Gove to tackle schools' 'no touch' rules

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by tammac

Some very reasonable threads, but, where does the labour, new labour,same old labour come from? the crash was caused by Disenvestment Bankers, mainly Goldman Sachs, didn't know they were in the Labour party, wish you people would think instead of parroting right wing party propaganda, you sound like "the Ood", Dr Who.

[colin25]

lol....i don't understand the ood..showing my age i guess

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by tammac

Some very reasonable threads, but, where does the labour, new labour,same old labour come from? the crash was caused by Disenvestment Bankers, mainly Goldman Sachs, didn't know they were in the Labour party, wish you people would think instead of parroting right wing party propaganda, you sound like "the Ood", Dr Who.

The structural deficit was caused by Labour overspending on the assumption the public and private debt fuelled bubble that ended with the crash would continue forever.

Wish you'd think instead of parroting left wing party propaganda about how it's all the bankers' fault and nothing at all to do with spending taxpayers' money like it was going out of fashion on expanding the public sector, and using debt fuelled tax receipts along with sovereign debt to do it.

The UK is set to miss the previous government's "golden rule" - of borrowing only to invest over the economic cycle - by £485bn

That's even taking account of the economic cycle being variable depending on needs.

Still if you'd like to come up with some facts to demonstrate that it's all down to the bankers please feel free. Partly for sure, entirely no chance.

[broadbandking]

The real bad kids will never care about been kicked out of school its a holiday to them, I bet the real bad ones would learn from a swift cane around the back of the legs, I would gladly do it to some of them, back in the 1940's,50's,60's every pupil respected the teacher because if they didn't then a cane would be the result.

My dad told me he got the cane a few times but he soon learnt to do what he was told and if he was brave enough to tell his dad he woudl then get a smack from his dad.

Displine has gone, parents are to blame as displine should be tought from a young age, the child should be tought what is right and what is wrong and a punishment should be in place and kept to if the kid misbehaves.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The structural deficit was caused by Labour overspending on the assumption the public and private debt fuelled bubble that ended with the crash would continue forever.

Wish you'd think instead of parroting left wing party propaganda about how it's all the bankers' fault and nothing at all to do with spending taxpayers' money like it was going out of fashion on expanding the public sector, and using debt fuelled tax receipts along with sovereign debt to do it.



That's even taking account of the economic cycle being variable depending on needs.

Still if you'd like to come up with some facts to demonstrate that it's all down to the bankers please feel free. Partly for sure, entirely no chance.

But not in this thread..because it would be off topic and better in a new separate thread.

[Stuart]

I think the problem is organisations are frightened of getting sued. This has meant that some organisations have introduced rules banning certain things regardless of what central government says.

It may be that this has happened with certain schools.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

What rubbish!Of course punishment and restraint go hand in hand along with rewards

Punishment and restraint do NOT go hand in hand. A teacher doe not restrain a child to punish them. They restrain a child to prevent harm to the child or someone else. We used sanctions, prohibitions or exclusions, not restraint, to punish children.

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35103379-post14.html

your own post.

You have misunderstood the post, I can see why and I apologise for not being clearer. The remark was a general one and not directed at you personally.

Everyone has already told you and Gove already put it as succinctly as anyone can.You are just using your usual method of pretending not to understand because it doesn't fit your own particular ideology.Plus What punishments are available to teachers that work.I already pointed out that which is available don't work

As you know, physical punishment was outlawed many years ago, and I suspect Gove does knows as well (or at least he should). It was outlawed for very good reasons. From what I am able to tell, Gove did not relate his
"no touching" statement to punishment at all. As I said, restraining someone is not punishing them and it should never ever be used as a punishment or a method of discipline.

Now you understand about restraining children physically..

I have never misunderstood what restraint means.

Besides which you have completely missed the point AGAIN.It's about making such rulings much ,much clearer to ALL including pupils and parents and Head teachers and simplfying what is allowed and what is not allowed

I do not disagree with that. All through this, all I have been saying, is that the rules do not need changing. Yes, there are some very stupid and ignorant headteachers in this country. I have met them and worked for one. But the danger here is that, to coin a phrase, "the baby is in danger of being thrown out with the bath water."

Then why are you so nit picky about this issue if you truly understand what it is all about.To be honest if you are truly what you say you are you wouldn't be picking holes in the statement made by Gove or in my comments because you would just KNOW how teachers have been cowed and placed in a situation where the minority of badly behaved children rule the roost and staff are left unsupported and believing that they cannot restrain children because they are ordered by the head teacher not to physically handle pupils. Seems to me you just haven't read or understood the article.

All I asked was what you meant by "physical discipline." Because I didn't understand how restraining a child could be related to punishment. Perhaps I should have worded it differently, but that is what I meant.

In my defence, if any is warranted, I had spent an hour on Friday, explaining to a very rude and aggressive parent, about why we can't beat a child who called his little **** of a son a bully. I had to explain to him that it was his son who was the bully (and I could see where got that nice little personality disorder from) and that we as a school will deal with the incident. I was annoyed at the fact that he was behaving this way towards an eight year old and just as annoyed that I was left to deal with it, seeing as it should have been the deputy head or headteacher. I am just an SSA, not a blooming security guard. I got fed up with people saying that corporal punishment should return and imagining that children today are nothing better than animals. So I am afraid, discussions of "physical discipline" was acting as a bit of a medium term bete noir, yesterday.

And fortunately for you I am unable to give vent to what I truly think of this last paragraph and of your so called intelligence plus again you are using Labour ideology as a counter because this decision comes from a Tory government.No doubt if Labour had issued the statement you would be applauding. .I too am concerned about some of the decisions of Gove on education(primarily the con job on Academy schools) but that is for another thread.

That is not true. I welcome clarification, but with Gove's history on "clarification," I am not holding out much hope of it getting any better. I have not discussed party politics on this thread, other than to critcise Gove's lack of understanding of the whole "no touch" subject. I really don't have any confidence in his abilty to do the job he has been tasked with. From his disasterous attempts at reforming the education system of this country, to communicating his intentions to the world of education, I truly and deeply worry about the future for our children, if he is allowed to continue in his job. This has nonthing at all to do with left versus right, Tories versus Labour, it is to do with what is right and wrong. My suspicions as to why he has raised this subject still stands. He is trying to dodge the issues about the very real and desperate state he is planning to create in our schools.

---------- Post added at 21:52 ---------- Previous post was at 21:50 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

I can take care of that.

Rule 1. clause 1.1 sub clause 1.1.1:
If there is an unruly and disruptive little sod in your classroom, which receives no discipline at home and is allowed to run riot and thinks he/she can do the same in your class.

Give them a crack round the back of their head, then invite their parents into school and give them a slap too.

Yes of course, because that will really make things better.

---------- Post added at 21:55 ---------- Previous post was at 21:52 ----------

Originally Posted by tammac

Some very reasonable threads, but, where does the labour, new labour,same old labour come from? the crash was caused by Disenvestment Bankers, mainly Goldman Sachs, didn't know they were in the Labour party, wish you people would think instead of parroting right wing party propaganda, you sound like "the Ood", Dr Who.

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The structural deficit was caused by Labour overspending on the assumption the public and private debt fuelled bubble that ended with the crash would continue forever.

<snip>

Still if you'd like to come up with some facts to demonstrate that it's all down to the bankers please feel free. Partly for sure, entirely no chance.

Have you two leaked from another thread.

Nothing new in the above post, just a repetition of a previous stance all be with different wording.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Yes of course, because that will really make things better.

Correct, glad you agree with me.