Should Teachers Have the Authority to Remove Disruptive Students from Their Class Permanently? I. The historical record of delegated authority to teachers. A. Do teachers have less authority now than they did twenty years ago? B. Are administrators/principals as supportive of teachers? II. The effect disruptions have on the learning community: in particular the teachers, peers, and administration. III. Reasons why teachers should have the authority to remove disruptive students from their class temporarily: A. Removing a disruptive student makes learning less interrupted for all the other students.

B. Removing a disruptive student makes teaching less frustrating and more productive for the teacher. C. Having a disruptive student in class is problematic to the success of the classroom. D. No student should be allowed to essentially control the classroom. IV. Reasons why teachers should not have the authority to remove a disruptive student from class temporarily: A. Part of the job of the teacher is to control students in the class, giving them authority to remove disruptive student’s makes teacher’s deal with more situations than ever in the history of education.

B. Teachers do not decide who has a right to be educated and who does not, this decision should be left solely to the administration. V. Reasons why the teacher should be able to remove disruptive students from their class permanently. A. Teachers have a right to work in a setting that is beneficial to effective teaching. B. Students have a right to learn in a safe environment. VI. Reasons why teachers should not be able to remove disruptive students permanently. A. Students may be disruptive for one or many reasons; teachers need to do what they can to help them.

B. Upon professional observance, some students need to be removed and offered an alternative learning environment. C. The decision to remove disruptive students permanently should be left up to administration just to make sure there is no personal bias D. Protocols must be taken by teachers, parents, and Administration if removing a student permanently is the last resort. VII. In conclusion, viewing both side of the argument in my opinion gives the teacher no authority to permanently remove a student, but does allow them to temporarily remove a student.

A. Temporary removal of a disruptive student not only develops the teaching and learning environment for all, but also sends a warning notice to other potentially disruptive students. B. Permanent removal of a student should be decided by the Principal, but definitely include the teachers opinion. Bibliography Todras P. (2009, August) Teachers’ Perspectives of Disruptive Behavior in the Classroom Retrieved October 2, 2011, from ProQuest: http://proquest. umi. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/pqdweb? id=1680778341;sid=2;Fmt=2;clientId=13118;RQT=309;VName=PQD The author examines disruptive behaviors in school and looks at its source. The author also gives a breakdown the different types of disruptiveness from the calmest form to the most unruly. Carr, S. (2007, May 8). Disruptive Students Bounced from School to School: Little Data on Movement. Retrieved October 2, 2011, from ProQuest:http://proquest. umi. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/pqdweb? did=1266796401;sid=2;Fmt=3;clientId=13118;RQT=309;VName=PQD This author discusses how disruptive students can be overlooked by higher administration.

Instead of finding a way to reduce the disruptive behavior, or improve their troublemaking, they simply get moved to another classroom, thus making the child not get settled and dealt with finding the actual source of the acting out. Tremblay RE; Masse B; Perron D; Leblanc M; Schwartzman AE; Ledingham JE (1992, Feb. ) Early disruptive behavior, poor school achievement, delinquent behavior, and delinquent personality: longitudinal analyses. Retrieved October 2, 2011, from EBSCOhost: http://search. ebscohost. com. ezproxy. apollolibrary. com/login. aspx? d