[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Gayle

We have explained why we thought the teacher was in the right many times. All you have done is make excuses for the young people so it's the same difference.

Do you accept (ignoring the teacher's actions completely) that the young people were in the wrong by being out of school at that time?

Sorry Gayle but the one thing that I haven’t done is make excuses for the kids not being in school. I defy you to find where I have sided with them.

My point is and always has been that the teacher did not have the authority to harangue the pupils out of school even if it was during school hours.

My first post in this thread on page 6 post 88 was responding to Jae Swift’s post 14, which by then had already drifted off the subject was:
Actually Jae Swift has a point.

When I was at school, albeit a long while ago, we had two or even three teachers who were specialists in a particular subject and knew it thoroughly. But s/he was not restricted to that subject and could teach other subjects with varying degrees of ability. However the specialist teacher would teach that subject to all classes of all years.

Any “clever clogs” in the class couldn’t baffle the teacher because the teacher always knew more than the pupil and thus gained the class’ respect. But there always have been and always will be some teachers who just cannot catch and hold the pupil’s interest. A disinterested pupil is a bored pupil and a bored pupil is likely to be a disruptive pupil.

The other side of that coin became evident during my first 12 months in the navy. We had instructor lieutenants who boffed up on the next days teaching the night before. Their tuition was not very good and it was up to the CPO teaching the practical side to get us to understand what the instructor lieutenant tried to teach.

There is nothing worse than being taught by someone who doesn’t really know their subject.

This respect thing starts in the home and should be reinforced in the first school. But then there is the disruptive element, where the teachers cannot or are not allowed to quash. By the time that the kids get to secondary school the rotten apple in the barrel has tainted other pupils.

As for the butty shop – well it’s none of the school’s business who buys what and when. The teacher who stormed in the shop was out of order. She/he should have been in school doing his/her job and not acting like some avenging Truant Officer. A schools’ responsibility starts and ends at the school gate.

That last paragraph brought out the knives, the abuse etc. because my view did not conform to the views of many others.

No one has been able to show that my view was incorrect. Show me a law or a rule which allows a teacher to harangue pupils off the school premises whether during school hours or not, except on an official trip away from school.

There has been a lot of nit picking and skirting around the issue and I didn’t start it but I reserve the right to defend myself and answer in kind if I so choose.