Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Secondary school detention concerns
Options
Comments
-
But as it has been said to you:To every one on here who seems to think my son must be a nightmare student I can tell you he is not ,yes he has had previous offences in school for Minor things like wrong shoes forgetting books etc and although I agree it's not acceptable it's not the crime of the century either but rules are there for a reason my original post is about his detention but the leading up to this detention was the fact that a teacher was bullying him picking on him what ever way you would rather put it ,but the fact is a teacher has accused my son in the wrong he has been punished in the wrong and teachers have lied they school has renaged on an agreement also I'm merely trying to let parents know maybe they shouldn't believe everything a teacher tells them and not to be afraid to question a teacher
Some parents won't challenge a school of the fear that it will make things worse for they're son or daughter ,teachers need to be taken off the pedestals that some people have them on that day is well and truly gone teacher do get it wrong and teachers can bully students so stop buring your head in the sand wise up a little ,oh and just because a student might have been in trouble in the past doesn't mean they are automatically trouble makers or in the all the time
1) Messing in the corridor hanging off a bag can be viewed as enough for detention, with\without kicking
2) You did not get the comment a teacher made about a "clean slate" clarified. You only interpreted it as you wanted it - meaning no detention. This does not constitute an agreement.
3) Do the decent thing for your son tell him to accept the detention. There may not have been kicking, but hard luck he was in a situation where he was messing.
Stop mammying him and let him take his punishment.
4) By letting this drag on your not helping your son/ yourself/ the teachersGuff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
I'd say your son picks up on your attitude to teachers, which may be part of the problem.
Thats a bit harsh. OP only seems to have a problem with 1 teacher and if only all children were perfect and didnt get notes/detentions etc what a wonderful place school would be and how much easier would the teachers job be.
Unfortunately thats not reality0 -
OP, the problem others have here is that any time you're asked to clarify a point you go off on a rant, repeating your vague accusation of bullying and saying that the school broke their word. Your answers are unclear, and it's not just because you don't use punctuation.
For example, you said your son refused to do the detention, then you said he never refused. Which is it? (See my post #257)
I can freely admit that my interpretation of everything I've read here is coloured by my numerous interactions with deluded, adoring parents, many of whom had a very difficult time in school and are now in a position, as they see it, to get their revenge on a jumped up snotty teacher.
An easy example is the sort of situation whereby a particular student simply won't stop talking, and has to be spoken to several times and eventually moved to another seat. All the student remembers, and all he tells his parents, is that the teacher kept at him for the full class time. Simply doesn't make the connection between the fact that he kept talking and the teacher's strategy for dealing with it. Kids and in some cases parents are very quick to make bullying accusations based on the multiple interactions the student had with the teacher, ignoring the fact that the kid's behaviour called for multiple interactions. Parents come storming in, either with half a story or a story and a half, and make themselves look silly as they attempt to defend their kid's right to disrupt classes.
This is what I see when I read this thread, and nothing you have contributed so far has given me reason to reconsider.0 -
jennyhayes123 wrote: »I've a 15 year old son who tells me how awful the teacher's are and how unfair they are etc but I think a big part of why the country is in such a mess now is parents who think there little darlings wouldn't do anything wrong and if a teacher says boo to them mummy will go in and give out to the teacher.
Yet we all know that an enormous problem in this country, one that ruined thousands of lives and ended hundreds upon hundreds of others, has been parents choosing to believe an authority figure over their child. Couple that with the fact that we have an ever growing body of scientific evidence that is telling us that punishment does not work in the ways we have presumed it does for generations. It's a lackadaisical attitude to not always have your child's back and to show them that they can always, always trust you to hear them out and understand their feelings.
That doesn't always have to mean standing up for their actions and telling them they are right when they are clearly wrong. It doesn't mean standing up for them against a teacher. It can in fact mean agreeing 100% with their teacher on a particular issue but finding a way to help them understand why you and the teacher feel as you do. It means finding a way to move forward in the best way possible for everyone. It's harder work for the parent in the short term but better for everyone in the long.0 -
Couple that with the fact that we have an ever growing body of scientific evidence that is telling us that punishment does not work in the ways we have presumed it does for generations.
It's not always about about punishment. A lot of the time it's just about trying to solve a problem so the other 29 kids can work without disruption and get the course covered. This is why in-house suspension works so well. The class is free to continue without one time-sink of a student absorbing all the teacher's energy and wasting time.
