Get Schooled

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

My thoughts on the Smokey case are pretty well known. Won’t rehash (yet).

Myspace case: I use my myspace to vent as well, but there are lines you CAN’T cross in a public forum, and threatening someone is one of those lines.

Spice Girls case: As I said earlier: Can anyone tell me why they would NOT have a problem with 12-14 yr old girls singing a song about “if you wanna be my lover”, particularly when paired with GA teen pregnancy rates??????

By OldSchool

May 22, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this

I’m not certain myspace comments should be punished by the school…investigated maybe but our school system blocks myspace and other similar sites along with various free email accounts and chatrooms/message boards.

Inappropriate actions during school should be addressed in some form but often punishment is not called for and a verbal “handslap” might get the point across better.

That being said, how about this “funny” joke that was pulled on me a couple of weeks ago: A student made several calls to the workroom phone knowing that it falls to me to answer it for our wing. Each time I picked up, he hung up. Funny joke, right? Not to me who jumped out of my skin in dread each time the phone rang. You see, my elderly mother had suffered a stroke and I was at school only to get things in order so I could return to her side during her hospitalization. I finally unplugged the phone and was forced to rely on my cellphone (which is always off during school.)

The same student had called in fake messages for other students just to have their classes interrupted by the intercom. And he saw nothing wrong with these actions, even when his cellphone was confiscated and the history of the calls shown to him. His punishment? A couple of days in ISS because the school year was nearly over.

There is a PS though: he later walked out of a class over his teacher’s objections and made a comment about a gun in a backpack in my class. If he returns to school next year (he also laughed in the asst. principal’s face that he wasn’t returning), he has behavior referrals waiting on him and a resource officer ready to have a little chat.

Yes indeed, intent should play into all this and I think his intent to disrupt school was pretty danged clear.

By Elane

May 22, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this

Yes, but the Spice Girls are the ones who put the song out there in the first place, and their fan base is that age group. So you’ve got (mostly) innocent kids with permanent marks on their record, while these supposedly adult, responsible women with kids of their own just keep raking in the money. No, you can’t arrest or fine the Spice Girls for the product they create, but in effect, the kids are being punished for being consumers. The only solution I can see is parents talking to their kids…”Do you know what ‘lover’ means, and why you shouldn’t be anybody’s ‘lover’ at your age, or for many years to come…?” That sort of dialogue. Not enough parents are doing that. Solution? Who knows. Sad!

By jim d

May 22, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Jeff, I certainly hope you’ve eaten today because I really have no problem with this type of speak.

What part of freedom of speech are you having a problem understanding? How would this type of speech infringe on anyone elses rights or liberties?

By Robert

May 22, 2006 12:55 PM | Link to this

IMHO, we need to get rid of the thought of “idiotic over reaction.”

We have rules in place. Infractions of these rules are obvious. There should be no gray area and therefore no “over reaction.” The rule was either broken or no, period.

And, when a school rule is broken, there are already defined consequences for that behavior. Again, no “over reaction” here either.

The question SHOULD NOT be what is “over reaction” but rather “is this a good rule?”

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

jim,

bluntly put: Students at school have only the “free speech” rights that the school gives them, and the United States Supreme Court has established that standard.

BTW: I also support SOME kind of action against whatever teacher allowed that song into the talent show in the first place.

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Elane,

As evident in the Smokey case, there are also songs urging violence against teachers. Just because a song is out there does NOT mean it is appropriate for school.

By V for Vendetta

May 22, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

I brought up the topic just so I could vent my frustrations about it…

While the “old smokey” song did contain words that could be perceived as threatening towards a teacher, the other two are complete wastes of time. In fact, the MySpace incident verges on the completely insane. The teacher wanted to file a lawsuit against the kid using “defamation of character” as his reason. Guess what, when you’re a teacher, kids are going to make fun of you. They are going to call you names and insult you behind your back. It comes with the job. If you cant handle that, well, perhaps you are in the wrong profession. This teacher succeeded in coming across as a cry-baby and a wimp, but little else.

The Spice Girls song is equally ridiculous. Kids performing at a talent show were suspended for singing the song. Are people really that afraid of the word “lover”? How pathetic are we? The song is bubble gum pop at best. One of the students suspended was a straight A student. Her priorities seem to be in order, do we really think one listen to the Spice Girls is going to convince her that a life of prostitution is the way to go? Oh, and as someone said on the radio this morning, that song is featured heavily throughout the movie “Chicken Little”, which I believe is rated G. Do we expect our schools to be rated better than G? Good luck with that.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

Here we go again Jeff,

No sir, the supreme court has ruled on this very issue several times. When I have a moment I’ll post.

