Get Schooled

By Mark

February 6, 2008 8:22 AM | Link to this

Parents get a booklet at the beginning of the year that explains infractions and consequences.

It would probably be better if the group focused on the reasons the students misbehave in the first place and then worked on a path of reform to help students accept responsibility for their actions.

By skeet

February 6, 2008 8:55 AM | Link to this

Same ole…same ole

Kids misbehave at school…parents want to know what the school did wrong that made them misbehave, or complain about the school’s consequence.

Then, when the child commits a crime later in life the parents want to blame the schools again because they led them into the criminal justice pipeline.

Incredible.

By Pompano

February 6, 2008 9:02 AM | Link to this

Why do schools get blamed for bad parenting? The disciplinary issues are truly reflective of what goes on in the homes of these students.

Of the +11,000 suspensions handed down last year, I wonder what percentage did not have a father present in the household?

By Lee

February 6, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this

What I inferred from this article is that this coalition doesn’t like the fact that most of the recipients of discipline are minority students. I say if they are the ones causing the trouble, then let the chips fall where they may.

The article also mentioned that the victim of the bathroom beating was given OSS even though there was ample evidence that this student acted in self defense.

That a student is suspended for defending himself is bull crap and is a direct result of all these ZERO TOLERANCE rules.

Remember, a weak man likes a lot of rules. That way, they can point to the rule and say, “See, it is out of my hands. We have this rule …”

Years ago, the people running our schools had something called common sense. Today, we have lawyers drafting rulebooks that no one can decipher. The system is set up to protect itself — the welfare of the student is way down the list.

By Jeff

February 6, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this

Well, I gotta agree with the first 3 posts and part of Lee’s.

Where Lee and I differ is this:

A rule is a rule. PERIOD. END of discussion.

‘Fighting was against the rules and it didn’t matter why’.

By Tater

February 6, 2008 9:56 AM | Link to this

Here is a post from yesterday’s blog which dovetails into today’s discussion:

**I’m really fed up with the amount of problems that schools have to deal with. Teachers are supposed to teach not deal with misguided students. (I really wanted to use another word)

It’s just time to stop talking about what to do with these hoodlums and actually DO something…

Behavior modification. That’s what the tent cities would do. It works in Maricopa County Arizona for inmates, there is no reason it wouldn’t work for the students who want to be inmates by their behavior.**

I put another post that the “inmates” (or the new students) wear PINK T-Shirts and Underwear…

Ah… in a perfect world….

By Lee

February 6, 2008 10:16 AM | Link to this

Jeff, since you like rules so much, how about this:

State of Georgia Code 16-3-21 states that: (a) A person is justified in threatening or using force against another when and to the extent that he or she reasonably believes that such threat or force is necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person against such other’s imminent use of unlawful force. (c) Any rule, regulation, or policy of any agency of the state or any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, or policy of any county, municipality, or other political subdivision of the state which in conflict with this Code section shall be null, void, and of no force and effect.

So, that means that any school policy or any principal that tells a student they cannot defend themselves is a violation of state LAW.

Years ago, when I was in school, teachers and administrators understood this concept. Whenever a teacher broke up a fight, the first question they asked was “Who started it?” Today, the teachers do not ask any questions but write it up to say that the students were “fighting.” There is a big difference between a fight between mutual combatants and someone defending themselves against an attack.

Why do they do this? Because if Student A attacks Student B, Student A could be charged with Battery. Get too many police reports and the school gets put on the Dangerous Schools List.

Administrators are playing games with the safety and welfare of the student. Plain and simple.

By Tater

February 6, 2008 10:24 AM | Link to this

Lee

Administrators are playing games with the safety and welfare of the student. Plain and simple.

Amen…

By Jeff

February 6, 2008 10:35 AM | Link to this

Lee:

Prove who hit who first. Realize that students lie, and do not make viable witnesses. Therefore, in a fight in the bathroom, you know that two students were fighting. You have no proof as to who hit who first.

Hallway (assuming the presence of cameras that could clearly see what was happening), different issue.

Hallway where cameras did NOT have a clear view of the events in question, again, no proof.

When the school has no proof either way, but proof that both students were in fact fighting, the school is justified in charging both and treating both crimes equally. Judging who hit who is NOT a function of the schools, but of the courts.

By Ernest

February 6, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this

If this is going to result in more people looking at the data, this can help. I believe in the saying, “What gets measured, gets improved”. Proactive data analysis should help people also formulate better questions and devise better solutions. If the data analysis leads to conclusions that are not ‘politically correct’, they still must be addressed in a transparent manner.

I do agree with Lee, common sense has been taken out of the equation. Documented guidelines were needed because there was subjective application of discipline. Unfortunately the addition of all these rules and regulations have caused situations like the “Tweety Bird” incident to become the norm and an embarrassment for school districts. Finding the right balance is tough.

By JustMe

February 6, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this

I agree with the previous posts. Schools don’t create poorly behaved students.

I laughed at Laura’s statement, “Many parents are afraid to challenge school officials.” IMHO, it is opposite. School officials are afraid of the parents. That is the core of many problems in GA education. Parents are quick to go and ‘defend’ their little monster with law suits, etc. Then, the school officials back down, thus giving students more ‘power’ to ‘control’ school.

By V for Vendetta

February 6, 2008 10:56 AM | Link to this

Where’s JimD on this one!?

Have fun with this …

They shouldn’t call it the school to prison pipeline, they should call it the PARENT TO PRISON PIPELINE. The values instilled in these children at a young age are what determines their futures more than anything that happens to them outside of their homes. If the parents want to know why some of these little punks are ending up in prison, they have to look no further than the nearest mirror.

This coalition can go the way of the Dodo, the Passenger Pigeon, and tough discipline in schools … .

By Mark

February 6, 2008 10:59 AM | Link to this

Just Me…

You are correct. I have never met a parent who is afraid to challenge school officials. It is the norm, even the expectation, certainly not an exception!

Lee…Once, just once, try asking two students who have been fighting, “Who started it?” You would quickly see why schools punish both kids in a fight.

By thomas

February 6, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

A real teacher knows that to truly be effective you must develop a rapport with your students and parents. Students are not subjects to be commanded. Nazi-like, military, strong arm tactics will get you no where.

By Tater

February 6, 2008 11:15 AM | Link to this

JustMe

I’m soooo glad that we agree on this topic! I hope I’m not corrupting you…

By Lee

February 6, 2008 11:16 AM | Link to this

Jeff, one thing is for sure, if you dont ask, you will NEVER know.

Schools of today engage in a perverse form of DONT ASK AND YOU WONT HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION.

Hell, even when one kids admits to starting the fight, the principal will still punish them the same.

Bottom line, the schools have abdicated their responsibility to maintain a safe learning environment. They don’t deal with the troublemakers and they hide behind their “zero tolerance” policies.

By Jeff

February 6, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Lee:

It is not the SCHOOL’s job to determine innocence or guilt in a legal case.

It is the COURT’s.

BOTH students were fighting. BOTH should be put into the legal system for battery, and the courts can then do THEIR job of determining who is guilty and who is innocent.

By Lee

February 6, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this

Actually Jeff, if two people are engaged in mutual combat, I think the correct charge is an Affray. Simple Battery is when one person attacks another.

