Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I will tell you something I believe. Every time a teacher sends a discipline problem to the office, some student or students think to themselves: "See, that teacher can't handle it".
Well, of course, they do. They didn't just start figuring this out; your average first grader knows which buttons work & on whom, by the end of the first week back to school.
I'm not a teacher, so maybe I'm not seeing the big picture here but teachers need to accomplish the task for which they were hired: Teaching.
They have one period, 5 days a week to teach that class that subject & if every day they have to square off with the same students & re-establish their authority ... they aren't teaching.
When a class continually de-evolves due to the distractions caused by the same student(s), isn't the whole class going to start thinking: "See, that teacher can't handle it"? If I were a teacher, I'd rather have 29:1 students thinking "can handle" vs "can't", than 30 for "can't".
Now, IMO, this is the bigger problem:
Every student already knows that a teacher's authority is mitigated. The student who is going to take it to that level is not going to be the student that respects social appropriateness; they operate at a more primal level: Might Makes Right.
The teacher's Might is mitigated: "See, that teacher can't handle it". The principal's Might is also mitigated: "See, that principal can't handle it". Principal calls parent: Yeah, you already know the end of that story. It's probably been years (if ever) that the parent has exercised any authority. That student or students think to themselves: "See, nobody can handle it".
Given that this student is still a literal child: That is one kid who knows he's in trouble. Who knows he/she is self-destructing right in front of his/her own eyes & knows that the adults; can't handle it. If I were that kid, I'd probably keep taking it to the next level too.
This is above & beyond what any teacher could possibly do. This has to re-trace it's own steps, meaning that the parent has to step up & back up the principal, the principal backs up the teacher & kids can be students because I am the parent & I said so.
That whole "In Loco Parentis" doctrine implies a responsibility for the school to function as the parent does. If a parent feels like a school is passing the buck? They might want to look in the mirror.
Nobody’s home to do that job anymore. Parents have been using the schools for free daycare for decades.
I’ve been home for 11 years now because my youngest son is SPED (severe needs) & it’s not uncommon for me to get a phone call & have to drop everything & get to the school. I might go 3 days in a row without a phone call. Other days I get 3 calls within a few hours.
But the timing was just right; that when he started preschool, his 6 older brothers were entering middle & high school.
There were times I wished I could claim the de facto “get out of parenting pass”: “Oh ... but I work!” The kids probably did too, because if they got sent home from school; they would be out in the yard pulling weeds.
I hate to admit it but not being able to work made me a better parent. My kids got a better education, the teachers could do their jobs because I did do my job. Just the uncompensated one. The one with no socialization. No validation & no recognition. Nobody even to say “Good morning” or “Have a great weekend!”
Here I am trying to see 18 teachers in 2 days during parent teacher conferences, while Ms. “I work!” is MIA.
Good luck on getting parents to do their jobs being parents; they don’t want to be me.
Do you have evidence that it isn't? Given the story provided the most reasonable explanation IMHO is that the administrator spoke with the student about his language, looked at the situation, and determined that a stern warning was the correct course of action. If you give the administrator the benefit of the doubt and assume they are competent there is no other reasonable explanation.
But of course, perhaps you left some details out? I'm certainly not unwilling to believe that horrid administration exists, I know it does... But not anywhere I have ever worked.
A teacher who was involved relayed the story to me. I didn't recognize the student's name so I don't know the history. I sub and coach in the school so the teacher assumed I knew the student's history.
All that I can say is I have seen the discipline problem growing in this school. The teacher's seem to be in agreement on this issue. I've known the principal for about nine years and he seems competent. I think he is trying an approach that is not working.
And what exactly should happen to a student who said **** a few times? Does it matter if this was their first offense? Suspension? In School Suspension? Saturday School? What?
Let me know what the right course of action is and then we can talk about our philosophical differences in regards to discipline.
Obviously I don't know enough about your school but I don't see what you describe either where I currently teach nor at any of the schools where I have worked in the past. I honestly can't tell if you are at a particularly bad school/badly administered school, or if you are just not "the type." I have never heard of any of my (competent) co-workers leaving due to problems with students... It's always been compensation related.
Ah, got it: "I haven't seen what you describe personally, therefore it's very difficult for me to believe it could possibly be true." Interesting logic. Reminds me a bit of Pauline Kael's quote after Nixon's re-election: "I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don't know." How is it possible that there are a great many teachers who have left this field for this reason if you haven't talked to them? Something to ponder, indeed.