But just for the sake of discussion, since I’m truly an advocate for freedom of speech, let’s say they hadn’t. Do we strike all the books that contain the word lover? Do we stop teaching Shakespere and an assortment of other classics? Mark Anthony & Cleopatra? Do we eliminate teaching about Abigail and John Adams? Shall we eliminate Thoreau? Gimme a break here, If we can require them to read these works mentioning love and lovers we can not then say they must not speak of these things.

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this

jim,

To the best of my knowledge (middle school english teachers correct me if I’m wrong), none of those topics/ authors are discussed IN EIGHTH GRADE.

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

May 22, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

The sad thing about the “On Top of Old Smokey” song is that if it wasn’t for the young ladies past behavior in “that” class, we might never have heard about the incident. Then again, It’s funny how she was only expected to apologize for insinuating you might harm someone.

Yes, complete waste of time.

Jeff, singing a song can’t be used as a correlation between the high teenage pregnancies in GA. I might try lack of birth control, not talking to preteens about sex and the confusion of love with sex, but not song lyrics. I’m not old, but I really like the song “Love and Happiness” and I song it a lot as a preteen. My mother asked me if I knew the meaning to those lyrics. I had know idea, but I liked the way it was song. It didn’t make me do Right and it didn’t make me do Wrong.

By Amazed (Independent Woman)

May 22, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this

The sad thing about the “On Top of Old Smokey” song is that if it wasn’t for the young ladies past behavior in “that” class, we might never have heard about the incident. Then again, It’s funny how she was only expected to apologize for insinuating you might harm someone.

Yes, complete waste of time.

Jeff, singing a song can’t be used as a correlation between the high teenage pregnancies in GA. I might try lack of birth control, not talking to preteens about sex and the confusion of love with sex, but not song lyrics. I’m not old, but I really like the song “Love and Happiness” and I song it a lot as a preteen. My mother asked me if I knew the meaning to those lyrics. I had know idea, but I liked the way it was song. It didn’t make me do Right and it didn’t make me do Wrong.

By EW

May 22, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

Jim D

I have one for you. Kids got their yearbooks last week, in exchanging year books a certain student writes all types of racial derogatory slurs in the yearbook in plain view. He also calls a teacher the stupid n-word; however nothing can be done because it is in a yearbook and it is considered freedom of speech.

The student said it was just a “joke”, well it really wasn’t funny to the number of students who were personally offended…

Where do we draw the line of the freedom of speech excuse?

By smason

May 22, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this

I am the mother of 2 school children. Unfortunately, as a single Mom I am not able to monitor their day as close as I would like. However, when my child came home singing what I found offensive, I called the daycare (she says she heard it on the bus radio). A few days later we were watching “Chicken Little” and the Spice Girl song came on. I was surprised that Disney would put such an obnoxious song in a kid movie, however I just chalked it up to bad taste…I didn’t boycott Disney! I sat my girls down, and told them that I did not think they should sing these songs and a generality of why. However, when they are older who knows? After all Spice Girls was once in my CD collection! Though now you are more likely to find Jars of Clay or Stephen Curtis Chapman.

By decaturparent

May 22, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

So the word “lover” gets you suspended. I guess that kids won’t be singing The Rainbow Connection at recitials anymore. It talks about “the lovers, the dreamers and me.”

To me, if it isn’t an explicit threat against a teacher, I think that the adminsistration needs to think long and hard about how they will react - especially if it takes place off campus. We all know that adolescents, especially early teenagers, are idiots at times.

BTW, that raises a whole new issue with me. I recently had a conversation with a friend whose neighbor’s kid was in MAJOR trouble for something he did off campus (drinking) on the weekend. It had nothing to do with campus at all except that there were other students there. Apparently, word got back to some administrator at school, and he faces some pretty serious consequences.

I guess that I am naive, but I had no idea that the long arm of high school stretched that far into families’ private lives. I don’t condone underage drinking or drugs as all, and trust me, when my kids reach that age, any punishment that a school could dish out pales in comparison to the plans that we would have for our poor kid. It just bothers me to see a school getting involved in an incident that is not on their time and does not involve a threat of violence against someone at school.

I can see why a school would be concerned, but I guess that the libertarian in me doesn’t want the government meddling in something that my hub and I can handle quite well on our own.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this

Wrong Jeff,

Here’s a few titles from an 8th grade reading list

Zel by Donna Jo Napoli

Rebecca by Daphne du Maurier

Romeo & Juliet- William Shakespeare

Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck

By EW

May 22, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this

DecaturParent,

The only way a school should be involved in an off campus incident is if it, or the participants comes back to school and the incident is a disruption to school or classroom environment.