But that’s beside the point. The courts do not want the schools to call the police for every fistfight that occurs. The courts are clogged up enough as it is. As a result, the schools are expected to handle minor infractions administratively.

I dont disagree with that.

My main point of contention is that there is a difference between a fight where two kids square off and start swinging at each other and another fight where there is clearly an aggressor and one kid is merely defending himself. The punishment should be commensurate with the level of aggression.

Man, how times have changed. 30+ years ago, when I was in HS, if two kids got into a disagreement, they could go to the PE teacher and ask to “put on the gloves.” About a minute of swinging those things around pretty much took the fight out of everybody.

By Jeff

February 6, 2008 12:34 PM | Link to this

Lee:

The problem is this (and every teacher out there will agree with me):

As was pointed out by both myself and Mark, if you ask two students who were fighting who started it, you will ALWAYS get the answer “He did” from EACH of them.

Asking student witnesses the question only gets the answer of who they are more afraid of or who is the more popular one (they will thus say the other one started the fight).

Only when you have faculty/staff who saw the ENTIRE encounter (rare) or when you have video documentation showing the ENTIRE encounter (also rare) is the issue ever cut and dried on the school’s side.

Therefore, punish BOTH. If you want to be official, send BOTH into the court system. The school has done its job - both students were acknowledged to be in a fight, and both were punished - and the courts can do theirs - well, student A was actually just defending himself from student B, so only student B will face criminal sanctions.

By Lee

February 6, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this

From my county’s Code of Conduct regarding fighting:

Disciplinary consequences may be different for an aggressor than for a victim.

Which begs the question, “How do you know who is the aggressor if you do not even ask the most basic, elemental questions of how the fight started?”

For a teacher or administrator to not even attempt to ascertain this information is a dereliction of duty.

By jim d

February 6, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this

V,

Just lurking today.

We’ve already blogged this one to death and my views are well known and little respected on the topic.

So y’all just have a free pass to the potty today.

By me

February 6, 2008 1:39 PM | Link to this

I am of the believe that you just do not misbehave, stay out and away from fights, stay out of touble and that is exactly what you will do. STAY OUT OF TROUBLE! Get into trouble, hang around the wrong students you GET IN TROUBLE! It is really simple. Lets not make to much out of it.

By jim d

February 6, 2008 1:50 PM | Link to this

Self defense — defense? Doesn’t apply Lee. See bolded comment below.

Use of force is justified when a person reasonably believes that it is necessary for the defense of oneself or another against the immediate use of unlawful force. However, a person must use no more force than appears reasonably necessary in the circumstances.

Force likely to cause death or great bodily harm is justified in self-defense only if a person reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm.

The Right To Protect One’s Person And Property From Injury.

It will be proper to consider: 1. The extent of the right of self-defence. 2. By whom it may be exercised. 3. Against whom. 4. For what causes.

As to the extent of the right: First, when threatened violence exists, it is the duty of the person threatened to use all prudent and precautionary measures to prevent the attack; for example, if by closing a door which was usually left open, one could prevent an attack, it would be prudent, and perhaps the law might require, that it should be closed in order to preserve the peace, and the aggressor might in such case be held to bail for his good behaviour. Secondly, if after having taken such proper precautions, a party should be assailed, he may undoubtedly repel force by force, but in most instances cannot, under the pretext that he has been attacked, use force enough to kill the assailant or hurt him after he has secured himself from danger; such as if a person unarmed enters a house to commit a larceny, while there he does not threaten any one, nor does any act which manifests an intention to hurt any one, and there are a number of persons present who may easily secure him, no one will be justifiable to do him any injury, much less to kill him; he ought to be secured and delivered to the public authorities. But when an attack is made by a thief under such circumstances, and it is impossible to ascertain to what extent he may push it, the law does not requite the party assailed to weigh with great nicety the probable extent of the attack, and he may use the most violent means against his assailant, even to the taking of his life. For homicide may be excused where a man has no other probable means of preserving his life from one who attacks him while in the commission of a felony, or even on a sudden quarrel he beats him, so that he is reduced to this inevitable necessity. And the reason is that when so reduced, he cannot call to his aid the power of society or of the commonwealth, and being unprotected by law, he reassumes his natural rights which the law sanctions, of killing his adversary to protect himself.

The party attacked may undoubtedly defend himself, and the law further sanctions the mutual and reciprocal defence of such as stand in the near relations of hushand and wife, patent and child, and master and servant. In these cases, if the party himself or any of these his relations, be forcibly attacked in their person or property, it is lawful for him to repel force by force, for the law in these cases respects the passions of the human mind, and makes it lawful in him, when external violence is offered to himself, or to those to whom he bears so near a connexion, to do that immediate justice to which he is prompted by nature, and which no prudential motives are strong enough to restrain.

The party making the attack may be resisted, and if several persons join in such attack they may all be resisted, and one may be killed although he may not himself have given the immediate cause for such killing, if by his presence and his acts he has aided the assailant.

The cases for which a man may defend himself are of two kinds; first, when a felony is attempted, and secondly, when no felony is attempted or apprehended.

1st. A man may defend himself and even commit a homicide for the prevention of any forcible and atrocious crime, which if completed would amount to a felony; and of course under the like circumstances, mayhem, wounding and battery would be excusable at common law. A man may repel force by force in defence of his person, property or habitation, against any one who manifests, intends, attempts, or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a forcible felony, such as murder, rape, robbery, arson, burglary and the like. In these cases he is not required to retreat, but he may resist and even pursue his adversary, until he has secured himself from all danger.

2d. A man may defend himself when no felony has been threatened or attempted: 1. When the assailant attempts to beat another and there is no mutual combat, such as where one meets another and attempts to commit or does commit an assault and battery on him, the person attacked may defend himself, and; 2. An attempt to strike another, when sufficiently near so that that there is danger, the person assailed may strike first, and is not required to wait until he has been struck.

When there is a mutual combat upon a sudden quarrel both parties are the aggressors, and if in the fight one is killed it will be manslaughter at least, unless the survivor can prove two things: 1st. That before the mortal stroke was given be had refused any further combat, and had retreated as far as he could with safety; and 2d. That he killed his adversary from necessity, to avoid his own destruction.

A man may defend himself against animals, and he may during the attack kill them, but not afterwards.

As a general rule no man is allowed to defend himself with force if he can apply to the law for redress, and the law gives him a complete remedy.

By jim d

February 6, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this

Me,

Get into trouble, hang around the wrong students you GET IN TROUBLE! It is really simple

Really? hmm, guess that would shoot down any other reasoning as to how a good kid might make a bad decision and end up in trouble. But then we all know that good kids never make mistakes—Right?

By HS Teacher Too

February 6, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this

I’m with Lee. Don’t ask, and you won’t even have a possibility of knowing.

Besides, when the courts face an issue of “he said, he said” (or wait, don’t want to be sexist here: “s/he said, s/he said”) they call it a question of fact. It is then for a fact-finder (depending on circumstances, either the judge or the jury) to decide who is telling the truth.

Thus, even when knowing the truth is impossible, deciding on what is most likely to be the truth happens all the time. But again, we have to ask the question.

