Britain's Strictest Headmistress - ITV, Sunday 22nd May 10:15pm

[jdrobbo]

Hi Rowls,

Yes there’s lots of good learning taking place, I’m sure. I can see fantastic Progress 8 scores, as already alluded but SHE’S BREAKING THE LAW by not delivering the National Curriculum. I do believe that the National Curriculum needs considerable change but that doesn’t give Heads the right to not carry out their legal duty in providing the full curriculum to their pupils. The fact that you or dsr can’t acknowledge this (it puts them at a significant advantage) makes it hard to have a balanced discussion.

With respect, if you can’t acknowledge that this is not appropriate, then it makes the discusses unworthy, and that’s not great because I’ve been genuinely interested by the thread.

[jdrobbo]

Apologies for the poor use of the quote function

[jdrobbo]

DSR said, in response to my comment about breaking the law by deliberately narrowing the curriculum…..

The national curriculum is far too restrictive IMO. The whole policy of making school bigger and bigger, the size of small towns in many cases, is wrongheaded in my book, as is the idea that all schools should have the same curriculum. There should be much greater freedom of choice by both parents and schools and let state schools (just like in the private sector) specialise in whatever they blinking well want.






I get where he’s coming from but that doesn’t excuse the choice being carried out. It’s not right

[Rowls]

edit - deleted..

[Rowls]

Hi Rowls,

Yes there’s lots of good learning taking place, I’m sure. I can see fantastic Progress 8 scores, as already alluded but SHE’S BREAKING THE LAW by not delivering the National Curriculum. I do believe that the National Curriculum needs considerable change but that doesn’t give Heads the right to not carry out their legal duty in providing the full curriculum to their pupils. The fact that you or dsr can’t acknowledge this (it puts them at a significant advantage) makes it hard to have a balanced discussion.

With respect, if you can’t acknowledge that this is not appropriate, then it makes the discusses unworthy, and that’s not great because I’ve been genuinely interested by the thread.

Hi jdrobbo & good evening!

The Curriculum page on the Michaela School website directly contradicts your claim that several subjects aren't taught in the school.

https://michaela.education/home/seconda ... m-wembley/

The school also recently had an Ofsted inspection and I can't see this being flagged as an issue? In what way is it "illegal" and wouldn't the Ofsted inspection have discovered this if it was the case?

Can you expand on what it is you believe is "illegal" about the Michaela curriculum?

[jdrobbo]

Hi jdrobbo & good evening!

The Curriculum page on the Michaela School website directly contradicts your claim that several subjects aren't taught in the school.

https://michaela.education/home/seconda ... m-wembley/

The school also recently had an Ofsted inspection and I can't see this being flagged as an issue? In what way is it "illegal" and wouldn't the Ofsted inspection have discovered this if it was the case?

Can you expand on what it is you believe is "illegal" about the Michaela curriculum?

Honestly Rowls. I really appreciate the conversation but please, please do some digging about their taught curriculum, away from their website (of course the subjects are taught but the curriculum has been ‘narrowed’ beyond acceptable levels with intention), read their released Ofsted notes from inspector conversations (not the final report) [I genuinely thought you’d have done this], read the comments from former HMIs On the inspection and better-inform yourself around this issue.

There are many good aspects to the school, I know that and I don’t need to visit the school to see that. I don’t like the leadership style (I’m allowed to have that opinion) but see that results are good (although as I’ve said but hasn’t been acknowledged), i feel there are significant questions behind how such results have been continuously achieved.

With regret, I’ll leave it here. For the record, I don’t wish failure upon any school or leader, I just wish for a fair and level playing field for all, where leaders conduct themselves professionally both inside and out of the workplace, when putting their views in the public domain (see references to calling people morons etc).

I wish Michaela lots of future success. Hope the thread can continue in a positive manner. Take care.

J

[Rowls]

Honestly Rowls. I really appreciate the conversation but please, please do some digging about their taught curriculum, away from their website (of course the subjects are taught but the curriculum has been ‘narrowed’ beyond acceptable levels with intention), read their released Ofsted notes from inspector conversations (not the final report) [I genuinely thought you’d have done this], read the comments from former HMIs On the inspection and better-inform yourself around this issue.

