Teachers given new powers to discipline pupils

[Greenday]

Being harassed makes you a victim.

Beating up a student because you can't control yourself instead of just walking out makes the student a victim.

[Lace Neil Singer]

If you mean the right to misbehave and disrupt class, than no. They don't have that right.

Good; I'm glad we agree on that. As for right to privacy, does that include suspicion of carrying drugs or weapons, then?

[MrsEclipse]

If you misbehave at school, you get punished. Don't want to get punished? Then behave.

This is the only thing that worries me:

"For the first time, teachers will be able to search pupils for any item they believe troublemakers can use to cause disruption during lessons... Previously, teachers could only frisk pupils’ clothes and search bags without consent for weapons, drugs, alcohol and stolen goods."

The wording makes it sound like children can be punished* for potential misbehavior, and that's where my concern lies. Not only that, but where's the list of things that can cause disruptions? It's pretty much everything. I worry that this rule is going to turn into a pissing contest between delinquents and teachers more than a chance for teachers to gain some equality.

Also, in your story, the object of the search was a weapon, and would have already been covered as grounds for a search. I feel this case is different.

*confiscation of an item is counted as a punishment

[Rageaholic]

Good; I'm glad we agree on that. As for right to privacy, does that include suspicion of carrying drugs or weapons, then?

Depends on the situation.

[Peppergirl]

Depends on the situation.

Care to elaborate? This *is* a debate site.


*Peppergirl ducks and runs away from flying objects*

[Greenday]

If a kid has a weapon or drugs on him, call a professional (a.k.a. the police) to handle that.

[Nyoibo]

Kids should be entitled to basic rights

Since when did having a mobile phone, mp3 player or anything like that become a basic right? As far as I'm aware basic rights are food, shelter and safety, if you've got them, shut the fuck up and be greatful.

[Rageaholic]

Care to elaborate? This *is* a debate site.

If it's just a he said she said thing, teachers will use that as an excuse just go up to a student and search their stuff. But if there's actual evidence, than I think they should get the cops involved like greenday said.

I still think it's hard to judge what to do about potential drugs and weapons in possesion of students. I mean at least those are legit threats (especially weapons). Cell phones and electronic devices however, do not warrent such draconian policies.

Since when did having a mobile phone, mp3 player or anything like that become a basic right? As far as I'm aware basic rights are food, shelter and safety, if you've got them, shut the fuck up and be greatful.

I was not talking about the right to have electronoics. I was talking about the students right to privacy. \

[Lace Neil Singer]

If a kid has a weapon or drugs on him, call a professional (a.k.a. the police) to handle that.

You do remember that this is the UK we're talking about, not the US? We don't tend to call in the police at the drop of a hat. Of course, once the teachers actually find out who has the weapon or drugs, the police will be called in... but if the culprit doesn't own up, then what? Magic? The teachers don't have psychic powers to home in on the culprit. They search all the students' bags to find the culprit.

While I'm aware that schools have changed since my school days, I don't remember anyone kicking off and stabbing or smacking a teacher just cuz they were found with something in their bag they shouldn't have had. Only that one time, it was a weapon; other times, it was stolen property. You might think it's necessary to call in the police cuz a kid has pinched some random stuff from the science lab... I however, disagree.

[blas87]

As much as there are people called teachers who shouldn't even have their jobs, people also need to realize that schools are not a place where you have the same rights as you have in your own home.

Kids have to abide by a dress code. There are rules regarding their electronics. There are rules about language and profanity.

There is no freedom of speech as a free-for-all in school. Our government teacher was quick to remind that to a student who thought he had every right to call girls he didn't like "whore" and also to say "fuck" every other word.

And once again, people need to get off their stupid high horses about "MAH RIGHT TO PRIVACY!" and "MAH RIGHTS!" and just plain be fucking respectful and obey the rules. It makes things a lot less complicated.

[Lace Neil Singer]

It's like on CS.com; Raps is the headteacher, and the mods are the teachers. They have the right to go into your profile, or to delete your posts if you break the rules. And you certainly don't have the right to speak out of turn, put profanity in your signature, or spam.

[Greenday]

Apples to oranges Lace. If a teacher wants to confront a student and risk getting stabbed/shot, then by all means, feel free to take a chance at being removed from the gene pool for being stupid.

But I see no reason as to why a teacher should be able to search a student just because. If a student is being disruptive, kick them out of class.

School, public, my house, whatever. No one is searching my house without my permission or a warrant. I realize this is Britain and I'm not too familiar with their laws, but I assume you can't just randomly pat down people because why the heck not?

Also, blas, I'd like to point out that your example is faulty. You can't do those things in public either. Not in the US at least. In the US, that's harassment and the police can come up with all sorts reasons to arrest someone for ranting and saying "Fuck" every other word.

[Canarr]

Schools have rules. Those may differ from the general rules to be followed in modern society - for instance: no phones in class, because you can just google the anwers to every exam. How, exactly, could such a rule be enforced, unless teachers were allowed to temporarily confiscate bags, and/or search suspicious students?

@Greenday:
Couple of years ago, a business trip took me to the German subsidiary of a US company. Prominently displayed at the entrance was the sign: "No firearms allowed on the premises." Not something you read in Germany every day, but more prevalent in the US, I'd imagine. Now, what would you do if your employer decided to enforce such a rule? Complain about the violation of your 2nd Amendment rights? Or just accept that, on private property, there may be rules that you don't like, but are valid nonetheless?

[Greenday]

Schools have rules. Those may differ from the general rules to be followed in modern society - for instance: no phones in class, because you can just google the anwers to every exam. How, exactly, could such a rule be enforced, unless teachers were allowed to temporarily confiscate bags, and/or search suspicious students?

@Greenday:
Couple of years ago, a business trip took me to the German subsidiary of a US company. Prominently displayed at the entrance was the sign: "No firearms allowed on the premises." Not something you read in Germany every day, but more prevalent in the US, I'd imagine. Now, what would you do if your employer decided to enforce such a rule? Complain about the violation of your 2nd Amendment rights? Or just accept that, on private property, there may be rules that you don't like, but are valid nonetheless?

Beginning of the year, establish a no cell phone rule. Tell the kids that if you see them using a phone during a quiz or test, they will have their test/quiz removed and will be given a zero. You see it, you take their test. No need for giving someone a cavity search over it. You are the teacher, you are the supreme authority in the class room, your word wins over the student's.

Actually, my employer DOES have that rule. I'm not allowed to be issued a firearm. The US military hasn't deemed it necessary for a civilian of my position to need one so I'm not allowed to carry one. I have been given adequate protection in the event that a firearm is needed to protect me: go to the office and let the soldiers shoot the terrorists. If I didn't feel safe, I would have fought for and probably would have been allowed one or I wouldn't have taken the job.

[Canarr]

Beginning of the year, establish a no cell phone rule. Tell the kids that if you see them using a phone during a quiz or test, they will have their test/quiz removed and will be given a zero. You see it, you take their test. No need for giving someone a cavity search over it. You are the teacher, you are the supreme authority in the class room, your word wins over the student's.

Please.

"No, I don't have a cell phone on me. You saw wrong. And you're not allowed to search my bag. So nyah."

Supreme authority? What kind of authority would that be? How many parents do you think will just accept an accusation of cheating against their darling, on the teacher's word alone, without any evidence?

The problem is, if you establish rules, but grant no power to actually enforce those rules, then they become moot. Don't like a school where the teachers may search your kids' bags or pockets? Choose a different school. Just like you said about your job: either except the "No firearms!" rule, or don't take the job.