1867-1868 School Committee Report

Browse Search

10 I opinion that much of the interest with which the school was of punishment by the rod as a means of correction? If not, invested, was due to her scholarship and good judgment.* then a Committee must either require the punishment of a per- At the close of the year, the annual public examination was sistent offender by the rod, or subject a school to almost any followed by interesting graduation exercises, by members of the h little disturbance which the ingenuity of a mean disposition might retiring class. Diplomas were presented to Misses Annie H. :^ contrive. There seems to be little room for any difference of Coolidge, Julia F. Coolidge, Carrie F. Fiske and Georgiana L. opinion on this subject: A Committee who should, regardless Parker. of this dilemma, expel a child without any attempt to- reform j, him by force, might expect the courts to pronounce their doings yn unlawful, whenever any litigious person should stand ready to GENERAL REMARKS. avail himself of the child's right of action. The best method of Our detailed report of the condition of the several schools dealing with misconduct in a school is, of course, if possible, to ;{ quell it by weight of authority and without force. What we will give some idea of what we might otherwise suggest. We have endeavored to say above is, that we think the laws of will add that most of our school rooms stand in need of better u� heating apparatus. Good coal stoves would furnish more heat, Massachusetts intend that force should be used rather than expul- in case of need, than those at present in use, and with a saving t) sion, in any case where either would remove the evil. The of fuel. Such stoves might also be supplied, as most of those {y officers in charge of the public schools are expected to keep them. Twe now have cannot be, with water dishes for hydrating the air. free from such defiant misconduct as will interfere with their Air heated without an addition of fi is not it . usefulness. These officers have the power to exclude the mis- chievous;water but they cannot'exercise the power lawfully, we fear, We offer a few suggestions on the subject of corporal punish- until the have tried what in some cases must be injurious and meat in the public schools. The laws of Massachusetts provide y that "A child unlawfully excluded from any public school shall Y � �° perhaps useless force. This state of things we deprecate. It seems rather behind the age. We can see no practicable escape recover damages therefor in an action of tort, to be brought in from the difficulty but by the enactment of a law somewhat in the name of such child by his guardian or next-friend, against the the following form:—Corporal punishment for past offences shall city or town by which such school is supported."—Gen. Stat., be unlawful in any public school, or any branch or class thereof, jChap. 41, Sect. 11. Suppose a pupil to be so insubordinate so far as the School Committee of the city or town supporting that the prosperity of his school requires relief from his miscon- the school may have voted to exclude it.—With such a law on. duct. Such a pupil might doubtless, if necessary, be lawfully �� the statute book, the Committee of this town might,for example, excluded for the sake of other pupils. But is it lawful to ex- ,I lawfully exclude corporal punishment for past offences from the clude him without first employing all the means given by law to the teacher :to control the pupil within the school? In other A+ High School; and then present to the unruly the plain alterna words, the rod being one of the means which the teacher has the r, tives, good behavior or expulsion. Good behavior would, in our right to use, can the proper authority lawfully expel a child from opinion, be universal. a school for insubordination, without first requiring a fair trial f Parents sometimes undertake to instruct teachers not to strike �j their children, but rather to send them away from school if they * In the remarks following the graduation exercises, it was stated that one will not obey the rules prescribed for all the pupils. A moment's of these contained an expression which the teacher, in revising, had cancelled reference to the section of the laws cited On the previous page with his pencil. The young lady who read the exercise referred to,says she T will be sufficient to reveal the fact that the right of action for 9f was not aware of the teacher's purpose to erase the expression, and disclaims all intention to evade his decision in the matter. The expression, of itself,was unlawful exclusion is given to the child, and not to his parent Or not seriously objectionable. We take pleasure in giving publicity to this { guardian. This fact makes it at least probable that the parent explanation.