Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been on both sides of this.

As a teacher, yes I always did this.

As a parent I have been annoyed as my child has been used as a buffer child consistently.

I am not sure what you think the alternative is though?

I have the kid who won't stop talking and I ask that she not be put near people she would prefer to talk to. Keeps her quiet, she won't bug her neighbor, and everyone can focus on their work better. Why does this bother the "buffer"? They weren't going to misbehave or talk either way so the end result is the same for them. But now the classroom has less chatter.

Did it occur to you to teach your kid how to behave in a classroom setting?

Well, she has ADHD, so how could I "teach" her to do that?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does this mean?

Assigned seating in class or at lunch where well behaved kids are sprinkled amongst the troublemakers.

I mean, isn't that just how assigned seating works? Or are you suggesting labeling each kid as well-behaved or trouble maker and segregating accordingly? Hopefully you realize how silly that sounds.

Not silly at all- common. For example at a table of four a teacher will put: 2 well behaved girls and one quiet boy with a troublemaking boy. Never more than one troublemaker together. It is pretty obvious.

Do you think you should put the trouble makers together? That doesn’t sound like a recipe for a peaceful classroom. Instead of saying that you are putting the well behaved kids with the troublemakers, think of it as separating the troublemakers. You can’t keep them in a bunch or they ramp each other up. What do you suggest instead?

Teachers do their jobs and stop treating children as their meat shields. My good kid is not fodder for your lack of classroom discipline.

+1

DC was consistently put next to the kid who constantly missed directions, yet would not shut up. Nip it in the bud with the teacher, and flat out tell the teacher you demand your kid NEVER be next to that kid. Parents have to stand up for themselves.

It drags the whole class down, and my kid is not your 1:1, unless you want to generously pay me and DC cash, directly. Nope.

Good luck with that plan.

Then the loud kids sit by themselves. Done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been on both sides of this.

As a teacher, yes I always did this.

As a parent I have been annoyed as my child has been used as a buffer child consistently.

I am not sure what you think the alternative is though?

I have the kid who won't stop talking and I ask that she not be put near people she would prefer to talk to. Keeps her quiet, she won't bug her neighbor, and everyone can focus on their work better. Why does this bother the "buffer"? They weren't going to misbehave or talk either way so the end result is the same for them. But now the classroom has less chatter.

Did it occur to you to teach your kid how to behave in a classroom setting?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does this mean?

Assigned seating in class or at lunch where well behaved kids are sprinkled amongst the troublemakers.

I mean, isn't that just how assigned seating works? Or are you suggesting labeling each kid as well-behaved or trouble maker and segregating accordingly? Hopefully you realize how silly that sounds.

Not silly at all- common. For example at a table of four a teacher will put: 2 well behaved girls and one quiet boy with a troublemaking boy. Never more than one troublemaker together. It is pretty obvious.

Do you think you should put the trouble makers together? That doesn’t sound like a recipe for a peaceful classroom. Instead of saying that you are putting the well behaved kids with the troublemakers, think of it as separating the troublemakers. You can’t keep them in a bunch or they ramp each other up. What do you suggest instead?

Teachers do their jobs and stop treating children as their meat shields. My good kid is not fodder for your lack of classroom discipline.

+1

DC was consistently put next to the kid who constantly missed directions, yet would not shut up. Nip it in the bud with the teacher, and flat out tell the teacher you demand your kid NEVER be next to that kid. Parents have to stand up for themselves.

It drags the whole class down, and my kid is not your 1:1, unless you want to generously pay me and DC cash, directly. Nope.

Good luck with that plan.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For parents or teachers of high school kids, hoping you tell me at some point teachers stop using the quiet, listening, attentive kids as table blockers for the louder and misbehaving kids. I knew happened in lower ES grades, but surprised still going on in higher grades.

Ex HS teacher here. Sorry but they won't stop, because it works. Show me 50 classrooms with an excellent classroom management and dynamic and I'll show you 50 classrooms where the louder kids were not all grouped together.

The loud and distracted kids may have to sit by themselves for a while.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does this mean?

Assigned seating in class or at lunch where well behaved kids are sprinkled amongst the troublemakers.

I mean, isn't that just how assigned seating works? Or are you suggesting labeling each kid as well-behaved or trouble maker and segregating accordingly? Hopefully you realize how silly that sounds.

Not silly at all- common. For example at a table of four a teacher will put: 2 well behaved girls and one quiet boy with a troublemaking boy. Never more than one troublemaker together. It is pretty obvious.

Do you think you should put the trouble makers together? That doesn’t sound like a recipe for a peaceful classroom. Instead of saying that you are putting the well behaved kids with the troublemakers, think of it as separating the troublemakers. You can’t keep them in a bunch or they ramp each other up. What do you suggest instead?

Teachers do their jobs and stop treating children as their meat shields. My good kid is not fodder for your lack of classroom discipline.

+1

DC was consistently put next to the kid who constantly missed directions, yet would not shut up. Nip it in the bud with the teacher, and flat out tell the teacher you demand your kid NEVER be next to that kid. Parents have to stand up for themselves.

