I am with you Pixiefish. The loss of a priviledge may well get them to re-think their behaviour. My kids primary does this with great success. It is most definatly not a return to the 50s meanbean. The school has an estabilshed dicipline policy. There are a series of sanctions, starting with a verbal repremand, if the behaviour continues they have their name on the board, if it continies they may lose a break time. This is used in a gentle, and if I may dare say it loving way, and the children are made to realise that there are ways in which they are allowed to behave and ways that they are not.
I would love to think that all children enter school with the rudiments of reasonable behavior in place, but this is not the case. Simply having a quiet chat with a child, while sometimes an excellent method, may not be enough.
During my teaching practice I spent a week in primary. During this time I saw many acts of real, deliberate violence carried out by small children, most of them with no special needs. One incident, a child was queuing up for lunch and, unproviked, spat at and head butted the child in front of him in the queue. I know that it was unprovoked as the child was stading directly in front of me. The injured boy was brused by the attack. Should the school have had a 'quiet word'?
I see children every day in secondary who are essentialy feral. They have no idea how to behave, they swear, spit and fight and see all these things as a normal part of everyday life. their parents seem not to have civilised them in any way at all. When they leave us they often become the probelm for the poilice. How much better if their antiscicial bhaviour could have been tackled at an earlier time and that some simple, non traumatic punishment made them realise that society has rules.
I have a boistrous boy of 5. If he hurts someone in school I will let them sanction him. To give him an 'out' will start him on the path of 'devide and rule'.