There are many good aspects to the school, I know that and I don’t need to visit the school to see that. I don’t like the leadership style (I’m allowed to have that opinion) but see that results are good (although as I’ve said but hasn’t been acknowledged), i feel there are significant questions behind how such results have been continuously achieved.

With regret, I’ll leave it here. For the record, I don’t wish failure upon any school or leader, I just wish for a fair and level playing field for all, where leaders conduct themselves professionally both inside and out of the workplace, when putting their views in the public domain (see references to calling people morons etc).

I wish Michaela lots of future success. Hope the thread can continue in a positive manner. Take care.

J

Thanks for the response jdrobbo,

I note you've changed the description from "illegal" to " 'narrowed' beyond acceptable levels with intention".

KB is unabashed about the narrower curriculum. I think I've already posted this here:

https://twitter.com/Miss_Snuffy/status/ ... 9972500644

She says the choice IS completely intentional. She is unabashed about it. Given the spectacular results, I think her decisions have been fully vindicated.

I don't believe for one second this is illegal and the reasoning for it is sound - she wants her pupils to be able to compete with pupils from much wealthier backgrounds. To do this, the Michaela School focuses on the core subjects rather than easier options.

I'm speaking as somebody who has a grade C GCSE in something called "Office Studies". Even at the time I was studying I knew it was useless and that I'd wasted my time. If my school had not had this option, I'd have had to study something worthwhile. I chose it because it was an easy option and it was obviously wrong to do so but my school let me get away with it.

I can even remember that one of the questions in the exam entailed drawing a poster and marks were awarded for "use of colour". I hadn't brought crayons into an exam because I was expecting a serious exam. I should have known better because it wasn't a serious subject. It was an utter waste of my time.

The Michaela School pupils won't have their time wasted in the same way I was allowed to waste my time. The benefit for them is there for all to see in the results the school is achieving, the rankings the school has won and in the continuing success of the school and it's pupils.

Thanks again for your replies and the debate tonight and keep up the good work yourself.

[dsr]

Hi Rowls,

Yes there’s lots of good learning taking place, I’m sure. I can see fantastic Progress 8 scores, as already alluded but SHE’S BREAKING THE LAW by not delivering the National Curriculum. I do believe that the National Curriculum needs considerable change but that doesn’t give Heads the right to not carry out their legal duty in providing the full curriculum to their pupils. The fact that you or dsr can’t acknowledge this (it puts them at a significant advantage) makes it hard to have a balanced discussion.

With respect, if you can’t acknowledge that this is not appropriate, then it makes the discusses unworthy, and that’s not great because I’ve been genuinely interested by the thread.

I don't know if she's breaking the law or not. And furthermore, I don't really care. Teachers do break the law. I know a teacher who broke the law by assisting in giving a really smelly child (progeny of an unfit, drug addicted mother) a bath. The child was happy, the mother was too doped to care, but they broke the law. And I don't care. The law is there for a reason, but slavish adherence to it isn't the reason.

Jeremy Clarkson once drove while over the limit because his son was potentially dying of meningitis and there were no ambulances. He broke the law, and I don't care because to treat the tiniest detail of the law as more important than the life or welfare of a child, is taking the law too far. IMO.

It comes back to the priorities of education. I think, as perhaps Katherine Birbalsingh thinks, that education policy should not be strictly the preserve of politicians. I think, and perhaps she thinks, that teachers and parents should have more input than politicians. And if there is a way of interpreting the law that isn't prosecution-worthy, then I treat it as seriously as the driver who does 31 mph on an empty road. Illegal, but not to an extent that I care.

(And if I discover that at some point anyone in your school has breached a regulation, I wouldn't care about that either. Teaching is or should be about educating the child, not ticking the box.)

[Uwe Noble]

You've done nearly 40 years, Uwe?

Yup! I'm still going!

[Quicknick]

Yup! I'm still going!

26 years was enough for me. You've got stamina, Uwe.

