DataNinja's Scintillating Digital Random Banter #231

[Rawhide]

The bell does not announce the official end of class time. The bell indicates that class is to wrap up as soon as possible.

"I dismiss you, not the bell" is an accurate statement. We can discuss the accuracy of the statement "I dismiss you, not the bell" without discussing the inappropriate behaviour of some teachers.

Under normal circumstances, the appropriate thing for the teacher to do is to quickly wrap things up, if the teacher is not already finished, then to dismiss the students. This could include asking the students to stay for a reasonable amount of time. What is reasonable is dependant on the situation.

Getting up and attempting to leave before you have been dismissed is disruptive to other students, and will mean that the teacher will usually need to take even longer to finalise the end of class and be able to dismiss the students.

I wanted to join the debate, but seeing my experiences have no relevance, I'll stay out.

I should say that it's not relevant to the specific thing I was addressing, who or what dismisses the students. Rater202 appears to have had some experience with teachers they weren't fond of, so it may be relevant to that (as long as you can keep it peaceful).

[Rater202]

Interestingly, the major argument from my side was about responsibility. When we were held back like this, it was usually not due to the teacher not planning their lessons - it was because we - the students - were not behaving properly and made the teacher lose time. When we were held back, we quickly learned the lesson of personal responsibility - if we do stupid stuff, we lose our privileges.

But who am I to talk? I grew up in post-communist country and our teachers were usually rather strict (while fair). And I am a brainwashed zombie - we usually sat in our places while teacher talked and even when the bell rang, we waited for them to finish - as a sign of respect. They showed their respect to us by wrapping up as soon as possible.

See, this is what is supposed to happen. Everyone follows the rules and gets punished for breaking them.

But I find it irritating when I start a discussion with "I just found out that the abusive bullcrap myself and others were subjected to might be illegal. Why do I never find out this stuff when it would be useful" and am met with "Teachers have the right to abuse people in that way and it's good thing becuase they need to teach you to respect and obey them no matter what and besides here's an uncommon circumstance where doing something superficially similar to the abuse would be the right thing."

In the American public school system, "I dismiss you, not the bell" is universally an excuse used by abusive teachers to punish students who did nothing wrong while the teacher gets away scot-free. If a good teacher has a valid reason to hold up the class, they will say soinstead of acting like they're an omnipotent authority whose every whim must be obeyed even to the detriment of the students.

A teacher does not have the right to hold up an entire class of students long enough to guarantee that they will not make it to their class without a valid reason. To deliberately do so is abusive. "I dismiss you, not the bell" is at best a drastic simplification used, by teachers in the American public school system, to get away with such abusive behavior.

[Rawhide]

See, this is what is supposed to happen. Everyone follows the rules and gets punished for breaking them.

The rules are, wait to be dismissed by the teacher.

But I find it irritating when I start a discussion with "I just found out that the abusive bullcrap myself and others were subjected to might be illegal. Why do I never find out this stuff when it would be useful" and am met with "Teachers have the right to abuse people in that way and it's good thing becuase they need to teach you to respect and obey them no matter what and besides here's an uncommon circumstance where doing something superficially similar to the abuse would be the right thing."

You were not. Not a single person has said that teachers have the right to abuse people.

Multiple people have tried to correct your claim about who or what dismisses the students, though.

[Rater202]

You were not. Not a single person has said that teachers have the right to abuse people.

They do not have the right to hold the entire class up for the full five minutes that you have to get to your next class for the sole sake of finishing a lecture that they had the responsibility to time better

Yes, they do.

So, here we have an exchange wherein I state that teachers do not have the right to deliberately make students late to another class to cover up the teachers own mistakes met by you stating that they do.

You even edited my statement to make it seem like I was saying that teachers don't have the right to hold students at all.

Your other responses to me have been similar in tone or content.