It drags the whole class down, and my kid is not your 1:1, unless you want to generously pay me and DC cash, directly. Nope.

Anonymous wrote:For parents or teachers of high school kids, hoping you tell me at some point teachers stop using the quiet, listening, attentive kids as table blockers for the louder and misbehaving kids. I knew happened in lower ES grades, but surprised still going on in higher grades.

Ex HS teacher here. Sorry but they won't stop, because it works. Show me 50 classrooms with an excellent classroom management and dynamic and I'll show you 50 classrooms where the louder kids were not all grouped together.

Anonymous wrote:I was just volunteering in my DD's class. On nearly every single boy's desk there was a sign taped on. It said something like "Remember to sit quietly, raise your hand, don't talk when others are speaking, don't touch other people" with a picture of a stop sign. I looked and didn't see any signs on girl desks.

What is going on with boys? Is school asking too much of boys? Do we need same sex classes? I do think that boys and girls learn differently.

No, I think single sex education is a terrible idea and hurts kids who don't fit stereotypes. My quiet, soft spoken little boy who only got along with girls until 5th or 6th grade because the boys were too "crazy" according to him.

What's going on is that kids who used to get kicked out of class no longer are (for better or for worse) so behaviors that used to be removed now stay. Think about who was sent to the principal repeatedly when you were in school--the boys. It's always been this way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does this mean?

Assigned seating in class or at lunch where well behaved kids are sprinkled amongst the troublemakers.

I mean, isn't that just how assigned seating works? Or are you suggesting labeling each kid as well-behaved or trouble maker and segregating accordingly? Hopefully you realize how silly that sounds.

Not silly at all- common. For example at a table of four a teacher will put: 2 well behaved girls and one quiet boy with a troublemaking boy. Never more than one troublemaker together. It is pretty obvious.

Do you think you should put the trouble makers together? That doesn’t sound like a recipe for a peaceful classroom. Instead of saying that you are putting the well behaved kids with the troublemakers, think of it as separating the troublemakers. You can’t keep them in a bunch or they ramp each other up. What do you suggest instead?

Teachers do their jobs and stop treating children as their meat shields. My good kid is not fodder for your lack of classroom discipline.

Anonymous wrote:I was a quiet kid and am a quiet adult, and this thread is kind of throwing me for a loop. I never thought of being quiet as a positive attribute, while being extroverted and gregarious as a negative one.
I have always wanted to be more like the “troublemakers.”

There's a time and a place for this type of personality. In a classroom while the teacher is teaching is not the time and place to be class clown.

I was a quiet kid and am a quiet adult, and this thread is kind of throwing me for a loop. I never thought of being quiet as a positive attribute, while being extroverted and gregarious as a negative one.
I have always wanted to be more like the “troublemakers.”

Anonymous wrote:This stopped after ES for us. Actually it stopped IN ES for us after I sent a scathing note about it.

Same here. My daughter was crying in January because she heard they weren’t changing the lunch seat assignments. First I had heard of this. She was miserable sitting beside the worst kid in class. I called and said it was someone else’s turn.

Op, your middle and HS kids have assigned lunch seats.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been on both sides of this.

As a teacher, yes I always did this.

As a parent I have been annoyed as my child has been used as a buffer child consistently.

I am not sure what you think the alternative is though?

I have the kid who won't stop talking and I ask that she not be put near people she would prefer to talk to. Keeps her quiet, she won't bug her neighbor, and everyone can focus on their work better. Why does this bother the "buffer"? They weren't going to misbehave or talk either way so the end result is the same for them. But now the classroom has less chatter.

For my child, she gets really tired of always being next to someone off task.

Most kids who won't stop talking don't stop talking just because you put them next to someone they like less. They still talk, just usually more across the room.

If all the "bad" kids are sitting next to each other chatting away the always on task aren't going to hear a word the teacher says.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have been on both sides of this.

As a teacher, yes I always did this.

As a parent I have been annoyed as my child has been used as a buffer child consistently.

I am not sure what you think the alternative is though?

I have the kid who won't stop talking and I ask that she not be put near people she would prefer to talk to. Keeps her quiet, she won't bug her neighbor, and everyone can focus on their work better. Why does this bother the "buffer"? They weren't going to misbehave or talk either way so the end result is the same for them. But now the classroom has less chatter.

For my child, she gets really tired of always being next to someone off task.

Most kids who won't stop talking don't stop talking just because you put them next to someone they like less. They still talk, just usually more across the room.

Anonymous wrote:I have been on both sides of this.

As a teacher, yes I always did this.

As a parent I have been annoyed as my child has been used as a buffer child consistently.

I am not sure what you think the alternative is though?

I have the kid who won't stop talking and I ask that she not be put near people she would prefer to talk to. Keeps her quiet, she won't bug her neighbor, and everyone can focus on their work better. Why does this bother the "buffer"? They weren't going to misbehave or talk either way so the end result is the same for them. But now the classroom has less chatter.