Thoughts on low level forms of physical punishment in schools

[cowfacemonkey]

I'm not talking hitting or anything like that, more along the lines of being made to stand for periods of time in front of the class etc.?

DS has come home today and complained that he had to complete all his work stood up bent over a desk as punishment for talking in class. To his annoyance I have sent him off with a lecture about not talking in class. In the absence of full information on his "crimes" I'm not about to contact school over it BUT even as a fairly strict parent this type of inducing physical discomfort type of discipline doesn't sit well with me.
Just wondered where other people draw the line been discipline and physical punishment.

I don't think the question is whether the child did something wrong but whether the punishment was appropriate. I don't think standing up and bending over the desk is appropriate. If they were so disruptive they should have been sat somewhere on their own facing away from the class or simply sent out of the lesson.

When people say "move him" or something like that - how do you think that works?

I've frequently taught in rooms where there aren't enough desks so children are grouped up around the ends of tables. Or there's the kid who will talk to anyone - even themself - just loud enough to distract others. Or call out. Or take 5 minutes to gather all their stuff and move. Or the ones who then argue and you end up having to call a senior member of staff because the entire lesson has ground to a halt as this kids refuses to move and now they need to be taken away. There isn't a spare room that you can send a kid to to work quietly - and there would have to be a spare adult to supervise them.

It's not the best/most fitting thing, but if standing up made him stop talking, and it's the quickest/simplest way to make him pay attention, then it's not a big deal.

Just in general - standing up, or kneeling on the floor would be the most I'd do to a child. I'm not sure it even counts as punishment - there are plenty of people who choose to have a standing desk - so if it's mainly listening and not a lot of writing, it would be fine.

there are plenty of people who choose to have a standing desk

They have a specific desk which is made higher for standing they don't crouch over their normal desk though!

KickAssAngel when I was teaching we used to send Mostly Harmless Chatters to one another's classes by mutual agreement (secondary school core subject with all our classrooms next to one another). The year was blocked in two halves, so half the department would have a set each of year 11 while the other half had year 7, or whatever. Sending a year 7 or 8 into a year 10 or 11 class or a year 11 to sit with year 7 usually worked. For the harmless but annoying, not for nasty behaviour obviously.

Standing desks are expensive fancy bits of kit - if you're standing to work your desk is at elbow height.

For talking then it seems like a silly punishment and quote illogical to me.

For swinging on chairs repeatedly, endless turning around then it's fair game to me, used sparingly with professional judgement. They are refusing to sit properly and get on with their work so don't need a chair. I've probably taken a chair for repeated swinging and not working twice in the last few years. It's not a difficult concept for your average teenager or pre teen to grasp (and it's a rule through primary too).
The 2 times I did it the option was prove a point by removing a chair for 10 minutes and use humour to consolidate or escalate through the behaviour policy as defiance. I chose the first option. It was effective in both cases as I had a good relationship with the students.

so I would probably think it more effective in the long term to wonder to yourself if a child doesn't follow an instruction after 17 verbal prompts there might be a reason for it!

There may be, though not a diagnosed one as far as I have been informed. I teach the class for 45 mins once a week, whereas the class teacher (primary) has them for the whole rest of the week, so there is a limit to what I can do about it really!

As others have said, chair removal is for not being able to use a chair safely.

I don’t agree that standing up for the rest of the lesson is “humiliating” though, he wasn’t already drawing attention to himself by being a chatterbox in class, so he’s clearly not painfully shy.

Standing for talking is a bit random but probably easier for him and the teacher than a detention or whatever else is at the teachers disposal.

Knittink
Not only that but certainly by secondary it isnt a case of there being some deeper reason (I never get the jump from 'standard disruption and not following instructions' to 'but there's probably a deeper need'). It's a case of teenager doesn't see the point in an instruction and therefore feels it is optional.
A bit like 'write the date and title' means write the date and title, not stare into space and then when I move on say 'oh was that for us' or ask me to wait whilst you catch up having started when it suited.
Or 'this piece of work will be completed in exam conditions. That means silence' means you are working in silence, not work in silence unless you think you want to ask your peer something in which case whisper quietly and then seem shocked when told to work in exam conditions.

Admittedly, it's not helped by staff who say silence but then tolerate whispering but the principle is there. Follow the simple instructions.

bring back the belt (joke).
kids are hard work these days and i would never cope being a teacher to 25+ kids. perhaps it was a last resort to stop him chatting.
i actually think schools are too slow to punish at times and kids lack respect to authority.
do they still do punishment excercises or copy out timestables ?

Just making him change seats so he is next to someone who won't reply to his talking would have ended the annoyance quickly.

So the well well behaved end up having to manage the poorly behaved.

Unfair and very poor teaching strategy

When parents complain about methods of dealing with poor behaviour in schools, I don't think they are really aware of the reality of what it's like dealing with individuals' behaviour in the context of a room full of 30 kids while knowing that your job depends on you getting through the syllabus and getting kids to their expected levels.

Having said that, I'd love to know what punishments people think should be used in schools, because judging by the behaviour in many schools, the punishments currently in use are not much of a deterrent. The only kids who are really bothered by the threat of a detention are usually the ones who are unlikely to get one! It's not surprising that it's hard to maintain discipline when parents are likely to complain about their child having to stand up for a while.

Why is everyone who disagrees with you jumped on? Pretty normal in schools if they are messing about/swinging on chair to have chair removed. Also persistent talking can often result in standing. Try teaching 30 kids and then maybe consider why it’s done. It’s not going to kill him.

If it isn't something that would be meted out in a place of work, then it shouldn't be meted out in school.

If it isn't something that would be meted out in a place of work, then it shouldn't be meted out in school.

Nonsense. School children and adult colleagues do not behave similarly. Do you object to detentions for pupils? I haven't heard of detentions in the workplace.

GlassLantern
Moving someone seats isn't getting the well behaved to manage the poorly behaved. To say that is to misunderstand or misrepresent the strategy.

It can be that if the well behaved student is expected to tolerate disruption and the teacher does nothing, but most of the time a quick 'X move over there please so you can focus. Good now get on' is all that is required.
Assuming it's a member of staff with good classroom presence and good behaviour management then the act of moving them is effective. If I've moved someone seats then they generally get their head down because if they continue then they are out and get an instant after school detention (because I don't accept anyone preventing others learning).

Individual strategies are just that, strategies. They can be used effective or ineffectively. (E g. A firm raised voice can be effective, but done all the time is ineffective / sending students out can be effective but makes the teacher seem weak if done too often with no follow up).

I wouldn’t be impressed tbh. As others have said, it doesn’t sound like the punishment had any relevance to the crime, like if he’d been balancing on two legs.

I’m assuming your DS is in secondary since one of your other posts mentions secondary. It does occur to me that it would be a wildly inappropriate punishment for a girl (I.e. forcing a girl to bend over a desk for a whole lesson). So I think if a punishment isn’t appropriate for both sexes, it’s probably not an appropriate punishment at all, IYSWIM.

Why does the punishment need to be relevant to the crime? A detention for rudeness or an internal exclusion for fighting aren't specific to the behaviour. The point of the punishment is as a deterrent.

Knittink
Because detentions are specified sanctions established in a school's behaviour policy.

Part of classroom management is managing your room and fitting within the behaviour policy. Unless you are in one of these schools where every tiny thing is documented then that gives staff a bit of flexibility of what to do before escalating through the policy.

Doing something silly or illogical doesn't really serve any purpose. Standing for talking is neither a deterrent, nor is it the sort of well planned mini sanction which can be used along side other strategies to avoid escalation.