PDA

View Full Version : Do you think expelling a student is the best way to treat him/her



S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 09:49 AM
I don't I suspect that they consider it a vacation. An opportunity to um play on the 'puter.
At boardingshool where I went, the kids were only kicked out permanently.. Those who broke the rules ( minor breaks in the rules ) were assigned work on campus during the holidays.. Effective!

McMike
12-04-2010, 09:51 AM
Only for the most extreme cases.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 09:55 AM
Only for the most extreme cases. Extreme case suggest permanent expulsion. For minor infractions doesn't expelling them seem like a vact]ation to them. The don't have to get up, the parents leave to go to work and they communicate by phone, hang out, play with the computer etc.
Now some parents are obviously harsh on the kids and make them toe the line if they are expelled but I don't think that is necessarily true now.

Paul Pless
12-04-2010, 09:56 AM
only if they are a danger or extreme distraction to other students. . .

Most school districts in Alabama have alternative schools for problem students rather than suspensions or expulsions. The one in my former school district is a hallway of cubicles where students are sent to study their normal classroom assignments on their own - they aren't allowed any contact with other students during their time there. . .

Allison
12-04-2010, 10:12 AM
They don't expel kids under 17 here from public schools, they exclude them for up to 10weeks for things like attacking teachers but then they are let back in.
Of course the private schools can suspend and expel whoever they want.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
12-04-2010, 10:29 AM
I went to a state grammar school which had a boarding section. I was a boarder. Suspensions were never used, probably because corporal punishment was retained, albeit seldom applied. There were occasional expulsions - usually because, as a state selective boarding school, we were the only school to which the County Council could send boys who should have been in an Approved School but who had passed the Eleven Plus. I have always been proud of having been esposed to some of the most capable little villains around - it probably did me no end of good!

The idea of expulsion was of course to protect the children who remained in the school from further villainy, not to do anything good for the offending child.

The sanction only works if the alternative is worse.

Suspensions from modern comprehensives are presumably also intended to protect the school from the pupil, but I do not see that ten weeks sitting at home playing computer games is an effective sanction on the villain!

BarnacleGrim
12-04-2010, 10:31 AM
Getting out of school free must be every unruly child's fantasy.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 10:32 AM
They don't expel kids under 17 here from public schools, they exclude them for up to 10weeks for things like attacking teachers but then they are let back in.
Of course the private schools can suspend and expel whoever they want. Explain please

Allison
12-04-2010, 10:33 AM
Andrew 10weeks is the extrem end. Suspensions are usually only for a few days. They are required to do work and the district offices have teachers that work with them when they are out for more than 5 days.

goodnight gentlemen!

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 10:35 AM
Getting out of school free must be every unruly child's fantasy.That's what I think and yet I think there are schools that expel students for a variety of infractions. Paul mentions another solution but here I think the local district does expel kids may be wrong but my understanding.

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 10:54 AM
is an extreme case when a 4th grader doodles a pic of a gun on the edge of his paper?

RichKrough
12-04-2010, 10:55 AM
Effectiveness of school suspension is dependent on parental participation. If the kid is just left at home all day to sit in front of a TV or play on the computer there isn't much punishment experienced.

The one time my son was suspended from school, I stayed home from work and made him do his schoolwork all day. I then deducted some of the money I lost from work that day from his allowance for 3 months. He never got another suspension.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 10:57 AM
That is the way it should be. In the dynamics of our families I think that is not the norm. Yes there are those who did what you did but you have heard of the "latch key Kids".

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 10:58 AM
Effectiveness of school suspension is dependent on parental participation. If the kid is just left at home all day to sit in front of a TV or play on the computer there isn't much punishment experienced.

The one time my son was suspended from school, I stayed home from work and made him do his schoolwork all day. I then deducted some of the money I lost from work that day from his allowance for 3 months. He never got another suspension.

how much parental neglect is because of the modern requirement for two income families?

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 11:02 AM
My parent's generation was probably the last one that did NOT need two incomes. That both parents work or have to work is the norm not the extreme and is typical of our economy and a desire on wives part to get nto the work place. As always there are exceptions. There are always exceptions.

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 11:05 AM
I guess we can blame it on Hitler...

