Poor UK education standards

Yeah, let's model the way we treat children on those paragons of virtue, biker gangs and chavs. That will in no way reinforce that violence is an acceptable solution to problems and encourage them to use violence themselves.


Quoting pupils' opinion is generally worthless. I'm willing to bet if you asked them their opinions on chewing gum, homework, lunch hours, uniforms, detentions etc. they'd tell you any old rubbish.

Still, since you're so in favour of this, how would it work?

Biker gangs have a hierarchy, should all business and forms of government stop having hierarchies because bikers do? No? that why should violence be the sole preserve of criminals?


That's right mate, just ignore 19% of kids actually wanting the cane being reintroduced because that kind of shits on your theory that all is okay in the schools.


Its would work the same as any other punishment would work. Do something wrong, get a smacked arse.
 
I have never known of a boxing coach, martial arts trainer or cadet instructor get assaulted by a schoolkid. i've never even known a kid get lippy with them.
Indeed, 2CS boxing coach rarely had discipline problems in his team either.

Obviously he sat down with anyone acting like a **** and listened to their problems before telling them how disappointed he was.
 
I have never known of a boxing coach, martial arts trainer or cadet instructor get assaulted by a schoolkid. i've never even known a kid get lippy with them.
Equally I’ve never known a martial arts instructor exercise corporal punishment on anyone.

Edited to add:
plus there’s so much different between the two situations as to render any comparison either meaningless or an example of how one proposing such a comparison understands neither situation.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I have never known of a boxing coach, martial arts trainer or cadet instructor get assaulted by a schoolkid. i've never even known a kid get lippy with them.
Okay, this is over 30 years ago but I can think of only one incident when I was at school where one of the 'hard kids' took a swing at a teacher - and it wasn't a soft school by any means.

Let's just say that 'hard' 16 year-old versus grown man didn't last long. The man involved is still there - all these years later he's now the headmaster.

The difference is that back then the teachers, rightly, weren't preoccupied with the consequences of hitting back. They weren't dishing it out blithely but there was an understanding that the poor little, misunderstood darling who lumped you first wouldn't then have legal recourse.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
Equally I’ve never known a martial arts instructor exercise corporal punishment on anyone.

Edited to add:
plus there’s so much different between the two situations as to render any comparison either meaningless or an example of how one proposing such a comparison understands neither situation.
Probably because there's an element of respect and and understanding of who's in charge. But not all are infallible. The ex-wife used to do karate and once went along to a new class. It became obvious that the guy running it was an ego and took delight in, shall we say, enthusiastic demonstrations of certain moves.

She didn't go back. Respect is a two-way thing in such an environment.
 
Biker gangs have a hierarchy, should all business and forms of government stop having hierarchies because bikers do? No? that why should violence be the sole preserve of criminals?
Not what I said. You argued that because violence works to maintain discipline in gangs and with chavs that means it should be used in schools as well. I suggested that basing the discipline structure of a school on that of a gang probably isn't a good move.


That's right mate, just ignore 19% of kids actually wanting the cane being reintroduced because that kind of shits on your theory that all is okay in the schools.
Show me one post I've ever made where I've claimed everything is fine in schools.

Just because a newspaper reports that 19% of pupils in a survey over eight years ago want the cane reintroduced does not mean that is accurate. I notice the newspaper was very careful not to state that 50% of adults want corporal punishment reintroduced but instead said "he majority of parents and pupils think teachers should have the power to be tougher with unruly students." Which I would definitely agree with.


Its would work the same as any other punishment would work. Do something wrong, get a smacked arse.
Some more details? What level of 'wrong' gets a walloping? Is parental consent required? Is informing parents before corporal punishment required? Who carries out the corporal punishment - classroom teacher, senior leaders, headteacher? What happens when a kid refuses to stand still and be hit? What happens when a kid runs away instead of being hit? What happens when a kid gets hit and then retaliates?

I don't think you've thought this through.
 

