To think DD's punishment from PE teacher was draconian?

[moonlightshadow1]

DD is in Year 10 and came home quite annoyed about a punishment she got in PE for something very minor in the first place. Her teacher made her get changed into her PE kit at lunchtime (without any tracksuit in the cold wet weather), and run laps around the football pitch for all but the last 15 minutes of the break (so she could eat), much of it whilst the boys were having football practice, who apparently found it quite funny. Is it overreacting to think this is a bit out of order? I might not have been surprised when I was at school but I can't help be a bit annoyed, seems a bit like it was intended to embarrass her and unnecessary.

I have changed my mind on that and understand that though it might seem minor to me, the teacher felt it was important, and see why that is. In terms of how to deal with her, a direct instruction not framed in the way it was would have sufficed I think.

I cannot understand where the humiliation is. A PE kit in front of other kids in PE kit. When I was at school it was 'get your PE kit on' followed by 'I haven't got my PE kit' followed by me having to do it in my knickers. Not those horrible PE knickers, my normal fucking knickers. That was humiliation. I learnt and didn't do it again.

Uncrossing her legs is a form of fidgeting. Would you really expect her to sit completely still not moving an inch?

Francis surely children who uncross their legs do not need to be dealt with. The teacher sounds really insecure to me.

Pseudonym99 kids were routinely humiliated in schools for years, I am sure, it doesn't excuse it happening now. I think being made to run around a field in your PE kit while a group of children of the opposite sex are playing team game is a form of humiliation. Can you think of any other situation where this would be OK?

You would expect her to sit for half an hour in exactly the same position without moving the tiniest bit? Self-control maybe, but that's hardly comfortable or likely, especially sitting on the floor.

Francis to be totally fair I was a language teacher (English) and students (adult or child) were very compliant. That is the custom in many countries, plus classes are smaller.

I can't pretend I know how hard teaching a class of 30 kids might be. But I have done a TA training course which meant I was given a brief experience in a school for very behaviorally disruptive children. Interestingly the way those children were handled was very specific and was all geared around minimizing dispruiton but i did not feel it was done in a way to brig about the best outcome.

It is hard to explain, I guess I feel schools can sometimes be quite good at getting at specific kids while some others who are very disruptive are not sanctioned in the same way.

I am sure it is very hard but at my dd's school we have had some very bad behaviour that seemed to continue etc.

What the school for the behavioral issues seemed to do was to actually try and get the kids on side. Which the OP's example given above really doesn't seem to do at all.

sorry ... minimizing dispruiton but i did feel it was done in a way to bring about the best outcome.

No Francis, she could have told my DD simply to do so, not make a show of it, stopping the class, "what do you think you're doing?" "and how did I tell you to sit?" etc...

"I'm still interested to hear how OP thinks the teacher should have communicated with her DD."

Well, I think (am not OP but my 2p worth is) she should have ignored the fart comment, ignored the 2nd fart comment, got on with lesson and not worried so much about farts! We can never re-run the class but I think the teacher made a mountain of a mole hill and that led to the whole must sit with cross legs, must run round a field. All a massive waste of everyone's time.

But I know that view won't be popular!

All a massive waste of the teacher and OP's DD's time.

she was told not to move or talk, she didn't talk, and moved slightly, hardly a disruption. Not really worthy of being made a show of in my opinion, I can't see why it is?

Were you there? If she had "moved slightly" there wouldn't have been an issue. I can promise you that.

Italiangreyhound

Your "mild comment is low level disruption it is the bane of most teachers lives, solely because parents dismiss it as "mild", 'just talking to mates' or from the pupils 'I was just asking X what I should be doing', 'I wasn't looking at game based websites, honest' (having had to separate 5 + pupils that child has invited to look at their screen). We have just recently put a whole new policy in place due to low level disruption in the classroom.

And we still get parents who say 'Everyone was talking'.

Poor girl was uncomfortable that's why she moved. Perhaps OP can suggest that a comfy armchair be put in the gym!

Francis, there may be many definitions of chip on the shoulder but here is one random one from the internet....

"To have a chip on one's shoulder refers to the act of holding a grudge or grievance that readily provokes disputation."

I would probably add an unnecessary or unwarranted grudge.

Do you think possibly the teacher had a bit of a chip on her shoulder?

Was the OP's dd the only one making two comments about smells?

If yes, then it had not led to a mass meltdown of discipline.

If no, then why were other kids not sanctioned.

I think the OP's dd has every right to take issue with most of those items as mentioned above.

I didn't mean not in front of everyone, I meant not in front of everyone in that way. "Keep your legs crossed" or something along those lines would be briefer for everyone, fair and not disrupting the lesson more. To pose questions designed to embarrass then tell her off again and warn not to move was unnecessary. Yes DD was upset at those things but I've told her why they happened and that it was down to her, she hasn't been backed up being aggrieved by me to her.

eddiemairswife not saying that, just saying it's not surprising she moved a tiny bit.

Francis, in my opinion. No, I certainly wouldn't say that to her, or the school, but here I can express my opinion just as I appreciate you expressing yours.

I don't think it would be difficult and would in fact be easier to have just said "cross your legs again like I asked" rather than making a show of it...

"That is implying malicious intent and is actually a serious allegation when levelled against a teacher. It could be used to prove misconduct, if you can prove that. I'd be thinking very carefully before you go saying anything like that, either to your DD or to the school."

She's saying it on an anonymous forum.

But I can't imagine a teacher dosn't know what will embarrass kids. Maybe teachers are not aware of them

Francis I am not sure if you are serious, can a teacher really command a student to sit still and tell them off for uncrossing their legs? That all sounds massively over the top.

How about this for an idea, the teacher gets on with the class and stops worrying about if one girl uncrosses her legs!