By anon

May 22, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

I wonder if the AJC has considered the possibility that it is being “played like a fiddle” when it gives so much play to stories like the “On Top of Old Smokey” incident.

What I mean by that, is that such incidents allow school systems a perfect dog and pony show opportunity to pretend they have “zero tolerance” on discipline.

School systems LOVE the fact they are accused of overreacting. It provides a nice cover for the thousands of times they don’t react at all. (Look at the discipline data: the only reasons we have thousands of incidents in Georgia is that students KNOW they can “get away with it”. Cases like the ones cited are the exceptions that prove the rule.)

Until teachers start showing some backbone and speaking out, we will continue to see stories such as the “Tweety Bird Chain Incident” get all the media play, while the daily abuse and disrespect of teachers continues to be underreported.

When I asked an AJC reporter why more stories weren’t done on discipline the reporter told me that it’s hard to find teachers that will speak up. I don’t think that let’s the AJC off the hook, because they could actively seek out organizations like MACE, or former and retired teachers who could speak out without fear of retaliation.

Having said that, if current teachers aren’t speaking out, do they “get what they deserve” as far as lack of support on discipline?

By Beccaann

May 22, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

Jim, where did you get the copy of the reading list? What school is it for?

By Beccaann

May 22, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this

Oh, and Jim, is it a required list or just a suggested list?

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

anon,

TRUST me, If I described here even ONE PERCENT of the disrespect I get from the kids, jim and others would call me a “whiny teacher”.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

How bout these lyrics Jeff? Should they all be censored?

“Oh baby, take my heart and don’t complain, My poor heart just can’t stand the strain, I can cure your disease, Come on and say pretty please,Take your medicine down on your knees.”

“I’ll do anything to let him know that I’m his, his for the taking”

“If you’re filled with affection you’re too shy to convey,meditate in my direction. Feel your way.”

” I could flirt with all the guys, smile at them and bat my eyes Press against them when we dance, make them think they stand a chance Then refuse to see it through,that’s a thing I’d never do”

“I’ll be yours in summer, when we’re playin’ in the sand. We’ll spend the day together, makin’ love and gettin’ tanned. And on the beach at sunset, when we’re walking hand in hand”

These lyrics are from the production “Grease” which is often performed by 13 and 14 year old students in the school setting.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this

Some of it was required and some suggested and the school WAS NOT in the SOUTH.

By R

May 22, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this

Well, when the kids who posted on MySpace actually write about inflicting harm upon a teacher, all bets are off. I dont care if it was meant in jest, it’s not right, especially in this post-Columbine era. Kids need to know that 1)- free spech does not mean you can shout FIRE in a crowded theatre and expect to get away with it, and 2)- anything you post on the internet CAN be found. Personally, if every parent knew what was written on their child’s MySpace page, the company would be out of business.

By R

May 22, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this

Well, when the kids who posted on MySpace actually write about inflicting harm upon a teacher, all bets are off. I dont care if it was meant in jest, it’s not right, especially in this post-Columbine era. Kids need to know that 1)- free spech does not mean you can shout FIRE in a crowded theatre and expect to get away with it, and 2)- anything you post on the internet CAN be found. Personally, if every parent knew what was written on their child’s MySpace page, the company would be out of business.

By R

May 22, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

Well, when the kids who posted on MySpace actually write about inflicting harm upon a teacher, all bets are off. I dont care if it was meant in jest, it’s not right, especially in this post-Columbine era. Kids need to know that 1)- free spech does not mean you can shout FIRE in a crowded theatre and expect to get away with it, and 2)- anything you post on the internet CAN be found. Personally, if every parent knew what was written on their child’s MySpace page, the company would be out of business.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this

R,

A terroristic threat is a terroristic threat is a terroristic threat.

But singing do you wanna be my lover don’t fit in that category

By MMM

May 22, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this

Intent is important. Respect is important. Adults agreeing on a standard is the necessary first step. Clearly we don’t have that agreement in many of these cases—so it is all He said, She said, He meant, She meant. We will never hear about the cases where the teacher/parent/administrator put up a united front—because then the child will fall in line in such cases.

But if there is no agreement I would defer to the Administrator/Teacher/Parent in that order (with the understanding that absent very compelling evidence otherwise—the administrator has a duty to back the teacher). This doesn’t mean that the parent is less valuable, the the Administrator is accountable for the whole school, the teacher for the whole class and the parent for the behavior of only one child.