4(T)

LE
Some more details? What level of 'wrong' gets a walloping? Is parental consent required? Is informing parents before corporal punishment required? Who carries out the corporal punishment - classroom teacher, senior leaders, headteacher? What happens when a kid refuses to stand still and be hit? What happens when a kid runs away instead of being hit? What happens when a kid gets hit and then retaliates?

I don't think you've thought this through.

To be fair, schools had a system for corporal punishment for centuries before it was banned. All of your points were thus covered. Many older members of this site can no doubt describe exactly how the regime worked in practice - i know I could.

If the law and social attitudes permit corporal punishment, then it is straightforward to execute.
 
Not what I said. You argued that because violence works to maintain discipline in gangs and with chavs that means it should be used in schools as well. I suggested that basing the discipline structure of a school on that of a gang probably isn't a good move.
The state used to use violence itself, why would you assume you are copying a gang?
The point is violence does work in the majority of cases, you might disagree with violence and think there is a better way but it still works.



Show me one post I've ever made where I've claimed everything is fine in schools.

Just because a newspaper reports that 19% of pupils in a survey over eight years ago want the cane reintroduced does not mean that is accurate. I notice the newspaper was very careful not to state that 50% of adults want corporal punishment reintroduced but instead said "he majority of parents and pupils think teachers should have the power to be tougher with unruly students." Which I would definitely agree with.
You did say, in post 2370

Personally I suspect that schools have improved since the early nineties. They do seem to take things like bully, health and safety, and inclusion seriously.

I then put up a link in 2375 showing that if it has improved it must have been really bad in the 90s

Some more details? What level of 'wrong' gets a walloping? Is parental consent required? Is informing parents before corporal punishment required? Who carries out the corporal punishment - classroom teacher, senior leaders, headteacher? What happens when a kid refuses to stand still and be hit? What happens when a kid runs away instead of being hit? What happens when a kid gets hit and then retaliates?

I don't think you've thought this through.
The same level as wrong that you determine other punishments, you probably wont be short of volunteers to use the cane


What happen when the kid doesn't attend detention? Or runs away from a telling off? Or punches a teacher for telling him off?
 
To be fair, schools had a system for corporal punishment for centuries before it was banned. All of your points were thus covered. Many older members of this site can no doubt describe exactly how the regime worked in practice - i know I could.

If the law and social attitudes permit corporal punishment, then it is straightforward to execute.
Thanks, I knew someone would make my point. They don't. Never going to happen.

A couple of weeks ago I spent a fair bit of time sorting out a detention for one of my tutor group. Parent responded along the lines of "I don't think that's fair so [child's name] will not be doing that detention". If that's the parental response over a half hour sat in a warm room what do you think will happen when the school starts deliberately committing ABH?
 
You could always give the kid a choice of the punishment, or have a sum deducted from the family's child benefit, or from the parents' pension in years to come. I bet the punishment would be carried out then, behind the family's front door. Let the crap parents find out first hand, that crap parenting has crap consequences.
 
The state used to use violence itself, why would you assume you are copying a gang?
The point is violence does work in the majority of cases, you might disagree with violence and think there is a better way but it still works.
I didn't, you did: "how do gangs from football crews to biker MCs, maintain discipline? If violence didn't have any effect there wouldn't be any criminal gangs. "


You did say, in post 2370

Personally I suspect that schools have improved since the early nineties. They do seem to take things like bully, health and safety, and inclusion seriously.

I then put up a link in 2375 showing that if it has improved it must have been really bad in the 90s
No I didn't. That was Yokel.

The same level as wrong that you determine other punishments,
Which? Break/lunchtime detention, 30 minute detention, 60 minute detention, 90 minute detention, internal isolation, fixed term exclusion, managed move to different school, permanent exclusion?

What happen when the kid doesn't attend detention? Or runs away from a telling off? Or punches a teacher for telling him off?
Probably nothing, internal isolation, permanent exclusion respectively. The difference with the last one being that a punch for a telling off is a disproportionate reaction and a child has no legal right to self-defence from a telling off. Any half-decent lawyer would have a field day with that one.
 