That being said, I do believe that in school situations where an administrator will act as the fact-finder, it is entirely reaonsable to expect that sometimes punishing both students is the most appropriate thing to do for any of a number of reasons. But when a student is sucker-punched or jumped or whatever else, then I don’t think it’s fair to punish the student who defended himself. (Sorry, him/her- self.) To my mind, all such a policy does is to encourage the non-aggressor to swing back … which, despite anyone’s moral beliefs about what may be the right thing to do, still may not be the “right” thing to do in a school setting.

I’m also all-for the NHL third-man-in rule. Third man in ought to get the book thrown at him!

By HS Teacher Too

February 6, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this

jim d, interesting post. What’s the source? You usually post code that you cite, or give hyperlinks. Also, I think you give too much credence to the part that you bolded. Everyone knows self-defense is legit. But as the post says earlier, the force must be appropriate and match the force with which you’re faced — and more importantly, the danger must be perceived to be imminent. Someone’s swinging at you, I am pretty confident that in 99% of the cases, swinging back is fair play.

By SET

February 6, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this

What we are not discussing is racial disparity in school discipline. People with 2 digit IQ’s require more discipline to keep them in line. Now what’s the average black & hispanic IQ? Duh…

A well run urban school should expect to have more actions taken against black students than Asian students (Using San Francisco Chinese as the Asians not Hmongs). No apologies. This is regardless of the ratios of black to other races. If you are running a tight ship in these schools there will be a greater ratio of discipline against blacks than other races. If the administration can’t get over that, then we will have - what we have now - out of control schools.

You can reduce this problem by segregating the schools by race. Then the black students have no other reference points to use to complain that their discipline experience is greater.

If you don’t want to do that, you have integrated schools with one set of morals and values and whatever level of discipline required to maintain standards, let the chips fall where they may. We have historically refused to do this in integrated schools because the blacks - or whoever - feel they are being picked on. The real problem is administrators who actually care about urban blacks or any other group being comfortable. This is the start of our problem. Schools are not created to make kids or parents happy, they are there to educate kids for industry, military service, or higher education (housewivery is no longer attainable for non ruling-class women).

Our decision to relax basic standards and morals is why the CA schools systems such as Los Angeles Unified, Oakland Unified, and many others have degenerated to failure factories.

Talking about self-defense fighting bores me. You always have the right and the obligation to kill in self defense (self defense includes parent protecting child, older sibling protecting younger sibling). No school rule can in any way change that. We’re getting off point.

The schools need to publicly declare that they will maintain standards of deportment and academic performance which include dress standards regardless of ethnic ratios. It’s essential that the parent and the students get this loud and clear on day one and to make the point clear even to the dimwitted, I’d go back to lining the students up for roll & inspection outside school every morning before those that pass inspection being allowed to march silently single file into the building. Then lock the doors. If the students can’t perform as required get them out of the normal schools into schools for inferior students.

Funny how these little (control) things from the past are now recognized as actually being useful in keeping order. We dropped them because we didn’t see how they were really needed anymore…

This nation once ran public schools successfully. I don’t care what races are in what schools. We can do so again.

By Jeff

February 6, 2008 2:12 PM | Link to this

HST2:

But how do you know which of the two was in fact sucker punched? It aint always the one with the more damage. An easy example is in my own fights. I have a standing policy to NEVER initiate contact - no matter how much I may want to. But as soon as contact is made, I WILL end the fight - more than likely fairly quickly and extremely violently. Thus, the one that sucker punched me INITIATED the fight, but also sustained the most damage. When you couple that simple fact with the facts that I’ve never been extremely popular and in school I was always seen as a trouble maker (even though I only RESPONDED to what others did), and most administrators would typically assume I made first contact. Only one who knew me very well, knew about my policy, and had seen me enforce it would know differently.

By jim d

February 6, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this

Too,

Can we just be realistice here for a moment? Anyone one blogging here ever been pushed and then pushed back? To be quite frank, I’d say most of us have had some type of phsical confrontation in school as children. Were we criminals? I don’t think so. Most of us have turned out pretty normal.

Allow me to point out one other small fact. In most instances where fighting took place as a child, the opposition generally became a life long friend.

Perhaps a controlled environment such as Lee mentioned with the gloves wouldn’t be such a bad policy to dredge back up.

By jim d

February 6, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

Sorry Too,

It came from The ‘Lectric Law Library

By HS Teacher Too

February 6, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

That’s the question of fact that to which you determine your answer — or best guess — as to the truth of what happened. Most people I know wouldn’t make the dangerous (and naive) assumption that the person who looks worst couldn’t have started the fight.

By jim d

February 6, 2008 2:24 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

But how do you know which of the two was in fact sucker punched?

Ever really been sucker punched Jeff?

If done properly —— there is no fight.

By HS Teacher Too

February 6, 2008 2:27 PM | Link to this

Jim d, Did I say otherwise? I just thought your bolded comment was unrealistic, because as I read your comment you were essentially saying self-defense is never a viable excuse. Did I misread you?

in any event, if I’ve been confusing in my posts, let me clear it up: 1. I think that self-defense is fair. I believe in it.
2. Whenever possible and/or practical, the non-aggressor shouldn’t be punished for defending himself or herself.
3. Really making a go at #2 will mean in certain cases that all you can do is make your best guess as to who did what, when.

As to today’s topic, which I am realizing I’ve not yet addressed — parents already bully the schools, who refuse to take a stand and do their jobs. I don’t think that the coalition is necessary. I think it is potentially — disclaimer being that I don’t know much about the group to really judge it — just a more organized bullying group.

But that’s how GCPS is run. Parents bully teachers and admins, admins bully teachers, kids bully each other … and some bad-egg teachers bully back to the kids.

By HS Teacher Too

February 6, 2008 2:31 PM | Link to this

Thanks jim d. I was especially curious b/c of how they spelled “defence”. ;)

By Lee

February 6, 2008 3:51 PM | Link to this

HS Teach, I think that clears it up nicely. I agree.

Back to the original topic, maybe I read it wrong, but I inferred that this group will be paying particular attention to the discipline of minorities. My opinion on that is that it is hard enough to get schools to impose discipline on ANYBODY. The last thing we need is for an administrator to not impose needed discipline because he doesn’t want the hassle of dealing with this group.

By HS Teacher Too

February 6, 2008 4:32 PM | Link to this

Lee, Thanks for pointing that out to me. I read the original blog topic hurriedly and then got sidetracked by the self-defense commenting.

I think I might buy into the idea that there are some groups that might NOT know how to best advocate for their children; and I’d venture a guess that some of those groups are minorities, especially non-native-English speakers. So maybe there is a point to this group. I’m not really qualified to pass judgment since I know so little about it. Suffice it to say that I think there could certainly be good that could come of it; but I reserve my fears that I shared above. Better bullying is still just bullying.

By catlady

February 6, 2008 6:06 PM | Link to this

Two observations: at my school, Latino students in trouble for fighting or otherwise get in BIG TROUBLE with their parents 90% of the time. Whether it is due to better morals, stronger parenting, deference to teachers, or just not wanting to stand out, that has been my experience. They are much less likely to cry that their child is innocent or being picked on, EVEN WHEN THEY ARE.