From my perspective, Rawhide, your entire argument consists of you trying to correct a statement, a rather unimportant part of my argument all things considered, by making excuses and providing justification for teachers that abused myself and others and trying to downplay what my experiences and research tell me are the majority in my country as an insignificant minority.

[Rawhide]

From my perspective, Rawhide, your entire argument consists of you trying to correct a statement

Correct.

I am 100% only addressing one specific point. A claim you made (multiple times) about who or what dismisses the students. I have, multiple times, stated that I'm not addressing abuse of that responsibility.

So, here we have an exchange wherein I state that teachers do not have the right to deliberately make students late to another class to cover up the teachers own mistakes met by you stating that they do.

You even edited my statement to make it seem like I was saying that teachers don't have the right to hold students at all.

I didn't edit your statement, I trimmed it to the relevant portion for context. As I have stated previously, I am only addressing who or what dismisses the students.

[Anonymouswizard]

I do agree that that kind of bluster is typical of a teacher who has already lost control of their classroom. A good teacher shouts the homework assignment over the sounds of their students packing up to leave, then shoos their students out so they can have a quick conference with their colleague and plan their next globetrotting adventure.

I've had it happen once, by a teacher who wanted to finish their point. And the entire class sat back down, because she had control of the classroom, and two minutes later we were out. I also think it happened due to us going on lunch next instead of the five minute dash across campus to the maths building.

Maybe a teacher who abuses it regularly is a [redacted], but that doesn't apply to every teacher who uses it. Sometimes lessons overrun by a minute or two, and a teacher knows that students are listening to what the homework is if they're not busy packing their bags. At the same time a good teacher doesn't penalise you for being a minute or two late unless you're coming back from a school-wide break, and it never happened because IME it's not uncommon for the teacher to be up to five minutes late.

Plus I once turned up two minutes late to a lecture on time management, just to be funny.

Now I'm nowhere near posh enough to have attended a public school, but in all the state schools I've been in (three) only one used a bell, although the one I was a student at the longest, and my university didn't either. Heck, by university there were no penalties for being late to a lecture beyond missing the material, unless you had disability support.

[enderlord99]

Correct.

I am 100% only addressing one specific point. A claim you made (multiple times) about who or what dismisses the students. I have, multiple times, stated that I'm not addressing abuse of that responsibility.



I didn't edit your statement, I trimmed it to the relevant portion for context. As I have stated previously, I am only addressing who or what dismisses the students.

This seems relevant.

EDIT: Anonwiz, when people outside the UK say "public school" they mean "state-funded." If they meant one you had to pay for, they would say "private school."

I have been to both, even though my parents aren't rich.

[Rater202]

I didn't edit your statement, I trimmed it to the relevant portion for context. As I have stated previously, I am only addressing who or what dismisses the students.

You removed important context from my point to make your own point relevant when it was not to the full statement you were responding to.

You are hyperfocusing on what is ultimately an irrelevant detail and in doing so you are, giving the benefit of the doubt, unintentionally defending and justifying people who have abused myself and others.

Can you at least acknowledge that I am justified in finding that frustrating?

[Rawhide]

You removed important context from my point to make your own point relevant when it was not to the full statement you were responding to.

You kept replying to me with irrelevant information that did not back up your claim, a claim you kept re-stating. I kept trying to dial it back to just what I was addressing and quoted the relevant portions for context. I also tried to explain what I was and was not addressing to no avail.

Can you at least acknowledge that I am justified in finding that frustrating?

You are hyperfocusing on what is ultimately an irrelevant detail and in doing so you are, giving the benefit of the doubt, unintentionally defending and justifying people who have abused myself and others.

I focused on a specific detail. I corrected that specific detail. I explained that I was only talking about that specific detail.

I have never defended or justified abuse. I've only spoken about something that is not abuse in and of itself, but can be abused.