[evensteadiereddie]

I managed 40 years as a teacher of English and Head of Years 8 and 9.
I can probably count on the fingers of one hand - five not six - the days where I felt like packing it in.
Not an easy school by any means but a close knit and er, interesting catchment area.
Fair play indeed, Uwe.

[aggi]

They had exams long before the national curriculum was invented. Teaching to the exam didn't start in infant reception class then,. and it won't now.

As for which schools are not good enough, that's for the parents to decide. They would be the ones that can't attract pupils. I do not like the school of thought that says education policy should be almost entirely in the hands of the politicians.,

I think if you're planning on closing down the "bad" schools you're going to get a lot of schools teaching to the exam syllabus. In fact I think you'd end up with an even more narrow approach as for many that became the big focus.

I don't disagree with your politicians comment. Education is a real area that would benefit from long-term thinking and being largely divorced from becoming a wedge issue every six months. We've had something like ten education secretaries in the past ten years, it's clear there's no long-term plan there.

[aggi]

...
The only thing that can be said confidently about Finnish education is that although it is still excellent, it is slipping alarmingly and the only clear change that has happened in recent years has been the implementation of the kind of progressive teaching ideas that KB and the Michaela School eschew.

Yes, as you say: The phonics IS working brilliantly. It has been one of the few stand out successes this government has brought in.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/more ... he%20board.

BTW please don't quote me on this but the reason that anybody "needs" to know what a "fronted adverbial" is (and I don't know BTW) is that by teaching this kind of grammar, it should help children to learn foreign languages more easily. I think that's at least one of the reasons but as I said, please don't quote me on this.

We're notoriously bad at teaching foreign languages but we're also uniquely disadvantaged because of the ubiquitous nature of English. Imagine how keen teenagers would be to learn French for example, if every blockbuster film, every top pop song and ALL the tik tok videos were in English?

That's interesting around Finland (although your conclusion seems pretty flawed in that you don't know what teaching methods were previously employed) but you seem to have conveniently avoided mentioning Estonia in your response who implement the kind of progressive teaching ideas that KB and the Michaela School eschew and are doing very well.

Your conclusion on the phonics working is also fairly shonky. It is clearly working in teaching phonics better (which is what the test you linked to is about). It isn't so clear when you look at actual reading with reference to the PISA scores which you have been giving weight, there hasn't been an improvement in the score there and we'll have to wait and see whether we start to see an improvement.

I have seen the arguments around it makes it easier to teach a foreign language but they seem a bit like one of those explanations that were generated after the fact, I've never actually seen a convincing study on it (particularly compared to the alternative of just teaching a foreign language instead).

I think part of the mistake you are making, or at least that's how it comes across, is that there are minimal levels of discipline at most schools. I know this head for instance https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... lking-rule She's obviously big on discipline but also progressive teaching. It's not one or the other.

[Rowls]

That's interesting around Finland (although your conclusion seems pretty flawed in that you don't know what teaching methods were previously employed) but you seem to have conveniently avoided mentioning Estonia in your response who implement the kind of progressive teaching ideas that KB and the Michaela School eschew and are doing very well.

Your conclusion on the phonics working is also fairly shonky. It is clearly working in teaching phonics better (which is what the test you linked to is about). It isn't so clear when you look at actual reading with reference to the PISA scores which you have been giving weight, there hasn't been an improvement in the score there and we'll have to wait and see whether we start to see an improvement.

I have seen the arguments around it makes it easier to teach a foreign language but they seem a bit like one of those explanations that were generated after the fact, I've never actually seen a convincing study on it (particularly compared to the alternative of just teaching a foreign language instead).

I think part of the mistake you are making, or at least that's how it comes across, is that there are minimal levels of discipline at most schools. I know this head for instance https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... lking-rule She's obviously big on discipline but also progressive teaching. It's not one or the other.

Evening aggi!

Just to clarify re. Finland: Its not a conclusion, just a supposition. But something very clearly changed and the country has indeed recently moved over to the kind of "progressive" ideas that were prominent in our own rotten "bog standard comprehensives".

