View Single Post
Old 04-10-2010, 19:02   #14
Flyboy
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,375
Flyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful one
Re: Gove to tackle schools' 'no touch' rules

My concern is how are they going to, "clarify and shrink that." The two dangers are that they will throw the baby out with the bath water (not an uncommon trait with this particular Secretary of State), or they will do nothing but waste time, effort and money, achieving little more than firing cheap shots at schools, previous govermnents and teachers.

---------- Post added at 18:02 ---------- Previous post was at 17:58 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy J View Post
Typical Flyboy reaction.In fact I expected it..I knew he'd be against it and see the words physical discipline as meaning beating the crap out of the pupils rather than preventing them from beating the hell out of each other and the staff.
So, what did you mean by physical discipline?

I am not against it, I just am against the knee-jerk rhetoric playing to the readers of the Daily Heil that every school in the country is going to hell in a handbasket.
Flyboy is offline   Reply With Quote