Requiring students to remain in the class after the bell until they have been dismissed, even if its just to ensure that students understand that they need to remain in the class after the bell until they have been dismissed when they don't follow that rule, is not abuse. But requiring students to remain in the class after the bell can be abused, this responsibility can be misused to harm students. I've always acknowledged that it can be abused.

[Anonymouswizard]

EDIT: Anonwiz, when people outside the UK say "public school" they mean "state-funded." If they meant one you had to pay for, they would say "private school."

I have been to both, even though my parents aren't rich.

I know, I was trying to be funny. There's also a difference between a paid for school and a public school here, we also have private schools.

[Peelee]

The end of class/school bell comes without warning* and can happen in the middle of a sentence, paragraph, or topic, or before explaining any homework or after-class activities. If at this point, every student started to get up to leave, it would be very disruptive. The bell instructs the teacher that it is time to finish the last point being made, and to inform the students of anything that need to know before they leave the classroom. It does not immediately dismiss the students.

It's very rare in my experience for a teacher to list yeah of tone like that ; clocks are strategically placed for teachers (back of room) so they always have a line of sight on it. You don't meet to look every thirty seconds, a passive perception of it is usually enough. Plus, most teachers have been teaching for some time and have a good idea of how long their lesson plans will run, though student participation is always a wild card. But for the most part, teachers are usurping aware of their class's imminent end. An easy example of this is American university, where there is no bell; the professors need to end their classes on time with no indication other than the clock, and they typically have much more intense topics (and much more passion for the topic) than grade school and high school, which can balance out the likely less disruptive classes.

Now, the biggest time it's justified is when students by and large start packing up before the end of class, which is also super disrespectful and still happens well into college.

All that said, again, Rater, it's almost certainly not illegal, certainly not illegal in the sense you appear to think, and definitely within the purview of the teachers. The specific phrase "I dismiss you, not the bell" I only heard from an IMO subpar teacher, so I agree with you on that, but others did do similar actions while explaining why and that was perfectly within their scope of authority (and taught me to be mindful).

[Rawhide]

It's very rare in my experience for a teacher to list yeah of tone like that ; clocks are strategically placed for teachers (back of room) so they always have a line of sight on it. You don't meet to look every thirty seconds, a passive perception of it is usually enough. Plus, most teachers have been teaching for some time and have a good idea of how long their lesson plans will run, though student participation is always a wild card. But for the most part, teachers are usurping aware of their class's imminent end. An easy example of this is American university, where there is no bell; the professors need to end their classes on time with no indication other than the clock, and they typically have much more intense topics (and much more passion for the topic) than grade school and high school, which can balance out the likely less disruptive classes.

It's the responsibility of the teacher to finish approximately on time. Not exactly on time. They are monitoring that clock for the approximate finish time, not the exact time. There will be times when a teacher will be in the middle of a sentence when the bell rings and they just have a sentence or two to get out. Or there will be times where time gets away from the teacher and they are surprised by the bell, then they need to quickly find a way to wrap up the lesson. Sometimes, teachers will take a moment after the bell to remind students of what homework or after-class activities they need to perform, or what material they need to take home with them, so that it's fresh in their mind as they walk out.

If a large number of students get up and start to leave as soon as the bell rings, it's highly disruptive.

If you want to end every lesson exactly on the bell every single class, you do need to watch that clock like an absolute hawk. If you want to end it approximately on the bell, and give the best education you can to your students, you will go over the timeslot frequently enough.

Remember too that a teacher can't just let every student out before the bell rings, that causes problems in other ways, so if they are running five minutes ahead (for example), they need to find an activity that will last approximately five minutes, then they need to wrap that unplanned activity up.

Looking at your university example only from a time management standpoint (the rest is so different as to not apply), I'm not sure how that changes things. They still have the same issues of occasionally running out of time and needing a little extra to finish up, just without a centralised bell system.