Correct again that the phonics work hasn't really transformed our PISA scores but these things take time and I'm confident the improvements will be reflected their in the future.

You're also absolutely right that discipline and teaching styles are distinct. I don't think I've ever conflated the two.

Is a lack of discipline in schools a national problem? I couldn't say with authority and I'm not afraid to admit so but I've known three close friends who quit teaching because of the lack of discipline. That's only second hand anecdotal evidence, but it paints a picture. I've read many blogs from teachers complaining of the lack of discipline in schools. I also have my own experience of how my own old school was. And there's the "Educating XX" series. Obviously, the producers are deliberately picking certain schools but there's seems to be a school suitable to their, shall we say, "requirements" in each and every region of the country.

So no, I cannot say with authority that lack of discipline is a major problem in lots of schools up and down the country, but there is plenty of evidence I've seen that suggests it might be the case.

[Clovius Boofus]

Phone-in on 5live this morning about discipline in schools.

Teachers are so up against it re discipline. From what I can gather from the phone-in, it seems that the most disruptive kids tend to have the kind of parents who come barging into schools, aggressively demanding special treatment should their little darling be reprimanded in any way. Many of these parents lack basic parenting skills, and don't care about the kind of education their offspring receives. Then you have the child-centric parents who have never said 'no' to their kid/s. It must be a nightmare trying to teach in some schools.

[evensteadiereddie]

Luckily, speaking from my experience anyway, the vast majority of kids and families want to do well.
It depends largely upon the catchment area, I guess, but it's a fact that in a class of thirty, say, you only need three or four disruptive, disinterested kids to make life difficult for the teacher and, just as importantly, the other kids who want to get on.

[Jakubclaret]

Discipline went to pot when all the do gooders took control away from the teachers, you had none of this when kids were caned & slippered.

[Big Vinny K]

Close friends with a teacher and he says the discipline has been out of control for years. I was listening to 5 live this morning and to a teacher who was saying about the kind of language that is common place and abuse teachers receive and it reminded me of what my friend said to me a couple of years ago that not a day goes by when at least one of the pupils tells a teacher to F off (or worse).

I was a governor at that same school for 15 plus years. They had a crazy process in place which was implemented by the head teacher whereby any kids misbehaving in class would be sent to the Head Of Year.
The Head of Year was also often teaching classes too and would have to deal with these kids aswell as his own class. The attitude of the more experienced and older teachers was pretty disgraceful as they would send the misbehaving kids to the Head of Year purely from a selfish point of view. The Heads of Years were invariably young experienced teachers who took the role because it was worth a couple of grand extra and a few grading points - the experienced teachers didn’t need this hassle or the extra money.
Not surprisingly there was a large turnover of Head of Year roles as they would be burnt out after a year or so and give up the role.

The Headteacher - someone who was on a very significant salary - was adamant this was the best way of managing misbehaving pupils.

When she finally went and a new headteacher appointed the practice was stopped and they moved to a system of the misbehaving kids being sent to cooling off classes with staff who were not trying to teach other kids.

[aggi]

Discipline went to pot when all the do gooders took control away from the teachers, you had none of this when kids were caned & slippered.

So if the discipline was so good why were they getting caned & slippered?

[aggi]

The squeeze on budgets together with bringing more kids into mainstream education is also an issue.

Plenty of statemented children who are meant to have 1:1 teaching assistants but the budget can't stretch to that or there aren't enough of them out there to fill the vacancies (as the salary for a TA is crap). This then knocks on to the rest of the class.

[Big Vinny K]

So if the discipline was so good why were they getting caned & slippered?

Back in the day teachers were that good that they could anticipate when a child was going to misbehave so they got in their first…..
Added benefit that after giving the kid a jolly good thrashing the teacher had an extra 15 minutes spare for a cigarette break

[Big Vinny K]

The squeeze on budgets together with bringing more kids into mainstream education is also an issue.

Plenty of statemented children who are meant to have 1:1 teaching assistants but the budget can't stretch to that or there aren't enough of them out there to fill the vacancies (as the salary for a TA is crap). This then knocks on to the rest of the class.