By Elane

May 22, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

You say that just because a song is out there doesn’t mean it’s appropriate for school. Right. BUT — who sets the standards, and how do you buck the tide, short of cloistering all our kids until they’re over 18? It used to be (back in the olden days when I was in school) that you ASSUMED teachers would disapprove of pop culture. We didn’t study it in English or in chorus. It stayed outside the door (by the way, junk food did too!!) and we were taught the “good” stuff. Somebody let the bad stuff in. A big reason for this is, the educational gurus decided kids would learn better if they had familiar stuff in the classroom. I think a majority of people now believe this was a mistake. But can it be undone? Anybody have an answer? Until there is an answer, it seems extremely unfair to let the kids wallow around and suddenly drop a net over them when they say the wrong thing at the wrong time in front of the wrong teacher.

By Elane

May 22, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

Well, I guess I’m off on a rant. It occurs to me that when we talk about students having respect for teachers, there used to be a much clearer line in terms of conduct. Even dress. Male teachers wore suits and ties. Female teachers wore conservative dresses (remember the “schoolmarm” image?). Now teachers are younger & younger; they don’t stick with the job, and they don’t hesitate to “be their real selves” in the classroom. And yes, it’s often the same with parents. I’d wager that the increase in teen pregnancy blurs the line further between an adult and a child, in terms of standards. I guess that’s a big part of the answer to my previous question: who lowered the standards.

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 03:24 PM | Link to this

Elane,

Simple. In my classroom, I set the standard. As to bucking the tide: Firm walls keep the tide back in nearly every major bay in the world…. you can’t completely block it, but you CAN build a safe harbour. As has been pointed out to me repeatedly: School is the only safe place a lot of these kids know.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

I Would NEVER call you a whiny teacher, I’d simply suggest you recieve what you give.

By Jeff

May 22, 2006 03:34 PM | Link to this

Jim,

That attitude and the passing of it to your children is EXACTLY the reason I have so many problems. I AM the adult in that classroom and because of THAT FACT ALONE I am entitled to respect from these children. Whether or not I give it IS NOT a condition of whether they should.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

School is the only safe place a lot of these kids know?

Pretty scary!

http://www.hcnonline.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16563771&BRD=1574&PAG=461&dept_id=532245&rfi=6

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060118/METRO/601180440/1003

http://www.wndu.com/news/032001/news_6916.php

http://www.wect.com/Global/story.asp?S=4922785

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/9167505/detail.html

Need I continue?

By jim d

May 22, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

Ah, the old adage; do as I say do not as I do.

Yep—Yer special.

By Cletus Snow

May 22, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this

Old Smoky ~~~~troublesome probobly. How did the school discover a problem with my space?What takes place outside of school should be the parents business.If my child writes obscene graffity on a marta bus thats between me, Marta and my child,Should have NOTHING to do with school.While we are on the subject of school LETS PUT PRAYER BACK,hire some more qualified teachers and see if we get the child molesters out of the CLASSROOM!!!

By Cletus Snow

May 22, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this

Old Smoky ~~~~troublesome probobly. How did the school discover a problem with my space?What takes place outside of school should be the parents business.If my child writes obscene graffity on a marta bus thats between me, Marta and my child,Should have NOTHING to do with school.While we are on the subject of school LETS PUT PRAYER BACK,hire some more qualified teachers and see if we get the child molesters out of the CLASSROOM!!!

By jim d

May 22, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

Dearest Cletus,

Allow me to respectfully point out that Prayer has never been removed from the schools. The Supreme courts have ruled that Stopping a child from praying at school would be a violation of his contitutional rights.

Granted, he must do so in a non disruptive way, but he can pray none the less.

By Cletus Snow

May 22, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

Very good Jim, let’s give them the oppertunity to do so,

By MMM

May 22, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Intent is important. Respect is important. Adults agreeing on a standard is the necessary first step. Clearly we don’t have that agreement in many of these cases—so it is all He said, She said, He meant, She meant. We will never hear about the cases where the teacher/parent/administrator put up a united front—because then the child will fall in line in such cases.

But if there is no agreement I would defer to the Administrator/Teacher/Parent in that order (with the understanding that absent very compelling evidence otherwise—the administrator has a duty to back the teacher). This doesn’t mean that the parent is less valuable, the the Administrator is accountable for the whole school, the teacher for the whole class and the parent for the behavior of only one child.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Oh but we do and they do. Christian athletes, meet at the flag pole, early release for religious classes and now we have approved biblical history classes.

Personally I feel that’s enough. Anymore may be misconstrued as establishing a state religion.

Let’s keep it free!

By jim d

May 22, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this

BTW Cletus, We give them an opportunity to pray every time they are given a test. And thats alot now days.

By MMM

May 22, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this

Patti, It would be nice to see the real court position on prayer in schools posted and then let this audience discuss it.