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-04-2010, 11:07 AM
When I was a kid our public schools were considered quite good. There was a policy of expulsion. But the kid almost never was booted immediately. They were segragated in a different school and if the kid failed to come around he was eventually let go.
The upside was our school system had a large highschool night-school branch. Once an offending kid was gone for a year he/she could enter night school and get a standard academic diploma. Night school required a small tuition and, of course, there were none of the usual high school emenities. Most of the night school students were adults so a recalcitrant teen-ager would have no audience to play to.
Also, night school was the eventual option for any kid who attained 19 years but was not ready to graduate.
Today there is virtually no permanent expulsion, the system has been a basket case for decades and there is no night school because nobody in their right mind would want to attend any public school after dark. Most extracuricular activiities occure in the afternoon for the same reason.
The current philosophy for our public highschools seems to be they are a cheap alternative to incarceration which would result from having a lot of ex-students roaming the streets during the day.
Finally, to get rid of a kid school administrators have to go thru' a detailed process to keep themselves safe from parental law suites.

RichKrough
12-04-2010, 11:18 AM
how much parental neglect is because of the modern requirement for two income families?

I agree Phillip that is major contributing factor ( Latch key kids). My hard-ass opinion is if folks can't afford or not willing to adjust their lifestyle to be a parent 24/7 then they shouldn't be reproducing. My wife and I both worked full time while our son was growing up, We changed our work schedules so that one of us was always there. It was tough and it didn't always go well between us, plus we had the pressure of making less money during those first few years. However it was a duty we both signed up for and vowed to complete.

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 11:24 AM
I agree Phillip that is major contributing factor ( Latch key kids). My hard-ass opinion is if folks can't afford or not willing to adjust their lifestyle to be a parent 24/7 then they shouldn't be reproducing. My wife and I both worked full time while our son was growing up, We changed our work schedules so that one of us was always there. It was tough and it didn't always go well between us, plus we had the pressure of making less money during those first few years. However it was a duty we both signed up for and vowed to complete.

your idea may be good but I don't see it as very likely...

we would end up with a Chinese system and mandatory abortion and such

RichKrough
12-04-2010, 11:34 AM
your idea may be good but I don't see it as very likely...

we would end up with a Chinese system and mandatory abortion and such

Not a system I would advocate nor am I one to support legislating morals.
Plenty of parents I have known over the years also reared their children by our example.
Unfortunately it is the abject failures that make the headlines

David W Pratt
12-04-2010, 01:23 PM
How does it get to that serious a stage? Public school teachers are all "certified", what ever that means. I think it is probably very rare that a kid goes from no trouble to expellable in one leap. Why wasn't there an intervention earlier.
Yes, I know there will be transfer students with emotional problems who make that leap, and examples like the 4th grader doodling a gun who gets expelled by whack-job, zero tolerance principals. Dosen't teacher training include maintaining discipline?

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 01:27 PM
How does it get to that serious a stage? Public school teachers are all "certified", what ever that means. I think it is probably very rare that a kid goes from no trouble to expellable in one leap. Why wasn't there an intervention earlier.
Yes, I know there will be transfer students with emotional problems who make that leap, and examples like the 4th grader doodling a gun who gets expelled by whack-job, zero tolerance principals. Dosen't teacher training include maintaining discipline?

I would like to see "your" whack-job get expelled from the teaching business...permanently
ever wonder why popeye cartoons are no longer seen?...not PC

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 01:32 PM
One would think that the administator's role is to intervene but the parents are ultimately responsible Parents I have seen have supported the kids. Exceptions granted. But there is a feeling that THEIR child could do no wrong.

A teacher of an 8th grader complained/talked to the child's parents about the umm grooming in class; eye liner, finger nail polishing. etc. Disrupted the other students who enjoyed the show regularly. Weeks went by and the parents did nothing. One Friday, the teacher trimmed the student's finger nails with a pair of nail clippers. Monday morning the teacher was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon.

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 01:40 PM
what was the outcome?

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 01:42 PM
I don't know. I think being led off in handcuff was enough. The point is the kid went to mommy and complained, the parent (s) took her side and the teacher was arrested

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-04-2010, 02:08 PM
How does it get to that serious a stage? Public school teachers are all "certified", what ever that means.
?



You certainly don't have a knowlwdge of the constraints teachers are subject to today.

Certification means the teacher has acquired the necessary education to be teaching whatever they teach. It doesn't make the teacher all powerful. In fact teachers are severly limited because of the danger of law suites. A good teacher contract usually has a built in insurance policy in case a parent sues.


I think it is probably very rare that a kid goes from no trouble to expellable in one leap. Why wasn't there an intervention earlier.
?



