Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Behaviour' started by Henriettawasp, Jan 13, 2011.
What's to say they have a genuine sore throat?
I think that's a bit of a red herring. Surely it's down to (a) those professional decisions Tom talked about earlier that every teacher has to make and (b) how well you know and how much you trust the children you teach every day.
We're graduates and trained professionals, so it's not outwith our intellectual capabilities to work out whether or not a child has a sore throat, I reckon. Once you've made that decision, so what if the child doesn't actually have a really sore throat? The ground isn't going to open up and swallow us.
Besides, would you suck a Strepsil if you DIDN'T have a sore throat?
When one is bored or hungry or both then he/she may eat anything.
And I'm quite sure, bodega, you are intelligent and professional enough to decide whether a pupil is bored, hungry or suffering from a sore throat, and that you wouldn't waste any time worrying about it.
Students should not have Strepsils in school with them anyway!
You have to be over 18 to purchase them.
I still don't understand why a student should be able to answer a phone because of a death in the family. People managed these events without a phone in school in the past, why do they suddenly need them now?
This must be your favourite icon.
Indeed it is! Well spotted!
All these things are in classrooms because they are supposed to make teaching and learning easier.
A child answering a mobile phone clearly makes both things more difficult.