Get Schooled

By Leia

August 16, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this

It has been my experience that the “good” kids are the ones who fit the profile for bringing weapons to school, etc. This requires planning and “bad” kids don’t plan - they mostly just react.

I definitely fault the schools for not acting on the tip. If this child were considered “bad”, you can best believe that his house would’ve been swarmed and searched before they hung up the phone!

By catlady

August 16, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this

I don’t have a clue about this. We have so many angry children out there who seem to take offense at everything. I don’t think the huge schools we build help with a feeling of being known and belonging. Seems like “saving money” really costs us in terms of student achievement, student engagement, and student feelings of the managability of the environment. Lack of those things and increased pressure from all sides,added to our many disfunctional families, is a recipe for disaster. I see, at the elementary level, ticking time bombs every day.

By Recently Retired

August 16, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

I’m not sure the school would have been justified in doing anything over the summer unless they had proof that he had the guns in his car on school property. It’s not illegal for a kid his age to have guns. So, I think they would have to wait until he came on campus. It sure is a different world from when I was in school. Back in the dark ages you could see any number of boys’ pickups parked in the school parking lot with their deer rifles proudly displayed in their gun racks. No one thought anything about it.

By SET

August 16, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this

This is a great post. The first problem is the incorrect assumption that most people have that they have a right to be “saved” by other people or by their government. You don’t. There is usually no cause of action against government agencies such as the police or sheriff for not rescuing you, or answering the 911 call, or not showing up if you are being attacked. This surprises most people when the find out the hard way.

So if someone had information that a person might be a threat to others there is no requirement to pass along the info unless you can point to a duty to do so by contract or relationship. Yes the schools have a duty (as any property or business owner) to keep the premises safe. Thus they decided to do nothing until “he came back to campus”. Why are we surprised?

This doesn’t mean that they couldn’t have voluntarily acted on info that indicated someone might get hurt away from school. 60 years ago the school would have. The “mission statement” of public schools is different now.

Schools will commonly come into information that there is danger or trouble brewing. For example - promiscuous girl is flirting with dangerous boy. Are they going to call the parents and tell them what Susie is up to? Not anymore.

You are all on your own.

And - news flash - Teens going “Goth” - wearing black all the time, etc.. is not a sign of good mental health. I’ve previously mentioned something about subtle “social screens”…

There is a book by Gavin DeBecker titled “The Gift Of Fear”. It should be required reading for High School students.

By T-Man

August 16, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

Recently retired - is correct in her statement. There was nothing they could have done until the kid was on school grounds. He had the right to have the guns in his car when it sits at his parents home. If the police went to the house during the summer it would have been their word against his. That’s a no win situation for the police. I think they handled it well.

By goth

August 16, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

SET I agree with everything you said except one thing..I dressed all in black most of my growing up, especially highschool. I even had my hair different colors. It didn’t have the term “Goth” back then, actually I was called Rainbow Brite because no one knew what color my hair would be next. I just loved the way black looked. And I loved looking different. I didn’t kill animals, didn’t worship satan, I had perfect grades, went to college, graduated Suma Cum Laude and went on to a great career.

To lump all the “Goth” kids into one bucket and say they are not stable is an over generalization. Some may misguided or simply “bad” but others are perfectly ok.

By Reader & Writer

August 16, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this

I would urge everyone to scroll up to catlady’s entry earlier today. I believe it ia the second entry of the day. As a former secondary public schoolteacher, I assure you she has hit the nail on the head. There is a huge lack of a sense of community in our public high schools. Many of us who grew up in metropolitan areas are products of mega schools ourselves. I graduated from high school in 1965 in a class of nearly 700 seniors. I didn’t know all of the seniors, let alone the underclassmen. However, I did have an advantage that today’s young people do not have: I did grown up with a strong sense of community. I attended a neighborhood public high school and a church with an active youth group in the neighborhood. I knew my neighbors, and they knew me. I could expect to be corrected if need be by any adult around me, and I would obey. I was expected to watch out for the younger children as I was out and about in the neighborhood because that’s what we did for one another. High school students today do not for the most part do not experience this kind of life. They have no experiences to override the large, impersonal, one-size-fits-all, educational institution they experience on a daily basis. There is plenty of educational research that shows students learn best when schools have 350, maybe 400, or less students in the student body. Statisitics also indicate that schools in which parents are actively engaged have higher achieving students. Statisitcs also show there is less staff turnover and burnout in smaller schools. From my own observation and experience, new teachers are less likely to make it through the first five years in the profession without intentional, close, consistent mentoring by master teachers. Large, impersonal secondary schools are overwhelming and alienating for both students and staff, and society is losing with both groups. I truly believe commiting to smaller schools will allow for greater accountability for all stakeholders and defuse those ticking time bombs that catlady mentions.