I had a very interesting time several years back trying to research, explain and get buy-in from a church congregation as to what would be required to both comply with the law and put a public(charter) school into a church owned (and still used every Sunday) building. The rules aren’t at all what the pundits on either extreme would have us believe. We are co-existing in a legal(from the school’s point of view) and theologically acceptable(from the church’s point of view) way. Isn’t that amazing!

By Cletus Snow

May 22, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

After rereading this blog I can’t help but wonder how jim d could know what school kids wrote in thier yearbooks last week,the reading list for the 8th grade,the words to all of those songs and much more. Yes sir that jim d is one special guy,I’ll bet he knows a lot more than he’s telling us.

By jim d

May 22, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

mmm,

Here’s a link you may find helpful.

http://candst.tripod.com/jnt-sta.htm

And Cletus, you’re right—I am special.

By another teacher

May 22, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this

One of my college professors said something to this effect:

When you consider intent, you remove consistency

Good point. How do you know what students were intending to do? Does a “good kid” get less of a consequence for the same behavior than a “bad kid” because he didn’t mean it?

Food for thought.

By Cletus Snow

May 22, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

Your mother thinks so also

By another teacher

May 22, 2006 05:07 PM | Link to this

One of my college professors said something to this effect:

When you consider intent, you remove consistency

Good point. How do you know what students were intending to do? Does a “good kid” get less of a consequence for the same behavior than a “bad kid” because he didn’t mean it?

Food for thought.

By Lee

May 22, 2006 05:48 PM | Link to this

Another teacher, I think you do have to consider intent. For example, last week’s blog about a girl who sang the “On top of old Smokey” song. From the news story, it was apparent that her intent was to convey a message to that particular teacher. Contrast that to a teacher walking by a group of kids joking around and being silly. Same song. Different circumstances. Different intent.

Consistency can also imply “consistantly bad.”

By SET

May 22, 2006 06:32 PM | Link to this

Just a few minutes ago I was brought into a case where a 15 year old boy and girl had a bad day at school and both got expelled. The only question now is if the prosecutors will file criminal charges. The school is hoping the lid will stay on.

There is no way either one of them will be allowed back at that school. Both sets of parents are crying about the situation. I think the kids are stunned at the swiftness of their expulsion and the reaction of the adults. They were so clueless they readily made statements all about what happened (to the police) without understanding the inevitable consequences of admitting what they did. Can we say serious felonies?

Clueless! Did they think they could do this and admit it and stay at the school? They’ll be lucky to stay out of jail.

I’m not going into what they did… You can all insert your favorite crash landing.

Back to a recurring theme of mine. We have so much “self-esteem” in these kids heads that they are a danger to themselves and others. If students were more unhappy (or nervous) and more scared (or challenged) as they went about their school career I think they’d be a lot more careful about what they did from day to day.

Both the parents and the school administrations seem to want Johnny and Susie to be “happy” whatever that means, rather to earn their “happiness” upon passing their classes and tests and actually graduating.

Maybe High School happiness should be deferred till graduation day. Maybe they’d be healthier if they fell into bed exhausted at the end of the day.

The tendency of some kids to mouth off on MySpace, play around with sex, drive like maniacs, enter into premature love affairs with people they should know use violence as currency, etc. might abate if they weren’t led to think the world revolves around them.

So I am real reluctant to say a teacher or a school is being too tough. All the best schools are touch around here.

By MMM

May 22, 2006 06:36 PM | Link to this

Jim D. Thanks—I had already read many similar items. My situation was reversed. We had a physical building outfitted for sacred worship and the question was one of what symbols must be removed or covered in order for the Public school to meet it’s duty to be neutral. And would that from church member’s point of view constitute denial of their own faith if they allowed these items to be covered and/or removed during the school day.

In addition to the question of legality, there was also the question of hospitality—since about 35% of the charter school’s children are muslim refugees. Talking a conservative muslim family from Afganistan or Somalia into trusting that they can safely send their child to school in a church building takes some diplomacy.

By SET

May 22, 2006 06:39 PM | Link to this

All the best schools are tough around here.

Sorry about the typo!

By T

May 22, 2006 06:44 PM | Link to this

I’m so sick of hearing excuses like we need to invade your privacy because it’s post 9/11 or we need to censor students because of post-Columbine. Intent is subjective and hard to prove.

By robert

May 22, 2006 06:48 PM | Link to this

My son was suspended for making a comment about the columbine killings on my space. He said he could relate to them. They suggested we take him to a shrink. We did , he was fine . Just being his push the envelope self. Intent was never an issue . He did not repeat the action . Last week he graduated Georgia Tech with honors. The schools need to be able to approach these issues without reprimand in order to prevent future tragedys. My sons suspension did nothing to harm him . And we are all proud of his accomplishments.