You could always give the kid a choice of the punishment, or have a sum deducted from the family's child benefit, or from the parents' pension in years to come. I bet the punishment would be carried out then, behind the family's front door. Let the crap parents find out first hand, that crap parenting has crap consequences.
This isolation lockdown situation may be bringing that fact home to a number of households.
 
Some more details? What level of 'wrong' gets a walloping? Is parental consent required? Is informing parents before corporal punishment required? Who carries out the corporal punishment - classroom teacher, senior leaders, headteacher? What happens when a kid refuses to stand still and be hit? What happens when a kid runs away instead of being hit? What happens when a kid gets hit and then retaliates?
Seems to be a lot of what ifs in there, where are the possible solutions ?

Expelled - Special school - Then if you still wanted to be a c**t it was off to Approved School and the end play was Borstal. Remember those days ? Might not have been perfect, but at least it gave those who wished to learn a fair crack at the whip, instead of being dragged down by those who were NFI.

Mr '' D '' was one of my teachers, he was also one of my fathers teachers.

Should I have traipsed home from school and announced that Mr '' D '' had given me the belt ( as was in those days ) I would have got another belt from my father.

If a warning letter was issued by the school, have a crack around the earhole.

God forbid I would do something dastardly that would seen me expelled from school.

Police bring you to the door :D :D No questions asked - Wham - Right in front of the Police.

Whacked for being a c**t ? Nope, whacked for '' Blackening '' the family name.


The pendulum has swung too far from one extreme to the other and it is now too late to do anything about it.
 
Last edited:
I didn't, you did: "how do gangs from football crews to biker MCs, maintain discipline? If violence didn't have any effect there wouldn't be any criminal gangs. "
Once again, the state used violence for years, the fact that it has stop, doesn't mean it will be copying anyone else if it chooses to start again.

No I didn't. That was Yokel.
My mistake.

Which? Break/lunchtime detention, 30 minute detention, 60 minute detention, 90 minute detention, internal isolation, fixed term exclusion, managed move to different school, permanent exclusion?
Any that the school sees fit.

Probably nothing, internal isolation, permanent exclusion respectively. The difference with the last one being that a punch for a telling off is a disproportionate reaction and a child has no legal right to self-defence from a telling off. Any half-decent lawyer would have a field day with that one.

Did "half decent lawyers" have a field day when the cane was legal? Do "half decent lawyers" have a field day in countries that still have corporal punishments? No? Then why make up a problem that didn't/doesn't exist?


As someone has already pointed out, the UK had canning for centuries, there wasn't exactly masses of the problems that you keep pretending would happen.
 
Seems to be a lot of what ifs in there, where are the possible solutions ?
Solutions?
Discipline policies should be implemented and followed rigorously -all too often the policy is followed by classroom teachers and management then find creative ways to not do their job of following up.

Child refuses to follow instructions / does not attend detention - should be followed up with increased sanction the next day. Escalation happens every day until fixed term exclusion. Multiple fixed term exclusions are the trigger for permanent exclusion.

Schools can tell parents to jog on without fear of parent triggering an OFSTED inspection (and yes, that is a current worry). Heads to be allowed to make the point that, while their child has a right to an education, it is not the right to an education in whatever school the parent wants. If the parents refuse to agree to the school's behaviour policy and enforce sanctions then the parents move their child to an alternative school. No transport costs to be paid by the council either.

The really, really important one - schools are allowed to get rid of the persistently offensive kids. Without the lengthy appeals process, without lawyers getting involved, without being made to take an excluded child from a different school. Increase funding for the PRUs and put kids in them. Potentially, if they can behave in the PRU for a year, they could be allowed back into mainstream education (effectively on parole). **** up in mainstream it's back to the sin bin.

None of which involves hitting the kids.
 