By AR

August 16, 2006 05:05 PM | Link to this

In reference to Reader & Writer… It is worth looking at what Clarke Central in Athens is doing to combat the problem of the huge school. It only has 1500 students, there are a lot bigger schools around, however, they have developed some programs that make the school smaller for the students. Every teacher has an advisement group. Students are assigned to that teacher in the 9th grade and they stay with that teacher throughout high school. The advantages of it are that the teacher can keep up with his or her ten or so students, making sure they’re taking what they need to be and finding out where they are when they’re missing. It is a program that’s been around for about five years now and I think they are finding that it’s helping reduce the dropout rate. Also, about four years ago they developed 9th Grade Academies where the 9th graders are divided into three groups of around 125 students. These students have the same team of teachers for the core subjects - English, Math, Science, History. So they have developed a community of kids that isn’t too big to be impersonal. This year they have divided whole school into sections based on what students’ interests and future plans are – recognizing that not everyone is planning on going to college. They have college prep, but they also have business and industry and technical and vocational. This starts with the 10th grade and last year the students had to pick which group they wanted to be in. I’m sure that it’s not set in stone, they know that kids can change their minds. But all of this is a good way to make the school a smaller place for the individual and it might keep them in school.

I also think that schools who require every student to get involved in some sort of group of school achieve much the same thing, but what Clarke Central is doing is providing a lot of opportunity for kids to succeed.

By Reader & Writer

August 16, 2006 05:05 PM | Link to this

I would urge everyone to scroll up to catlady’s entry earlier today. I believe it ia the second entry of the day. As a former secondary public schoolteacher, I assure you she has hit the nail on the head. There is a huge lack of a sense of community in our public high schools. Many of us who grew up in metropolitan areas are products of mega schools ourselves. I graduated from high school in 1965 in a class of nearly 700 seniors. I didn’t know all of the seniors, let alone the underclassmen. However, I did have an advantage that today’s young people do not have: I did grown up with a strong sense of community. I attended a neighborhood public high school and a church with an active youth group in the neighborhood. I knew my neighbors, and they knew me. I could expect to be corrected if need be by any adult around me, and I would obey. I was expected to watch out for the younger children as I was out and about in the neighborhood because that’s what we did for one another. High school students today do not for the most part do not experience this kind of life. They have no experiences to override the large, impersonal, one-size-fits-all, educational institution they experience on a daily basis. There is plenty of educational research that shows students learn best when schools have 350, maybe 400, or less students in the student body. Statisitics also indicate that schools in which parents are actively engaged have higher achieving students. Statisitcs also show there is less staff turnover and burnout in smaller schools. From my own observation and experience, new teachers are less likely to make it through the first five years in the profession without intentional, close, consistent mentoring by master teachers. Large, impersonal secondary schools are overwhelming and alienating for both students and staff, and society is losing with both groups. I truly believe commiting to smaller schools will allow for greater accountability for all stakeholders and defuse those ticking time bombs that catlady mentions.

By SET

August 16, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this

Goth: You have a point actually. If there is a group of Goths and someone is joining the crowd the situation may be different from one who is isolating himself/herself. In any event it is usually not a good sign that someone is going to extremes.

As far as I’m concerned I would not hire or deal with the classic “Goth” teenager unless I had the occasion to learn enough that contra-indicated trouble. And I normally would never take the time to learn more. My time is valuable.

Call it profiling - which it is. When someone shows you what they are, believe them.

I once had a new receptionist dismissed at a non-profit I was in authority at when I noticed a gang tattoo on her hand. The Manager was cautioned that further hires like that would risk his/her own position. That particular non-profit handled money and sensitive information. We had a duty to safeguard our clients and staff which includes not allowing gang infiltration of the organization.

Other people may disagree. They can go deal with who they want.

I throw this in because our thread involves when you pre-emptively try to investigate, warn or protect others from possible harm. Schools now take a narrow view that they will only act when absolutely required to avoid their own criminal or civil liability. That is their decision to make.

That means that other people may be hurt, killed or whatever, which might have been avoided. On the other side it means having maximum privacy and minimum involvement with people.

For a long time Drs kept quiet about their patients menacing other people. In the 1970’s a UC Berkeley student killed another student after discussing his murderous desires with UC Doctors at the student health center. The girl’s parents sued for wrongful death and the Tarasoff decision resulted - imposing a previously unknown duty in CA for Drs to warn 3rd parties that might be harmed by patients. The doctrine was later extended to Attorneys.

