45 Pennsylvania Teachers Quit Due to Violent Students

E'rybady thuggin' these days.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

When parents won't do it, who's left?

When I was in school, my parents were most definitive in drawing a line, this far, no further. That, most assuredly, applied to school. As with all kids, I pushed at the boundaries, and suffered the consequences. If parents are willing to do discipline, teachers will seldom have to.

So, the question is, if parents won't...who's left?

a reply to: seagull

I agree with you. I don't care who they are. Kids who won't behave shouldn't be in the room, and I am not talking about kids who only have intermittent problems, but ones who are chronic, everyday problems.

However, that leaves open the question of what you do with them.

Do we just give up on them recognizing they will need support from society for the rest of their lives?

Or do we try to come up with a rehabilitation of some kind understanding it means removing them from their current home situation and into an intensive program. But how do you do that? The state certainly has shown it's not the best way to undertake that.

The wisest man in the world said this (with GODS approval).
Proverbs 22:15 Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.

Proverbs 23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall no die.
14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.

Proverbs 29:15 The rod and reproof gives wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.

My oldest is a teacher. He teaches the class where they send the kids who are chronic behavioral issues. He's a small (5'7", 130lb) gay man that seems to be an expert in dealing with kids peacefully when I'd rather grasp their throats.

Most schools have a place for the chronically disruptive once you leave elementary school. And the kids in those classes are really, really screwed up. Some of the stories of parental neglect are utterly heartbreaking to hear.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Which is why I say that dealing with them means deep rehabilitation in an environment that removes them from their current home situation.

Most are destroyed because of what takes place at home, but you have to put them in something that can take the place of home and intensively discipline at the same time.

I am not sure how you do that.

It would have to structured tightly from dawn til dusk and beyond and somehow still in a way that cares. Two tough concepts to reconcile although it is possible.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I could see that working for select situations. Say where the disruptive students are under 5% of the student body. What happens when they approach 20% or even 50%?

It almost seems like schooling really isn't doing anything to help these kids mature and grow into adults. There are exceptions but stigmas are there for a reason. We constantly ignore them and now the results speak for themselves.

We still can't even discuss the underlying issue. I bet certain statistics have been buried or even exclusively prohibited from being collected anymore.

There are cases where a more involved parent can make the difference. There are cases where that expectation is completely futile, as in this circumstance, IMO.

a reply to: ketsuko

That is a very important question...

Remove them from the classroom environment is easy to do... "you, get out of here, go to the Principles office", or whatever the process is these days...

What then?

Parents? Grandparents? If not them, then who? There it becomes so much trickier, and complicated. Child welfare dept are woefully inadequate, if not downright criminal, in most cases...and these children will, not might, be in as much trouble as before.

The solution? I've no idea. If they're so disruptive and antagonistic by the time they reach school... Unless it's something like your situation, the only solution is draconian, or so it seems to me.

a reply to: seagull

What happens if this isn't nurture but the other side of the equation?

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: seagull

What happens if this isn't nurture but the other side of the equation?

I am not discounting what you say. I think there are some children who do have natures that are problematic, but I think that's vanishingly rare.

Most that you might call bad natured likely have some sort of learning issue or other undiagnosed problem like that underpinning their problems that are beyond their control.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Then, of course, the situation changes. There are learning disabilities out there that can be dealt with, and don't require removal, save perhaps a weekly appointment with an outside tutor or the like. When I was in elementary school, I had a speech impediment that required therapy once every two weeks, as I recall...

It depends very much upon what the problem is. If it can be solved without removing the child, that's, to me, the preferred solution.

a reply to: ketsuko

Oh well. It appears this situation is going to get a lot worse and I suggest the continuing downfall is directly related to the PC/SJW movement. That wonderful movement that makes certain theories completely taboo to discuss.

If this was a steady degradation of our society, then why isn't this happening everywhere across the USA? I bet there are correlations for these situations. Maybe even the same correlations that link directly between crime statistics and one other factor.

a reply to: ClovenSky

I would suggest that factor is poverty, not so much because poverty causes this degradation but because the two go hand in hand.

I know you are implying race, but there are kids of all races who display the types of behavior this article discusses. I've seen it.

a reply to: ClovenSky

You won't find much argument, from me anyway, that the PC/SJW silliness has increased problems that have always been present.

We're going to find, however, that that isn't the only problem. Increasingly, to me anyway, it's becoming apparent that environmental factors are playing a roll.

People will poo-poo it, but religion/spiritualism (call it what you will...) does play a roll for many, and the lack of it may also play a roll.

Playground games, rough-housing, also play a roll. There's a balance to everything, and something is, so it seems, out of whack.

The question is in all cases, what do we do about it? Identifying the problem is fairly easy, but the solutions seldom are. One size fits all solutions seldom are.

I knew someone growing up who had lots of trouble in school and out. One of those people who don't grow out of it. Guess what? Parents, where? What? Whenever I was over at his place, I saw no parents. They didn't seem to exist. I think he lived alone. This 12 year old kept the place up himself and money came from a hole in the ground.

Just relaying a memory. I know we can't blame everything on parents, but that case sticks out so much it hurts my brain. I agree a lot of this can be solved by sending them to rehabilitative places and making them swallow pills. Some people don't wnat help though.

I believe some things are f****** up. We can't do anything about it. This is why religion exists. To explain thigns.

a reply to: ketsuko

It may play a roll...but I simply don't see it as a be all factor. It plays a more minor roll, I think, than most are willing to admit. I've been poor my entire life. Thing is, I didn't know it for most of my childhood, we ate off the discount shelf at the grocery store? Didn't know, wouldn't really have cared.

I was less disruptive, though I had my moments, than many who we may safely say were well to do, if not rich.

Poverty, if it's a problem, was made into one, by attitude, not its mere existence. Many will disagree.

Personally, I think that people are born good and learn bad behaviors.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I could see that working for select situations. Say where the disruptive students are under 5% of the student body. What happens when they approach 20% or even 50%?

It almost seems like schooling really isn't doing anything to help these kids mature and grow into adults. There are exceptions but stigmas are there for a reason. We constantly ignore them and now the results speak for themselves.

We still can't even discuss the underlying issue. I bet certain statistics have been buried or even exclusively prohibited from being collected anymore.

There are cases where a more involved parent can make the difference. There are cases where that expectation is completely futile, as in this circumstance, IMO.

If disruptive students make up 50% of a student body, then I'd say the issue may lie in how we define "disruptive students".

The statistical model implied by the bell curve fully applies in any situation involving humans. Some will suck real bad/be rock stars. The closer to the middle ground between these 2 extremes you get, the more humans you will find clustered. If that curve changes, its most likely due to a change in the method of measurement.

Long story short: less than 5% of the student population will ever end up in programs like this. That said...regional populations have different behavioral norms. It could be that a teacher from a prominent school in Cape Cod or Richardson, TX would struggle to find their way at an inner city Detriot school.

a reply to: ketsuko

If only there were funding to help with these types of things.

As it stands, pulling kids out of homes for a better environment typically ends up just victimizing them in novel ways.

a reply to: seagull

I didn't say poverty caused it, only that it was an indicator because the kinds of behaviors that would lead on to raising a child that tends to behave like this usually are found in an impoverished environment because they help lead to poverty. They tend to go hand in hand.

However, there are people who are in poverty for other reasons. Believe me, I am well aware of that having been there myself.