I'm always surprised that we don't hear more from parents of well-behaved kids who are annoyed that one or two miscreants are ruining classes.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
beveragelady wrote: »It's not always about about punishment. A lot of the time it's just about trying to solve a problem so the other 29 kids can work without disruption and get the course covered. This is why in-house suspension works so well. The class is free to continue without one time-sink of a student absorbing all the teacher's energy and wasting time.
Yes and like I said that's why sometimes it will mean that the parent sides 100% with the teacher. If my son was in school and being disruptive in class, which resulted in him being put in that type of detention, I would see the teachers point and I would explain to my son that it seemed to me that taking him out of the class was a logical consequence of his behaviour. That a teacher with so many other children to work with needed to be able to do so that it had less to do with punishing him and more to do with giving the teacher the ability to continue on teaching the class.
Though I would also discuss with my son why he was being disruptive. If he was just messing with his friends and causing disruption I'd agree that he needed to be removed. But if, for example, the teacher led a class prayer and tried to insist on his participation and accused him of disruption when he refused (something that caused a huge amount of teacher caused disruption in a number of classes I attended in secondary school, as there were a couple of non RC students in my class) I would be standing up for my son 100%. And there are plenty of scenarios where the parent may need to act as a bridge between their child and the teacher and help them find a middle ground, maybe in a subject the child is genuinely struggling with or in the case of a child knowing more on a subject than is in the curriculum leading to boredom and tension.0 -
Right. I just went back and re-read the entire thread (it suddenly started raining and I needed to occupy myself.)
1. I still don't know if the boy was put in detention for kicking a kid (which he may or may not have done), hanging out of a kid's schoolbag (which he may or may not have done) or for walking out of a class.
2. I don't know if he refused to do a detention, or if he never refused.
3. I don't know if there are detentions outstanding still to be served for one of the offences (no idea which one) or if he has served his time and his clean slate begins on Monday.
4. I don't have any idea what the OP means when she accuses her son's teacher of bullying. Examples would be great, with details changed for anonymity.
Please OP, in short clear sentences with full stops, could you give numbered answers to these questions. I think it would clear up a lot of the speculating that's going on.0 -
beveragelady wrote: »OP, the problem others have here is that any time you're asked to clarify a point you go off on a rant, repeating your vague accusation of bullying and saying that the school broke their word. Your answers are unclear, and it's not just because you don't use punctuation.
For example, you said your son refused to do the detention, then you said he never refused. Which is it? (See my post #257)
I can freely admit that my interpretation of everything I've read here is coloured by my numerous interactions with deluded, adoring parents, many of whom had a very difficult time in school and are now in a position, as they see it, to get their revenge on a jumped up snotty teacher.
An easy example is the sort of situation whereby a particular student simply won't stop talking, and has to be spoken to several times and eventually moved to another seat. All the student remembers, and all he tells his parents, is that the teacher kept at him for the full class time. Simply doesn't make the connection between the fact that he kept talking and the teacher's strategy for dealing with it. Kids and in some cases parents are very quick to make bullying accusations based on the multiple interactions the student had with the teacher, ignoring the fact that the kid's behaviour called for multiple interactions. Parents come storming in, either with half a story or a story and a half, and make themselves look silly as they attempt to defend their kid's right to disrupt classes.
This is what I see when I read this thread, and nothing you have contributed so far has given me reason to reconsider.
As I dared to be critical of teachers can I take it I'm included in this?
I didnt have any problems when I was in school.
I did have a couple of issues in my childs school as stated and they were dealt with. No fuss. No shouting. No bullying of teacher.
My point is that sometimes teachers can get it wrong.
Yes a child that continually disrupts a class is a problem both for teacher and other pupils but I think people seem to be judging OP harshly. She has admitted that her son is no angel and has got notes/detention but maybe this time the teacher is wrong.
We would need to hear teachers side of the story to know for sure but I think having a go at OP is a bit harsh0 -
beveragelady wrote: »OP, the problem others have here is that any time you're asked to clarify a point you go off on a rant, repeating your vague accusation of bullying and saying that the school broke their word. Your answers are unclear, and it's not just because you don't use punctuation.
