Should teachers have to take tougher tests before they qualify?

[Solopower1]

What do you think?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-20083249

Moving them to other schools is just pointless surely. Can't schools have sin bin type classrooms. You could have one highly brave and highly paid marine teacher in charge to give them a chance and they can disrupt each other.

Apart from the don't care comment I agree with what a lot of Ronaldo says.

sorry - have to go. My computer seems to be running wordstogether. Need to clean keyboard I think

Ronaldo, IMO, you shouldn't be in teaching in that case. You can't pick and choose which students you're going to care about. And no, schools shouldn't be more like yours.

She sounds like she's a great teacher and would be a loss to the profession. She's done, in a way, the same as Arisbottle: identified where she can give the most benefit. That seems very sensible.

IMO, you shouldn't be in teaching in that case. You can't pick and choose which students you're going to care about

Clearly I can and have.You cannot legislate my feelings eviltwins. You can stop me saying it I suppose. You cant stop what I think and feel.

And don't forget "soft" teachers are picking which students they care about: the disruptive ones over the non-disruptives.

Brycie, no, of course not. You're really coming across as pretty ignorant here. For a start, kids aren't fundamentally and consistently "disruptive". Some piss around in Science because they don't understand it but are fine in drama. Some find it hard to behave in practical lessons. Some have a shitty home life. Some have been taught not to respect women as much as they respect men. There are so many complex reasons for poor behaviour in schools, and schools need to have the tools to deal with them. Putting kids into a sin bin and forgetting about them is a hideous suggestion. Kind of like the 17th century assumption that criminals were criminals and not worth rehabilitating.

I'm not really coming across that way at all but there you are. Poor behaviour shouldn't be allowed to disrupt others' learning. That should be a core principle; what you do about it is up for debate. Leaving them to be disruptive in class shouldn't be an option. Unless you don't care about the other kids. Do you?

That's bollocks. So-called "soft" teachers don't choose the disruptive kids over the non-disruptive kids. They often can't cope, and, IMO, need either support to make rapid improvement or need to move on to a different job. Soft (poor, call it what you like) teachers cause damage, and it's no fun for the kids or for those of us who are left to pick up the pieces. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating allowing teachers who can't manage classrooms to continue causing damage. The "naughty kids can go to hell" attitude is vile, though, and anyone who truly believes that they can think and behave like that has no place in a school. OFSTED would certainly spot it.

Well they are if they're leaving them in class together. And if they want to have them removed and management won't help, then management are choosing the disruptive children over the non-disruptive children. You can't have it both ways.

Bollocks is quite rude by the way.

Kids don't disrupt in my classroom.

I provide fun, engaging lessons and often the naughty kids do well in my subject because it is creative and they don't have to do much writing.

If there is disruption, then my school has a very effective system for dealing with it.

I care for all the kids I teach. It's part of the job. The day I stop caring is the day I resign.

What happens in your classroom isn't really relevant to whether disruptive children should be allowed to stay in class.

You sound unutterbly pi.

Surely if children are not being disruptive they should stay in ETs lessons . Seems rather sensible to me

What counts as disruptive these days?

Why not create a disruptors classroom where the only subjects ever taught are maths and english. As soon as they disrupt they're out and learning maths or english somewhere. If they're repeatedly disruptive they miss design technology or music or something they like. At least they're still learning necessary stuff while they're out of hte class room.

You asked my opinion. I gave it. The issue goes much deeper than whether disruptive kids should be able to stay in class. A well-planned, engaging lesson should stamp out a lot of disruption because the kids should want to be in the room, learning. Beyond that, schools need robust systems to deal with disruption. We use partner classes. It's usually enough. So a kid from one class is taken and put in another class. The disruption rarely continues when the child is away from his/her immediate peers. If the disruption does continue, the child then goes to SLT. Any child removed from a lesson, whether to a partner class or to SLT gets a detention after school the same day.

Do I sound pi? Good job I read Malory Towers as a child, otherwise I'd have no idea what you mean.

Genus, Brycie - make Maths and English a punishment. Please tell me you don't work in education.

"The issue goes much deeper than whether disruptive kids should be able to stay in class"

no it doesn't, really.

I've read a thread about a week ago where a teacher described (using colourful language) exactly how engaging and creative her lesson plan was and how the children were behaving appalling despite all her efforts. It's easy for you. You don't have to teach something tedious. Why do you think you have the right to lecture those who teach more difficult subjects than you do, in terms of maintaining student interest? Comes across as a bit ignorant.

Are you a teacher?

It's not a punishment. Missing the creative non academic stuff they like is a punishment. Being taken out of the classroom is a pragmatic move. It's also pragmatic to teach them something useful while they're out of the classroom. What do you want to do. Give them playdough?

So taking them out of GCSE drama or music because they can't behave in maths is a solution?

No - why are you even arguing if you agree that disruptive children should be taken out of class?

Yes definitely, for persistent offenders. Gasp faint shock horror. Missing drama? oh my gaaaaaaaaaaad

often the naughty kids do well in my subject because it is creative and they don't have to do much writing Well, that's nice for you and them, EvilTwins but I take it you understand that teachers teaching subjects where writing is required - and exams can't be passed without it - probably have a rather rougher time with those same kids? Writing is not really optional in our type of education system!

And where do you put them when you've taken them out of the classroom? For how long, and to what end?