Punishing the whole class for the actions of one student

[thejboy88]

This is something that, I think, everyone would have experienced at least once. You're in school, and the teacher or headmaster/headmistress has called out the whole class, telling them that one or more of your classmates has done something wrong, but that they don't know who. They tell you this, either the person comes forward, or else the whole class gets punished (how they punish varies depending on the circumstances). Nobody comes forward, you don't know who it is yourself so you can't tell them, so the teacher decides to go ahead and punish the class, even knowing that not all of them were responsible.

This is a practice I've seen in school after school in my life, and it's one that I've always taken issue with. I know that, by punishing the whole class you are TECHNICALLY punishing the ones responsible for the deed, but, as I said earlier, it also means you're knowingly punishing lots innocent kids who did nothing wrong.

What are your thoughts on this practice?

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

Heck it's the case in the rest of the adult world out side of university and the military too. Punishing everyone because one person was too stupid to do something correctly.

 

[L. Declis]

Because it is very rare that literally no one knows; at least two or three people know, and they're not coming forward either. You cannot let it get away; it sets a bad example.

It also helps teach the other members of the class that they must also demand better behaviour from their classmates.

It teaches life isn't fair.

Finally, it's a good bonding exercise. Nothing will improve unity like collective disgruntlement.

 

[Twintix]

I'm not sure how effective a method like that actually is. I mean, I'm sure it can be, but statistically, is it more or less effective in getting students to behave?

The person in question who misbehaved may have done it on purpose because they take delight in getting everybody in trouble, especially those who normally don't misbehave. This may vary from person to person, of course.

 

[L. Declis]

I'm not sure how effective a method like that actually is. I mean, I'm sure it can be, but statistically, is it more or less effective in getting students to behave?

The person in question who misbehaved may have done it on purpose because they take delight in getting everybody in trouble, especially those who normally don't misbehave. This may vary from person to person, of course.

It isn't effective. But then, the classroom education system isn't effective, it's efficient. That about sums up most education systems.

 

[Pandalisk]

It's not effective at all. The people who don't know who did it are screwed beyond a doubt and the people who do know wont say it anyway because of peer pressure and the teachers know, or surely must know as it classroom boys knowledge 101, that the lads aren't going to rat out the other lads. I'd be a bit more sympathetic to the teachers and this type of punishment if it was done for something extreme but it was only ever rolled out for the most mundane shit and never the big shit we'd pull so it just came across as petty.

My religion teacher rolled out some Roman army shit (arbitrary 1 out of every 3 crap) to try and break this uniform silence and the result was whole years just acting out worse. She had an entire student revolt on her hands at one point, bless her.

 

[LetalisK]

I'm not sure of its efficacy in a classroom setting, but I do know it's probably the single best tool in a drill sergeant's arsenal. Getting fucked over is one thing. Getting your platoon fucked over, whom you have to eat and sleep with for an extended period of time, because of your actions is something else entirely and they let you know it.

 

[Smooth Operator]

It's a dumb old practice because they can't think of a better way.
The only thing it teaches is that people will treat you unfairly and you need to find the best way around it, that is a very important lesson in life but something completely different then what they sell it as.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

The teachers who do that are lazy and stupid, and half the time it's not even someone from the class who did the shitty thing.

 

[Barbas]

It's a lazy punishment that is unfit for the classroom. As for boot camp,

School =/= boot camp.

 

[loa]

It turns the class against each other, makes disobeyance something everyone looks out for, tones down.
Creates anxiety. Stressful environment.

I don't know if this is the right or the wrong way, don't know a better method. It works.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

I remember our teacher used to make us all go outside of the classroom just because one guy tried throwing trash into the trashcan like he was playing basketball. Fun times.

Personally, fuck that shit. The people who were supposed to be punished got a fucking kick out of not having to learn things. I, on the other hand, had to, and sometimes still do, waste a lot of time and effort writing lines because my idiot classmates decided to spill half a bottle of juice on the floor and not clean it up. Not to mention this type of punishment has more to do with the teacher being on the rag rather than the seriousness of the infraction. I really have no idea what this is supposed to teach us besides people in authority often have no handle on what they're supposed to be in charge of, and that the shit classmates need to be weeded out before you graduate.

 

[MiskWisk]

It turns the class against each other, makes disobeyance something everyone looks out for, tones down.
Creates anxiety. Stressful environment.

I don't know if this is the right or the wrong way, don't know a better method. It works.

Are you taking typing lessons from Mordin Solus?

OT: In secondary school, we had a former soldier who was pretty fond of this method. The thing was, he added a nice little twist to it. Namely, those he knew were innocent got let go. While I don't think it is the best method, it was a hell of a lot better than general group punishment. Was it still a good idea? Probably not but in school teachers have to use some method to get control and by the end of the first year no one acted out in his class. Sure, you can probably ascribe that to other things about his teaching style but letting the guilty part get away without punishment is ultimately a bad idea.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

Collective punishment. You think it's bad in school? Try Military training...retraining because of one stupid fuck.

The military is the only place where collective punishment works.
You fuck up, all around you get punished. You keep fucking up, all around you keep getting punished. Then they decided one night to "re-educate" you with a blanket over your head and severe beating. Now you take your shit seriously.
School? Punish everyone, yet they can't do anything to force the one who is reason for the punishment to improve besides encouraging kids to beat each other up.

Collective punishment can only work when the "collective" can punish the one who is at fault in return. That's not the case anywhere but the military.

 

[Parasondox]

Its a shitty and lazy punishment teachers use to gain their authority back. And yet I see a lot of this outside of school like in the work place or a political matter.

 

[KyuubiNoKitsune-Hime]

It turns the class against each other, makes disobeyance something everyone looks out for, tones down.
Creates anxiety. Stressful environment.

I don't know if this is the right or the wrong way, don't know a better method. It works.

No it doesn't. It turns a class hostile to the teacher. Creates an environment of total hostility towards a teacher, where their only allies are maybe one or two teachers pets. The rest of the class on the other hand gets closer to starting a riot at the drop of a hat.

Also for all those who said that this teaches the lesson "life isn't fair." No it really doesn't. It teaches the lesson of "fuck anybody in a position of authority." Because arbitrary punishments don't breed thoughtfulness they breed resentment.

 

[Saltyk]

We do this all the time in society. It's like overpasses having fences on them. They're there because a few idiots thought it would be fun to throw things at oncoming cars and have killed people as a result. Effectively, we can't trust a few people to not recklessly endanger and murder their fellow man, so we can't trust anyone.

Note: I'm not saying this is a bad thing that we have fences on overpasses. We probably should have before, for various reasons. It's just sad that we have it because of particular horrible incidents.

The particular incident you hypothesize is annoying, though.

I remember on a school bus, we had a sub driver, who suddenly stopped because someone threw a penny. A freaking penny! And she wouldn't go until the responsible student came forward. The thing is, she apparently had already dropped off the kid who did it, according to several students, but she wouldn't budge. Eventually, three different students claimed responsibility. When she questioned this, they came up with a ridiculous story about how they had either thrown it to each other in order or all threw it together at the exact same time. This seemed to make her happy.