For example, you said your son refused to do the detention, then you said he never refused. Which is it? (See my post #257)
Actually I think the problem here is that way too many posters are jumping all over the OP and not bothering to read her replies properly just thanking all of the posters who are badgering her. Her story doesn't ever seem to have changed and is clear as the water that comes out my Big Berkey, ie super clear.:cool:
Her son never refused to do the first detention but let his mother know and she came and removed him. He did refuse to do the 'redo' of it until he was told what the detention was for, then he complied and did it. But we have all sorts of imaginary accusations being leveled at the OP's son and then when she corrects those fantasies, she is accused of changing her story when her story has been consistent throughout. Admittedly it would have been better if the OP had contained the full story rather than it coming out in non-linear snippets over the course of the first few pages of the thread. But despite that the story itself hasn't changed.0 -
Advertisement
-
Actually I think the problem here is that way too many posters are jumping all over the OP and not bothering to read her replies properly just thanking all of the posters who are badgering her. Her story doesn't ever seem to have changed and is clear as the water that comes out my Big Berkey, ie super clear.:cool:
Her son never refused to do the first detention but let his mother know and she came and removed him. He did refuse to do the 'redo' of it until he was told what the detention was for, then he complied and did it. But we have all sorts of imaginary accusations being leveled at the OP's son and then when she corrects those fantasies, she is accused of changing her story when her story has been consistent throughout. Admittedly it would have been better if the OP had contained the full story rather than it coming out in non-linear snippet by snippet over the course of the first few pages of the thread. But despite that the story itself hasn't changed.
It can't be any cleared than this:He never refused to do any detentionit was a few days later and there was no other altercation he was told he had to redo it as he refused to do it till they told him what the detention was for0 -
Actually I think the problem here is that way too many posters are jumping all over the OP and not bothering to read her replies properly just thanking all of the posters who are badgering her. Her story doesn't ever seem to have changed and is clear as the water that comes out my Big Berkey, ie super clear.:cool:
Her son never refused to do the first detention but let his mother know and she came and removed him. He did refuse to do the 'redo' of it until he was told what the detention was for, then he complied and did it. But we have all sorts of imaginary accusations being leveled at the OP's son and then when she corrects those fantasies, she is accused of changing her story when her story has been consistent throughout. Admittedly it would have been better if the OP had contained the full story rather than it coming out in non-linear snippet by snippet over the course of the first few pages of the thread. But despite that the story itself hasn't changed.
Have to agree with you. The first taste of critisim of teachers and everyone up in arms.
The poor child started off with detention and by the end of post he's a deliquent.
Very unfair to OP and child0 -
beveragelady wrote: »
Please OP, in short clear sentences with full stops, could you give numbered answers to these questions. I think it would clear up a lot of the speculating that's going on.
Definitely a real teacher comment above
Don't make them get the red Biro out OP, they always carry one!Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »Definitely a real teacher comment above
Don't make them get the red Biro out OP, they always carry one!
And very condescending to the OP in my opinion0 -
beveragelady wrote: »It can't be any cleared than this:
Refusing to do detention until you're told the reason why you're getting it in the first place as opposed to refusing to do detention full stop , are two different things. Youre playing with words and context.0 -
Incorrect, this thread started off questioning the "legality" of detention. Verging on habeus corpus stuff.Have to agree with you. The first taste of critisim of teachers and everyone up in arms.
The poor child started off with detention and by the end of post he's a deliquent.
Very unfair to OP and child
Most people are been fair minded, but people are getting annoyed by the confusion the OP is creating and the vagueness in her posts.
If there was systematic targeting of her child fair enough, but it seems far from it.Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
And very condescending to the OP in my opinion
It does seem a little schoolmarmish when I look at it now. I was actually just looking for clarity, not a garbled rant about bullying and reneging on deals. I thought short, clear answers to specific questions might help the OP dig herself out of some of the holes she's in.
I'm going to turn into one of those teachers who calls for ciunas at the dinner table...0 -
Refusing to do detention until you're told the reason why you're getting it in the first place as opposed to refusing to do detention full stop , are two different things. Youre playing with words and context.
Ok, so she didn't mean 'never' when she said never? This is why it has been so hard to get a clear picture of what happened.0 -
And very condescending to the OP in my opinion
An they can' t help it sometimes it's ingrained in them! She does have a point it is not clear.
I hope the OP gets it sorted out as it is obviously causing her stress. I also hope the young fella is getting lots of study done during the midterm!Guff about stuff, and stuff about guff.
0 -
gormdubhgorm wrote: »Incorrect, this thread started off questioning the "legality" of detention. Verging on habeus corpus stuff.
Most people are been fair minded, but people are getting annoyed by the confusion the OP is creating and the vagueness in her posts.
If there was systematic targeting of her child fair enough, but it seems far from it.
If you look back on posts no 134 for example and reference to judge/court.
also another reference to obnoxious kids and parents on another.
It seems to me that posters have formed an opinion that child is trouble and mother is blinkered.0 -
Advertisement
-
If you look back on posts no 134 for example and reference to judge/court.
also another reference to obnoxious kids and parents on another.
It seems to me that posters have formed an opinion that child is trouble and mother is blinkered.