There usually is but the school system can't usually supply therapy beyond what is obviously related to learning disability and can't make the parent get the kid therapy for more severe issues or even admit their kid is a problem.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 02:13 PM
Our public school system is living hand to mouth. Tax bill to tax bill. One one side the curriculum is being cut back and the need for especial ed. or other programs are on the rise.. Everyone seems to want schools to do what parents can't or won't. My gosh, the schools have to serve breakfast to some kids.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 02:18 PM
Certification is just another hoop new teachers have to jump through

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 02:20 PM
Certification is just another hoop new teachers have to jump through

I think the certification is bogus...this nation grew up without everyone needing special credentials for each little thing they do...it has not gotten any better that I can see since

Peter Malcolm Jardine
12-04-2010, 02:22 PM
Chuck makes some very good points. The education system has a very wide range of legal constraints now compared to 30 years ago. Physical intervention by a teacher is out, no straps, no rulers across the knuckles, all the Norman Rockwell poster style stuff is gone. Now we have kids with knives, guns, drugs, and a host of other weapons and substances roaming the halls.

While I believe that public education is a necessary part of a progressive society, I am not sure it's a right. I think universal health care is more of a right than public education. Education is a privilege. Frankly, I think a kid that continually disrupts classes and poses any kind of threat, intellectually or mentally to other students or staff, should be punted. The only sad part is that the home environment is a probable cause of the behaviour and the attitude the child has towards learning.

I never completed high school. My mother died when I was fifteen, and I went to work. Issues I had with my academic/scientist father had something to do with it as well, but my mother's death was the tipper. That said, I grew up in a household that valued knowledge. We had a lot of books, magazines and newspapers around our house, as a family we went places that had educational value. I know I possess a portfolio of knowledge and understanding that would rival a lot of university graduates, but I am a lucky exception. The downside is that I have been usually underemployed because of my lack of a degree, the "piece of paper" as it were.

I am in favour of some return to the idea of education as a privilege, instead of the watered down system we have in terms of discipline. A lot of really bad parents that didn't appreciate their teachers have entirely too much to say about how schools run. The other side is the teachers union, which in Ontario particularly, has a LOT of power that doesn't seem to be used improving the education system, but simply bettering the income of teachers, while protecting them from consequences of poor behaviour.

andrewe
12-04-2010, 02:38 PM
An earlier era. I went to a private school in the UK. 50/50 boarders/dayboys. Single sex, of course. The only problems were from pupils who bucked the system. A friend, smoked behind his locker door. Not a great idea. He had to go. Simply because he raised two fingers to the system. (that might be 'one' in the US) The rest of us realised that the way forward needed you to pay attention to the rules. Not difficult. Nowadays, the teacher/learner, combo is out of control.
A

PMJ has a lot of truth..

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 02:40 PM
If you can expand on some of that, Peter, I'll read it...

htom
12-04-2010, 03:18 PM
I was "suspended" for three days just before graduation (along with a dozen others) for an unauthorized gathering of the Drama Club. B.....ds fired the Club's supervising teacher the next year, and her husband, even though they knew nothing about it. Our parents knew about the gathering, we'd told them, provided maps and phone numbers, too, but didn't believe us, panicked when a storm took down some phone lines and they lost contact with us, and called the cops, who called the sheriff, .... Sorry, Mr. & Mrs. Pratt, we didn't mean anyone any harm, and didn't harm anyone. Which we all said repeatedly at the time, not that it did any good. Stupid "Adults". I remember the first day we all worked in the theatre, doing a pile of those chores that are never done, but were then not allowed to do that; IIRC, we went to the lake with our s.o.s and had a party the next day (no fun because we were all still angry, doubling the number of students, too), and then we did work at a local church the last, with a picnic lunch. Really stupid adults, parents, teachers, administrators, school board. Sheriff was the only one who was nice about it; didn't see what the fuss was all about. We'd broken no laws, had no booze, no drugs ... he thought we should be commended for being good student citizens, even though we were up all night. I'm surprised, I'm still angry about this. Totally unjust to dismiss Carol & Bob.

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 04:16 PM
I was "suspended" for three days just before graduation (along with a dozen others) for an unauthorized gathering of the Drama Club. B.....ds fired the Club's supervising teacher the next year, and her husband, even though they knew nothing about it. Our parents knew about the gathering, we'd told them, provided maps and phone numbers, too, but didn't believe us, panicked when a storm took down some phone lines and they lost contact with us, and called the cops, who called the sheriff, .... Sorry, Mr. & Mrs. Pratt, we didn't mean anyone any harm, and didn't harm anyone. Which we all said repeatedly at the time, not that it did any good. Stupid "Adults". I remember the first day we all worked in the theatre, doing a pile of those chores that are never done, but were then not allowed to do that; IIRC, we went to the lake with our s.o.s and had a party the next day (no fun because we were all still angry, doubling the number of students, too), and then we did work at a local church the last, with a picnic lunch. Really stupid adults, parents, teachers, administrators, school board. Sheriff was the only one who was nice about it; didn't see what the fuss was all about. We'd broken no laws, had no booze, no drugs ... he thought we should be commended for being good student citizens, even though we were up all night. I'm surprised, I'm still angry about this. Totally unjust to dismiss Carol & Bob.