Words without actions are meaningless with kids, at least in terms of changing the behavior. They laugh at and disregard "verbal warnings." It tells them you aren't serious. What is an appropriate sanction?
kids hate losing time at lunch or to have to get up earlier. That would be perfectly appropriate here.
Yes, you are quite good and many of your colleagues are quite bad and incompetent. I caught onto that awhile back.
I agree with a lot of what you say here. But in my teaching career I worked in a couple of marginal schools...one so bad that the principal was profiled on "60 Minutes".
I will tell you something I believe. Every time a teacher sends a discipline problem to the office, some student or students think to themselves: "See, that teacher can't handle it".
Here's a question for you: What does it tell you when one teacher virtually never sends a student to the office, while another teacher with basically the same students sends several kids to the office a week?
Once again, you're assigning people arguments they haven't made, unless I missed it. I certainly wrote nothing about sending students to the office. At my current position, I've done it once. The feedback I get from administrators is that I have a very orderly, calm classroom. That said, I'm not so dumb as to think that anytime a teacher sends a student out of the room, the students read that as a failure on the teacher's part. Many times, the other students appreciate it and respect the teacher for removing a student who is disturbing everyone else and refuses to waste any more classtime dealing with the belligerent student. If you wish to delude yourself that good teachers never have to remove students, have at it. I have been and currently am amongst some excellent teachers who, at times, have disturbed students who have needed to be removed at times, in spite of the ample skills of these teachers.
Of course teachers who are constantly having kids removed do not have control of their classrooms. Who in the world are you arguing with on this point? Do you get that there is a ton of real estate between "Never removes a single kid" and "Removes kids all the time?"
There was mention in a different post of giving the administrators the benefit of the doubt. Given the state of public education and the processes by which we select administrators, I don't know why anyone would do that in a situation like the one described by another poster. There are many outstanding administrators. There are many lousy administrators. A big reason for the latter is the process. Instead of seeking out people with demonstrated abilities and experiences leading large numbers of their peers, we often look for teachers who have obtained comical graduate degrees in education, which in terms of rigor lie somewhere above gender studies degrees and somewhere below leisure science degrees, and no longer wish to teach. How could that ever lead to any sort of broad positive results? I've seen so many principals who taught for four or five years and then became administrators. I think many either didn't like teaching all that much or weren't all that good at it. Many times, not only are we choosing just from a pool of teachers, but not even the good teachers. If I were czar, I would go beyond the education industry to consider people outside the profession who have knowledge and experience managing large groups of people and large organizations. Leadership is probably the most most valuable resource in society while also the rarest. Good leaders can adapt to new industries and fields. The acquire knowledge quickly. What's much more difficult is teaching adults how to lead a couple hundred people and answer to a board and satisfy your customers and so forth.
Once again, you're assigning people arguments they haven't made, unless I missed it. I certainly wrote nothing about sending students to the office. At my current position, I've done it once. The feedback I get from administrators is that I have a very orderly, calm classroom. That said, I'm not so dumb as to think that anytime a teacher sends a student out of the room, the students read that as a failure on the teacher's part. Many times, the other students appreciate it and respect the teacher for removing a student who is disturbing everyone else and refuses to waste any more classtime dealing with the belligerent student. If you wish to delude yourself that good teachers never have to remove students, have at it. I have been and currently am amongst some excellent teachers who, at times, have disturbed students who have needed to be removed at times, in spite of the ample skills of these teachers.
Of course teachers who are constantly having kids removed do not have control of their classrooms. Who in the world are you arguing with on this point? Do you get that there is a ton of real estate between "Never removes a single kid" and "Removes kids all the time?"
There was mention in a different post of giving the administrators the benefit of the doubt. Given the state of public education and the processes by which we select administrators, I don't know why anyone would do that in a situation like the one described by another poster. There are many outstanding administrators. There are many lousy administrators. A big reason for the latter is the process. Instead of seeking out people with demonstrated abilities and experiences leading large numbers of their peers, we often look for teachers who have obtained comical graduate degrees in education, which in terms of rigor lie somewhere above gender studies degrees and somewhere below leisure science degrees, and no longer wish to teach. How could that ever lead to any sort of broad positive results? I've seen so many principals who taught for four or five years and then became administrators. I think many either didn't like teaching all that much or weren't all that good at it. Many times, not only are we choosing just from a pool of teachers, but not even the good teachers. If I were czar, I would go beyond the education industry to consider people outside the profession who have knowledge and experience managing large groups of people and large organizations. Leadership is probably the most most valuable resource in society while also the rarest. Good leaders can adapt to new industries and fields. The acquire knowledge quickly. What's much more difficult is teaching adults how to lead a couple hundred people and answer to a board and satisfy your customers and so forth.