What are the secondary schools supposed to do? They may have information that a student is HIV positive and she him/her getting involved with other students. They may know that certain students or their families have issues of sex crimes, psych disorders, or violence. Do they warn other students and parents about going over there? It goes on and on. What I think the schools are doing is staying out of everything that is not specifically mandated by state law. Lowest common denominator. Maybe that’s what happened here.

In some states this means reporting crimes after they occur and not doing anything before.

By fk

August 16, 2006 05:45 PM | Link to this

I graduated in 1981 from a neighborhood public high school, in a class of 600+. Of course, with a class that size, you don’t know everyone. However, I knew lots of kids, not all from the same group or clique or grade. My son attends a large public high school, and he is thriving.

As a parent, you encourage your child to become involved in school activities, to make friends, to connect with others. That’s part of the high school experience. If not at school, then encourage participation in another social environment. Unfortunately, in this day and age, many parents don’t even know their neighbors. Isolation is a dangerous thing. The article mentioned that the boy in question was in band. Band is a class. Was the kid in marching band, the extra curricular activity?

I don’t think it’s the mega schools that are the issue, especially not in high school. High school is supposed to be preparation for life. It’s a big world out there. How many people attend large universities after high school and go on to work for corporate giants? Are those places bad now, too?

How can a school or the police warn anyone about dangerous juveniles? Recently, I was involved in a legal proceeding involving a minor. The kid had more rights than the victims. We had to sign a confidentiality agreement.

By Jeff

August 16, 2006 06:08 PM | Link to this

OK, this is a sensitive topic for me, but ehre goes:

a) As was said: It takes a LOT less legally to search someone at school rather than at home, and the items he had would have been legal at his domicile anyway.

b) NO ONE should be shocked by ANY security violation at school. Columbine should have served as a MAJOR wake up call, and for a while, it did… a LITTLE BIT. “School Security” is about the BIGGEST oxymoron out there!!!! You want REAL school security? Americans couldn’t stomach it. Look how we handle just about ANY inconvenience when it comes to delays caused by security apparatuses (ELA teachers: What is the plural of “apparatus”??)

c) REAL school security: Have a precinct of the local police department at every school, staffed by 3 people continously (more for larger schools). Put a 12 foot high, concertina wire tipped fence 2,000 yards out from ANY building on campus, on the edge of the school premises. Search EACH AND EVERY vehicle or person coming through the gate THOROUGHLY- with only ONE gate in the fence. (BTW: The reason I list the fence being 2,000 yards out? It takes a VERY good shot or a pretty decent sized bomb - particularly of the homemade variety - to reach that far….

d) Even the procedures listed in c) can be defeated - truly, rather easily - but it takes a LOT more planning and cunning than current methodologies. At least with c) you can keep the VAST majority (call it 99.9%) somewhat sane. Even then, you may have fist fights, but you can be reasonably sure that no weapons will be involved.

e) Like I said… Americans won’t tolerate that kind of security….

By Jeff

August 16, 2006 06:15 PM | Link to this

BTW: The security features I mentioned as SHOULD happen? Try to get on any military base when the Threat level is orange or red… my strategies decently mirror (plus in some ways, minus in others) the strategies you would have to defeat to get on base if unauthorized. The way I look at it: If it takes that kind of security for military bases - re: an institution LOADED with people with guns that are trained to use them in life or death situations - is it REALLY too much to ask for our schools - re: institutions where adults have to tell the kids what to do in case of FIRE?

By Taxpayer

August 17, 2006 08:07 AM | Link to this

Geez, Jeff, I think it may be time to switch to decaf, bro.

By sobegape

August 17, 2006 08:56 AM | Link to this

First, on subject: I believe that the law enforcement officials acted appropriately. As others have said, it was not a crime for the child to have those items at his home, but it was a crime for him to bring them on school property. My main question in all of this is…Where were his parents and what were they doing when he was amassing this arsenal?

Second, and slightly off subject: I have been considering a move to the area of Fayette County that is zoned to Whitewater High School. I’ve all but relinquished that idea. I cannot put my child in that kind of danger.

By teach overseas

August 17, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this

Why doesn’t anybody ever ask the teachers? We know a lot about what is going on with these kids. We hear things, we see things, we have a good gut instinct. Our hands are largely tied because we don’t have “proof” or we know the parents don’t care or that they will go screaming to the principal about “interference” with their parental rights. I am sure there are teachers at that school who knew something was a little off with this kid. I am equally sure teachers in Colunbine knew those boys were in real trouble. We can’t say anything that could possibly lead to a lawsuit.