I read that twice...I can't figure out what was done?

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 04:20 PM
I thimk the punishment received is in the middle... An in house suspension with a little work to do.

skuthorp
12-04-2010, 04:21 PM
I could never see why anyone would become a teacher when I was in school and the situation hasn't gotten any better. I am surprised that the supply just hasn't dried up completely. Of course there are some idealists, and those who take it on in default, but why would you want to put up with all that sh**? Private schools can and do dump disruptive students and sometimes disruptive parents, they also cull the academic bottom end at about year 10 and offer top students from public schools 'incentives'. They are business of course and final year results are their major marketing tool. Public schools get stuck with the detritus which interferes with the performance of the other students as much as the burocratic nightmare teachers are required to go through. Figures say that young nteachers don't stay in the service more than 10 years on average, I'm not surprised.
In the end of this you get a population divided by opportunity, class, and economics. At the bottom an underclass with almost no academic skills and in these days virtually unemployable. Their alternative occupations? Crime plays a large part, drugs part of the reason they ended up at the bottom anyway. Maybe 'survival of the fittest' still is in play.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 04:30 PM
Skut-- Much of what you say maybe true but there are pluses.

But bottom line is the quality of the school. Two I went to umm sucked.... Two were fantastic.

Private schools pay a good bundle creating a different calibre of parent and student and much better for us.

skuthorp
12-04-2010, 04:40 PM
Yes, but what about the others? If you don't let people on to the gravy train why should they buy the ticket? Why should they obey the rules? In fact the rules may actually force them not to. Throwing a man and his family onto the street at the endo of your unemployment benifit period solves nothing, it just removes the statistic. Allowing a system that has that as it's default setting is so stupid and immoral so as to defy reason. The top end will always look after themselves.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 04:45 PM
Yes, but what about the others? If you don't let people on to the gravy train why should they buy the ticket? Why should they obey the rules? In fact the rules may actually force them not to. Throwing a man and his family onto the street at the endo of your unemployment benifit period solves nothing, it just removes the statistic. Allowing a system that has that as it's default setting is so stupid and immoral so as to defy reason. The top end will always look after themselves.

A different thread?

skuthorp
12-04-2010, 04:49 PM
Yeah, probably. Thread drift but they are connected. But it's gonna be a hot day here and I've got stuff to do. Be back on air in about 9 hours. You are welcome to use my post if you want to start one.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 04:51 PM
No, I'll let you do it. I don't want you to be blamed for what I do.

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 04:53 PM
Got busted for going up the "down" stairs during a period. No amount of rationale could convince them that the "rule" was for between period traffic control. Turned me into a s**t raising little pr**k ready for the sixties. Burn baby burn. Never finished high school, have a degree though, no thanks to the morons who ran high schools. Never trusted an authority figure after that debacle.

your example re enforces my idea that our schools teach kids WHAT to think and not HOW to think

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 04:54 PM
your example re enforces my idea that our schools teach kids WHAT to think and not HOW to think
Blame the tests

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 04:56 PM
Blame the tests

perhaps, but I don't think we should limit ourselves to that

Meli
12-04-2010, 05:00 PM
I could never see why anyone would become a teacher when I was in school and the situation hasn't gotten any better. I am surprised that the supply just hasn't dried up completely. Of course there are some idealists, and those who take it on in default, but why would you want to put up with all that sh**? Private schools can and do dump disruptive students and sometimes disruptive parents, they also cull the academic bottom end at about year 10 and offer top students from public schools 'incentives'. They are business of course and final year results are their major marketing tool. Public schools get stuck with the detritus which interferes with the performance of the other students as much as the burocratic nightmare teachers are required to go through. Figures say that young nteachers don't stay in the service more than 10 years on average, I'm not surprised.
In the end of this you get a population divided by opportunity, class, and economics. At the bottom an underclass with almost no academic skills and in these days virtually unemployable. Their alternative occupations? Crime plays a large part, drugs part of the reason they ended up at the bottom anyway. Maybe 'survival of the fittest' still is in play.