[Peelee]

It's the responsibility of the teacher to finish approximately on time. Not exactly on time. They are monitoring that clock for the approximate finish time, not the exact time. There will be times when a teacher will be in the middle of a sentence when the bell rings and they just have a sentence or two to get out. Or there will be times where time gets away from the teacher and they are surprised by the bell, then they need to quickly find a way to wrap up the lesson. Sometimes, teachers will take a moment after the bell to remind students of what homework or after-class activities they need to perform, or what material they need to take home with them, so that it's fresh in their mind as they walk out.

If a large number of students get up and start to leave as soon as the bell rings, it's highly disruptive.

If you want to end every lesson exactly on the bell every single class, you do need to watch that clock like an absolute hawk. If you want to end it approximately on the bell, and give the best education you can to your students, you will go over the timeslot frequently enough.

Remember too that a teacher can't just let every student out before the bell rings, that causes problems in other ways, so if they are running five minutes ahead (for example), they need to find an activity that will last approximately five minutes, then they need to wrap that unplanned activity up.

Looking at your university example only from a time management standpoint (the rest is so different as to not apply), I'm not sure how that changes things. They still have the same issues of occasionally running out of time and needing a little extra to finish up, just without a centralised bell system.

This is both anecdotal as well as appeal to authority, but my dad held a Doctorate of Education and both taught and wrote textbooks on educational philosophy (teaching teachers how to be teachers at a graduate level), and I never got the impression from him that what you say would be correct.

This is also vague on top of those. I'm fully aware of how it's not a great argument, but since I can't ask my dad directly that's what I gotta go with.

[Rawhide]

This is both anecdotal as well as appeal to authority, but my dad held a Doctorate of Education and both taught and wrote textbooks on educational philosophy (teaching teachers how to be teachers at a graduate level), and I never got the impression from him that what you say would be correct.

This is also vague on top of those. I'm fully aware of how
It's not a great argument, but since I can't ask my dad directly that's what I gotta go with.

I'll PM you why that particular appeal to authority won't work in this specific instance.

(In short, I'm not talking from a basis of just theory either.)

[Peelee]

I'll PM you why that particular appeal to authority won't work in this specific instance.

(In short, I'm not talking from a basis of just theory either.)

Then to pure anecdotal evidence it is! I can't remember the last time a class I had ran over time, especially since there would nearly always be the assignments for practice given at the end of class (where the professors would choose from the pre-made lost based on what seemed to give issues to the students or what may not have been covered as deeply as expected that day).

[Lacco]

See, this is what is supposed to happen. Everyone follows the rules and gets punished for breaking them.

Interestingly, it only happens once both sides become civilized enough. I remember that this started even in later primary school classes, where we were informed that the fact that the bell has rung has no bearing on the presence of the teacher.

The other part was the swift action of each teacher during first classes in high school - once the bell rung, we started to be loud and not care about the teacher, he swiftly put us back in line. After two or three repeats, we knew this was no winning battle - and instead started to respect that only when the teacher says the lesson ended, we are free to have our break.

Once we did respect it, they had no reason to further "abuse" us as you call it. I call it discipline.

Also, on personal anecdote basis: it worked best with teachers that put a list of rules on the table first class of the year. We had 3 of those, very systematic. The rules were followed and everybody did well.

Once we even called out one of our teachers (each class had a "class teacher" in addition to subject teachers - the class teacher was a person responsible for disciplinary activities) on unfairness of the system when he required that we greet him formally, but he only nodded back often. We agreed that we'll be bowing low to each other - we all bowed to him, he bowed to us. It was a lot of fun - but that was the last year and the respect went both ways.

In the American public school system, "I dismiss you, not the bell" is universally an excuse used by abusive teachers to punish students who did nothing wrong while the teacher gets away scot-free. If a good teacher has a valid reason to hold up the class, they will say soinstead of acting like they're an omnipotent authority whose every whim must be obeyed even to the detriment of the students.

And due to my personal experiences... while you may feel like the students did nothing wrong, I could give you a wagon of good reasons to be curt and require more discipline.