Secondly, when my son was in sixth grade he got suspended for fighting. Teacher was out of the room (? with SIXTH GRADERS?) my son accused a girl of farting and she picked him up out of his desk and began beating him around the face. He did not strike her back (all agreed) but put his hands over his face. (You see, he had multiple surgeries and all kinds of wires and springs holding his face together, and he knew it would be very bad to have something happen to that. Not to mention the skull defects). But he was suspended for fighting. Now, I got mad and insisted that his record be changed to reflect that he was suspended for improper language or for being a victim of a beating, but NOT FOR FIGHTING. (I also advised the principal that if something like that EVER happened again and he was assaulted, to go ahead and call the police because I WOULD be swearing out a warrant and I WOULD be suing anyone within sight at the school for negligence). Girl ended up in juvie in less than a year.

By holdingAJCaccountable

February 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Link to this

Someone actually thinks there needs to be some “checks and balances” because there may be too much discipline in public schools?

Why are we looking for signs of intelligent life on other planets when it is so obviously lacking on our own?

By Lee

February 6, 2008 8:22 PM | Link to this

Jeff, you need to read Catlady’s post of 6:06. Her son was attacked, he did not fight back, but still got suspended.

That’s exactly the kind of chickenshit administrative decision making I’ve been talking about.

By catlady

February 6, 2008 8:30 PM | Link to this

holding: I have to agree with you. While there are cases where mistakes are made, in 34 years I have never seen a situation where there is too much discipline. It has mostly been too little, too late.

Just this week, twice I have been in the office when an administrator has been reviewing a bus tape because the parents involved are claiming their precious did not do something the bus driver said he did. Both times, it is quite clear the child DID do it, and reviewing the tape from the time the child got on the bus till the incident, there is no evidence that the assaulted child “caused” it.

‘Course, I don’t care for the “he made me” defense anyway. No one “made you.” You DECIDED to do it. You may have decided very quickly, but you did it on purpose.

I have a real problem with parents telling their children “if he hits you, you hit him back.” How I have seen it play out over the years is most of the time the child takes that as a license to hit anyone who “bothers” him (very loose definition), with a look, a sour expression, or even an accidental tap on the arm. There are times when self-defense is necessary, but a whole lot less often than it is involked, IMHO. We all gotta learn to live with annoying people (look at this blog : ) but we learn to walk away, holler for help, etc. So many of our kids think they have permission to clobber anyone they want, and claim “he made me” or “he was bothering me”.

By catlady

February 6, 2008 8:57 PM | Link to this

Lee, my son should have been punished. He used inappropriate language in public. 3 days suspension seemed pretty stiff to me, however. I still supported the administration in making a decision. I was unwilling, however, for him to be branded a fighter when the only hand he raised was to protect his “bionic” ($100,000 25 years ago) face.

Kinda grinded on my nerve in walking around the school and hearing kids say “F you” and “you N…B….” and nothing happen to that, but a “fart” got him a suspension. Also seeing the resource officer being knocked to the ground and stomped and the officer loses the job?! “She made him do it…”

In this same college town, my youngest daughter was repeatedly assaulted by a boy in the afterschool program. I sent letters notifiying the supervisor. When she could not stand it any more (he had gotten a stick and striped her legs) she grabbed him by his “rat’s tail” and yanked it completely out. She was put out of the program for a week for her behavior. When confronted, the supervisor was unaware of the two letters of complaint I had written about the boy’s aggression. The principal wanted me to meet with the boy’s mother (who wanted me to pay for his new haircut) for us to talk about how we could help our children get along. I told the principal that I would NOT be meeting with her, I would pay for his haircut if SHE wanted to reimburse me for the bruises and cuts my daughter had suffered at his hands, and if she wanted our children to get along, all she had to do was to tell her son to leave my daughter alone. That easy. Apparently it worked because he would not so much as look at her for months. She never went back to afterschool.

By Lee

February 6, 2008 10:26 PM | Link to this

Cat, from what you described, the teacher came back into the room, saw them in an altercation, and took them to the office for “fighting.”

No questions asked.

That gets back to exactly the thing I have been blogging about. If this teacher had taken 30 seconds to ask a few questions, you might not have had to go to the principal to get the wording on his suspension changed. Heck, more than likely, if it was handled correctly, he would not have gotten suspended at all… at least not for fighting.

Any teacher or administrator who would hide behind a “zero tolerance” rule is a cop out, IMHO. I have no tolerance for them.

By Jeff

February 7, 2008 5:49 AM | Link to this

Lee:

I’m still going to side with zero tolerance and put the question of guilt or innocence in the court room rather than the classroom.

In catlady’s son’s case (and even her daughter’s), more could have been done to avoid the altercation. God knows I’ve taken some pretty stiff hits to my ‘honor’ to avoid a fight! Yes, I’ve been called ‘coward’ or ‘chicken’ probably more than any 3 people on this blog combined. I don’t mind fighting, but I will ONLY do it if three conditions are met: Proper time (or at least not a clearly IMPROPER time), Proper place (or at least not a clearly IMPROPER place), ABSOLUTELY no other option.

In each of the cases catlady’s kids experienced, WALK AWAY!!!! To me, I’d rather get in trouble for walking 10 miles off campus to avoid a fight rather than to get in trouble for fighting.

Ya know, y’all may get the idea from the way I talk here that I’m some big bad dude (or at least one that likes to LOOK big and bad) that just LOVES to fight. NOTHING could be further from the truth. When I’ve said repeatedly that I try to do whatever it takes to AVOID a fight, I mean just that. MOST of the time, my various efforts to avoid the fight are successful. Sometimes, they’re not. But honestly one of my greatest assets in a fight is that due to my efforts to avoid them, people begin to underestimate just how good I am - to their peril, once I am forced into it.

But all this is neither here nor there, and I do apologize to Laura and all the bloggers for getting this topic so off track.

By jim d

February 7, 2008 7:37 AM | Link to this

What say we go ahead and heat this one up a bit?

Let’s discuss who these kids are that are constantly in trouble.

Off the record stats I’ve been given, for a particular school, indicated that better than 85% of the problems were caused by about 3% of the student population. And while I doubt that official stats are kept along these lines, it was indicated those involved were, shall we say, “special students.”

Tony can you elaborate, based on your expierence, if their is indeed an element of truth in what I was told and if that would be pretty much a norm in other schools?

By JustMe

February 7, 2008 8:00 AM | Link to this

jd - Yes, that sounds about right. And, I would add that those 3% students have parents that seem to have lawyers (private or ACLU) in the wings ready to pounce on the school and school system at any chance of a mis-step when the administrators handle their little darlings. That explains why the administrators are spine-less when dealing with them.

By V for Vendetta

February 7, 2008 8:18 AM | Link to this

JimD,

You are absolutely correct. Here’s why:

Many of these special children fall into two groups. The first is the group of kids who are constant discipline problems, but get to hang around as a result of incompetent or spineless admins. As Lee has pointed out numerous times, that is a HUGE problem (my school is a particularly nice example of this).

The second reason is because the kid is qualified SPED — more specifically, EBD. For anyone not familiar with EBD (Emotional Behavioral Disorder), it is simply a classification given to students who are unable to exist within the confines of what we would call society. They are typically crack-babies, FAS babies, or ill-raised losers. The label is nothing more than an excuse to allow their behavior to continue.