First of all, this thread is an ongoing discussion with many participants. Everything that is said is not necessarily a response to what you specifically said.
Second, yes I know all the criticisms of administrators. I found over the years that that the percentages of bad teachers and bad administrators wasn't that different. And when a school superintendent and/or school board appoints an administrator, staff doesn't always know the marching orders that the administrator has been given. But with rare exceptions, administrators did a teacher's job for some number of years, while it is rare that a teacher ever did an administrator's job.
A big reason for the latter is the process. Instead of seeking out people with demonstrated abilities and experiences leading large numbers of their peers, we often look for teachers who have obtained comical graduate degrees in education, which in terms of rigor lie somewhere above gender studies degrees and somewhere below leisure science degrees, and no longer wish to teach. How could that ever lead to any sort of broad positive results? I've seen so many principals who taught for four or five years and then became administrators. I think many either didn't like teaching all that much or weren't all that good at it. Many times, not only are we choosing just from a pool of teachers, but not even the good teachers. If I were czar, I would go beyond the education industry to consider people outside the profession who have knowledge and experience managing large groups of people and large organizations. Leadership is probably the most most valuable resource in society while also the rarest. Good leaders can adapt to new industries and fields. The acquire knowledge quickly. What's much more difficult is teaching adults how to lead a couple hundred people and answer to a board and satisfy your customers and so forth.
Looking from the outside, I have wondered the same thing. Our district is in the process of hiring a new superintendent and I wish they'd look outside education for someone who can lead and manage a large diverse workforce. Education operates as a closed shop at all levels which has made it hard for the industry to relook at itself and adapt because outside thought and ideas are rejected.
Ah, got it: "I haven't seen what you describe personally, therefore it's very difficult for me to believe it could possibly be true." Interesting logic. Reminds me a bit of Pauline Kael's quote after Nixon's re-election: "I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don't know." How is it possible that there are a great many teachers who have left this field for this reason if you haven't talked to them? Something to ponder, indeed.
Words without actions are meaningless with kids, at least in terms of changing the behavior. They laugh at and disregard "verbal warnings." It tells them you aren't serious. What is an appropriate sanction?
kids hate losing time at lunch or to have to get up earlier. That would be perfectly appropriate here.
Yes, you are quite good and many of your colleagues are quite bad and incompetent. I caught onto that awhile back.
Hey man, I can only speak to my experience. I've known about 30 or so teachers who left due to pay and only three or four that left due to student behavior... And they were all in their first year.
Obviously that does not mean that I am right about the state of education or that you are wrong... But it does mean we are seeing very different things.
You know, it's almost as if there is wide variation within the education system due to lack of any centralization.
I'm personally not much of an old school authoritarian type but I certainly believe in punishments when needed... Seems to work well for me. I can see the merits of taking a "broken windows" approach but for me I think there are some less tangible things you give up when you do that.
A teacher who was involved relayed the story to me. I didn't recognize the student's name so I don't know the history. I sub and coach in the school so the teacher assumed I knew the student's history.
All that I can say is I have seen the discipline problem growing in this school. The teacher's seem to be in agreement on this issue. I've known the principal for about nine years and he seems competent. I think he is trying an approach that is not working.
I'm sorry to hear that. It sounds like your school is going through some hard times. I'm unsure, however, that your school can be taken as a model to understand teacher turnover.
Teachers leaving due to student behavior is not new and has been going on for decades.
Schools have no recourse with bad behavior. Years ago the first school at which I taught had "Saturday detention". Kids who got too many demerits would have to come all day on Saturday and clean gum off the sidewalks, help wipe down tables or pick up trash. Kids hated this so getting demerits was avoided by most. But then a parent complained and it was decided that the school had no legal standing for for a child to come on Saturdays. So the program was scrapped and bad behavior escalated.
We used to be able to have after school detentions but again parents complained and the school had to end those too.
There is this attitude that if a student is disruptive then it's the fault of the teacher for just not being good enough. Not being a good enough classroom manager, not making the lessons as fun as they should be, etc. Fault was never placed on the student for not wanting to behave or learn. Parents were never held accountable for reinforcing good behavior on their end.
Unless you have taught in such an environment you have no idea how quitting seems like your only option to keeping your sanity.
Last edited by Coloradomom22; 05-26-2018 at 09:25 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
