Elle Seven
Superstar
The most confusing thing about this entire thread has been the insistence that teachers ought to send disruptive students to the principal's office.
I graduated in 1998, and back then, this was a legitimate threat. Most students, even those who indulged in weekly fukkery, didn't want this particular consequence. We came up with corporal punishment (where the teachers could spank you), the advent of metal detectors (but folks brought weapons to handle their direct enemies, not shoot up the entire school), and general respect for authority and the teacher's within the classroom (even when we felt the teachers were on some bullshyt). There was a whole culture which supported this type of mentality, which is why children could go into a school and certain disciplinary techniques were still effective.
That being said...
Who here legitimately thinks a child would think to mace a teacher and the others who choose to outright fight them will 1) willingly leave the classroom once the teacher directs him/her out and 2) will submit to whatever authority/discipline the principal or staff attempts to impart on him/her? It's damn near comical to keep seeing people suggest that. Maybe it's a reflexive response, because nothing in the way some of these modern children move, at least a lot of them, suggests to me they are going silently.
Additionally, imagine the energy and time a teacher would have to put into trying to expel a disruptive student from a classroom. This takes away from the time the other children who are in the classroom get for their own education. How is this fair? The time and space is a shared resource; when a teacher has to spend a chunk of it directing a student's behavior - not trying to teach a child a math problem or how to read or something else all the kids in the class can collectively learn from - then how are the other children supposed to manage? Who is benefiting from any of this?
I'm not even focusing on the white teacher here because I've seen this kind of foolishness with black teachers and students as well. What is with this expectation that teachers are supposed to keep acquiescing to these children? It's not to say teachers ought to abuse their power as authority figures either. I'm saying somewhere along the line, the social contract went to shyt. There was an expectation you sent your children to school with, at the bare minimum, the ability to act like they had some couth; this could give the teachers what they needed to help the child. Teachers ought to have come in with the task to teach these children...and the lessons weren't always curriculum based. It seemed like the school used to re-enforce what was learned at home and vice versa.
I don't know what the fukk this is going on now though. It really does seem like some people expect teachers to babysit their children, for lack of a better term.
I graduated in 1998, and back then, this was a legitimate threat. Most students, even those who indulged in weekly fukkery, didn't want this particular consequence. We came up with corporal punishment (where the teachers could spank you), the advent of metal detectors (but folks brought weapons to handle their direct enemies, not shoot up the entire school), and general respect for authority and the teacher's within the classroom (even when we felt the teachers were on some bullshyt). There was a whole culture which supported this type of mentality, which is why children could go into a school and certain disciplinary techniques were still effective.
That being said...
Who here legitimately thinks a child would think to mace a teacher and the others who choose to outright fight them will 1) willingly leave the classroom once the teacher directs him/her out and 2) will submit to whatever authority/discipline the principal or staff attempts to impart on him/her? It's damn near comical to keep seeing people suggest that. Maybe it's a reflexive response, because nothing in the way some of these modern children move, at least a lot of them, suggests to me they are going silently.
Additionally, imagine the energy and time a teacher would have to put into trying to expel a disruptive student from a classroom. This takes away from the time the other children who are in the classroom get for their own education. How is this fair? The time and space is a shared resource; when a teacher has to spend a chunk of it directing a student's behavior - not trying to teach a child a math problem or how to read or something else all the kids in the class can collectively learn from - then how are the other children supposed to manage? Who is benefiting from any of this?
I'm not even focusing on the white teacher here because I've seen this kind of foolishness with black teachers and students as well. What is with this expectation that teachers are supposed to keep acquiescing to these children? It's not to say teachers ought to abuse their power as authority figures either. I'm saying somewhere along the line, the social contract went to shyt. There was an expectation you sent your children to school with, at the bare minimum, the ability to act like they had some couth; this could give the teachers what they needed to help the child. Teachers ought to have come in with the task to teach these children...and the lessons weren't always curriculum based. It seemed like the school used to re-enforce what was learned at home and vice versa.
I don't know what the fukk this is going on now though. It really does seem like some people expect teachers to babysit their children, for lack of a better term.
his hand
