Last year, Michael Howard placed school indiscipline among the top five priorities of any future Conservative government. Recently, New Labour announced a ?zero-tolerance? policy in the classroom, in a tit-for-tat electioneering rhetoric. None of the parties shied away from strong language to outline their determination. The unruly teenagers have been warned.

The level of indiscipline in Mauritius is small change compared to the situation in Ireland and England. But high profile cases of misconduct get the alarm bells ringing. In the last few years, students celebrating their school?s achievements in the HSC exams have earned the scorn of both their peers and the general public. Other incidents involving physical violence tend to reinforce the stereotypical image of teenagers: boisterous, disruptive, disrespectful and plain uncontrollable.

In England, anxiety among both parents and teachers has brought school indiscipline on the political agenda. The ?zero tolerance? ideology of the two electoral rivals has proposed all kinds of measures to tackle the problem. The Conservatives have argued for ?turnaround? schools where nearly 24,000 incorrigible pupils would be ?reformed?. Modelled closely on Thatcherite thinking, these institutions would be run by private companies. Even the teachers? unions expressed their concern about this extreme measure. They saw it as thecreation of ?boot camps?.

But the Tory proposal went even further. Headmasters would be given increased powers to expel disruptive pupils. At the moment, Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) cater for 4,000 expelled students. But the 24,000 capacity of ?turnaround? schools means that expulsion would be more common. Abolition of the rights of appeal will come to reinforce the measure and shift large quantities of pupils out of classes into a strict disciplinary environment.

However, New Labour is refusing to concede any electoral battleground to the Tories this time around. Whether on immigration or school indiscipline, Blair?s government has come out with its own sets of unimaginative and right-wing policies. ?Zero tolerance? will be applied to children?s behaviour, a jargon more reminiscent of the crime-tackling approach made famous by New York?s ex-Mayor Rudolph Giuliani. Low-level disruptions, like the use of mobile phones would fall foul of the new proposals. In a radical development the Education Secretary would target the parents of unruly pupils. Parenting orders would be issued to those whose children fail to behave. The courts would then be given the right to apply fines to adults and impose parenting lessons.

<B>Playground violence</B>

It is true that one of the major challenges in education today has unfortunately taken the form of school indiscipline. As we move towards a knowledge society, life chances are measured according to the level of education an individual receives. This spurs a militant drive in parents to ensure the best schooling for their children. The fuss witnessed in Mauritius over the abolition of ?star? colleges is a proof of the ?dog eats dog? mentality prevalent in education. Indiscipline, rightly so, becomes a liability for the parents? increasing ambition. Children are thrust into an unforgiving system where high-achievers are invariably the only achievers. In such a situation, parents will not tolerate that another child, for whatever reason, jeopardises the opportunities of their own.

As indiscipline becomes a concern for voters, any political party sees tough short-term policies, with the appropriate sound-bite, as a well of votes. Amidst this political squabble, the losers are the teachers. The more their authority declines, the more demoralised they become. It is a vicious circle, as tough kids need a strong figure in full control of emotions and situations. In both Ireland and Britain, teachers have been physically threatened and assaulted. Weapons, knives and even guns, have progressively made their appearance on the playgrounds. Take the case of the 15-year old boy, who was stabbed in a Dublin classroom, and was recently awarded damages in a court case. How can teachers work in such an intimidating environment?

Last year, when the Civic Action Group (CAG) projects were submitted to the National Productivity and Competitiveness Council (NPCC), deviant behaviour was a recurrent theme throughout the report. Writing on walls, stealing, disrespect towards teachers, vandalism and absenteeism were all part and parcel of Mauritian schools. Discipline, or the lack of, was the common denominator in all the schools surveyed. For a long time, the disparity of the heavy-handed (literally) approach in primary schools and the relative freedom of colleges bred a discipline gap. As this is slowly disappearing, there is a need for new and progressive management of teenagers. The government?s education reforms are also designed to redress some of the classroom imbalances, if given the necessary psychological and social support.

<B>Blame game</B>

?Zero tolerance? in schools serves only to temporarily mask the problems, without addressing them. According to the British Department for Education, this approach will create a self-disciplined student. ?Pupils who lack respect for themselves, respect for their classmates, and respect for their teachers need to be made to take responsibility for their own actions.? The problem is that indiscipline, as the department concedes, only affects a minority in the classroom. But aren?t these the same people who need help the most? Why make them bear the complete blame?

A hardcore few will always be very difficult to change. But clearly indiscipline is a major problem for teachers. A survey among members of the Scottish Secondary Teachers? Association, in 2003, put rebel pupils on a par with workload as the issues poisoning working conditions. Furthermore, nearly 80% of respondents perceived indiscipline as a problem in their schools and over 90% thought the trend had not changed or worsened.

The onus remains firmly on both the government of the day and parents to rein the kids in. However, a coercive and humiliating approach is not the solution. Expulsions, detentions, rustications and the array of conventional sanctions have failed on countless occasions. They merely make the hierarchy of the school more acute and suffocating for the pupils.

<B>Diren valayden

Outlook Correspondent in Dublin</B>