School stands up for discipline and rules

Originally Posted by Chris T

Interesting points. Butr are you going to answer my question about arguing with your child's school?

I have, with my partner, argued with my child's school after, for example, the deputy head reacted to my kid and others giggling during a screening of Aladdin (they were bored and who can blame them!!). She told them if their behaviour didn't improve they'd be sent to the special needs teacher and if that didn't work a child psychologist and if that didn't work a Pupil Referral Centre. She then made them stand by a wall during break, in the middle of winter. My boy only had a polo shirt on. The head backed our complaint saying the deputy had over-reacted.

I should add my kid has never been in serious trouble at school and is expected to achieve better than average grades.

With power comes responsibility and sometimes, as in this case, that can seem to be lacking. Sometimes teachers do get it wrong and it is a parent's right to challenge them (though not with fists!). In addition I think it is dangerous to teach your kids to blithely accept authority come what may. Mine are taught to respect their teachers (and are very respectful from what I have seen and heard) and indeed others, but I have no wish for them to become doormats for authoritarian figures in society.

Thank you I can't see much to disagree with there ... except possibly to reiterate that for the sake of maintaining the school's authority over my child I'd make very sure, if I needed to challenge the school, that it was done in a circumspect manner and involved him as little as possible. Certainly I'd not sit at the dinner table explaining him how I planned to rip Mr Smith's head off.

Now, as for my assessment of 'Mr Chav'. I think it's self evident to be honest. 'Chav' is a label that fits young people who exhibit a certain pattern of dress and behaviour. Turning up at school in trainers, in brech of rules, and then using the incident as an excuse not to sit an important exam, fit that label so far as I can see.

As for the world going 'Daily Mail' on us ... don't forget that the Mail is the country's best selling mid-market paper because it's the one that best reflects the attitudes and opinions of the middle classes. I think the Mail's editorial line reflects the country's attitudes more than it sets them.

[Monster Jedi]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Well, I hope your attitude to the school doesn't rub off on your kids. What kind of example are you setting? Do you really want your children to grow up to be boorish louts who think they can always get their own way by challenging someone to a fight? I can see why you don't like the school's points-based approach to discipline. If your kids have already learned their behaviour from you I expect they will be topping the league table. Sad, sad, sad.

I've had many problems at my son's school. I have tried to sort things out the normal way threw the channels. The Education Authority. School board of Governors. Passed from one to the other. been to meeting told one then another. My son was getting bullied at school. The school backed the bully. He has loads of friend's and made loads of good allibys. Had the same problem with bully from his previous school. My son got the bully and fractured his jaw. He got excluded for 7 weeks. I smacked his dad in the pub got done for ABH. But I broke his jaw. The two boys are now in seperate classes ect.

I am not proud of what Iv'e done expect the bully's dad. I am proud of what my son did. 7yrs of hell was enough. I did what I had to do. It was not something you let go. The system failed me. I tell my son not to use violence only as a last resort.

Should I start a new thread and an opinion poll if I should run as a School Governor??

I see absolutely no reason to label this child a 'chav' simply because he wears trainers in what looks like a stupidly minor breach of school regulations. There is an unhealthy obession with demonising young people fuelled by the populist right wing press which loves nothing more to righteously stir up a moral panic as they have always done (have a read of Stan Cohen's Folk Devils & Moral Panics for insight into this longstanding phenomena). The Daily Mail and the Express lin particular loves to whip up fear. But following your logic, because the Mail is popular it is right., So Crazy Frog is the best song out at the moment? The Mail succeeds through a blend of very strong features with great appeal in particular with women (where the paper scores against it rivals) and massive investment in editorial and marketing. It is now upping its celeb count in a bid to take some of the Sun's readership. This does not, therefore, necessarily mean it reflects the attitudes of the middle classes. It's a very well put together paper - but no less odious for its professionalism
__________________

Originally Posted by Monster Jedi

Should I start a new thread and an opinion poll if I should run as a School Governor??

No, you should go to anger management classes you plonker.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Graham

I didn't say it was "acceptable" for him to break the rules, nor that he should be "allowed" to break the rules, nor even that this rule was "silly", however I don't think that what the teacher did was reasonable.

All he needed to do was to say "ok, because it's your exams I'll let you stay *today*, but if you come in with those tomorrow you're out".

Bleh.... we don't know the history do we.

The kid KNEW that they were against the uniform regs and he admitted that - he also said he'd got away with them, but so what, ignorance or not being caught isn't a reason to carry on. They'd presumably also been told to wear full school uniform- which of course includes correct footwear- and if they weren't, they'd be refused entry into exams! In that aspect, the kid had no leg to stand on.

And let's not forget he was also offered a choice. Spare shoes, that DID fit in the regulations- which he turned down for alleged "medical reasons". He had the choice to take the exam in the spare shoes or to not take it in his chavwear, he chose to walk out. Which provokes a few thoughts...
- if he had a genuine medical reason to wear his chavvy trainers, he should have checked
- his condition cleared up quickly enough for him to conform to the rules next time
- if he'd cared about the exam he would have taken the spare shoes and sat the paper

He may have also had warnings about not wearing proper uniform *not necessarily footwear* in the past, the school may also have a zero tolerance policy in exams.

As it stands, we have a brief one-sided account of the incident. It would be interesting to see detailed statements from both sides, and also if there's any history, because apart from what we know, there's little about the incident itself. Personally I feel the school were right sticking up for the rules but OK, if others feel Little Johnny is able to get away with whatever he wants to and has a right to sit exams regardless, etc etc, than that's fair enough- but boy, the PC brigade is really beginning to really **** me off!