If we had the political will to stop public funding of elite private schools, there might be a bit more in the pot to pay public school teachers better and attract the really good teachers away from the private schools.

Elite private schools here are living on publicly provided cake. They not only have the funds to provide all the extra tuition and teacher aids, they toss their failures into the public system and poach the best teachers and use Craig from Craigiburns tax dollars to do it, while the Craiglets get the crumbs.:mad:

If we didn't have the social security safetynet that we do, things would be even grimmer.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 05:00 PM
We have to...PSAT,SAT, ACH TESTING, GRAD SCHOOL TEST ( CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IT IS CALLED LSAT?)
And those yearly competency test given every spring. The entire school system caters to testing.

Tom Montgomery
12-04-2010, 05:02 PM
Sometimes expelling a student results in a safer environment for the rest of the student body.

I have a co-worker who was offered a deal by his principal in his senior year of high school. The deal was: Any morning that you awake and feel like fighting, stay at home. If you then go through the entire school year without being involved in a fight, we will give you a diploma.

My friend followed through on the bargain and graduated. He subsequently enlisted in the U.S. Marine Cops (a judge gave him that option rather than incarceration).

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 05:02 PM
We have to...PSAT,SAT, ACH TESTING, GRAD SCHOOL TEST ( CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT IT IS CALLED LSAT?)
And those yearly competency test given every spring. The entire school system caters to testing.

tests...a lazy way to quantify life

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 05:05 PM
How did the administrator get around the attendance issue. Unless it was a private school but that can't be, private school heads are usually called headmasters

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 05:07 PM
How did the administrator around the attendance issue. Unless it was a private school but that can't be, private school heads are usually called headmasters

Andy Griffith was Headmaster in No Time for Sargents...

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 05:10 PM
Andy Griffith was Headmaster in No Time for Sargents...


Private military School

Phillip Allen
12-04-2010, 05:16 PM
Private military School

yep...military schools got lots of privates in em

Tom Montgomery
12-04-2010, 05:17 PM
How did the administrator get around the attendance issue. Unless it was a private school but that can't be, private school heads are usually called headmasters

My friend is now a non-violent citizen who is a stanch GOP voter. He absolutely believes his extra-curriclar illegal business activity is completely within American entrepreneurial tradition.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 05:20 PM
My friend is now a non-violent citizen who is a stanch GOP voter. He absolutely believes his extra-curriclar illegal business activity is completely within American entrepreneurial tradition.

That may be but what happens to the student who does not have his required attendance record? He doesn't graduate. Good this guy doesn't care if he doesn't follow the rules but the kid is allowed to suffer. Makes perfect sense

Tom Montgomery
12-04-2010, 05:27 PM
.
Well... yeeaahh. :rolleyes:

My point is, Jamie, is that sometimes expulsion is necessary to ensure a safe environment for the rest of the student body.

And yes, sometimes, the expelled student can get turned around (like my co-worker... sort of). But school administrators must, +1, be concerned about maintaining a safe environment for the student body as a whole.
.

htom
12-04-2010, 05:58 PM
Oh. Forgot to say. Last play of the year, the spring musical. "Oklahoma!" IIRC. There was the traditional cast party afterward, ending at 11:30 by new officialdom's decree, midnight for seniors. This gave us (since curtain down was ~10:25) a little more than an hour for a party. Previous cast parties had gone until (sometimes) 1 or 2 or 3 in the morning for a few attendees. Nope, none of that, everyone to leave for home by the stated times. (They originally said arrive home then, but some students couldn't get home in an hour, South Dakota being a big place.)

Those of us who were seniors were offended. We were being punished, we felt, for a few of the previous year's senior class's bad behavior. We asked for 1 AM. No. Please. NO! It's a Saturday night. Ask again and there will be NO party.

So we quietly rebelled. Went to the cast party, left as told, took the youngsters home like the good baby sitters we'd been.

Then went to a different place -- on our way home -- and had our own party, which was to last until 6, when we'd all show up for early Mass, even those of us who were not Catholic, and then continue home. (6 being the earliest service in town.) All of us had our Sunday go-to-church clothes, it was a big house (and barn), enough showers, and privacy would not be a problem (the farm belonged to the parents of one of the seniors; they were living "in town".) We played theatre people games, cooked, talked, cried, laughed. No booze, no drugs, no sex. (Well, we'd all agreed to that, none of us had a significant other who was both theatre and senior; don't know of anyone who broke their word about it.) We didn't need any of those things; we were higher than kites, on the applause still ringing in our ears.

