Should Teachers Have the Authority to Remove Disruptive Students from Their Class Permanently?

Should Teachers Have the Authority to Remove Disruptive Students from Their Class Permanently?

I.Disruptive students make teaching difficult and ineffective and interfere with the learning processes of other students, but permanent removal of students should not be decided by the teacher.

II.Removal of disruptive students can be temporary (such as one class, or one semester) or permanent, and so permanent removal is not the only option available.

III.Reasons why teachers should have the authority to remove disruptive students from their class temporarily:

A.Removing a disruptive student makes learning easier for all the other students.

B.Removing a disruptive student makes teaching easier for the teacher.

C. Having a disruptive student in class, whom the teacher cannot remove, undermines the teacher’s authority.

D.Having a disruptive student in class, whom the teacher cannot remove, may encourage other students to be disruptive, thus creating a snowball effect.

E.Having a disruptive student in class may disengage other students from the learning process.

IV.Reasons why teachers should not have the authority to removea disruptive student from class temporarily:

A.Part of the job of the teacher is to control students in the class, so if a student is disruptive this may indicate the teacher is weak or at fault.

B.Teachers do not decide who has a right to be educated and who does not, as this is a decision to be made by higher educational authorities than the teacher.

C.Life is not always ordered, peaceful and predictable, and students must learn how to deal with conflict, and this is a valuable part of their education.

D.Positive reinforcement of good behavior is better than negative reinforcement of bad behavior.

V.Reasons why the teacher should be able to remove disruptive students from their class permanently.

A.Teachers have a right to work in an environment that is conducive to effective teaching.

B.Students have a right to be educated effectively.

C.A normal classroom is not the place for dealing with anti-social behavior.

D.Other students need to understand that if they practice disruptive, anti-social behavior, they can also be excluded from class permanently.

E.Once temporary exclusion has been tried and has failed, the only recourse is to exclude the disruptive student permanently.

VI.Reasons why teachers should not be able to remove disruptive students permanently.

A.Students, even those with behavioral problems, have a right to be educated, and removinga student permanently effectively denies that student the right to an education.

B.Teachers are paid to teach the students in the class, and not to select which students they will teach.

C.The decision to remove disruptive students permanently should be made by the principal, faculty, school board, or other educational system authorities, in consultation with the teacher.

D.Removing a student permanently implies the student would not be able to return, even after rehabilitation and an end to the disruptive behavior.

E.Prevention measures are a better option than the ‘quick fix’ of removing a disruptive student.

VII.Weighing up the arguments leads to the conclusion the teacher should not have the authority to permanently remove a student, but may have the authority to temporarily remove a student.

A.Temporary removal of a student improves the teaching and learning environment for all, and indicates to the disruptive student (and other class members) that his/her behavior is unacceptable.

B.Permanent removal of a student should be decided by education authorities higher than the teacher, but with input from the teacher.

C.The definition of ‘temporary’ removal must also be determined by higher authorities than the teacher.