The problem is that it is almost IMPOSSIBLE to kick a SPED kid out of school, no matter what he does. He could take a crap on the principal’s desk, and they’d give him another chance. Thank IDEA and the like for junk like that.

As I’ve sad before: once we get over this asinine notion that school is a “RIGHT” only then will we have solid discipline in our schools.

By jim d

February 7, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

AHhhh yes,

The benefits of inclusion with lawyers and childrens advocates to assure even the most violent and brain dead are provided, not just equality but a special status, even to the detrement of other students and even society itself.

SET, often mentions segreagation prior to the 60’s as a major reason blacks were motivated and successful, perhaps we should take a hard look at past practices of segregating the special students and how intergarting them into mainstream has affected our ability to provide for other students to be motivated and successful.(just a passing thought)

By JustMe

February 7, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

jd - IMHO, the integration of SPED students have benefited the general student population more than the SPED students. Why? I have seen an obvious trend of more compassion, caring, and understanding of the “special” student. In the past, the general students would make fun of them, etc., because they were separated and either feared them and/or didn’t understand them at all.

This compassion is important and should count as a benefit to society as a whole.

Is the benefit of compassion worth the ‘negative’ of the other stuff? Don’t know.

By catlady

February 7, 2008 11:36 AM | Link to this

My experience has been the 5% of the kids who cause most of the trouble are frequently NOT “officially” SP ED. They are kids who have not been given that designation and who are way overplaced in their current situations. Some are SP ED, and they have been overplaced, too (see inclusion) and everything they do is attributed to their disability. The others are just children who have been allowed to grow up as animals in the jungle. The school is unwilling to draw a line and say, “When you come in here, this behavior will not be tolerated.”

Re: Jeff and the walk away. My daughter had walked away three times already from being assaulted. She had requested help from the adults in charge. No help had come, so she took care of it herself. Not the ideal situation, but I understand her taking the law in her own hands. I failed her, as I should have gone down there the first time the boy pulled a chair out from under her.

In my son’s case, he could not walk away as he was having the stuffing beat out (or attempted to beat out) of his head. The other students formed a ring around him and his attacker. He could have avoided it by not commenting on the girl’s personal bodily functions. He should have: discretion and all that. The reason he was suspended was because she was black, and “we all know” that a black kid wouldn’t beat up a white kid for no good reason. The principal operated on that assumption all the time (the white resource officer getting punched and stomped “made” the black kid hit her, so SHe was reassigned). (At this same school my son was denied admission to an academic interest club because of his race—white—and the school system attorney tried to defend the practice, citing black socal groups on college campus. I pointed out that there was no “white” honor group like this, so he had no alternative for his interest. The school gave in, with much grumbling. You should see the club pictures.)

In the school I am in now, there are about 25 major miscreants (out of 630) and quite a few in the wings warming up because we give the students chance after chance instead of taking the bull by the horns initially. An ounce of prevention… If we got serious about nipping it in the bud, we would not have year after year of this with these same children, who, when they go to middle school, end up in ISS immediately and finally in alternative school within months. Meanwhile they inflicted years of chaos on their classmates.

By Jeff

February 7, 2008 12:07 PM | Link to this

catlady:

Back in the day, I was the victim of some pretty severe beat downs. I know how hard it is to get away in the middle of someone assaulting you. But it CAN be done, and SHOULD be done in a school setting. (Believe it or not, I have also had to bust out of a ring or two in my day. I know from first hand experience how hard it is - both physically and emotionally. Your emotions are screaming at you to stand up like a man and duke it out, your body is screaming at you that you are in severe pain and about to pass out, and you’ve got to have the mental capacity to tell both of them to shut the HADES up long enough for you to high tail it out of this situation. It aint easy, and it certainly aint fun. You’re more than likely going to be called a coward and a chicken for doing it. But it is STILL rhe right thing to do.)

Your daughter walked away 3 times, eh? She should have walked away the fourth time as well. And the fifth. And the sixth. etc. Again, not always the EASY thing to do, but in a school setting it is ALWAYS the RIGHT thing to do.

There are many situations we discuss here on this blog that I pontificate about the right thing to do and I’ve never been in the situation. Many of you claim that I would do differently than I say if I were in such a situation, and maybe you are right. But in this particular situation of fighting and walking away, I’ve lived it FAR more than many of you, possibly all of you. And I’ve walked away FAR more often than I’ve fought.

By catlady

February 7, 2008 12:28 PM | Link to this

Jeff, one thing I think we agree on. Fighting is not the answer.

By SET

February 7, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

jim d: On the segregation thing - Underclass Blacks need segregation the same way the Amish need it. The culture will perish without segregation. They wouldn’t survive as a distinct culture if forced to exist alongside mainstream culture.

Ghetto Blacks want nothing to do with whites and will self segregate because doing so is pleasant and like the Amish, allows abberrant culture to avoid change.

We had black segregated schools as the norm up to the misbegotten civil rights movement that started out with one idea and quickly turned into forced integration at the expense of the Constitution which was tossed out the window. Had Brown v Board merely stated that school assignments could be made by objective standards of performance but are otherwise open to all citizens we might still have our major cities fit to live in. As it is, we still have segregated schools which function far worse than before, and have absolutely trashed our cities as well.

Like the new Deal, the ’60s CR movement was used as a Trojan Horse to expand Federal Power into the Roman Empire the USA has become.

The funny thing is that we had segregation then and we have segregation now, but also Washington DC sets speed limits, grade school requirements, and regulates marijuana use within the states. And black society is headed to economic, medical & social extinction (yes, extinction) in favor of an imported Mexican-Indian underclass that by the 2012 elections will have more political power/votes than the blacks. And I’m noticing interesting trends on interracial marriage among educated blacks…

Funny how things turn out. And funny how the Federal Empire used the public schools to accomplish it’s power grab.

My view of what should have been done with the integration issue is what the military did - strictly segregated the ranks by IQ tests (performance) and imposed a visible & rigid discipline model to maintain standards. If you want in you know what the daily requirements are for each job and the exit door is always there.

On Thread, when we are talking about routine beat-downs in public schools the schools involved should be closed and reconstituted. If the schools have degenerated into this kind of violence they should be closed. The cities can run correspondence schools until they can set up safe schools.

Brave New World.

By Tony

February 7, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

jim d, your statistics are pretty close. I would say that about 80% of discipline is from about 10% of the population of students. We analyze repeat offenders when we look at our stats and make sure that we step up the consequences.

I’m not sure what you mean by “special”. If you are referring to racial and ethnic comparisons, it is evident that there is some disproportionality. In our school there is 70% white, but about 60% of referals come from that population. If by “special” you are referring to special education students, it is feasible to say that a very small percentage (3%) has a big impact on the number of discipline incidents.

We are in the midst of a mid-year review and have found our stats are better this year than last year at this same time. The racial/ethnic disproportionality has improved, too.

By Sharon

February 7, 2008 5:37 PM | Link to this

There should be accountability in alternative schools just as there is in every other public school. Georgia ranks close to the bottom in graduation rates but at the very top for being most punitive. Georgia leads the nation with one out of every 15 adults under some form of correctional oversight. Do you think there might be a correlation? Improved efforts need to be made to keep kids in school and zero tolerance is not the answer.