By Taxpayer

May 23, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Sorry — I’m joining this thread late. What is this about students posting threats against a teacher on MySpace? If anyone has a link or more information, I would appreciate having it. Thanks.

By Hannah

May 23, 2006 08:47 AM | Link to this

robert - I’m glad your son turned out alright, but, the fact that he ended up at Tech means very little! Didn’t they recently arrest a kid throwing bombs last semester? And didn’t that wannabe terrorist go to Tech? When they go to college, they get arrested for “being their push the envelope self”!!!

By luvs2teach

May 23, 2006 09:39 AM | Link to this

A thought - something that gets missed in these stories (not so much the MySpace one, but the others that occurred in class), is the fact that these things are obviously disruptions.

Why isn’t anyone asking why these students were singing when they should’ve been working? I think we’re losing the forest and seeing only the trees.

I had a similar situation where I had to write a referral for for a child threatening to hit me. She threatened to hit me because I wouldn’t let her go to the bathroom (before you jump all over me, there was another student out, and I’m only allowed to send one at a time, and they had had a break the prior period).

Mom’s response? All this because she had to go to the bathroom? No, all this because she caused a class disruption.

I read these of these inane situations and I can’t help but wonder, what part of the story are we not getting?

BTW - I thought I saw that the “Spice Girl” girls were singing at a talent show, but I couldn’t verifiy it - in which case, that’s the responsiblity of the sponsoring teacher.

jim d - freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequence - particularly in case of libel or slander, which IMHO, calling a teacher gay on a public forum falls under that category.

By jim d

May 23, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

Calling a teacher gay, dear, is niether slanderous nor threatening and is protected speech just as much as a teachers speech is protected if they were to post that a child was a little a**hole. So I fail to see your point.

By dan

May 23, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

Jim, I wish I could see things your way because the world would be a lot simpler. Is it hard to have all the right answers or do you find that easy. I guess what I am trying to say is that for months I fail to see your points.

By Jeff

May 23, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

jim,

Considering the fact that a teacher can be- and occassionally is - fired simply for being homosexual, stating in a public forum that a teacher is gay is in fact slander.

By jim d

May 23, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this

L2T,

Don’t you just love the english language?

Gay can mean homosexual or a variety of other things such as happily excited : MERRY : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits : BRIGHT, LIVELY or brilliant in color and not even one of these definitions is inflamatory.

By jim d

May 23, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

Jeff, I’d just guess that a teacher fired for living an alternative lifestyle would have one hell of a case in court and would never need to work a day in their life again.

By dan

May 23, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

If a child writes something like that in a public forum or says something like that in a public forum then that student should get in trouble. Same way as if a teacher says something about a specific student in a public forum or out loud in a public the teacher should be in trouble. It is called what is right not what is protected. I think that it is common sense but I must be mistaken because not everybody sees it like that I guess.

By SET

May 23, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

Libel and slander applies to telling lies. What if the story is actually true? The students still are not free to say anything (true) they want.

California and perhaps other states has a cause of action for “Making public private facts” which covers invasion of privacy. You are not free (outside of privilege) to gossip about someone else even if your information is true. So truth is not always a defense if you are shooting your mouth off about someone else’s (kept secret) life.

The schools as well as the parents fail to educate students about current law controlling their behavior. The parents probably don’t know - the schools don’t seem to want to get involved. It would take a bit of reading for the kids to begin to get into the subject. Our State Bar publishes a Teen guide to the law every year.

Adolescents say and do things without realizing exactly how much trouble they can get into. They find out in bits and pieces as they get older and hear about someone else getting punished for something.

The most common danger other than running up against sex and drug & contract laws is accomplice liability - Kids seem to believe that they are only responsible for their own acts and are free to accompany others as crimes are committed - or to assist others in hiding evidence, transporting contraband and creating false alibis.

I’m probably preaching to the choir here. The common thread is the total lack of responsibility for anything. Things happen, they never make it happen or let it happen.

In my experience we were not educated on the law specifically - but our school and our parents just put it this way “If you do anything to embarrass us or upset us we will make you wish you had never been born”. That seemed to give us just enough guidance to keep us cautious. We knew they both meant it.

By dan

May 23, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this

If a child writes something like that in a public forum or says something like that in a public forum then that student should get in trouble. Same way as if a teacher says something about a specific student in a public forum or out loud in a public the teacher should be in trouble. It is called what is right not what is protected. I think that it is common sense but I must be mistaken because not everybody sees it like that I guess.