Why? I have been on both sides of the fence - even if not for too long. I enjoyed being a teacher. And I have certainly used some methods you would not like - because they work. And they work without issues. Talked to my students once they were out of the UNI and they told me my classes were fun and even if I was strict, it was fair.

"I dismiss you, not the bell" is an accurate statement. We can discuss the accuracy of the statement "I dismiss you, not the bell" without discussing the inappropriate behaviour of some teachers.

I feel that this is not the point the other side wishes to discuss. Or that this is expected to be discussion.

I should say that it's not relevant to the specific thing I was addressing, who or what dismisses the students. Rater202 appears to have had some experience with teachers they weren't fond of, so it may be relevant to that (as long as you can keep it peaceful).

I'll try. If I feel I can't, I'll bow out.

I'll PM you why that particular appeal to authority won't work in this specific instance.

I have the feeling I know what the content of the PM will be . But would like to know.

So, back to the original question:

Why do I only learn that the bullcrap myself and others had to deal with is a crime after it's too late for me to use that valuable information.

Because nobody likes bullies and while getting back at the bully feels great, it makes you a bully on your own - and that means, you would be even a bigger target.

And while I have the feeling that you would be on the slippery slope of the dark side the moment you got this information, I don't think you would enjoy it.

Question answered!

[LaZodiac]

I think what's interesting about this entire teacher discussion is that, at least in Canada, it is the bell that dismisses you, 100%, because we actually acknowledge that not everyone has personal chaffer's that can take you too and from school.

If you're a kid who takes the buss, or kids with parents who can only afford so much time to get you home, when the bell rings you just leave. Don't bolt off like you're doing the 100 meter dash of course, but when the bell rings the teacher's time is over.

Honestly the idea that a teacher would be like "no, you have to stay I have more to say, I dismiss you" is horrifying to me. The teacher wants to go home too **** that. And if someone does like, try to do that, you can just... leave. What're they going to do, throw hands at a middle schooler?

Also just as quick aside; striking back when struck (in as simple terms as I can muster) shouldn't be punished and schools that push the mentality of "conflict requires two sides" doesn't understand a single god damn thing about what they're doing.

[Peelee]

What're they going to do, throw hands at a middle schooler?

Detention. If you don't go, suspension.

Also like all public schools are school-bussed and outside of private schools or high schools where the kids learn to drive and might have their own cars, most American schoolchildren also dont have their own personal chauffeurs either.

[LaZodiac]

Detention. If you don't go, suspension.

Also like all public schools are school-bussed and outside of private schools or high schools where the kids learn to drive and might have their own cars, most American schoolchildren also dont have their own personal chauffeurs either.

No school is going to successfully argue "they come to school every day, do all their work, but when the bell rings they just leave and don't listen, so we're kicking them out".

I know, that was just me exaggerating towards the teachers who DO think they can just, hold students back for whatever reasons.

[Anonymouswizard]

I think what's interesting about this entire teacher discussion is that, at least in Canada, it is the bell that dismisses you, 100%, because we actually acknowledge that not everyone has personal chaffer's that can take you too and from school.

Time of day is also a factor (the only time I had it happen was when we had a break immediately after), and while I've never heard of kids at that school being kept behind on the last lesson of the day every school I know of either specifically provided later services (if relatively remote) or relied on local bus routes anyway. Heck my school both provided later buses for those in after school clubs (mainly football and rugby) and detention and was near relatively regular services to most nearby villages if you could cough up the fare.

But yeah, being kept behind at end of day is much worse.

[Rater202]

I think what's interesting about this entire teacher discussion is that, at least in Canada, it is the bell that dismisses you, 100%, because we actually acknowledge that not everyone has personal chaffer's that can take you too and from school.

If you're a kid who takes the buss, or kids with parents who can only afford so much time to get you home, when the bell rings you just leave. Don't bolt off like you're doing the 100 meter dash of course, but when the bell rings the teacher's time is over.

