France Bans Ketchup in School Cafeterias

[John Bennett]

I agree that teachers have a very stressful job, and that they are having to pay for society's problems. But I can't help thinking that they have brought some of this on themselves. They were in the forefront of the campaign to abolish corporal punishment. So now they have kids whom they can't discipline, and they have to call the police.

I was caned at school and no, I didn't vow revenge on society. Even in our primary school (age 5 to 11) the teachers would sometimes give us a slap on the leg or the arm (boys wore short trousers in those days and girls wore skirts). Maybe I'm eccentric but it didn't make me twisted and bitter. What made me bitter was having to learn to bloody dance.

I'm not sure if teachers were at the forefront of having corporal punishment banned in the UK - I thought it was an act of Parliament (1987), but I could be wrong.

I feel that corporal punishment never worked anyway. It was around throughout my entire schooldays and it was used sparingly. And it always seemed to be the same pupils who got it, who rarely seemed to correct their behaviour afterwards. That said, I don't believe Messrs. Quinn, Garlick, McCloud or Smith spent the rest of their days grinding their teeth over it. Smith certainly didn't - he became a successful magician and children's entertainer!

I was never caned, but my parents were back in the 50s, for quite frankly minor indiscretions. In fact, one day a teacher asked my father's class if there was anybody who hadn't been given 'the slipper' yet. My father said he hadn't. "Come up here, boy" was the answer.... I think my father is none the worse for his experience.

But there is a totally different midset today. Kids think they are untouchable for a start. "You can't touch me" was a comment I heard often. In fact that was pretty much the rule when I first started teaching, until a code of 'reasonable force' was introduced to enable teachers to physically remove students from a class when it was entirely necessary. Some of these students clearly got a bit of a shock when they spouted the standard line only to be told "well actually, I can" and were then promply led out the door to cool off.

[Adam Went]

The only thing teachers can do these days to punish a student is something like sending them to the "time out room", short of sending them to the principal's office or suspending them, depending on how serious the offence is - in any case, it gets them out of a normal class routine which plays into some students hands. Half the time that's what they're trying to achieve in the first place.

Cheers,
Adam.

[Robert]

Limehouse, you say that sometimes it isn't possible to send a child out of the room. Why? Do they refuse to leave?

Any child who doesn't respond to discipline should be removed to a special institution.

John, yes, the cane isn't meant to be a dreadful experience that people remember for the rest of their days. I can barely remember the two occasions on which I was caned or what it was for.

Yes, the slogan is "I'm underprivileged....therefore I'm privileged." One mustn't pander to such attitudes.

I think the teachers were campaining for the outlawing of caning. One young teacher said that if he couldn't get the attention of his class without the threat of the cane, he'd be a very poor teacher.

Errata, your post tells me all I need to know about you. Do not address me again.

[caz]

I fervently wish they had banned suet dumplings at school when I was five. I can heave just thinking about suet, never mind if I smell it, and tasting it would make me sick as a dog. Miss Jones, my ancient headmistress at the time, came round to check we were eating our lunches, and she smacked me because I couldn't touch my dumplings (no jokes at the back please ).

While I can say quite truthfully that "it never did me any (lasting) harm", that was probably because I was otherwise a very happy and well-behaved kid, with no problems at home or school. And I have never been a fussy eater. I used to love my school dinners in general, and would help other kids who were having trouble finishing theirs, so they would avoid getting smacked too.

But I really don't think smacking young children for not eating certain foods should ever have been part of their 'education', and thank goodness we have moved on from such - wickedness. Yes, I would call it wickedness.

So much for the good old days.

Love,

Caz
X

[Errata]

Errata, your post tells me all I need to know about you. Do not address me again.

My post doesn't even address a tenth of the things people generally feel they need to know about me. But if you feel that my opposition to the specific subject of violence against children renders me unfit to know, that's fine. But you might consider what such a declaration says about you. Just a thought.

This is a public forum, and if you state an opinion on any given topic I am free to respond with my own opinion, or correct you if I feel your facts are incorrect. As I think that this is the first post in which I have ever actually addressed you, I can assure you that I can foresee no need to do so again. However please do not expect that further opinions will go unchallenged. That is not the nature of the forum. If there is something that you do not wish to open to public debate, I suggest you do not post it.

But on a social level? As you wish.

[Limehouse]

Limehouse, you say that sometimes it isn't possible to send a child out of the room. Why? Do they refuse to leave?

Any child who doesn't respond to discipline should be removed to a special institution.

John, yes, the cane isn't meant to be a dreadful experience that people remember for the rest of their days. I can barely remember the two occasions on which I was caned or what it was for.

Yes, the slogan is "I'm underprivileged....therefore I'm privileged." One mustn't pander to such attitudes.

I think the teachers were campaining for the outlawing of caning. One young teacher said that if he couldn't get the attention of his class without the threat of the cane, he'd be a very poor teacher.

Errata, your post tells me all I need to know about you. Do not address me again.

