To not get schools issue with dyed hair?

[fitforflighting]

I suspect I may get flamed for this but I genuinely do not get it.
They have a rule against earrings including sleepers. That I get especially with younger children or in sports were children can end up getting them at worst ripped out.

I can kind of even get extreme haircuts with big shaved stars or strange styles that look unprofessional and might not be allowed by adults in a professional work place.

But this week and last term several of senior age children who had dyed hair brown/red/dark purple etc were sent home from school to re dye or put in isolation by teachers with errr brown/red/purple dyed hair! One of the children's teacher has bright purple hair. It does not make her any less of a English teacher or lesson her professionalism in school I don't reckon so what is the problem for teens?

I always thought that schools were allowed to impose detentions legally as it falls under part of the legal duty of governors to "regulate the conduct of pupils". There are other guidelines, and parents are allowed to object and the schools are required to listen but not to agree to rescind. IF a parent was to repeatedly refuse, the governors would have grounds to remove the child from the school.

Oh and the Scottish girl who brought a human rights case against it lost as far as I recall.

No, that is not the "custom" is it, so you think I should call the children Miss, this and Master that?

If calling by surname is a sign of respect then yes. You should respect the children.

I think first names are fine for everyone but it's unfair to have something out of respect but not apply it to the kids you teach

But the children I teach are not professionals are they? Its the mark of respect for my profession that I get addressed by my title and surname.

Mind you, the respect for teachers on here is non existent, I bet you think we have to "earn" our respect from each individual child.

So only "proffesionals" are worthy of this respect?

so you would still call the person. hoovering in the local library Susan cow she's not a.proffessional.and ergo mot worthy of being addressed in a proffesionals. way?

Just musing about 'professional' titles.

Bishop Mark, the bishop
Prince Charles, heir to the throne
HRH Queen Elizabeth 11, current monarch
Rev. Smith, the priest
Rabbi Lev, the rabbi
Dr Jones, the GP
Professor Dixon, the world-renowned expert on blah
Wing-Commander Lee, from the RAF
Captain Thomas, from the army
Lord Haw Haw, hereditary peer in the House of Lords
Lady Brown, appointed peer in the House of lords
Sister Edith, nun
Mrs Tw2k, teacher

Which, if any, of these titles 'should be used' to indicate profession (unless the person involved actively introduces themselves to you as 'firstname')? Which would be used in writing, but not in speaking? Which would not be used at all and the person addressed by all and sundry by 'firstname' from first meeting?

in a professional. or respectful way?

OP, YANBU.

As a secondary level teacher who has had multiple hair colours myself, maybe green wasn't the best idea though, I personally don't see the need to ban dyed hair. I see no difference in performance in the students because of what colour their hair is - if they're going to arse about in the lesson and not do work then they will ultimately find any reason, excuse or topic that will aid them in slacking . This negates the arguments that it stops them focusing.

The one valid reason I can see for a ban on hair dye is that, as school uniforms are part of the British school system, schools want to keep up appearances. Imagine seeing Eton boys with multicoloured mohawks ! I doubt many of you can honestly say that you wouldn't automatically judge them . As such I think it's for this reason alone that head teachers enforce the hair dye rule, and I think that's up to the school to decide, it's their image afterall.

Altho I think this, though (in before "it's my child" etc), I do think it's stupid when they enforce the rule over natural/"un-flouncy" hair colours. dying your hair bright pink is one thing and doesn't fit with the image that most schools want their students to uphold, but if it's a subtle red/black-purple colour then I think the school is going overboard. Although I don't think the students should be allowed the same fashion freedom as teachers, I think there should be a level of common sense to it all. As a teacher I wouldn't dream of turning up to school with fluorescent hair even though I work in a country where school uniforms have never been utilized and where dreadlocks, tattoos and piercings are the norm in my generation of teachers. I think there should be a balance between what the school ask for and what the parents allow, ultimately it's the schools' decision but at the same time they aren't the parent so eh, it's difficult. That's just my opinion though, agree with it or not.

Giles, when addressing them when they are acting in their professional capacity.

(So when meeting Bishop Mark in the cathedral after a service, not when you bump into him in Aldi, say)

So if I called you Jane at a bbq having never met you before that would be ok. even though you don't know me.or have a relationship to you?

Well Bishop Mark when working in his professional capacity would be addressed as your Grace

Prince Charles as Your Royal Highness, etc etc.

I didn't say only professionals were worthy of respect, you're conflating that argument massively.

Blimey this has snowballed off track!

In regards to respect. My dc have lots of absolutely amazing teachers. They also have amazing teachers in a session out of school. The behaviour in the out of school sessions which involve 40 plus kids of age 4 - 16 in the same room and you can hear a pin drop when they command silence. I commented on this once and my dc said "because we respect them we want to be quiet for them because they treat us with respect too"

They also have one in school teacher who speaks to them like absolute shit on her shoe but demands they respect her. I have complained several times about her behaviour having actually heard her one day while in school for a SN meeting and have a child who echoes due to SN word for word with pretty much accuracy.

I struggle to force my children to respect this person who has treated them awfully. She said something awful to my child relating to their SN one day. My dc has no respect for this person, should they just because she is an adult? Do they speak to her politely? Off course but respect them? No.

