This has been explained why those who actually work in these situations know that this is not true.
People who have DONE THIS without violence.
Can you please present what in your background makes you feel that people who have successfully solved these situations without violence cannot possibly have done so? Can you explain why you should be believed when you claim this versus thoase who have said why they know it works?
I reference an earlier post of
this question in post 281
where I ask you:
My background is irrelevant. It is a matter of pure logic. If a person refuses to do something, you can issue all the paper slips with new orders that you like. At some point, in the face of continued refusal, force is usually the only option - the ONLY leverage (other than denying her breakfast and lunch in the cafeteria) is force or the credible threat of force.
Here's where you start off wrong: It's not a matter of pure logic. At least, certainly not any kind of logic divorced from knowledge of human behavior, and since we are talking about school children and adolescents, knowledge of child and human development and behaviors.
About those 'paper slips' you think are so ineffective: I guess that's why traffic cops issue so many tickets, right?
But as you repeatedly ask for my background I will relent. My wife and I raised her daughter. My wife was a elementary and high school teacher for 15 years, and spent the next 15 years as a special ed teacher and (later) supervisor of special ed teachers. In the last year and half (before retirement due to failing health) I was a school aid for special ed, and participated in her teacher-classroom meetings and paperwork on students.
Finally, my best friend and his girl friend raised 5 adopted children, three of whom were defiant destructive monsters - one requiring over 100 police dispatches (and occasionally handcuffing and taking to mental health incarceration).
I have also seen what happened to my sister's child, raised with an overwhelming fear of making or enforcing rules of behavior; as an adult he turned out as expected - an immature, unsocialized, and a wimpish narcissist.
Special education is its own special thing. My hat's off to your wife for doing it for 15 years. I know how high the burnout rate is.
I am aware of many of the challenges in classrooms and raising kids. I've spent quite a number of years in classrooms as well. Fairness and consistency are important, as is genuine affection and love for the children. And a sense of humor is mandatory. So is a sense of justice and a view to the long term.
BTW, all of this applies to special education as well as 'regular' ed.
My goal was to raise children who were intelligent and thoughtful, and kind and curious. I wanted children who would think for themselves, be compassionate, and to be productive. I did my best to not violate their keen sense of fairness and justice and to encourage them to think about others and what was fair beyond their own self interest. I wanted them to be individuals who had their own sense purpose, who could function independently, set and accomplish goals, both long term and short term.
My wife was one of the rare teachers who could get even the most troublesome children to obey. She taught me many things about children, including what teachers get wrong. Her rules were simple: give them the expected consequences for not following the rules, and ALWAYS follow through. Never get down to their level and argue, or 'negotiate' punishment, or let them off because they beg for an exception.
Yes, this is how I was raised, and this is how I raised my children.
Here's the thing about that, something I learned VERY quickly: You must think carefully before you issue a consequence for an undesired action--or for a desired one. Don't promise ponies if you aren't willing to invest the years and cash it takes. And too draconian a punishment backfires and betrays trust--with that kid and with all the other kids. Make sure that the consequence is logical, appropriate, and fair and in scale to the behavior. Kids have an extremely well developed sense of fairness. If you violate it too egregiously, or too often in smaller ways, the result is children who do not trust authority, and who are insecure, and rebellious and angry.
My favorite teachers were always those who respected the kids, and expected great things from them, in terms of their achievement and their behavior. I cannot recall a single one of those teachers ever raising a voice or calling the principal for backup, although I did have one pretty horrible teacher who liked to use the principal to punish the kid she decided she hated, regardless of whether he actually did whatever the offense was.
She taught in mostly inner city schools, mostly to black children. Once they understood that pleading was not acceptable (and likely to raise her ire), would not argue with them, and that she always followed through punishment she became one of the most loved teachers in her school - years later we received affectionate letters from former students who thanked her.
I am very aware that there are many methods of getting compliance, and have been in several classrooms where the teacher has serious authority. On the other hand, I have also seen or heard of classes where the "special ed" students (the emotionally troubled sections) are in chaos...with students throwing desks and the teacher being little more than a hands off zoo keeper.
I don't think you will find anyone in this thread who disagrees that schools and classrooms should be well run. It is to the benefit of all the children.
But please note: the descriptions you use can be equally applied to prisons. Something my own kids were quick to point out when rules at school were too draconian or out of scale.
Yet, in my wife's last elementary school, in spite of an excellent teaching staff (mostly african American teachers) there was always several times a year that the police had to be called. And even my wife had a knife put to her throat and threatened with death by a defiant 15 year old student.
So yes...sometimes force is needed - not every child or school is from "Leave it to Beaver" or "The Brady Bunch".
I will assume the 15 year old with a knife was not in elementary school. Obviously, that is not acceptable and obviously, there must be police involvement, even if it comes after the incident is diffused. Sometimes, the police are necessary to diffuse the situation.
So, about the 15 year old, who was clearly a serious and credible threat to the safety of your wife and anyone else: Did the police kill him? Taze him? Yank him from his desk by his neck? Throw him about?
You and Buford Pusser have a similar idea about what to do when things displease you. (reference..."walking tall."}
