Theories of aberrant or unusual behavior have been time and again used as possible explanations as to why they cheat (Lathrop & Foss, 2000). However, it has with time evolved from being an unusual way of behaving by students to something normal in modern day times. Consequently, this posses a major challenge to those who advocate for change among students to halt cheating in the school environ since it has become a part of the student code which is really tough to break. One of the most successful sociological theories in the explanation of cheating among students in institutions of learning is the conflict theory. Karl max developed the theory which has been further developed in modern times more prominently by C. Wright Mills (Davis, Drinan, & Gallant, 2009).
Standardized testing has become a norm in American education. It has been decided that every student should be able to meet a certain goal. If not, they are below average and will have a hard time being successful in life. Children aren’t motivated to learn when teachers “teach to the test.” There has come to be an understanding that there is a certain level of knowledge demanded by society. Who decides this?
In case, the student does not obey my instruction, positive punishment, which is the application of an unfavorable stimulus after an undesirable behavior in order to decreases that response, is a very useful method and the result can be shown shortly. For example, if the students are not obey my words I would like to tell their parents and let their parents to reprimand them afterwards or I would just castigate them at that time by myself. Although the students will become dutiful in a short time, they may afraid of me after that and do not want to have a lesson again. It is no doubt that positive punishment is an effective way for punishing students and it can achieve the result in a short time, however, this is not the best way to punish the students. It is because this may not only lead to a damaged relationship between teachers and students, but also can lead to negative associations.
Suspension and Expulsion are not of use to improve our schools! Suspensions and expulsions are both disciplines that are given to students for their disruptive behaviors and actions. Even our own principal in our school disagrees; suspension and expulsion should be used. (Dale) Suspension and expulsion are not the solution to the problem because too much of these two can lead to dropout rates, it causes negative behavior to students, suspension and expulsion can stop future crimes and learn from their actions and students are not learning properly and not gaining any benefit from their education. Suspension and expulsion is not an effective tool and solution in our schools because it can lead to dropout rates and other violent crimes in the future.
Despite the disagreements, strict disciplinary actions need to be enforced in schools to avoid bullying; because, it disrupts the learning environment, causes future disadvantages, and makes the victims become emotionally unstable. To begin with, not having strict disciplinary actions enforced in schools causes bullying to disrupt the learning environment. For example, victims of bullying find it impossible to concentrate in class while their bully is distracting them: This shows that not having strict disciplinary actions enforced in school could make many victims of bullying adapt school phobia. Additionally, fights in school that both the bully, and victim engages in diverts both of them from their learning process; this demonstrates, not having strict disciplinary actions in school is not only disruptive, but also dangerous. Lastly, constant fights, suspensions, or lack of the ability to cooperate in school with other students, makes it hard for bullies to apply for other schools due to their behavioral issues.
Students might want to drop out because they are struggling in school, getting bullied, have a health issue, have personal family problems, or just have a planned out future that doesn't require a high school diploma. Making teens do something they absolutely don't want to do, especially after they are 16, can result in even worse outcomes. “Efforts to raise the age usually come up against the argument that requiring students to stay in school when they no longer want to be there is disruptive to the other students and not fair to the teacher”. Thats a very knowledgeable statement because its true that when teens want to drop out, they want to drop out before they are 18, so they are most likely going to be careless and disrespectful at school. Some teens have personal reasons that are sometimes urgent, and staying in school isn't an option.
The behavior by bullies then is virtually encouraged as students become afraid or feel that the administration will not react appropriately should they inform them of a bulling situation. Students at this age will make mistakes and react inappropriately occasionally in response to a bullying situation if they feel there is no help from the school. Clearly each incident needs to be investigated and any punishment should be appropriate based on the circumstances involved. It is clear the principles only goal in dealing with behavior issues in the school is to indentify, isolate, intimidate, and remove. This simply will not work if no effort is made to correctly indentify were and with who the problem started.
One example of how uniforms restrict learners is that "without the outlet of expression in their clothes, students may turn to inappropriate hair styles, jewelry, or makeup". So by restricting students of their clothing choice, they will still find a way to show their personality in their makeup, jewelry, and hairstyles. As stated by the Public School Review, under the First Amendment, it argues that uniforms stifle (restrain) children who feel robbed of their individualism. In addition uniforms create a false sense of security. Even if uniforms decrease violence and everyone is treated equal, the outside world does not run as orderly and smoothly as it would in a school.
Should parents be banned from smacking their children??? Banning smacking would make parents feel like the Government is going too far, taking over the parental role...' Although I would like to advise the parents that the government is just trying to help them and their kids to be safe. I am Teen Thomas, who would like to prove that parents should not be smacking their kids and the government should make it illegal. I would like to acknowledge that smacking is generally not an effective means of discipline, as well as smacking can be a lead to more extreme forms of physical abuse. Indeed it is proven that smacking is a violation of the child's right to be safe and it could cause long-term intelligence or psychological harm.
Parents and educators have established partnerships, in order to promote anti-bullying programs, because this is an issue that might cause victims psychological problems for a lifetime. Usually, teenagers who suffer this kind of abuse never tell to their parents, maybe for fear of what could happen or because they were threatened by the perpetrators. As a consequence, these teenagers suffer alone because they do not have someone with whom they might talk. Because bullying problems has become a more frequent issue each day, it has called people’s attention. Approximately Approx40% to 80% of the school-age children experience bullying during their academic career, but only 20% to 40% of bullied people report incidents.