You have referred to two posts out of nearly 300. I wouldn't consider that to be a scientifically verifiable percentage....
You don't refer to the quite a lot of posts asking the OP to clarify her points which she fails to do.0 -
Actually I think the problem here is that way too many posters are jumping all over the OP and not bothering to read her replies properly just thanking all of the posters who are badgering her. Her story doesn't ever seem to have changed and is clear as the water that comes out my Big Berkey, ie super clear.:cool:
Her son never refused to do the first detention but let his mother know and she came and removed him. He did refuse to do the 'redo' of it until he was told what the detention was for, then he complied and did it. But we have all sorts of imaginary accusations being leveled at the OP's son and then when she corrects those fantasies, she is accused of changing her story when her story has been consistent throughout. Admittedly it would have been better if the OP had contained the full story rather than it coming out in non-linear snippets over the course of the first few pages of the thread. But despite that the story itself hasn't changed.
Just to clarify I am a teacher. However I think you are correct on a couple of things, that I don't think the OPs story has changed it has just be badly put across which has caused confusion and posts and replies crossing each other didn't help.
I also think people are being too harsh in some of the things they are saying about her son being a tear away and her being x,y or z, however I think some of her responses have contributed to this problem also.
I have read the full 19 pages and have only put in one question which wasn't answered. I think the bits and pieces of information is where the problem is occuring. If I was to try to sum up the 19 pages.
1. In the past there was some detentions for 'minor' issues. Thats fair enough it happens. I would take these are irrelevant if they were in first and second year and we haven't had any issues so far in third year.
However the question is the previous detentions - were they out of class all day like this one or were they just a lunch time or after school detention.
2. Something happened in the corridor, a teacher rang you to tell you, I presume the teacher told you that he would get detention for it. It was initially put across as a kick and then pulling out of someone.
It is not clear how this was dealt with at the time, was he taken out of his lunch sent to the office what?
3. Some time later in class with this same teacher something happened in class. You have not said what happened in this class. He walked out of the class as a result of the incident without permission.
Were you called in over this or phoned over this. When did you find out about him walking out of class?
4. As a result of walking out of class he was put on in school suspension out of class all day in year heads room or something. You came to the school and removed him from this. How did you know he was in this situation, you later mention he can't use his phone in school so how did you find out?
5. You kept him at home until you got to meet with the school (I think). You and the school agreed that you would all draw a line under the matter. As previous posters have pointed out this is where the big problem is - it appears your understanding of it and their understanding of it were different, as a result you felt they went back on their word.
On this I will give you what may have happened and what might have been the schools reasoning for continuing with it.
Firstly as people have siad it may have been a break down in communication that the principal didn't inform the correct people that the detention was not to happen.
Or more likely that the school meant that after the detention they won't bring it up again and leave it lie but they felt that he still had to do the detention. The fact was the detention was for walking out of class. The school most likely felt that if it is seen that if your mammy comes in you don't ahve to do detention and you can walk out of class anytime you want, then they will have bigger problems so the detention for walking out still had to stand.
Obviously there was a breakdown in communication on one or both sides but I would suggest this was the thinking (speaking from experience)
6. Your son did that second detention and told you about it when he came home, as he couldn't use his phone in school. He and you are annoyed that they appeared to go back on their word. Again I would suggest it was a misunderstanding between ye or the school didn't inform the right people in time and they do owe your son an apology for this.
Either way it is done and over with now.
7. You are right to want to find out why things changed. However you appear to be overly angry by this, firstly seen by your opening post which in reality is not where your issue lies and is why people seem to have gone against you to a certain respect.
in brief, your son misbehaved on the corridor, he didn't get a detention for it. Something happened in class and he walked out which he did get an detention for. You prevented him from completing this detention.
Your issue lies in the fact that the reason he got detention was for walking out which he is not allowed to do. Being blamed in the wrong does not mean he has the right to leave the room without permission (the reason for this rule is that the teacher is responsible for him during that time if anything happened they are responsible so schools need this to be strict)
There is no doubt he walked out, there is no doubt for the reason for the detention, there is no doubt he didn't complete that dentention due to you taking him out. So from teh schools point of view the detention needed to be served and the channging story of the kick would be left lie.
In relation to the bullying - bullying is a repeated action. You have not described any repeated action, one incident where he did do something however big or small on the corridor and one thing where he walked out of the room for whatever reason you haven't explained.
This does not look like a pattern of bullying unless there is more you are not telling us.
If you wanted to respond to this post which puts things in order a bit and answering the questions above might clarify where people are taking you up wrong.