Because the the little cnuts wont want a smacked arse.
Ive mentioned this before when people say that corporal punishment doesn't work, how do gangs from football crews to biker MCs, maintain discipline? If violence didn't have any effect there wouldn't be any criminal gangs.
Whipped with a Triplex timing chain and a shallow grave in Epping Forest isn’t available in most schools.
Sadly.
 
Once again, the state used violence for years, the fact that it has stop, doesn't mean it will be copying anyone else if it chooses to start again.
So your reference to gangs was irrelevant?

Any that the school sees fit.
Still conspicuously lacking on the details.

Did "half decent lawyers" have a field day when the cane was legal? Do "half decent lawyers" have a field day in countries that still have corporal punishments? No? Then why make up a problem that didn't/doesn't exist?
It's not a problem in those countries because that is the accepted norm. Bring caning back and you will have parents suing schools. That is not me making up problems, it's a realistic look at consequences.

If you want some idea of the scope for lawsuits, google "uk school lawyers exclusion" - now what do you think those law firms are going to do when little Johnny hasn't been sent home for 3 days but was viciously attacked by a grown man in a premeditated way, leaving injury and mental trauma? Not the way I would phrase it but that is the way it will be relayed in the press and by those ambulance chasers.


As someone has already pointed out, the UK had canning for centuries, there wasn't exactly masses of the problems that you keep pretending would happen.
As 4(T) made the point earlier, social attitudes have changed since then. The whole culture of 'no win no fee' hasn't existed for centuries.
 
Solutions?
Discipline policies should be implemented and followed rigorously -all too often the policy is followed by classroom teachers and management then find creative ways to not do their job of following up.

Child refuses to follow instructions / does not attend detention - should be followed up with increased sanction the next day. Escalation happens every day until fixed term exclusion. Multiple fixed term exclusions are the trigger for permanent exclusion.

Schools can tell parents to jog on without fear of parent triggering an OFSTED inspection (and yes, that is a current worry). Heads to be allowed to make the point that, while their child has a right to an education, it is not the right to an education in whatever school the parent wants. If the parents refuse to agree to the school's behaviour policy and enforce sanctions then the parents move their child to an alternative school. No transport costs to be paid by the council either.

The really, really important one - schools are allowed to get rid of the persistently offensive kids. Without the lengthy appeals process, without lawyers getting involved, without being made to take an excluded child from a different school. Increase funding for the PRUs and put kids in them. Potentially, if they can behave in the PRU for a year, they could be allowed back into mainstream education (effectively on parole). **** up in mainstream it's back to the sin bin.

None of which involves hitting the kids.
You say permanent exclusion, then say they can come back if they behave themselves for a year. So not permanent then?

Most kids who are persistently offensive little cnuts are so because they don't fear the weak punishment that is on offer. Being banned from school isn't going to worry them especially if they have a group of mates at the PRU.

While they are at the PRU, whats going to happen if they continue to misbehave?
I bet there will be a queue of teachers wanting a job there.
 
You say permanent exclusion, then say they can come back if they behave themselves for a year. So not permanent then?
"Potentially, if they can behave in the PRU for a year, they could be allowed back into mainstream education (effectively on parole)"

A fixed-term exclusion cannot exceed a certain period of time in one academic year (I think it's about 50 days). A permanent exclusion is a statement that unless the situation changes that child will not be returning to that school.

A child can be permanently excluded, a legal appeal is launched, the exclusion is overturned and the school is told to let the child back in. Didn't mean that the child wasn't permanently excluded in the first place.

Most kids who are persistently offensive little cnuts are so because they don't fear the weak punishment that is on offer. Being banned from school isn't going to worry them especially if they have a group of mates at the PRU.

While they are at the PRU, whats going to happen if they continue to misbehave?
I bet there will be a queue of teachers wanting a job there.
I hadn't thought that far ahead since that solves the immediate problem of getting them out of mainstream. Young Offenders Institution? Assuming they are still busy attacking staff and vandalising the place.

All of which is fairly academic as none of this will be implemented due to actually costing money.
 

Latest Threads

Top