And exacerbated by the specialist schools having restricted budgets and having to turn away children who clearly are not right for mainstream schools but end up having little option than to go to one.

Burnley is facing these problems right now. At primary school level the school we have for these children is based in the Thomas Whittam building. This building has been at least 50% unoccupied for the last few years since the sixth form closed. So despite the room and facilities existing to take on more pupils LCC will not provide the extra funding needed for teaching and children who need to be in this school are being turned away every term.

[Jakubclaret]

So if the discipline was so good why were they getting caned & slippered?

Simples there's a first time for everything & something has to start somewhere, put it this way they was less likely to do it again.

[evensteadiereddie]

Discipline went to pot when all the do gooders took control away from the teachers, you had none of this when kids were caned & slippered.

Your usual predictable nonsense, Jakub. So you're saying schools never had scrote kids before hitting them was abolished?
Discipline went to pot when parents, for whatever reasons, lost the ability to say "No" to their kids and showed them how to challenge or disregard any kind of authority whether it's a teacher, the police, doctors receptionist, hospital staff and so on.

[Jakubclaret]

Your usual predictable nonsense, Jakub. So you're saying schools never had scrote kids before hitting them was abolished?
Discipline went to pot when parents, for whatever reasons, lost the ability to say "No" to their kids and showed them how to challenge or disregard any kind of authority whether it's a teacher, the police, doctors receptionist, hospital staff and so on.

English teacher my hairy a**e, I was actually surprised you used commonsense the other day as an adjective & not common sense as a noun.

[evensteadiereddie]

What a knob. Hope that bullet hole in your foot clears up soon.
I'm not sure what your weird take on "commonsense" has to do with what's being discussed in this thread but I guess your little man, little intelligence syndrome prevents you from holding back and thinking before posting.
Anyway, I'll indulge you yet again by pointing out that "commonsense" can indeed be used as a noun or adjective.
Another form of the use of the word as an adjective is "commonsensical".
I prefer the former.
As usual, Jak, your ignorance shows you up.
What's your problem? Jealousy? Stupidity? Boredom?
Either way, if you've nowt of any value to offer, please keep it shut.
Oh, there's the bell, you may now leave the lesson.

[evensteadiereddie]

"they was less likely to do it again"

[claretonthecoast1882]

Jakub once claimed to have been a counsellor now admits he yearns for the good old days of giving a child a crack with a shoe or piece or wood.

Just shows there are times in life when those who give help actually need more help themselves

[Jakubclaret]

What a knob. Hope that bullet hole in your foot clears up soon.
I'm not sure what your weird take on "commonsense" has to do with what's being discussed in this thread but I guess your little man, little intelligence syndrome prevents you from holding back and thinking before posting.
Anyway, I'll indulge you yet again by pointing out that "commonsense" can indeed be used as a noun or adjective.
Another form of the use of the word as an adjective is "commonsensical".
I prefer the former.
As usual, Jak, your ignorance shows you up.
What's your problem? Jealousy? Stupidity? Boredom?
Either way, if you've nowt of any value to offer, please keep it shut.
Oh, there's the bell, you may now leave the lesson.

All I can say is god help the pupils who had the misfortune of being taught by you. I sense again you are determined to derail this thread into an argument so like before I will politely decline the bait & leave you to stew in your nonsense. It really isn't fair on the other posters so as always crack on with the last word because I won't be adding anything else.

[evensteadiereddie]

Anyway, back in the day, the cane was used fairly regularly at Edge End, Nelson, but, generally speaking, on the same few feral kids.
The other kids and their parents recognised and accepted the authority of Messrs Safkin and Birtwhistle whether they were right or wrong.

[yTib]

the person who plays jakub is apparently the same actor who played king prince charles in the eighties.

realistic but only to the limit of stupid.

[evensteadiereddie]

All I can say is god help the pupils who had the misfortune of being taught by you. I sense again you are determined to derail this thread into an argument so like before I will politely decline the bait & leave you to stew in your nonsense. It really isn't fair on the other posters so as always crack on with the last word because I won't be adding anything else.

