Schoolkids banned from local supermarket

A simple solution would be for the school to set up their own snack bar, our local secondary has one and students aren't allowed off grounds at lunchtime

Summerlove

Elegran

SpanielNanny the children who behave themselves in supermarkets (and elsewhere) will be very well aware of which of their classmates have caused the whole school to be banned. They know just who are the second-class citizens, and it isn't them, it is those who acted like selfish thieving bullies. That will have been reinforced by the talk that has doubtless been given them by their teachers, on how the school is judged by the actions of the lowest common denominator. Letters home to every parent (posted, not handed to the offending miscreants to deliver safely) should explain the situation and get the parents onside.

But the well behaved are still being treated as second class by being unable to go where they could before.

What a lowly opinion you have of school children

No. Summerlove I have a realistic opinion of some schoolchildren, just as I have a realistic opinion of some adults. The majority don't shoplift or knock over old ladies as they run amok in supermarkets. Identifying exactly which of the crowds of teenagers and children thronging a supermarket in their lunch hour are the ones who are being anti-social is not an easy task. Banning those individuals is even harder, particularly as the parents of the worst behaved may also be the most vocal and belligerent of all the parents in the school, and quite ready to visit the shop and threaten to duff up the staff if their little angel is "discriminated against" A general ban on any pupils from a school with a lot of offenders is likely to have an effect in causing a tightening of disciplinary action and an improvement in behaviour.
Plus, as I have said, those pupils who are there to buy something to eat and to hang out peacefully with their friends are well aware of who the troublemakers are and what specific events were the last straw, and their resentment is against them, for getting everyone banned, not against the supermarket. Children have a keen sense of what is fair.

It's difficult to know what to do about the (hopefully) minority of rowdy, disruptive school children in local shops and supermarkets. When their behaviour ends up causing someone an injury, then obviously something has to be done.

What are the schools themselves doing about it?

I think at the moment, the "two only at any one time" is the best and fairest way of dealing with the problem as it doesn't punish those kids who are innocent. It may take a bit longer for them to get served but if they are genuinely there to get something to eat, they should be able to nip in and out fairly quickly. Perhaps a dedicated check-out till at the appropriate time might be a good idea, so they don't have to queue behind those with full trolleys?

We have the same problem in our small town - but often the kids are just simply unaware that they're crowding the pavement in groups - they're not really intent on causing trouble and are quite apologetic when they realise they're causing a problem.

It's the same-old-same old. A minority of unruly kids acting like little oiks because their parents simply can't be bothered to teach them to behave. When you see some of the parents dropping off their younger offspring still dressed in their pyjamas, it does make you wonder how much they care about such things as discipline. I might get shot down in flames for even mentioning that, I know, because so many people believe that it doesn't matter if they are still in their nightclothes - and maybe I'm wrong, and maybe it doesn't matter, but I don't think it sets a good example to children.

I don't mind kids being noisy or being a tad lacking in awareness - they're full of life, energy, and natural enthusiasm. One such, who was shouting and waving his arms around in all directions the other day offered to carry my heavy shopping bags back to the car. It's just a minority of little louts-in-the-making who are intent on being a PITA.

Someone who works in the supermarket told me they probably will bring in the 2 at a time rule next term. They're just trying to send out a strong message at the moment in the hopes that the better behaved kids will be annoyed with the messers and bring a bit of peer pressure to bear.

We only have one secondary school where I live. The students are not permitted to leave the school premises at lunch time - this rule doesn’t include 6th formers. The whole school only has 40mins for their lunch. Early morning and after school some shops have signs saying how many youngsters are permitted at once.

When I was at school you either brought in a packed lunch or went home for something to eat. It must cost parents a fortune handing out money to their kids for a shop bought lunch every day.

nandad

At my son’s secondary school students weren’t allowed out at lunchtime, they either took a packed lunch or had a school dinner. I believe this is still the case there. At my nephew’s school, in a different town, teachers stood outside the shop where large numbers of pupils congregated and were dealt with immediately if they were being anti-social.

At many local shops that are close to schools teachers from the school are on duty at the door to restrict numbers and deal with problems. Even so I tend to avoid such times as I cannot stand for long in a queue.

Before I started teaching, I used to be wary of groups of teenagers on the street and would often cross the road to avoid them. However, after teaching in a tough, inner city comprehensive school, I was no longer as concerned as I was more aware that most teenagers were lovely people and were not necessarily going to mug me! I often smile at a group as I walk up, say hello or something else politely and find that they respond well.

Surely, the simple solution would be that they aren't allowed off the school premises during school hours. When I was at school, and when my kids were teenagers, students had to either have written consent from parents to be allowed home for lunch (throughout the term, not just the odd day when they feel like it), or had school lunches/packed lunch. The schools were responsible for the health & safety of the students during the school day.

Why is it now acceptable for them to be allowed to roam the streets/supermarkets/shopping malls, and cause a nuisance to other people, and shop owners? We all know that teenagers often get up to mischief (even the well-behaved ones can be lead astray!). As a parent, I'd rather know where they are during the day, but we all know that there are some parents who simply don't care what they're up to.

My parents definitely didnt know where I was during the school day. My teachers used to send us out to do their shopping. Often in lessons.

Beswitched

When I was at school you either brought in a packed lunch or went home for something to eat. It must cost parents a fortune handing out money to their kids for a shop bought lunch every day.

That's an interesting point Beswitched.

I'm sure it would be cheaper to make a sandwich than dole out for the supermarket every day - especially for those parents who've got more than one extra mouth to feed.

Without wishing to sound like a grumpy old woman (and probably failing) - what's wrong with the playground at lunch break? Surely there's seating where the kids can sit and munch, and then muck around and let off steam?... they don't have that much time anyway. I know I'd personally prefer my offspring to be on the school premises during the day - or come home. I don't think wandering around shopping malls and supermarkets is a 'healthy' way to spend their downtime - tho' it probably does teach them to be good little consumers...

Good for the supermarket. They didn't really have a choice. However, it might be fairer for the supermarket to use their CCTV cameras to identify those responsible and not to include all children wearing that school's uniform. I have never agreed with punishments which include the innocent with the perpetrators. Most unfair.

I agree Sarnia that where at all possible the perpetrators should be identified and punished. But when you have large groups of people all of the same age and wearing identical clothes it can be difficult to single out individuals. A friend was telling me of a situation in her local shopping centre where schoolkids used to race each other up the down escalators and down the up escalators. It was hugely dangerous for everyone else on the escalator. Most of the kids had their hoods up and the school staff couldn't make definite identifications from CCTV.

The only choice was to have already busy teachers, with lives and families of their own, patrol the shopping centre for at least an hour every evening after school, or to ban all kids wearing that uniform from the shopping centre.
So the latter solution was chosen. It really isn't the job of teachers to be acting as security staff on buses and in shops.

I wonder how many parents of 'the well behaved children' would be so proud of them if shown videos of them acting up with their mates?
What sort of punishment would they give to the children?
Maybe they should just be allowed in with their parents!!
I say good on the managers/owners for doing this.

Parenting, or lack of it, sadly is the root of this.
The shops suffer bad behaviour, and shop lifting, and lose adult customers.
Naming and shaming is one way of reducing this.
In Sussex, our local bus company would take a bus that had been damaged, to the school and the children had to sit in their seats again.
Bills for cleaning / repairs reduced the incidence!