Honestly the idea that a teacher would be like "no, you have to stay I have more to say, I dismiss you" is horrifying to me. The teacher wants to go home too **** that. And if someone does like, try to do that, you can just... leave. What're they going to do, throw hands at a middle schooler?

Also just as quick aside; striking back when struck (in as simple terms as I can muster) shouldn't be punished and schools that push the mentality of "conflict requires two sides" doesn't understand a single god damn thing about what they're doing.

Thank you, Canada, for proving that America's hat is, in at least one regard, saner than America proper.

[Peelee]

No school is going to successfully argue "they come to school every day, do all their work, but when the bell rings they just leave and don't listen, so we're kicking them out".

Oh of course not. It would be "they keep skipping detention to the point that they have been suspended". Unless they go to all the detentions, in which case it might just be easier to stay until the teacher dismisses them.

[Rater202]

Oh of course not. It would be "they keep skipping detention to the point that they have been suspended". Unless they go to all the detentions, in which case it might just be easier to stay until the teacher dismisses them.

I'm pretty sure that if the kid goes home and tells their parents "the teacher gave me a detention because I left classroom when class was over so I could get to my next class/the bus on time" and the parents go to the office and complain that the school will back down on the detention.

If not by themselves, then when the parent threatens to take it to the community or get lawyers involved over the school's blatantly unfair treatment of a child over a very petty matter when the student has a valid reason to want to leave when class is over instead of when the teacher says they can leave.

Schools don't like bad publicity and the school board will throw an entire administration under the bus to avoid a lawsuit if that's what it takes.

In general, if the parents make it clear that they will not tolerate a child being punished for something that the parent doesn't think is fair, the school will back down. This is a good thing because if the kid is being screwed over a good parent can put a stop to it... But it's also a bad thing because Karens exist.

Personally, I'm willing to tolerate the Karens abusing this if it means innocent kids aren't being punished over bullcrap.

[Peelee]

I'm pretty sure that if the kid goes home and tells their parents "the teacher gave me a detention because I left classroom when class was over so I could get to my next class/the bus on time" and the parents go to the office and complain that the school will back down on the detention.

[lukeskywalker] Your overconfidence is your weakness. [/lukeskywalker]

ETA: Also, as far as a lawsuit... For what? What damages would be claimed?

[Rater202]

[lukeskywalker] Your overconfidence is your weakness. [/lukeskywalker]

ETA: Also, as far as a lawsuit... For what? What damages would be claimed?

those detentions and suspensions go on your transcript.

Those transcripts are used when applying to college.

One would make a legitimate argument that giving a student an unfair detention, suspension, or expulsion is actively preventing them from furthering their education after high school, and thus limiting their future opportunities.

Suspending a child because they consistently leave the classroom when class is over so they can get to their next class on time, when there is a bell thats sole purpose is to announce the beginning and end of class time and that you have five minutes to get to the next class is pretty much the definition of unfair.

The only way it would be more clear cut that the school is in the wrong is if a kid get the absolute crap kicked out of them by another student, without in any way provoking the fight or fighting back, and then got expelled because of the School's zero tolerance policy.

[Peelee]

Suspending a child because they consistently leave the classroom when class is over so they can get to their next class on time, when there is a bell thats sole purpose is to announce the beginning and end of class time and that you have five minutes to get to the next class is pretty much the definition of unfair.

Unfair does it equate to illegal.

Also, that's not what goes on a transcript. That's a disciplinary record, which colleges may or may not ask for, and when they do they may only ask about major offenses, usually criminal ones. And if they request literally everything (which will be rare because they have a lot of applicants and limited time. They typically have neither the time nor the inclination), then they would also get the full context.

Short version, again, what damages? Keeping in mind you typically have to prove damages and.ot simply say "well things might have been different".

[Rater202]

Unfair does it equate to illegal.