Robert - sometimes it is unwise to send students out of the class for their own safety and that of other students. It is best to leave them to calm down and just keep an eye on them. The exception would be if they become violent. As John pointed out, we are allowed to use reasonable force to restrain students who are likely to cause harm to themselves or others. In my case that would be alomost impossible as I am half the size of most of my students, including the girls. In 17 years, I have only twice had to separate boys engaged in fighting in my class and I did so by jumping between them before the next punch was thrown.

You comment:

Yes, the slogan is "I'm underprivileged....therefore I'm privileged." One mustn't pander to such attitudes.

This rather assumes that all the ills in society (and disruption in schools) are caused by the 'underprivileged'. This is not the case. Many, many privileged people raise children who cause havoc and distress and disruption to others. The difference is that it rarely gets reported in the Daily Mail and their parents/carers pay for the damage and, very often, the incidents are smoothed over. As an example, it is said that our own Prime Minister and his pals (Boris, I believe) often went out smashing up restaurants and bars when they were students but always paid for the damage before they left.

[Robert]

Limehouse, nice to hear you admit that often these kids do not come from broken homes, are not regularly beaten at home, etc.

Still mystified as to why forcing someone to stand outside the classroom would be a health hazard.

[Ally]

If a fourteen year old punched me in the face, I would teach him what happens to people who randomly go around and punch people in the face, and usually what happens is they keep doing it until they find someone who beats the living snot out of them and then they realize the error of their ways and quit doing it. I would be happy to give that object lesson. And I frankly don't care if he's retarded, or high, or whatever. High people are still responsible for their actions and retarded people need to learn consequences can hurt just as much as non-retarded people do. If they are capable of understanding the power of hitting by hitting, then they are capable of being hit.

My friend (who knew me very well) had kids and her first kid, maybe around 3-4? was going around punching people all the time. Each time it would happen, they'd do the "no we don't hit people" and the kid would just keep punching. I told her if he ever hit me, I'd hit back, so if she was opposed, avoid me til he grew up. Sure enough, she brings the kid over one day and he tried to hit me because his mom and I were talking and he wanted attention. The first time, I grabbed his arm before he connected and told him "if you hit me, I will hit you back. If you hit my leg, I will hit your leg. If you hit my face, I will hit your face. I am bigger than you, and I hit harder". He'd been hitting his mom and everyone for a while and nothing had ever happened. Sure enough about five minutes later he came up and punched me in the arm so I took his arm and slapped him extremely hard on it. He went crying to his mother and she basically told him, she warned you she would do it. Don't hit her.

He spent the next few months continuing to hit his mother, but he never once tried to hit me again. He knew I wouldn't allow it and he knew he wouldn't like the result.

Hitting should not be the first recourse, but when reason fails, sometimes an object lesson is needed.

[Robert]

Caz, I am not suggesting that schoolchildren should be forced to eat what they don't want.

My own memories of school dinners (which I only had for a short while) was that they were OK but not a patch on home fare. After about a year I stopped going in for them, as I was too busy playing chess.

[Errata]

He spent the next few months continuing to hit his mother, but he never once tried to hit me again. He knew I wouldn't allow it and he knew he wouldn't like the result.

They've done studies on just this kind of scenario. And I think that you would agree that even through you slapped him kinda hard, it wasn't really that painful. Probably more startling than anything. According to developmental psychologists, it wasn't your slap that modified his behavior. He ran crying to his mother, and she essentially told him "I will not protect you from her. I am taking her side, and you no longer belong in this group." When she didn't immediately show concern for his well being and told him that you were allowed to do that to him, that made YOU her favorite instead of him. His status in his mother's eyes was now in question, and children are very very protective of their status in a family group. If they feel they do not belong in a group, they will do whatever it takes to be welcomed. Including modifying their behavior. It would have worked if you looked him right in the eye and screamed bloody murder. The only requirements are a conflict that results in the child running to their parent for reassurance as to their status, and the parent not giving it to him.

Had your friend understood this, she probably would have immediately instituted the same conditions whenever he hit HER, and it would have stopped pretty quickly. Having someone explain to you why you shouldn't hit people is really not terribly realistic. Had he hit a friend or a classmate, they would have shrieked, cried, and been really mad at them. Those are consequences, and kids don't like anyone being mad at them. A kid hits an adult, they don't get that reaction. There maybe an "ow" some awkward laughter and then mommy pulls them aside for some one on one time (which is probably what the kid wanted) to explain why he shouldn't do that. But he wants mom's attention, he hits an adult, and he has it. So it's a pretty successful strategy on that kids part. Mostly when a kid stops getting the payoff they want, they stop the behavior.

I had an English teacher who realized a very fundamental truth. The only thing a teenager wants more than to cheer on a fellow classmate for flouting authority is a chance to assert dominance over a peer. So when someone acted up in class, she had us all turn our desks towards that kid and say "Well Gabe wants attention everyone, so we're all going to look at Gabe for the next five minutes. No don't look at your books... Gabe really needs you. Look right at him..." And the typical teenage smartass can totally milk that for about two minutes. Its that extra three minutes that's just super humiliating. Cause your classmates adore watching you squirm. And she was our 10th grade teacher, and we started hearing about this teacher and her brutal punishment in 4th grade. It was like you had six years to plan how you were going to spend that five minutes, and the day comes and after two minutes you're begging to be sent out in the hall. She was kind of an evil genius.