About 5:30 AM, half-way through the shower & dressing process, the Sheriff and a couple of squad cars showed up, wanted to know what was going on. We told him, gave him a copy of the "Dear Parents" letter we'd written and mimeo'd a bunch of copies of, that told who was going to be there, their home phone and address, where the Senior party was, when, the program, ... and a map and phone numbers for the home, office, and barn. We were told that parents were complaining that we were lost or out drunk or ... all of the parental nightmares, the Sheriff checked the phones, all worked. Not one of the parents had bothered to call us. All of us were there, well and healthy.

We were told to hurry up, abandon the church plan, and get home. Church could be later. We did as we were told.

None of our parents, not one, believed that we would do such a thing. We had told them, explained it, given them the sheet of paper with all of the info.

I was grounded forever. (Pretty much everyone was.) I ignored it, it was an unreasonable punishment for doing exactly what I'd told my parents I was going to do.

Then we were suspended.

The work in the theatre was something we organized for ourselves to do for the three days while we were suspended; not a punishment. We didn't want to waste the time doing nothing. (We were, after all, "good kids".) We were not allowed to continue, so had the lakeside party, to be "bad", all of our girl friends and boy friends skipping school to come with us, and went to one of the local churches and helped with some charity thing they were putting together. Also volunteer, not punishment. We were just not to be on school property.

I suspect that the real reason that Mrs. Pratt was fired was because the school board was unhappy with her over a number of things; this was just the "excuse". She'd chosen some excellent plays (Tony and Drama Critic's winners) that were controversial, and had not removed the song "You've got to be carefully taught" from our performance of South Pacific. We didn't know it was supposed to have been removed until after opening night, when there was a huge outcry about it being there.

She was an inspiring teacher. I just realized that when my little brother Scott was at SD School of Mines (where they went), he might have had her as an English or Speech teacher, and she might have inspired him into theatre, as well. I'll have to ask him. (Both of the Pratts are now sadly deceased.)

Tom Montgomery
12-04-2010, 08:10 PM
.
You've got to be taught
To hate and fear,
You've got to be taught
From year to year,
It's got to be drummed
In your dear little ear
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught to be afraid
Of people whose eyes are oddly made,
And people whose skin is a diff'rent shade,
You've got to be carefully taught.

You've got to be taught before it's too late,
Before you are six or seven or eight,
To hate all the people your relatives hate,
You've got to be carefully taught!
.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 08:15 PM
I luckily taught at boarding schools and the issues are very different.

I agree that the primary concern is to keep the students safe but expelling or suspending a student is the last step. The first thing an administrator should do is some how get parents motivated the theory being that classroom behavior starts at home. With potential litigation at every door waiting to pounce, this is paramount. Think of it cutting the horse away from the pass. The greatest emphasis should be bolstering the concept of good family values in the home. Expelling or suspending a student usually backfires without support and usually that comes from the home.
There is a fine line though and one hard to tread.

I don't think and administrator and any one wants a policeman on every floor patrolling.

But you also have rules and regulations you have yo follow no matter how much sense they make. You have a school board looking up your kilt all the time

Meli
12-04-2010, 08:16 PM
:clap I like that, who wrote it. Very Tom Leah (sp)?

Tom Montgomery
12-04-2010, 08:20 PM
The lyrics were written by Oscar Hammerstein II, music by Richard Rogers, and the song was in the musical South Pacific.

I think you are thinking of Tom Lehrer.

S.V. Airlie
12-04-2010, 08:24 PM
The lyrics were written by Oscar Hammerstein II, music by Richard Rogers, and the song was in the musical South Pacific.

I think you are thinking of Tom Lehrer. I love the CD.. I've got to get that man outa my hair, etc.

htom
12-04-2010, 08:41 PM
Tom -- Yup. I can think of no better way of drumming that idea into a bunch of school kids' minds than forbidding them to sing that song. I don't think that that was the plan of those objecting!

bucheron
12-04-2010, 10:08 PM
Elite private schools here are living on publicly provided cake.

Forumites outside Australia should know that a new government website called Myschool is publishing profiles of all schools, public and private.

The private schools are twisting and turning to avoid revealing details of the cash reserves they have, after accepting taxpayer money.