So I do think that pupils should have respect for teachers but I also think that to a certain extent they do earn respect from the pupils too.

Why does a profession demand more respect than an average person? Do you respect a doctor more than a hairdresser? Why?

I would see nothing wrong with using first names, provided they were comfortable with that, for anyone on that list when talking to them face to face. Title is useful when talking about them to indicate their role. But face to face you both know their role.

I don't think it's titles that are the issue. but rather the lack of equality between people when one side is addressed informally and the other side formally. Most professions nowadays are aware that the power imbalance is harmful to ethical and long term goals of having people take on responsibility for their own health/legal situation/education etc. But schools seem to be bucking that trend.

Fitfor is the out-of-school session voluntary or compulsory?

No, but when a Doctor is acting in their professional capacity I'd call them Doctor X, unless they asked me not to.

I''m done with this, arguing with a bunch of malcontent internet loons is actually wasting my time.

byee

You haven't explained why though. Do you call The receptionist "receptionist Joanne"or the retail worker "sales assistant Jones?

Why is it only certain jobs are worthy of these titles? Could it be rooted in snobbery?

I'm guessing that peolel automatically mean years of training ir whatever commands respect and nothing else need be done.

truth is we should surely treat everyone nicely and respectfully be it the homeless guy on the street or a high court judge.

respect is maintained by how you continually treat people. I won't respect a teacher who treated me like crap (has happened) but I will respect John doe who raced after me to hand me back the wallet I just dropped.

a title is not a substitute fir being worthy of maintaining someone's and respect any more than some one who isn't working is automatically just "no one".

Longtime, I do appreciate that the 'verbal' form of address for some titles is different from the 'written' form, but I couldn't be bothered to type it all out.

The point I was making was to explore, for those people who feel that teachers acting in their professional capacity should not be addressed as Mr / Mrs / Miss X, how far that argument went for other groups of people who have a 'professional' title.

I would, for example, address Bishop Mark as Bishop Mark, and expect him to address me (an adult) as Mrs Tw2k or Dr Tw2k and, importantly, my son (a child) as firstname. Equally with Dr Jones. I would address the Queen as 'Ma'am', but would expect her to call my daughter by her first name.

As a rule, for adult to adult interaction, I would expect the same level of formality on both sides, as Boom says. But in almost all situations I would expect a child to be addressed by their first name, by anyone acting in a professional capacity, including a doctor or teacher, but not necessarily that a child would address that adult by firstname only until / unless invited to WHEN ACTING IN A PROFESSIONAL CAPACITY. (For example, I teach a child I know in another capacity. I am Mrs Tw2k in school, and firstname outside, as in one place i am acting in my professional capacity, in the other I am not. We're both happy with that)

Oh and just because a couple of teachers were nasty towards me. that doesn't automatically mean that I didn't continue to behave and pay attention on class

because guess what. I knew how to be honest and decent and behave even if the teacher didn't. and their actions did not reflect on my behaviour towards them.or other techies

Mooney, 'why' is, in most cases, rooted in history and tradition. Why do we call the Queen 'Her Royal Highness'? Because that is the traditional title. Nor am i saying that someone who does not have a 'traditional professional title' is more worthy of respect.

In fact, i am making the opposite point. I am saying that I call Dr Notgood (not my doctor) Dr Notgood because it is the traditional title for his profession. I do not respect him, because he is a poor doctor. Equally, I do not expect a child to call me 'Mrs Tw2k' to show that they respect me, but because in my professional setting that is the traditional title given to a teacher.

Why do we call a Rabbi 'Rabbi', but not a computer programmer 'Computer Programmer'? It doesn't mean the two are not absolutely equally worthy of respect, just that one has a traditional title in their professional capacity whereas the other does not.

I am just interested in whether people on here would use other 'traditional titles' when addressing someone who happens to have one in their professional capacity, but not the traditional title for teachers, and if not, why not.

"So if I called you Jane at a bbq having never met you before that would be ok. even though you don't know me.or have a relationship to you?"

Actually, as Mooney and I discussed upthread, no, I would introduce myself as Title + surname and would prefer to address you in exactly the same way unless you asked me to call you firstname, in which case i would respond in the same fashion.

But what I was actually exploring, for those posters who want me to be 'firstname' in the classroom, whether they would address the bishop in his cathedral as Mark, the doctor in his surgery as as Bob, the nun in her convent as as Edith, the queen at an official ceremony as Elizabeth etc - and where the line was drawn.

What about detention during the school day e.g. lunchtime? Is it the 'in their own time' aspect?

Detention during lunchtime is still to my mind inappropriate. Children need to have time to eat and relax. But it is preferable to after school which would only be legal with parental consent, consent which I would not provide.

"for those posters who want me to be 'firstname' in the classroom, whether they would address the bishop in his cathedral as Mark..."

Personally, no I wouldn't, but I would expect him to address me by title+surname too, in return. Same with your other examples. If we were friends outside of his professional capacity, we could both go by first names then. I don't think it's necessarily about being professional, either - I wouldn't address an unemployed person or someone with a low-status job any differently than I would a professional person. So not Mrs X the teacher but Sarah the cleaner, for example.

I think the distinction isn't with this but with the idea that you treat children as a separate class of people with different 'rules' governing polite forms of address, whereas I (and possibly some other posters) don't.