[Ally]

You know what, Errata, I could find you five studies that say the exact opposite of what you just said, but it all comes down to this: in the end, you are going to believe whatever you want, and in the end everyone else is going to believe whatever they want. There is no study that can prove a child's motivation. People decide about it what they want according to what fits their own personal beliefs and go to what appears to prove it.

You can throw up all the sociological psychobabble in the world and I could do the same but the fact is, the kid didn't hit the people who hit back, which included a couple of his friends in day care.

You hit me, I hit you. You stop. Works well. I can tell you one thing, the schools have gotten a lot worse since kids stop being hit. That's one fact that's kind of hard to argue against.

[Errata]

I can tell you one thing, the schools have gotten a lot worse since kids stop being hit. That's one fact that's kind of hard to argue against.

Well, no study can prove a child's motivation. Of course, there have been any number of psychiatrists who have spent countless hours talking to kids about their motivations, but even that is besides the point. You are correct. I believe what I believe, and you believe what you believe. But your own story illustrates a basic flaw in the physical chastisement of children. It doesn't work. He did not stop hitting people after you smacked him. He didn't learn the lesson. He didn't think "Oh! now I understand why they don't want me to do this". He just stopped hitting people who hit back. So he didn't learn not to hit people, he just learned to only hit people who wouldn't hit back. He kind of learned to be a bully. A clearly your friends method of calm discussion didn't work either.

There are any number of people who hit their TV when the picture goes wonky, and that seems to fix it for the moment. But until you open up the TV and screw down the loose connection, you aren't fixing it. Which isn't to illustrate some need for all children to psychoanalyzed, just illustrating that in the end it saves time to fix it the first time rather than just postponing it.

If I recall, you live in Florida, and there are many school districts that still use corporal punishment there. They hit kids in school here, the hit kids in school in my baby cousin's state, my grownup cousin's state, my best friend's state... They still hit kids in school. And I'm in Tennessee and we have some of the worst schools in the nation. I'm not sure that on the surface of things there is a correlation between a lack of corporal punishment and the downfall of schools.

[Ally]

Actually he did learn a lesson. He learned that some people allow themselves to be abused, and some don't and if he wanted to hit someone, he needed to confine his hitting to those who would allow it. If everyone responded the same way and hit him, he'd have learned not to hit everyone. Instead he learned he could be a bully to those willing to take it.

And as for corporal punishment in schools, I am actually against it. Not because I believe spanking a kid is evil, but because it's not the school's job to discipline the child. Instead, I believe that schools should have the right to expel the child permanently, if the parent doesn't handle the discipline and then the parent has to pay for private education.

I believe that education is a privilege that all have the right to--right up until they abuse the privilege.

Parents aren't doing their jobs as parents and it's the education system that's suffering. The onus needs to be placed back on the parent, not on "failing schools".

The job of the school is to teach math, reading, science, etc. Not to discipline unruly brats because their parents are too lazy to raise them properly.

[Errata]

The job of the school is to teach math, reading, science, etc. Not to discipline unruly brats because their parents are too lazy to raise them properly.

I agree there. My old school was pretty firm on the idea that their job was to make us want to learn. Not even make us learn, just make us want to. And of course they weren't miracle workers, because it would take some divine intervention to make me interested in math, but they did a good job. Even today me and everyone else I went to school with are constantly curious, constantly looking things up, trying new things. We want to know things, and we want to engage in the world around us. And to this day I don't know how they did it. But every teacher I ever had at that school assumed we were going to go on and do amazing things. And it was all of us, not like "I think this one kid might do well". Starting in Kindergarten. We all thought we were going to change the world somehow. Become President, write the great American novel, invent a car that runs on poop... something.

And as it stands I'm the only one in my class who hasn't done "Something". I've done a lot of "somethings", so I don't feel too bad about it. But class reunions are... daunting. And I don't know if its the expectation that made the difference. We were a flat broke little private school, so there are any number of factors that could come into play. But I know that public school was an immense shock for me. And I know that my old school clearly got something right when the public school I went to clearly got it terribly terribly wrong. And if I could figure out what it was and translate it to a public school system, I think I would be a national hero or something. But I can never seem to pin it down. Which is irritating, but such is life.

[Stephen Thomas]

And as for corporal punishment in schools, I am actually against it. Not because I believe spanking a kid is evil, but because it's not the school's job to discipline the child. Instead, I believe that schools should have the right to expel the child permanently, if the parent doesn't handle the discipline and then the parent has to pay for private education.

This is a most complicated argument, Ally, which even sets good people like Robert and Errata against each other. There's an example of parental discipline which you have probably seen that's all over the Internet at the moment that even made its way onto UK TV News.

Anybody wanting to be disgusted, watch this....

http://gawker.com/5855478/reddit-video-apparently-shows-texas-family-judge-beating-disabled-daughter