By Enlightened

February 7, 2008 5:55 PM | Link to this

Set - Your first post made me wonder if you have a 2 digit IQ, but your second post confirmed that you have a 1 digit IQ.

You must not be aware that Georgia ranks 49th or 50th in education each year mainly because of the white rural population.

By Lee

February 7, 2008 6:47 PM | Link to this

Sorry Jeff, but your zero tolerance stance makes some students a victim twice — once at the hands of their attacker and once at the hands of their school. A school, by the way, that has a responsibility to look after the safety and welfare of students in their charge.

What I am asking schools to do is nothing new, they did it for years and years. Just ask a few damn questions to see if you can get to the source of the problem.

Jim Ds take on a small percentage of students accounting for the majority of problems is probably correct. Here’s another consideration: these hard core, cronic troublemakers are often then informal leaders and instigators in the student body. The next 10-15% of students, you know, the students who can go either way, often fall under the influence of these cronic troublemakers. Now, instead of a teacher having to deal with 1-2 troublemakers, he/she has got 6-7 students acting up.

That sound about right teachers?

By Crimes Against Students

February 7, 2008 8:11 PM | Link to this

Crimes Against Students…

Reading many of the previous posting on Feb. 6, 2008 and Feb. 7, 2008…we are witnessing First Hand the Dark Mind Sets and Verbal Abuse that comes from so many Educators and Adults…these individuals need to be Investigated based on these Negative and Alarming posting indicated above.

It appears some of these individuals are Intentionally Targeting, Tagging and Labeling many of Our Children with such Great Pleasure…like it is their MISSION to harm and destory a child’s life. SCARY !!!

Case and Point…some of your comments are very Disturbing …making reference in regards to our children with such -

Are you getting a RUSH or some type of Satisfaction???

Crimes Against Kids continues daily within the school systems coming from Adults/Educators.

True - The amount of under taking that Administrators take part is an under statement - The BIG Cover Up is alarming including how they play games with the safety and welfare of our children/students.

We support the School to Prison Pipeline Coalition because of the above comments made by others, the unfair treatment, the targeting, Labeling and the STATS do not Lie…how about that!!!

Crimes Against Kids.

By catlady

February 7, 2008 9:05 PM | Link to this

Lee, we call those 10-15% that are teetering on disaster “About to go over to the dark side” They COULD be saved with intensive parental activism, but probably won’t. Teachers identify them and try to pull them along to the light.

By C.R.H.

February 7, 2008 9:19 PM | Link to this

“Crimes against students”…you are speaking out of your anus. The kids being referred to with the “labels” have EARNED those labels. When you pull your head out of where the sun light has never been maybe you can see the real crime is in allowing these few students to take up the majority of time & resources at the expense of those who want an education. It has nothing to do with race but poverty certainly is an issue! To the other poster commenting about GA being 49th or 50th…only when you look at SAT scores. Maybe you should try to actually look for REAL information instead of just reading the crap in the newspaper. I’m from a midwestern state (ranked significantly higher than GA) and only the top tier students take the SAT. Try to compare apples to apples. And it is NOT white rural schools where GA is getting caught up…clueless people.

By Gwinnett Parent

February 7, 2008 9:23 PM | Link to this

Ask our county leaders how many kids under the age of compulsory attendance (16), have been suspended from school for one year without any educational services. Then ask what the associated charge was that was so terrible that this action was warranted. Then look to see what interventions these student actually received while they were in school.

When you hear the responses you may just stop and consider that the the school to prison pipeline not only exists, but is thriving. Especially when students are then charged with truancy because they have no where else to go to school.

Our community would not stand for this if they were made aware - it is just that they are not aware. Most people would not even believe that it is legal to do this, much less actually occurring.

By Crimes Agianst Students

February 7, 2008 10:03 PM | Link to this

C.R.H.

This applies to you…Small Minds, Small Penis, Do and Say Small Things…just because you were deprived as a child and your Mother hated you…does not mean that you should continue to show your Label of being a IGNORANT Sicko.

We are on the West Coast Fool - it appears you are a slow reader and definitely a IGNORANT Fool with some serious issues.

Look just because you are DUMB and DUMBERER…the 49-50 percent is not only applicable to the SAT Scores….IGNORANT Fool.

Once again the STATS support the level of concern in regards to Zero Tolerance and the School to Prison Pipeline Coalition.

You can stop bumping your gums and put your mouth on your small body part because that is the only thing that your mouth is good for in reviewing your comments.

Note: I cannot do it for you, however, maybe your Mother can keep on doing it to you.

Sicko C.R.H. is on this BLOG - take your medication.

Crimes Against Kids

By C.R.H.

February 7, 2008 11:23 PM | Link to this

Sounds like someone has issues. I’ll leave your grammar alone because that is just too easy. But if you call someone ignorant please be grammatically correct. I don’t really give a rat’s azz what coast you are on as long as you don’t have any children…hate to see those genes get passed on to some poor unsuspecting individual. BTW, I don’t have a penis, interesting how you thought I did…I wonder why?

Why so much anger? Did you see your reflection in my post? As far as statistics go, any moron can pull a stat to reflect their own viewpoint. You know what they say about liars and statistics?

Maybe you should put your hands on your “small body part” to keep you from typing stupid remarks.

By C.R.H.

February 7, 2008 11:27 PM | Link to this

“Dumberer”? Seriously? Just WOW…

By SET

February 8, 2008 1:25 AM | Link to this

Enlightened: I’ve not seen you around the blog - please give us some info on your background. It will help everyone understand your perspective.

Personal attacks against other bloggers is a great start. In public discourse, that tactic places the speaker pretty firmly.

By Jeff

February 8, 2008 5:42 AM | Link to this

Lee:

RARE is the fight at school (or anywhere for that matter, if one is sufficiently observant) that cannot be anticipated and therefore avoided.

As I’ve said, to me it is better to get in trouble for walking 10 miles off campus to AVOID a fight rather than getting in trouble for fighting.

The school is not making them a victim for a second time by punishing both parties in a fight.

The student made that decision when they didn’t avoid the fight to begin with.

By Lee

February 8, 2008 7:33 AM | Link to this

Gwinnette Parent, re Ask our county leaders how many kids under the age of compulsory attendance (16), have been suspended from school for one year without any educational services. Then ask what the associated charge was that was so terrible that this action was warranted. Then look to see what interventions these student actually received while they were in school.

If you have that information, please post it. Personally, I think the opposite is true. That is, the school system has NOT done enough to get the cronic, hard-core troublemakers out of the general student population.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 7:36 AM | Link to this

So Jeff,

My neighbor has a bad a ss dog that attacks me walking to the mail box and I kick the s hit out of it requiring it to have emergency surgery. You’re saying I should be held liable because I failed to walk out the back door—around the block to my mail box when there is a leash law that required the dog be under the owners control?

Pretty silly don’t ya think, to require someone to evade an unsuspected attack from someone willing to break the law and then to hold the victim accountable?