Some of the explanation might give you a different view point to what you have now.
I haven't attacked you. I appreciate that you say you didn't go in previously about other detentions that you just feel there was an issue with this one which is fair enough.
But like others have siad there are two sides to everything and a bigger picture to consider for everyone.
You need to separate out all the issues.
is your issue with detention and getting 20 mins break
is your issue with being blamed for a kick that he didn't do
is your issue with getting a detention for walking out of class (which isn't in doubt) if that is the issue can you see it from the schools point of view that they can't have kids walking out when they don't like something
is your issue with the first detention because it was in your eyes about a kick and in teh schools eyes about walking out.
It just struck me, you took him out in teh middle of the detention (it appears) but you didn't speak to the girl involved until she was in your house which I presume was that night maybe? so on what gounds did you take him out if you didn't get the allegation clarified until after the detention had happened.
It is quite confusing in fairness.
Is the detention legal - I would say I don't know but I would suggest it isn't illegal. Have the school a discipline policy. Is this detention written into the policy. By sending your son here you agree to this policy so arguing the legalities aferwards may be futile I don't know0 -
Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »You have referred to two posts out of nearly 300. I wouldn't consider that to be a scientifically verifiable percentage....
You don't refer to the quite a lot of posts asking the OP to clarify her points which she fails to do.
More teacher talk!!
Some people just take the bits that suit them
I have no vendetta against teachers I'm just trying to give OP a chance without resorting to some of the things that are being insuinated here.0 -
Judging by the way the OP has handled the amount of vitriol she's got from this thread , I'd say she's quite a pleasant reasonable individual.
From the oxford english dictionary....
Vitriol noun
Bitter criticism or malice:
'her mother’s sudden gush of fury and vitriol'
Could you please point out some of the "vitriol" that was directed at the OP?More teacher talk!!
Some people just take the bits that suit them
I have no vendetta against teachers I'm just trying to give OP a chance without resorting to some of the things that are being insuinated here.
And most posters are trying to get the teachers view in order to form a balanced opinion. There have been no examples put forward of incidents that would lead to the accusation of bullying.
And lets be quite clear here. If bullying is taking place then has the parent gone through the correct procedures to deal with them? Its a serious issue and one which if true should lead to disciplinary action against the teacher as its completely unacceptable.
On the other hand, if its not true then it is horrible thing to do to criticise someone professionally in this way.
Perhaps we can all wipe the slate clean and ask the OP to start afresh with the events and answer the queries as they arise??0 -
BrianBoru00 wrote: »
And most posters are trying to get the teachers view in order to form a balanced opinion. There have been no examples put forward of incidents that would lead to the accusation of bullying.
And lets be quite clear here. If bullying is taking place then has the parent gone through the correct procedures to deal with them? Its a serious issue and one which if true should lead to disciplinary action against the teacher as its completely unacceptable.
On the other hand, if its not true then it is horrible thing to do to criticise someone professionally in this way.
Perhaps we can all wipe the slate clean and ask the OP to start afresh with the events and answer the queries as they arise??
We cant get the teachers view unless teacher joins thread. We can go on what OP has said but what i find difficult is that a lot of posts insinuate that OP's child is troublesome.
Most kids will get notes of some kind and while I do agree a disruptive child in class is not on I think some posters are making out like he is a trouble maker without facts.0 -
More teacher talk!!
Some people just take the bits that suit them
I have no vendetta against teachers I'm just trying to give OP a chance without resorting to some of the things that are being insuinated here.
I'm not a teacher, so I don't give a damn if you have a vendetta against teachers or not.
But your reaction is telling. Someone disagrees with you, and the only explanation must be that they have some agenda.0 -
We cant get the teachers view unless teacher joins thread. We can go on what OP has said but what i find difficult is that a lot of posts insinuate that OP's child is troublesome.
Most kids will get notes of some kind and while I do agree a disruptive child in class is not on I think some posters are making out like he is a trouble maker without facts.
As opposed to the outright contention by the OP that the teacher is a bully? It works both ways.0 -
Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »I'm not a teacher, so I don't give a damn if you have a vendetta against teachers or not.
But your reaction is telling. Someone disagrees with you, and the only explanation must be that they have some agenda.
At no stage did I say anyone had an agenda.!!
I have continually said that sometimes teachers can be wrong.
I have said I think posters are unfair to insinuate child is troublesome0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »As opposed to the outright contention by the OP that the teacher is a bully? It works both ways.
Yes it does work both ways . I have never said that I agree with OP that child is being bullied. If you read back I have stated time and again that sometimes teachers get it wrong0
Advertisement