classrooms while we wait for average teachers to create this culture you speak of.
So many percentages pulled out of thin air.
 
15th post
So many percentages pulled out of thin air.
Pulled out of seventeen years of public school experience both in the classroom and working with the "bad kids" after three years teaching at a private high school whose students had all been pressured out of public school.

If I didn't make it clear, those were typical with a wide range.
 

New Topics

Back
Top Bottom