3dce
12-05-2010, 03:53 AM
I attend a private "christian" school where, sadly enough, the curriculum is focused more on religion rather essential skills and knowledge that the students will need later in life. The drug problem is just as bad there as at public schools and yet the consequences are considerably less. We usually get the "rejects", kids who didn't fit in at other schools, kids who have been expelled from every other school around, or some because their parents think that they will get a better education. Several of the kids have been caught smoking (cigarettes), chewing, drinking, and smoking pot on school grounds. I have been there for four years now and out of all the unruly behavior which takes place there I have only seen one kid get expelled. Meanwhile the local public school is expelling students based on rumors or very little evidence in some cases (one kid who now attends my school was expelled over a rumor that was started about him by a teacher that he tried to sell cocaine on the bus which was proven to be erroneous). I personally feel that the drastic measures taken to "protect" kids is harming them! They are being taught that they can get away with just about anything with little to no consequences! Our education system in this country(U.S.A.) is pitiful! It amazes me how ignorant these kids are these days and its rather embarrassing to be a teenager! Something has to change!

Meli
12-05-2010, 04:07 AM
To answer the original question, I dont think expelling any student under the age of 18 should be permitted by any school. public or private.
The problem seems to be, how to get an education into these kids, without,
1) them disrupting other students
or
2) having them hang around on the streets causing and falling into life habits that are difficult to reverse.

Keep them in school, but separate them into other classes and extend their school hours until 9pm (with appropriate meals provided of brown rice and vegitables)
If they have finished their allocated tasks, they may leave for the day, Of course this will need MONEY.
No boot camps, no "punishments" just longer hours in school untill they've caught up

Allison
12-05-2010, 04:27 AM
Sadly Meli I don't think that would work in some cases.
You have some kids that you could never keep in the classroom short of locking them in when they want to leave and you have some kids that you really need to get out of the class room because they are not only a source of major disruption but also danger to staff and other students.
With either sort of students you have teachers trapped in the middle between parents supporting "Little Johnny" and all his rights to do what he wants and schools' duty of care to both students and staff.
Expulsion is something that just doesn't happen in public schools in Aust. for children under 17 these days. Exclusion is only used for really serious matters and that is only limited time. There hasn't been a public school student expelled in SA for more than 20years!

Meli
12-05-2010, 04:36 AM
simple, you get a written agreement from parent, little Joey (lets not be sexist:D) either attends or gets expelled with NO Social security.
Course if you could combine this with compuslory community service or school for all citizens under 20 it would be easier( that makes it applicable to little ****s of every socio economic group :D
Of course it wont work with all kids Hmmm maybe if we change the menu to free pizza???

Allison
12-05-2010, 04:44 AM
simple, you get a written agreement from parent, little Joey (lets not be sexist) either attends or gets expelled with NO Social security.

I think this would be pretty hard to get and if the kids didn't like it they'd have Children's Services in their over-riding the parents and protecting "Little Mary's" rights. They would automatically get support from Social services and that would be everybody back to square one. There is no easy answer because kids really do need all those protections and safeguards in place for them but it really does create problems trying to enforce any discipline on them. I don't think any one has a simple and easy answer and pretty much every case has to be taken on it's merits.
Maybe Rick RFNK will chime in later, he's an expert in these things and has a pretty good background.
I'm off to the gym, I'll check in later.
Have fun!!

Meli
12-05-2010, 04:50 AM
well of course there's no easy answer or the Mad Monk would have thunk of it... oh hang on, he has, he wants them all down t' pit.

S.V. Airlie
12-05-2010, 07:34 AM
simple, you get a written agreement from parent, little Joey (lets not be sexist:D) either attends or gets expelled with NO Social security.
Course if you could combine this with compuslory community service or school for all citizens under 20 it would be easier( that makes it applicable to little ****s of every socio economic group :D
Of course it wont work with all kids Hmmm maybe if we change the menu to free pizza???

A football coach did basically the same thing. He put together a contract saying that his athletes would not do anything during the season in the way of damage to the school etc. In essence a contract stating that they would not break the rules or laws during the season. If such an event occurred, the student would be kicked if the team.
The students signed it, the students parents signed it etc. Everyone knew the contact existed. Everyone knew the punishments. One night the students destroyed X number of mailboxes. Blew them up. The coach kicked them off the team..
Now the problem was the team was having a winning season...Bummer! Losing a portion of the team meant that they wouldn't. All the parents complained that it wasn't fair the students should remain on the team. Pressure, possible legal action followed. The administration folded.. Allowed the kids back n the team. Outcome; students one Coach nil.

htom
12-05-2010, 11:52 AM
Reasonable, in this context, requires that school administrations and parents -- and others -- think. Won't happen, they have rules to follow when they want to follow them, and thinking isn't required. In some ways, it's good training for the real world; lots of people with power are like that. It was good we were exposed to it. (It was better that I learned I had the self-control not to beat the c..p out of the head of the school board when he suggested the party was Mrs. Pratt's idea. I've rarely been so tempted to violence.)

pipefitter
12-05-2010, 04:04 PM
My parent's generation was probably the last one that did NOT need two incomes. That both parents work or have to work is the norm not the extreme and is typical of our economy and a desire on wives part to get nto the work place. As always there are exceptions. There are always exceptions.