By Concerned parent

February 8, 2008 7:51 AM | Link to this

Good behavior goes both ways. My experience with some (about half) teachers and administration is that when a parent tries to address issues, they receive sarcasm instead. Sarcasm is a vent. It is what people do when they feel there is no way to resolve a problem. I think teachers need to recognize when parents are trying to help the situation and respond to that. Also, it needs to be understood that there is a reason for behaviors. My child is not disrespectful, he is quiet but is often not able to do work. This embarrasses him. He is intelligent but has problems with reading. Too often, he gets responses from teachers that if he tries, the skill he lacks and that requires specialized remediation and differentiated instruction, will magically appear. What has happened instead, is he has not received the special reading help he needs and little by little he has fallen away from his aspirations to do well in academia. This results in a student that is “off task” or learns that no matter what he asks for, he does not belong there. There are a lot of consequences to this spiraling phenomenon that results in behavioral issues. In my son’s case, he does not want to go to school because he simply cannot do the work. His behavior is that he falls asleep in class. Everyday he just tried to make it through another day, is what he says. The help is not there. My son has developed a passive approach. But there are other students that respond differently. They are angry for the years of being misunderstood in an arena that they do not have the skills to survive in. They feel hopeless. When a person feels hopeless, they also feel they do not have a lot to lose. For these kids they need to have their skills brought up to their level. Most of these students have normal intelligence. The problem in this case, is that the expertise for this very specialized instruction is not available enough. The universities are not teaching it, the teachers are required to have these specialized skills and feel frustrated trying to help these students. Teachers are not given the time and the RIGHT (not just any training, as many teachers receive, but one that is grounded in researched based methodology) training that is needed. Like I said, for these students, the years of failure chip away at the foundation that is needed to develop the type of student and behaviors that are positive. This is one part of the problem. I will not be able to touch on the cultural part. I come from a family background that feels education is very important. We support our children in school issues. We are very concerned that there is no place in the school system for the son that needs special help. He is both intelligent and learning disabled. He is a behavioral problem because he is off task, he will require more of the teacher’s time. Since his needs steal resources away from the other students, he really should be in a private school that specializes in his learning problems and can individualized his instruction in order to meet his unique needs.

By Jeff

February 8, 2008 8:46 AM | Link to this

jim:

I doubt the dog was biting you as you walked out the door in the first place. Which means that it had to first come to you. Now, I’ve been around dogs all my life and RARE is it that I see a dog that isn’t a military or police trained guard dog come at someone intending them harm without giving away SOME kind of audible signal of its intentions. (Growling and/ or barking). Once said audible signals start, you know it is time to get away from the dog, as it could very well attack with little to no further advance notice.

The above notwithstanding, also realize that I do NOT show animals the same honor that I do humans. I tend to be of a mind that a dog that so much as barks at me is a dead dog, unless it is properly restrained either on its owner’s property or within its owner’s immediate proximity. To my mind, a barking and/ or growling dog is basically a living weapon, and I will deal with it as I do with any other weapon: disarm it and either securely discard it or destroy it.

A human is not such a living weapon by default. Indeed, more often than not, a violent human tends to need ultra strict control (to ensure that his violence doesn’t harm anyone, including himself) combined with a great deal of compassion (to help him work through whatever issue(s) has made him violent.

I believe that violent people are both born and raised, but that ALL can learn to control their violence and use it for good purposes. Take my own life, for example. I am a violent man that has seen the light, and I now control my violence and unleash it only to protect those I love. The lessons I have been describing were EXTREMELY hard for me, but they also became part of the core of who I am.

Have you ever heard the poem ‘I stand by the door’ by Samuel Shoemaker? It is a good depiction of who I am in so many ways, including this saga of violence and walking away.

By Gwinnett Parent

February 8, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this

Lee,

The data regarding # of students suspended for a year without educational services is not available without doing a costly open records request. This is the type of information that the public should have access to, because the majority do not even realize that this can happen to their student. You tell me, why do you think the expulsion rate is so low ? (1%)The action I described has the same effect, keeping kids out of school where there is no chance to catch up, but it is not a full expulsion. So I don’t know how big that number is, but my guess it is higher than most of us would feel comfortable with.

Although I do not have the pocketbook for open records information…maybe, just maybe, this new coalition will.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 9:01 AM | Link to this

Let’s approach this issue from another angle shall we?

There may be reason to believe that leadership style may be a variable through which principals can reduce school violence.

For example, Vecchio (1991) reports that studies of violence in the workplace have been fairly consistently associated with managerial leadership style. In this regard, Vecchio reports that when managers are oriented toward human relations rather than simply toward tasks, the levels of workplace violence are lower.

Could it be that when principals are more oriented toward human relations in their leadership style, the levels of student violence at their schools are lower than they are when other leadership styles are practiced?

By Lee

February 8, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this

Oh, Jesus H Christ…

Take my own life, for example. I am a violent man that has seen the light, and I now control my violence and unleash it only to protect those I love.

Jeff, I think you have locked yourself in the basement and played video games for far, far too long. Fantasy has become reality for you.

You’ve unleashed something alright. It’s called b******.

By Gwinnett Parent

February 8, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

bingo, jim d

It all rests within the local leadership. Now try filing a complaint on a principal, or moving your child to a more humane environment. You will find parents are unable to accomplish either.

If you re read the coalition article it speaks to poor judgment at the local school level. You are right on target.

By Lee

February 8, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

Gwinnette Parent, why do I think the expulsion rate is low?

The bottom line is that it takes an act of Congress to do anything with a problem student. I seriously doubt that there are very many students in the situation you described.

Like I said, if you could get that info, it might be interesting to talk about it.

By Jeff

February 8, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

Lee:

As with the Romans at Christ’s crucifixion, you know not the error of your ways.

By Tforlife

February 8, 2008 9:34 AM | Link to this

Wow!!! I haven’t read all the comments. However, there seems to be excellant points made. As an educator, I would say that we all need to work together. The blame can’t just be the school, parents or students. We all share and play a part in the lives of the students. There are some parents that are just awful but yet the student is a joy. There are also some students that are awful and the parents just don’t know what to do. There are teachers and administrators that would like to see the “gray area”. However, policy dictates the job. Being an educator it is sometimes difficult to get the “whole” story of who started the altercation, he said he said, she said she said, etc…This could go on forever and it does, student after student. All students (kids) are our responsibility in some way. As adults, we are the roll models. As human beings, we all have are different opinions, beliefs, etc. Our kids are influnced by peers and media and they do as they see and not as they are told. The job of parent, teacher, etc. is difficult. However, it can be done. We just need to work together. We should work to make every student a productive member of society. Remember taxes dollars take care of those in jail/prison.

By Gwinnett Parent

February 8, 2008 9:47 AM | Link to this

Lee, Elementary students are not eligible for the alternative schools. The movement out of the general school population in middle school and high school is pretty fluid.

Also, if the student is a huge disruption, there is probably something wrong. Have her tell her administration that she thinks he/she should be tested under Child Find IDEA, so he/she can get the services he/she may need. Have her document her request.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

Pretty close T,

I would suggest that compulsory education laws may be contributing to violence in public schools as well.

That being said, we need to encourage innovation and experimentation in schools through decentralization and deregulation. Incentives matter, so effectively addressing school violence must include some level of parental choice, and an emphasis on private, voluntary, contractual methods rather than compulsory ones.

By Jeff

February 8, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

jim:

Your last got me thinking about a comment I frequently make to parents whose kids are annoying me:

You handle it, or I will. And I GARAUNTEE you won’t like my methods.