That is all teachers hear about these days- lawsuit, lawsuit, lawsuit. It all about covering your a** and how not to get involved because you might be found liable in some way. So we know things, keep our mouths shut and are forbidden to talk to anyone about what we know.

By jim d

August 17, 2006 11:24 AM | Link to this

Teach OS,

The reason you must remain silent is because if you knew somwthing and didn’t report it. You’d still be liable. In this case ignorance is bliss.

By SET

August 17, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this

This thread keeps taking me back to the “social screens” point I made earlier. My younger cousins (who are in nuclear famlies) have school aged children. In the past they have mentioned that they prevent their pre-teen kids from associating with other kids and families based on a lot of things that to me sounded a little picky (at least at first). But I can’t argue with their logic.

For example they won’t let their kids go over to a home with a mother shacked up with a boyfriend. Nowadays that can prevent a lot of contacts. The cousins couldn’t care less. Are they wrong?

These people are under no illusions that the school will warn them about anything in the private lives of the other families. They periodically review Megan’s List for their zip code to see what sex offenders have arrived in the area. Other families who’s kids walk to school review the entire path between home and school periodically.

Of course the real fun starts when the kids are old enough to try to associate with who they want. My cousins are working on that by teaching them discrimination. Just like my generation was taught.

In CA Megan’s list has been kept watered down by the government to shield criminals from public view. Last year legislation passed increasing the information put online. Clearly from year to year more info is going to get added - for example adding the data about the kidnappings and armed robberies also committed by sex offenders, adding the dates of conviction and prison terms, adding work and auto info and other data about sex offenders. I’d support an initiative to put all criminal histories on the web.

Schools are having trouble even teaching reading. Who can expect them to use discretion in safety matters?

By hearthurt

August 17, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this

A lady custodian at one of our schools was stabbed and raped today by a man as she went out to hang up the flag. Dear God! What are we coming to?

By Lee

August 18, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this

A few observations…

• Teenagers don’t always make good decisions. This young man made a (poor)decison that will affect him for the rest of his life. Everything has a consequence. Some consequences are good, others are bad.

• I think the principal could have done more. What would it have hurt to meet with this young man and his parents and explain to them that they received a tip stating that he was bringing (or planned to bring) weapons on school grounds. At the same time, he could reiterate the penalties for bringing weapons onto school ground. In my viewpoint, there is the procedurally correct thing to do and then there is the “right” thing to do.

• Times have indeed changed. I carried a pocket knife from the 1st grade all the way through school. During deer season, most of the pickup trucks in the parking lot had a rifle or shotgun on a gun rack in clear view in the back window. We even had a rifle team and shot competively and (gasp) practiced shooting on school grounds. Nowadays, a kid merely draws a gun on paper or brings a gun magazine to school, and the teachers and administration go apesh1t.

• Whenever I see a kid dressed in black with piercings all over his body and purple hair, I not only think the kid has issues, but also his parents.

• Speaking of dress, I think a lot of issues could be alleviated by school uniforms and a strict dress code.

• At least the kid transported the guns in the trunk in a locked case - which is the proper way to transport firearms.

By hs sped

August 18, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

I think it was handled appropriately. He was caught red-handed and removed. That is one less danger to worry about. What bothers me is all of the kids that are, at this time, coming forward and stating that they knew Robin quite well, knew what he had planned and yet lacked the courage (and responsibility) to do something about it. Except, of course, for the one that phoned it it. That scares me because basically they are saying that they condone it. I know that a lot of them just want their five minutes of fame, but I imagine that some actually knew the truth. Bottom line-he’s gone and we’re safe (for now).

By OldSchool

August 18, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this

From Lee: “Speaking of dress, I think a lot of issues could be alleviated by school uniforms and a strict dress code.”

I couldn’t agree more. What would you think about orange jumpsuits with zip fronts and no pockets?

Actually, I would love uniforms. I’d even wear them. My thinking is khaki slacks and polo-style shirts in our school colors. I hate figuring out what to wear each morning and would love the sameness of uniforms. As a CTAE instructor, I’m preparing kids to enter the world of work and every job has some sort of dress requirments. Would it be so awful to save families money by requiring uniforms? Kids can be individuals the other 180+ days of the year.

By Lee

August 18, 2006 02:21 PM | Link to this

Oldschool, LOL on the orange jumpsuits.

My youngest goes to private school which mandates school uniforms much like you described - khaki pants/skirts with a polo style shirt. A side benefit is that we save a lot of money on “back to school” clothes. Also, the last Friday of the month is a “Fun Friday” and the students get to wear whatever they want (with limitations, of course). Fun Friday has become almost like a costume party with the kids trying to outdo each other. It’s good to get to blow off some steam every once in a while…