If Carlsberg did white flags......

Blimey, Jak, this is bloody lame even by your standards.

You were the one who went off topic and had a go at me. A rather silly thing to do when you're on very shaky ground but I guess you'll learn one day.

As for my career, I did 40 years as a class teacher, Second in Department and Head of Years 8 and 9 and breezed through ten Ofsted inspections so, as usual, there are plenty of people who would disagree with your perception of my value as a teacher.

[basil6345789]

At Grandson's school they now employ a Discipline Team, with a Discipline Manager. Daughter got a phone call asking her to tell him off for delayed removal of top coat!!!! Thanks Tony Blaor, thanks Tony Clarke for gifting us this massive progress

[evensteadiereddie]

Not sure what Tony "Blaor" or Tony Clarke have done wrong here.
You can't have it both ways - do we want parents to back the school or not?
If your kid's ******* about and taking ages to take their coat off, you'd want to know about it surely?

[Rowls]

For those who are interested: The 2023 PISA scores have been released.

https://www.oecd.org/pisa/

You might not have noticed this because very few news outlets have published the release. It's good news for the UK on the whole, not so good for Scotland and it's plain bad news for Wales.

The UK continues to rise slowly up the rankings, following the Gove reforms to education, despite the burden of having the rankings of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland included in our final scores and dragging us down.

It's worth remembering that the UK had previously been sliding down these rankings for years until the Gove reforms kicked in.

Here's a partisan article from the Spectator about the results, but it mainly focuses on bashing the SNP for the failures. (I think it's a little hyperbolic but the figures don't lie)

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/whe ... not-to-do/

While it's good to see the UK climbing the rankings, it's worth pointing out that our absolute scores have declined. Why? There is a simple one-word answer to this question: Lockdown.

This is what happens when you stop your children going to school. They don't learn. Globally there is a generation of children who have been failed and do not have the skills and learning they should have been given. They have not been given the education they deserve.

As the Guardian spun it, "UK pupils science and maths scores lowest since 2006" (see link below)

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... onal-tests

These drops in education attainment have been seen across the globe in every country that locked down but the Guardian headline is nevertheless accurate. Was the education of our children even considered when the decision to lock down was taken? The answer is on your TV screens daily at 6pm as if it's some kind of drama entertainment. The answer is, No. It was never considered.

Moving on from that, here's how the UK government put the results into their own perspective:

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/engl ... -education

Globally, the top seven countries / regions are now:

Singapore
Macau (China)
Taiwan
Hong Kong (China)
Japan
Korea
Estonia

It's interesting you reference the PISA ratings. Beyond the Asian countries at the top the first and second European countries are Estonia and Finland

Hi aggi,
It was interesting chatting with you earlier on this thread so I hope you don't mind me quote tagging you here.
I've copied out the "top seven" because that takes the list down to the aforementioned Estonia.
I haven't truly looked into the teaching methods of Estonia. My understanding is that you believe they're not using teacher-led instructional methods of teaching and are using the "progressive" methods such as "learning by discovery" and following "child-centred" approaches to learning?
It would certainly make them a massive outlier to be using these techniques and scoring so highly as the other countries at the top rely on traditional teacher-led instructional methods.
Are there any sites that discuss and demonstrate Estonia's teaching policies? I appreciate this is difficult (hence why I haven't done this myself) but if you've got any good resources bookmarked I'd be interested to view them.

Another very interesting point we discussed previously: Finland.

We discussed Finland at length, with me stating that the use of "progressive" methods in Finland is something very new and that their PISA scores have suffered badly since these "modern" reforms were brought in.

This trend has continued and, if anything, gathered pace. Finland has now slipped to 14th in the rankings. A long fall from being the undisputed top dog for so long.
Compared to their 2006 high point FInland is down 57 points on its reading score, down 64 points on its maths score and down 52 points on its science score.
The Spectator article I linked above uses a simple calculation to convert these points into "months of learning".
If this formula is applied to Finland the result is brutal: It means that the Finnish children who left school in 2023 lost "over 2 years of learning" compared to their older brothers and sisters who left the exact same schools in 2006.
That speaks for itself. The message to other countries couldn't be clearer: Whatever Finland did in terms of education reform between 2006 and 2023 has had catastrophic effects on their children's education. Do NOT do the same.