What if schools adopted a similar strategy? Draconian measures that would have made Draco himself beg for mercy, but give parents the opportunity to fix the issue first, and as long as documented progress is being made, the draconian measure is delayed. It would then be up to parents to get their tales in gear if they thought that the draconian measure was too much. The could use whatever methods they wanted, as long as verifiable progress is being made.

You get parental choice and involvement, and for parents that just don’t care, the problem is still solved.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 10:32 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

I fear you may have missed the point.

My idea of choice obviously doesn’t coincide with yours.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

Just so you understand where I was coming from with my comment. Let me explain that I was advocating prevention not remedy after the fact.

I believe that choice in education would go a long way to erasing many of the problems parents and teachers face today, not to mention improving outcomes for students themselves.

By Jeff

February 8, 2008 10:39 AM | Link to this

jim:

Difference is on the emphasis. Mine is on the problem getting solved.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 10:47 AM | Link to this

Ah yes,

and mine is on improving the system by eliminating or signifantly reducing the issue.

By Jeff

February 8, 2008 10:49 AM | Link to this

jim:

Know what the problem with jails and insane asylums is?

The people in them are still criminals or insane. They just happen to be in a different place.

School choice is the same. The problem kids will still be problem kids. Just in a different location.

My version of choice gets rid of the ‘problem’ aspect one way or the other, WITHOUT simply relocating it.

By jim d

February 8, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

Actually Jeff,

The only problem with jails and insane asylums is, they just don’t have everone in them that belong there. :-)

By Roy

February 8, 2008 12:13 PM | Link to this

Lee, I think you drew the wrong inference from the article. I don’t believe the writers are suggesting that minority children not be held accountable for their behavior. If and when they break the rules, they should be subject to pre-established, reasonable and constructive remedial actions. What they are asking, is if data supports the trend that has been shown around the country which suggests that for like infractions, minorities and disadvantaged children are more likely to receive harsher punishment. We should all be outraged if this is true. They are also questioning the quality and effectiveness of the remedial approaches currently used. What we all should keep in mind is that we are dealing with children and education. Even in addressing wrong behaviors, the objective has to be not only accountability for the behavior, but educating the student on why it was wrong and equipping the faculty, child and parent(s) with the knowledge and tools to avoid recurrence.
When children spend unnecessary time outside of a traditional classroom, there are no winners. I wholeheartedly agree that violent or disruptive children should not be allowed to prevent the majority from being educated. We should just be on guard to ensure that we don’t as the saying goes, throw the baby out with the bath water.

By SET

February 8, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

Roy:

I would argue that minorities and disadvantaged children (whatever that is) are receiving inadequate punishment in public schools because they still represent a disproportionate share of the problems we see in the CA schools - and indeed schools nationally.

I could also argue that minority students are placed in an impossible position in intergrated schools and acting out is a coping mechanism when a student is placed in a class that they cannot perform up to par in - which is what I have seen with Affirmative Action students in over their head in academic settings.

Just what do school operators expect?

There is a reason why the problems we see now did not exist in the segregated schools taught by the black middle class in the 1950’s.

I’m not saying that we have to segregate students by race although that’s exactly what is happening in the 1950’s and now in CA. I am saying that if you don’t segregate students by ability, the lower IQ students are going to put energy in what they do excel in which is physicality, at the expense of the other students and staff.

The Military and professional sports such as the NFL rigidly segregate by IQ, including deselecting for IQ that is higher than allowed for a given position. But they have a premium on not failing. There is no such premium in education and failure factories pay nice pensions to teachers and administrators.

Too bad about the kids, though.

I do say this: There will be no significant discipline in our public schools under the current dogma that all people are the same. You can’t discipline the lower functioning students without running afoul of the racial quotas that are vital to maintaining the lie the schools live under.

Nothing will change. Housing patterns will continue to be disrupted as the shrinking middle-class and the professional class put more physical distance between them and the proletariat. This country will continue to evolve a hereditary class system using language, dress, manners, education and family to place people at birth into lifelong class structure with little upward movement.

This was the warning contained in “The Bell Curve” and this process was not occurring when the public school system functioned well through WWII and up to Brown vs Board of Education. Back then our school system as well as other institutions such as the military and Corporate America would identify bright people of all races and classes and bring them forward. That process was stopped by Appellate Court rulings that forbade the use of IQ testing other than in the military and the NFL, and by Court Imposed Affirmative Action which damaged the value of minority held credentials.

I’d like to see the schools try again and undo the failure factory complex. It would start with real discipline.

By Sharon

February 8, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

Tforlife- I agree we all need to work together to make every student a productive member of society and it is much cheaper and wiser use of our tax dollars to educate than incarcerate. Suppose it is “the parents fault”, do we throw the child away? Or should we attempt to reform the behavior such as using positive behavior interventions vs. harsh punishments, especially for minor offenses?

Concerned Parent- I understand about learning disabilities and the frustration the child endures. LD and depression are often closely linked. Especially in boys, depression is often expressed as anger. When a student can’t read close to grade level, what are his chances for success? It takes a whole lot of extra effort on the child’s part that often goes unrecognized.

By tforlife

February 10, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this

Sharon—I really don’t care who’s at fault. I said we should work together to help the child. Regardless, of who’s at fault.

By Competitive

February 11, 2008 11:37 PM | Link to this

I didn’t read everyone’s post, but the ones I did read missed an important point. Teachers and administrators are facing increasing behavior problems with a decreasing number of options for changing behavior.

In days past, a student who talked repeatedly in class would receive corporal punishment and, possibly, a phone call or note home. In ninety-five percent of the cases, this was sufficient to solve the problem. Other students usually saw the immediate consequence and chose not to repeat the behavior. Often, the worst part of the punishment was the phone call home, which resulted in much stronger disciplinary action from the parents. Other options might include cleaning duties, writing sentences, push-ups, etc. This did not require an administrative referral, nor ISS or OSS.

Today, the teacher will follow the common discipline plan of a warning, some sort of isolation (maybe silent lunch), detention, then referral. Once the referral is made, the administrator has few options, most of which include suspension. Many of the options mentioned above have been deemed unacceptable by parents, students, administrators, etc.

Parents who used to support the disciplinary actions of the school now actively fight against them. Parents and students deny any wrongdoing, create excuses for their inability to attend detentions, or even ask for ISS instead of the inconvienence of detention or Saturday School. This further narrows the options schools have for discipline.

Teachers and schools need more options for disciplinary action and more support from parents. Also, parents and students deserve a teacher who is actively teaching and monitoring the class, setting clear rules and procedures, and enforcing them.

I always tell my students they can disrupt their own learning all they want, but the second they disrupt someone else’s learning, that’s when I have to intervene. I also try very hard to identify the leaders and the followers, and do all I possibly can to get the leaders to engage in the right actions. This usually prevents most problems.

By SomeoneClose

February 12, 2008 3:38 PM | Link to this

So what do you do when a principal makes false statements in the records of a student? What do you do when a principal goes public and files a police report with false accusations? File civil action against them! We were told that you can’t sue a principal. We were told they have immunity. We will see how Buford’s principal will fare with litigation soon. Irrefutable evidence will be presented at trial concerning false statements he made in a police report.