Discipline in education works, apparently.

Post Reply New Topic

It is very easy to maintain discipline and high performance if you can select only disciplined high achievers to be your students.
And yes, these students will thrive in such environment. Let's give them the opportunity.

My question is: what to do with all the other students?

I am an undisciplined high achiever. I need more creative chaos to thrive. The best teachers for me were very competent in the subject they were teaching and enthusiastic about it, so we could go far beyond the curriculum despite not always even attending classes. I thrive with other undisciplined high achievers, in an environment that would be summed up as creative.

Magz,

I found that the best teachers were the ones who actually knew their subjects well and showed an obvious love for teaching.

This is a neutral question: Could you guesstimate the proportion of students who are "undisciplined high achievers" that would perform better in the environment you have described?
I have heard that there are schools that are dedicated to this type of education system.
Perhaps it is a case of: "Different strokes for different folks."

Not all people are high achievers at all but I would guess the better performance in disciplined vs creative environment would be correlated with the last letter J (Judging) vs P (Perceiving) in the MTBI personality types.

https://personalitymax.com/personality- ... on-gender/ suggests, if I can do the basic math in the morning, that the last letter J appears in 51% of the population, the letter P in 49%.

Most people probably fall somewhere in-between, achieving their best with some discipline and some creativity.

I'm all for diversity in education that would adress diversity in students' learning styles.

What do you think about the students who are being disruptive during class?
Have they simply been spoilt by their parents?
Do they generally have an attitude of entitlement?
Are they the product of lack of discipline in a politically correct society which allows them to be free of any meaningful consequence for their poor behaviour?
Or is it a case of a square peg trying to be put into a round hole?

Also, consider:
The Asia schooling system tends to have better academic results.
The schooling system there seems to embrace a more disciplined approach to education.
If you agree, how do you explain this?

Warning.
The following joke may offend some people.
If you are easily offended by joke based on racial stereotypes I suggest you stop reading at this point.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Q: How do you know that your house has been broken into by a Korean adolescent?
A: Your dog is missing but your homework has been done.

First, a disclaimer: I've aquired my education in Eastern Europe, I also send my children to school here. Its educational system differs significantly from those of Anglo-Saxon countries and I may not even be aware of issues from outside my culture.

Students can be disruptive for variety of reasons.
Among younger children, it's often ADHD-related, or, more generally, some children just can't sit still. It has nothing to do with upbringing, it's a neurodiverse trait.
During my psychology course at uni, I learned that the best way of managing such children is to send them on various errands: erase the blackboard, bring me some chalk, hold this thing for me, etc.
My younger daughter is like that. She is extremely intelligent but she has short attention span and just can't sit still. I've learned that the preschool teachers did exactly the above to her: she was designated the main helper - to the benefit of everyone.
It seems an ADHD mind needs more distractions to focus - hard to imagine for my hyperfocused autistic brain but yes, my younger daughter is just like that.

Otherwise, specify what you mean by "disruptive students". Some teachers find students asking a lot of questions disruptive - some find them active and contributing.
Another expample: is a student who doodles in their draft book not paying attention to the class disruptive?

When you bring out East Asia, I'm sure it's much more than their education system. By the way, sleeping during classes is a norm in Japan and Korea, from what I've learned. But their high academic performance is most likely culture-related, because their culture does value high academic performance. A high achieving student is not a "nerd" or "loser", they is most respected and other students want to be like them.

Always enjoy your posts.

I've left the context of this discussion loosey-goosey.
Not a problem,
Just an observation.
At some point in time, it might be of value to differentiate the age of the students.

Regarding academic achievement, Australia is going backwards compared to many other countries.



For *some* children, but not all, as you have indicated.



The teacher's skills are very important, agreed.



What you have written so far suggests to me that perhaps the segregation of different personality/neurological types might benefit all concerned.
Perhaps some form of aptitude test at an early age?
From a pragmatic point of view, comprehensively providing schools with different teaching techniques may be thrown in the "too hard" basket.



Disruptive:


And specifically, as autistic individuals, we "all" know the problems of tangentiality.
An enquiring mind is something to be applauded.
However, continually going off at a tangent is disruptive to the prescribed curriculum, surely.


I've never come across the sleeping thing.
But a cultural emphasis in academic achievement seems to pay dividends, doesn't it?

Segregation carries high risk of negative sociological impact. People tend to think tribally, "them vs us", and groups easily start to fight each other and exercise their power over the other group. Racial segregation examples from the history show it too clearly.
Also, I know a teacher whose school created a class of troublemakers... the students knew it and they integrated it into their identity. The result was, students in this class achieved less than when they studied with "normal" others.

What I would find more beneficial would be some choice rather than segregation, so a student's position in the society was not determined from early age. If someone was motivated enough to curb their ADHD enough to study in a high-disciplined class of their interest, I would enthusiastically give them a chance. If they found it too challenging, there should still be choice and alternatives for them.

An example of choice vs segregation: in Poland, high schools often offer profiled classes. Typically, a Math oriented class has like 80% boys and 20% girls, a language oriented class is the opposite. Teenagers choose it that way themselves. I find this lack of "gender balance" perfectly acceptable. But if someone segregated all the girls into language-oriented classes and all the boys to Math-oriented ones, the situation would be completely different.

I'm living too far away from Australia to form any opinion on education in this particular country.

In hindsight, I would have much preferred being with other austic peers rather than the dregs of NT humanity.
But that is just me. Meh.


The older I get, the less sympathetic I get in *some* areas.
I have a personal problem with bad-mannered brats, err, I mean uncouth youth, with bad attitudes.
Perhaps these students are better off forgoing their academic education and enlisting in an attitude re-alignment course/program.
These sorts of "boot camps" are already in existence.
A good attitude in life will pay much bigger dividends than trigonometry or differentiation, imo.
In this context.


To me, it is all about attitude.
If someone is struggling *but* has a good attitude, I am willing to go the extra 100 miles.
I had massive problems when I was young but a good attitude, hence the amount of unsolicited help I was given by many people.



While I agree with what you are saying, I think we are talking at cross porpoises.
I am focusing on the canker of disruptive students with bad attitudes.
You, on the other hand, are being positive, rational, insightful and constructive in this thread,
You show-off.


Some people don't have the insight to recognise their limitations the way you do.
You would make a good Aussie, btw.
Come over here but leave the kids and the hubby behind.
I will sponsor you.

In my occasional teaching experience I have came across some spoiled brats.
I was able to manage some of them - the thing they wanted was some genuine attention. After I gave them my attention, they did the same to me.
There were also some unmotivated kids who behaved well but did not try to make any intellectual effort, they were just... completely passive. These were much bigger problem for me than the active but disruptive ones.
I'm sure it's not universal but that was my experience.

I completely agree that there should be some alternatives for teenagers who don't want to study - join the army or learn welding or something.

Thanks for the invitation but I hate hot weather

So do I.
Can I come over there?
Let's meet in Germany and then decide what we are going to do with the rest of our lives.

I rest my case.

Yes, other factors are involved in the poor/falling scholastic results of Australian skool kids, but it seems to me that left-wing political/social influences in the education system have taken its toll.

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases ... 120419.php

Yep, that is a major factor.
Here in Oz, it is said, joking or otherwise, that if you fail at everything else, become a teacher.