Doesn't have to be, we're talking a civil suit, not a criminal trial.

"The school is blatantly mistreating my child, I want a court order to make them stop" is a valid enough reason to get lawyers involved.

Also, on damage, the parent could be losing wages becuase they have to call off work to pick up the kid, watch the kid when they would have been in school, or go down to the school to argue with the school staff about the bullcrap that comes from the kid repeatedly being given unfair detentions and suspensions for the crime of wanting to arrive to and depart from class at the times specified

Edit: and likewise, it doesn't have to be a solid enough cas to win, just solid enough case that your lawyer will serve papers.

Schools don't want bad publicity and school Boards even ess so. Once papers are served they rather settle or offer concessions in exchange for you dropping it than let it go to court.

Assuming they don't drop th ensue when a rightfully pissed off parent comes in and exhaling at they will not allow the school to mistreat the child.

[Peelee]

Doesn't have to be, we're talking a civil suit, not a criminal trial.

"The school is blatantly mistreating my child, I want a court order to make them stop" is a valid enough reason to get lawyers involved.

Also, on damage, the parent could be losing wages becuase they have to call off work to pick up the kid, watch the kid when they would have been in school, or go down to the school to argue with the school staff about the bullcrap that comes from the kid repeatedly being given unfair detentions and suspensions for the crime of wanting to arrive to and depart from class at the times specified.

Again, "illegal" does not equate to "criminal". You've previously claimed it was illegal and have, to my knowledge, not walked that back.

Secondly, yes, you could file civil suit for that, but lawyers aren't cheap, and either case you're describing based on their merits is not terribly convincing. Also, did you mean to jump to two different potential cases? Because you've jumped to two completely different cases.

[Rater202]

Again, "illegal" does not equate to "criminal". You've previously claimed it was illegal and have, to my knowledge, not walked that back.

Secondly, yes, you could file civil suit for that, but lawyers aren't cheap, and either case you're describing based on their merits is not terribly convincing. Also, did you mean to jump to two different potential cases? Because you've jumped to two completely different cases.

You insisted on possible damages. If "the School id blatantly mistreating my child by punishing them for wanting to get to class on time."

See my edit, don't gotta go to trial, just has to e convincing enough that papers get filed.

Nobody wants the bad publicity that comes with schools getting sued because of a teacher as mistreating a student. If a teacher is consistently refusing to let students leave class on time and punishing students who leave anyway(becuase they need to get to their next class on time) and the school administration/other teachers don't step in to put a stop to that bullcrap, then the school would be in big trouble if that got out to the public.

Once papers are served, the school will probably settle, if not by itself then when the school board forces the issue.

As it is, the lawsuit is the last resort. first, it's the parent giving the school a stern talking to/strongly worded letter. Then it's a threat to take it to the court of public opinion. If it gets out to the public and the school still refuses to do the right thing and put a stop to the bullcrap/overturn the unfair punishments, then you get a lawyer to draft a statement.

Edit @Hyoi: We're not talking about staying after for 3 minutes.

Were talking about "teacher consistently refuses to end class on time, making students repeatedly late for class, and students are being punished either for being late or for leaving anyway to avoid being late, to the point that students are now being given long detentions of being suspended over things that are the fault of this one teacher rather than the fault of the students."

[Peelee]

it seems to me like this falls firmly into the category of "people are jerks sometimes, and the law can't really stop them".

Exactly. Now, one could argue against this, but it's high cost for low reward, and poor odds of getting that low reward to boot.

You insisted on possible damages. If "the School id blatantly mistreating my child by punishing them for wanting to get to class on time."

See above. It's not worth it unless you like wasting money, and that's even assuming you even find a lawyer willing to take it.

Once papers are served, the school will probably settle, if not by itself then when the school board forces the issue.

Settle for what? What are the damages you wish to recoup? Is it simply "make them stop it!"? If so, see above.