[Rowls]

Interesting short interview with KB:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN4Pzw_nN-w

[Colburn_Claret]

Your usual predictable nonsense, Jakub. So you're saying schools never had scrote kids before hitting them was abolished?
Discipline went to pot when parents, for whatever reasons, lost the ability to say "No" to their kids and showed them how to challenge or disregard any kind of authority whether it's a teacher, the police, doctors receptionist, hospital staff and so on.

I didn't dare go home and tell my dad a teacher had caned me, he'd have given me a good hiding.
Apparently, this is bad parenting, but I'm confident I had the best Dad in the world.
Discipline starts in the house, and it shouldn't end on the doorstep.

[Swizzlestick]

Absolutely shocking to me that anybody could be violent to a child.

[dsr]

Absolutely shocking to me that anybody could be violent to a child.

Does it equally shock you that people will imprison a child, or publicly humiliate a child? Those punishments are popular replacements for physical punishments, at least among people who still believe that children should be punished.

[Swizzlestick]

Does it equally shock you that people will imprison a child, or publicly humiliate a child? Those punishments are popular replacements for physical punishments, at least among people who still believe that children should be punished.

A child is imprisoned after due process of a conviction, trial etc. They are not physically harmed - or at least they shouldn’t be. I would have issues with public humiliation of a child yes. Violence against a child is often an expression of anger from a far stronger adult, whose actions are not in control and are intended to be physically harmful. I find that pretty abhorrent.

[dsr]

A child is imprisoned after due process of a conviction, trial etc. They are not physically harmed - or at least they shouldn’t be. I would have issues with public humiliation of a child yes. Violence against a child is often an expression of anger from a far stronger adult, whose actions are not in control and are intended to be physically harmful. I find that pretty abhorrent.

Children are often put in detention or sent to their room without due process, and the naughty step is commonly used.

Smacking a child doesn't cause physical harm. Obviously if done unreasonably or to excess it causes harm, but that's not a valid reason to stop reasonable physical punishment, any more than people driving recklessly would be a reason to ban all drivers.

My point is that people think it abhorrent to smack a child because they don't like physical punishment, but seem happy to accept imprisonment of a child for the same offence. The beauty of a smack is that it is over quickly. The longer the punishment drags on, the more some children will suffer. Different things suit different children.

(I've been smacked. It didn't cause physical harm. )

[Swizzlestick]

Children are often put in detention or sent to their room without due process, and the naughty step is commonly used.

Smacking a child doesn't cause physical harm. Obviously if done unreasonably or to excess it causes harm, but that's not a valid reason to stop reasonable physical punishment, any more than people driving recklessly would be a reason to ban all drivers.

My point is that people think it abhorrent to smack a child because they don't like physical punishment, but seem happy to accept imprisonment of a child for the same offence. The beauty of a smack is that it is over quickly. The longer the punishment drags on, the more some children will suffer. Different things suit different children.

(I've been smacked. It didn't cause physical harm. )

The due process comment was ref your point about being imprisoned. Being sent to your room or sat on the naughty step are acceptable discipline techniques because they don’t involve hitting a child. Smacks vary wildly. From a tap, to a full on whack from a much stronger person - I’m not having that doesn’t cause physical harm. And if that doesn’t do the trick, what’s next? Something stronger? Children can provoke strong emotions, I speak from experience.

I’m glad it didn’t for you. I’m sure you had great parents, and I appreciate this was the norm back in the day. There are a LOT of bad parents out there though. Ditto teachers, which is where this sprung from originally - I mean, honestly, three or four of my teachers were flat out alcoholics. I dread to think what they would have resorted to given the opportunity. Normalisation of any kind of physical response against others, never mind children, is something I can’t get on board with.

Anyway it’s Christmas still (just) I’ll leave it there - just not something I can get my head around.