It's not really about intent -
You say that, and then you go on to describe the intent to:
gain some kind of pleasure or satisfaction from humiliating or punishing others, even if that is felt through means less direct than the cane or the slipper.
But the point remains. Are you seriously suggesting that these schools are putting these rules in place purely for their own pleasure in humiliating children? At this point it is hard not to tell you to grow up.
Bend to the will of others in sometimes senseless rules and conventions
Who says they are senseless? You? That just means you dont understand them, but it doesnt mean they are senseless.
in which they have no input, choice or discretion, in other words.
And why should they? The whole point of these rules is to wrest control back from the children.
We're not talking about a brief situational surrender of autonomy, such as any of us might make in order to get something done, especially when we are the learner or less experienced party - we are talking about the character of young people's everyday life for years on end.
What like not being able to shout and swear in lessons while the teachers are talking? Having to come to school equipped? And actually having to do some work?
Yeah. Poor kids. Scarred for life they'll be.
What? Im quoting your words. "Forced academisation". Most schools converted willingly. The only schools forced out of LEA control were the schools that were shìt, and the LEA were doing nothing about it.
Schools are quite literally issued with orders. And what happens if teachers, parents, and children all decide they don't like the MAT they are under and decide they want to return to LA control? Clue: they can't.
Parents can move their kids (I moved mine) Teachers can move jobs (loads do)
lI never said any of that.
No, but it is the logical corollary of what you are saying.
No, I'm not - I'm simply saying I don't find the kind of control-freakery described in the thread I posted as 'good discipline'. YMMV.
Funnily enough, guess who is happier in schools with established discipline? The kids.
Once again, I think we are arguing from a perspective of social mobility v one of social transformation
It isn't a binary opposition. Social Mobility transforms society. I note that in spite of your criticisms you aren't posting any sort of realistic alternative method for schools that have gone feral, and are letting their students fail, to improve. And your usual nebulous stuff won't cut it. It has to be precise.
I don't agree that this is the basic function of schools, or the default condition of unschooled children
I didn't say anything about unschooled children. I'm saying that in broken schools where discipline is awful children are trained that misbehaviour works.
I suspect that there are plenty of people heareabouts with a lot of knowledge of teaching and schools. If you're going to frame it as a dispute between expertise and ignorance, I would say that you need both to make fewer assumptions about what others know, and to be a bit more explicit about your own credentials
I choose not to divulge any personal details on social media.
. I don't pretend to expertise in either field, but I have a professional interest in the creativity of children and young people and the sorts of environment in which it might flourish.
Yes, but with total inequivalence. Presumably they are voluntary (ie self-selecting), in small numbers, and doing something they are interested in
Also, as it's something none of us get to opt out of, everyone is entitled to views about schooling derived from their own experience and that of other people they know.
Let's here from people who went to chaotic schools with rampant bullying, no results to speak of and how itvreally set them up for a succesful life