By EW

May 23, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Thank you SET, children today have lost the FEAR component. Fear of consequences, Fear of their parents, teachers, and administrators. I feared my mother, I knew what and understood and weighed very carefully what I was about to do before I did it.

Parents are so concerned about having them be happy and having them “like” them - it is crazy.

Anything whether it is on campus or off that causes a disruption in the class or school environment is punishable by the school.

Robert, I’m glad your son graduated, however you as a father should have been the first to put your foot up his behind after he posted those foolish comments, the real question is WHY could he relate to these students who killed innocent children. That is the real issue here. Yes, he should have been suspended. Yes, he should have seen a shrink, and Yes if you continue to think that just because he graduated from Tech that this signifies the fact that why these things shouldn’t have happened to him - you are just the kind of parents that I speak of. Graduating from tech is an accomplishment; however it is not a get out of jail free pass, and let him make a threat to someone else of that magnitude and he’s going to jail, with his Tech diploma.

When these events happened, parents on both sides of the coin said, “I can’t believe this happened to us”; WELL we just ignore some of the warning signs.

By dan

May 23, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

Jim, Please print in all bolds the next time that you actually have something intelligent to say so I can skip over all your other comments. You remind me of a few defense lawyers that I see that present defenses that makes the rest of the world wonder “how can they sleep at night”

By jim d

May 23, 2006 10:41 AM | Link to this

Horsefeathers,

I could publicly state that every teacher I’ve ever met was gay and there’s not a thing anyone could do about it. You folks obviously think that being gay refers to living an alternative life style and that lifestyle is something to be ashamed of. That people that elect to live this lifestyle are somehow lesser humans.

Not only are you narrow minded but you’re damn wrong.

By SET

May 23, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

Jim,

A teacher (or any employee without a contract) can be fired for living an alternative lifestyle.

There are lots of lifestyles that are not compatable with being a public or private school teacher. - Or compatable with many other occupations.

I’ve seen people lose their careers when their personal life got out of control and out of the house. I’ve even (once) had someone arrested and testified against them at their personnel hearing - where they were fired. It happens.

It happens fast when they have become a danger to themselves and others.

By jim d

May 23, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Funny thing SET, I know school administrators that are living openly alternative lifestyles and have even been introduced to their “partners”. I don’t have a problem with this and obviously the thousands of parents of children that have been intrusted to these people don’t either.

I don’t see this as an issue, the issue to me is, is the person qualified for the job. Perhaps I’m the one thats narrow minded.

By Taxpayer

May 23, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Patti, since no one else will respond, will you please tell me (and anyone else who may have missed it) where to find the story or information concerning the MySpace postings about teachers that keeps getting mentioned? We’ve been having quite a few discussions in my home and among the parents at my kid’s school about MySpace, so this information would be most helpful. Thanks!

By SET

May 23, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

Jim,

Assumning you were referring to my earlier post about the CA privacy actions - there is a difference about referring to something that is already in the public view - and running your mouth about someone else’s private life that is not on public view.

CA has many privileged areas such as spousal, parent-child, complaints to government, etc.

But if you decide to start chatting up what you think you know or what you have managed to discover on your own about the (previously unknown) personal life of someone (such as a co-worker) in this state you can expect to pay damages for harm you inflict on that person.

Not every state has this legislation. If was enacted here a long time ago because libel and slander laws are subject to truth-as-a-defense - and the legislature decided that people have a right to be left alone if they conduct themselves so as to not put their affairs in the street.

Invasion of privacy is often pled along with libel and slander when suits are filed against gossips.

The laws of your state may be quite different.

By SET

May 23, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this

By alternative lifestyle I wasn’t referring to just being gay! This is California!!!

When we do alternative lifestyles I mean really alternative!!!

Rip-roaring alcoholism - (bad in a school bus driver), Porn Websites (Webcams), Meth manufacturing and use, S&M Dungeons, Escort services, I don’t know what next…

Even though we try you can’t have it all. You might have to give up a few hobbies to be a schoolteacher!

By jim d

May 23, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this

Taxpayer,

http://www.wsbtv.com/education/9223824/detail.html

Decide for yourself, or wait for the courts to decide

By Taxpayer

May 23, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

Thanks, Jim!

By jim d

May 23, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

SET,

Perhaps I’m a bit on the liberal side of this in that I don’t give a #@%* what teachers do on their time as long as it doesn’t drag over into the class room.

By Beccaann

May 23, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Thanks for the link, Jim, and thanks for the comments about not caring what teachers do on their off time. I have had several students who wanted to fuss when I told them that what they were wearing to school was inappropriate. My next sentence would always be that I didn’t care what they wore outside of school because it was none of my business.