Originally Posted by nffc

but boy, the PC brigade is really beginning to really **** me off!

Being one of the PC brigade who actually AGREES with you I'm likely to get upset with you.But I won't-have a greenie.

Originally Posted by nffc

if others feel Little Johnny is able to get away with whatever he wants to and has a right to sit exams regardless, etc etc, than that's fair enough- but boy, the PC brigade is really beginning to really **** me off!

I would be very careful what you are saying - I doubt anyone on this forum would class me in the "pc brigade", and I would be very insulted if they (or you) did. I think this was a massive over-reaction by the school over a pair of trainers - and TBH - I cannot understand why they insist that you wear "uniform" for exams anyway - no school any of my family have attended required this. You need only turn up for the exams, and wear you normal casual clothes.

Originally Posted by Paul M

I would be very careful what you are saying - I doubt anyone on this forum would class me in the "pc brigade", and I would be very insulted if they (or you) did. I think this was a massive over-reaction by the school over a pair of trainers - and TBH - I cannot understand why they insist that you wear "uniform" for exams anyway - no school any of my family have attended required this. You need only turn up for the exams, and wear you normal casual clothes.

I'm afraid those days have gone Paul..I think it had summat to do with the punk era.. It was thought that some of the gear was a little too OTT and a distraction to examinees.This way they aren't involved in a fashion parade and are concentrating on what's really important.

Mind a little leeway should be made on the account that as students are now about to finish school some year 11's parents DO NOT want to be replacing any item of school uniform that have been outgrown/wornout, because it would be a waste of money..But I'm sure if any parent brought this up BEFORE the exams they may be offered a replacement via the usual school system of good used second hand uniform that is sometimes available through the PTA.

Believe me when I say that generally teachers DO want their students to pass,but when every child IS told before the exams take place(repeatedly by class teachers and year heads)what to expect...Then pupils must start to take some adult responsibility for their own actions and behaviour.

Originally Posted by Paul M

I would be very careful what you are saying - I doubt anyone on this forum would class me in the "pc brigade", and I would be very insulted if they (or you) did.

I wouldn't. I'm a high ranking officer in the PC Brigade and earned those pips

I think this was a massive over-reaction by the school over a pair of trainers - and TBH - I cannot understand why they insist that you wear "uniform" for exams anyway - no school any of my family have attended required this. You need only turn up for the exams, and wear you normal casual clothes.

Agreed. Of course Kevin Keegan thinks that sometimes footballers brains are in their boots in which case appropriate footwear is in fact necessary!

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Paul M

I would be very careful what you are saying - I doubt anyone on this forum would class me in the "pc brigade", and I would be very insulted if they (or you) did. I think this was a massive over-reaction by the school over a pair of trainers - and TBH - I cannot understand why they insist that you wear "uniform" for exams anyway - no school any of my family have attended required this. You need only turn up for the exams, and wear you normal casual clothes.

It was a general comment, not specifically aimed at anyone or even this thread!

As for the uniform... well, it does happen, some schools do enforce a strict code in exams- I know ours did (as I've already said)... it's at their discretion.

Originally Posted by Incognitas

I'm afraid those days have gone Paul..I think it had summat to do with the punk era.. It was thought that some of the gear was a little too OTT and a distraction to examinees.This way they aren't involved in a fashion parade and are concentrating on what's really important.

Sorry but those days are not gone. I have some relations taking exams this month, they do not need to wear their uniform.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by Paul M

Sorry but those days are not gone. I have some relations taking exams this month, they do not need to wear their uniform.

And some people will... as I've said, it's up to the school/college what the policy is.

Originally Posted by nffc

And some people will... as I've said, it's up to the school/college what the policy is.

Agreed, it's not surprising that different schools have different policies on uniform in exams, just as they have differing policies on uniform during the rest of the year.

My school's attitude was that you were a pupil of the school until the official valediction day in July, well after the exams were over. That meant that when on school premises you behaved *exactly* as you would on any other day. Furthermore, as you were still a pupil, study leave was considered a pivilege, not a right, and could be revoked at any time. This was the nuclear option when dealing with bad behaviour among fifth years ... making you sit in an empty classroom, in uniform, to do your revision there, rather than at home (or, more likely, out on the town with your mates).

I'd be curious to know if there's any correlation between schools with strong uniform policies and discipline/academic achievement.

Originally Posted by Chris T

I'd be curious to know if there's any correlation between schools with strong uniform policies and discipline/academic achievement.

OK, this is a particularly strong piece of evidence which NOBODY can ignore. I went to a school with a strict uniform policy and left with but one 'O' level. Went to an FE college - no uniform, 7 O levels. Went to Poly - no uniform, within a whisker of a First. Proven beyond all doubt that uniforms inhibit rather than promote academic achievement. So, you might as well just close the thread now Chris

[Paul K]

Originally Posted by andyl

OK, this is a particularly strong piece of evidence which NOBODY can ignore. I went to a school with a strict uniform policy and left with but one 'O' level. Went to an FE college - no uniform, 7 O levels. Went to Poly - no uniform, within a whisker of a First. Proven beyond all doubt that uniforms inhibit rather than promote academic achievement. So, you might as well just close the thread now Chris

The evidence could just point to you growing up and realising that you needed a better education than you left school with