I was watching the box earlier and there was a Tonight special on ITV called "Who Wants to Be a Teacher?"
Former teacher Chris Tarrant hosted this fly on the wall documentary, which focused on some of the negative behaviour plaguing classrooms up and down the land. The main question posed was should pupils with extreme behavioural problems by kept in mainstream schooling?
The liberal left argument is that excluding dangerous and disruptive pupils catalyses a downward spiral that costs more to resolve in the long term. Far better to endure a few tantrums now than have them end up in prison later. The counter argument is that the criminal actions of some pupils are so severe that they pose a danger to themselves and those around them.
The show highlighted the real life cases of Connor and Reggie.
Connor, a primary school child who assaults other children and members of staff, is being educated in a special unit on Teesside. The unit, part of a mainstream school, gathers together the rough diamonds and tries to educate them about the error of their ways away from the other children. The footage shows one instance of Connor hitting and spitting at his teacher, who battles to restrain and calm him.
Conversely Reggie is educated in a trendy-left mainstream school which, to the extreme detriment of the well behaved majority, doesn't believe in segregating their wayward peers. The school in Luton receives financial incentive not to exclude pupils so it keen to keep them in the classroom at all costs. The usual rules of society are put to one side as the staff endure the constant grind of Reggie's challenging behaviour. The footage shows two learning support assistants guarding Reggie on a break time detention, where he's kicking out at the furniture and fittings of the room.
Should either of these children be entertained by the mainstream state education system?
Former teacher Chris Tarrant hosted this fly on the wall documentary, which focused on some of the negative behaviour plaguing classrooms up and down the land. The main question posed was should pupils with extreme behavioural problems by kept in mainstream schooling?
The liberal left argument is that excluding dangerous and disruptive pupils catalyses a downward spiral that costs more to resolve in the long term. Far better to endure a few tantrums now than have them end up in prison later. The counter argument is that the criminal actions of some pupils are so severe that they pose a danger to themselves and those around them.
The show highlighted the real life cases of Connor and Reggie.
Connor, a primary school child who assaults other children and members of staff, is being educated in a special unit on Teesside. The unit, part of a mainstream school, gathers together the rough diamonds and tries to educate them about the error of their ways away from the other children. The footage shows one instance of Connor hitting and spitting at his teacher, who battles to restrain and calm him.
Conversely Reggie is educated in a trendy-left mainstream school which, to the extreme detriment of the well behaved majority, doesn't believe in segregating their wayward peers. The school in Luton receives financial incentive not to exclude pupils so it keen to keep them in the classroom at all costs. The usual rules of society are put to one side as the staff endure the constant grind of Reggie's challenging behaviour. The footage shows two learning support assistants guarding Reggie on a break time detention, where he's kicking out at the furniture and fittings of the room.
Should either of these children be entertained by the mainstream state education system?