By Jeff

May 23, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

jim:

Remember, I don’t have to contend with just YOUR beliefs. You can be more liberal than Ted Kennedy (if that’s possible), but I still have to contend equally with people that are more conservative than Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell.

Teachers have MANY things that are WAY too subjective and can cost us our careers. “Professionalism” and “moral turpitude”, just to name a few.

By ugh

May 23, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this

Some cases on this - http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/index.html

I remembered this because a kid in a nearby highschool in WA state brought a bunch of trouble on himself. He was an honor student with scholarships, senior, gradutating, etc. The principal contacted the colleges and scholarship folks, took back their references and whatnot to punish the student. In the end, the student won in court. District said the students had free speech, apologized for their reaction, and paid the scholarship they caused him to lose.

By ugh

May 23, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this

I gave the wrong link before, this one is better: ACLU Student Freedom of Expression page

By ugh

May 23, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

I personally don’t care what teachers do in their own time. If they leak a little bit of their alternative lifestyle into their interactions, I really don’t care either. In fact, I find that’s a good thing especially with older kids. They should see some of the little eccentricities that make people unique.

By ugh

May 23, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

You know, I say I think they should drip a little of their personal lives in, but at my kid’s middle school, in 6th grade, there’s a little issue I think. A male teacher there, who’s new, is too friendly with the students. It’s reached a point where the girls (6th graders) literally squeal like he’s the rockstar when he walks into the gym. I don’t really blame anything he’s doing specifically, but it’s obvious he wants to be the “fun friendly” teacher. I’m just real worried that one of these girls daddies is going to freak out someday, or one of these girls will start a false gossip like Mr. Teacher hugged me or kissed me! All of this is related to his personal hobbies, I think. He’s very interested in his music and exposes the class to lots and lots of music. I think that’s why the kids see him as fun and more friend than teacher. His classroom sounds like their bedrooms, full of music and games.

By SET

May 23, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

The reference to the kid who had his references cancelled because of something he did to outrage his references is a good example.

School districts settle claims all the time because they feel like it. It doesn’t mean the principal wasn’t within his rights to withdraw references he’d previously given when a student proved himself to be dishonest or otherwise unworthy of the principal’s approval.

Anybody who thinks their freedom of expression means they can’t be shunned by others is engaged in wishful thinking.

I just had lunch with a government type who was mentioning that they just backgrounded 50 people in their 20’s for new hires. Only 3 were cleared to hire. (This is in Northern CA)

I’m hearing this a lot. Only a fraction of local job applicants are getting through background - and the percentage varies by age and race. Tell me all you want about “freedom of expression”! If you express yourself with a “13” or a “14” tattoo you are unhirable for any decent job. If you have collection agency items in credit bureau from grocery stores (your forged and stolen checks, perhaps!) you aren’t hirable. If you have a criminal case (booze, drugs, domestic violence are the most common) you are unhirable. The list goes on and on. It’s easier to get into school.

Of course with some effort you can find the more undesirable jobs where the employer isn’t backgrounding.

It is so easy to spot the personalities who take what they want, when they want, from who they want, that any prudent employer can keep such people from getting into their organization.

We haven’t even reached the “hair” drug testing and other measures that are becoming standard for store clerk jobs here now. And then there is credit scoring and other behaviorial score systems.

This thread is about kids “trying to be funny”. Yes it’s a free country - and nobody but their relatives owe them a life preserver if they fall into a lake.

Public Schools are artificial constructs where they usually can’t be fired and evicted. When they turn 18 the party’s over.

The sad thing is that these kids are better taught the ways of the world by Mommy and Daddy.

If you don’t maintain a reputation of fidelity and reliability you can’t even make it on Ebay.

By SET

May 23, 2006 02:33 PM | Link to this

I meant to say it’s sad these kids aren’t better taught by Mommy & Daddy.

By Karen Armsby

May 23, 2006 07:51 PM | Link to this

Kids will be kids, and often they do not know the correct time place or manner to express themselves. That’s where the adults come in, because we are supposed to teach them when it is correct to let it all hang out, tell it like it is, and when not. These days PC and zero tolerance policies are in the room looming over all. Kids are often judged guilty for infractions that should be dealt with more quietly, more intelligently and with some understanding. Adults need to learn to put a child’s actions into context, i.e. realize that it is a child that they are dealing with, a work in progress, and one subject to faltering steps. Teachers and parents need to learn to teach our youngsters the limits on time, place and manner of their expressions. Teach first, and punish only after you know that you did your job teaching first, and the child refused to learn the lesson.

By Laf

May 24, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this

teachers are more interested in punishing students than teaching , teaching , teaching them appropriate behavior.