I used to think that as well. After talking with numerous elders from around that time period, the most common consensus was that they did indeed need an additional income, but instead, just did without for the most part. Their existence was indeed more humble all the way around, right down to the amount of space that people from that era used to raise significantly larger families. Two, three children sharing a bedroom was commonplace. It is only in more recent times that it has been decided that people need their "space".

My mom was a stay at home mom while we were all young. My father worked two jobs. Same being the case when my children were young. My ex stayed at home with the boys. I worked double shifts and/or two jobs along with a 3rd, weekend job when it was available.

Allison
12-05-2010, 04:10 PM
That whole thing of sports "heroes" being given way too many privileges is so common.
There was an article I saw a while back about a young girl in Texas, a cheerleader, who was raped by some guys on the basketball team. to avoid a trial they plead guilty to sexual assault. They were allowed back on the team, one was some "rising star" that the team needed
The young girl refused to cheer for that particular guy and the school booted her off the cheer squad over it!
Now that's cr*p!!

S.V. Airlie
12-05-2010, 04:12 PM
Well there was the case at ummmmm basketball town.....DUKE!!!!!!

Phillip Allen
12-05-2010, 04:15 PM
That whole thing of sports "heroes" being given way too many privileges is so common.
There was an article I saw a while back about a young girl in Texas, a cheerleader, who was raped by some guys on the basketball team. to avoid a trial they plead guilty to sexual assault. They were allowed back on the team, one was some "rising star" that the team needed
The young girl refused to cheer for that particular guy and the school booted her off the cheer squad over it!
Now that's cr*p!!

I agree...sports fans are whores themselves (this belief gets me in trouble with my daughter who is a rabid football fan)

Allison
12-05-2010, 04:16 PM
Apparently the girl fought it through the courts but it was ruled that she had a contract to cheer no matter what and the school won every time!

bucheron
12-05-2010, 05:04 PM
... they have rules to follow when they want to follow them..... In some ways, it's good training for the real world.....

This is what education theorists call the "hidden curriculum".


That whole thing of sports "heroes" being given way too many privileges is so common.


It has always been there. Robert Graves wrote in "Goodbye to all That", about his pre-WWI british Public school*, the cricket and football players were called "The Bloods" and were allowed to flout many rules.

* This is Hidden Curriculum again. An expensive, exclusive private school is called "Public". The system can choose to make you believe something that is logically nonsense.

Phillip Allen
12-05-2010, 06:04 PM
Good question. And the follow-up question is how much of the modern requirement for two income families is due to the huge tax burden? The answer is a lot of it.

if everybody suddenly went back to one income families, the government would collaps. Our government desperatly needs to put as many family members to work as possible...we can expect the child labor laws to change someday...income tax is a progressive desiese

skuthorp
12-05-2010, 11:56 PM
Good question. And the follow-up question is how much of the modern requirement for two income families is due to the huge tax burden? The answer is a lot of it.

Aren't you forgetting some thing? How else would you pay for this.

Cost of War in Iraq & Afghanistan
$1,117,114,413,911
For more details, click here. (http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home)

htom
12-06-2010, 12:06 AM
1.2e12/300e6 = 1,200,000e6/300e6 = 3,000 per person, over (say) ten years, $300 per year. Probably not enough to require a second income.

Allison
12-06-2010, 02:35 AM
Good question. And the follow-up question is how much of the modern requirement for two income families is due to the huge tax burden? The answer is a lot of it.

Rubbish Popeye!
How much of the need for 2 income families is in the huge price rises that have happened for so many basic things that have not been matched by wage rises.
In 1983 we bought a house for $43,000, it needed fixing up and we did a lot of work. It has changed hands 3 times since then.
That house sold recently for $980,000. totally insane!!
Wages haven't gone up that much!!
How much of the increased demand for all the latest gadgets and the relentless advertising that is used to create this demand, has caused the need for 2 income families.
Part of the rise in 2 parents working has been the freeing of women from the plague that saw so many of them forced out of their professions when they had children. When they tried to return they never got back those sort of jobs again. this disgrace has been banished in most Western countries now and women can have a profession but it often entails childcare costs that eat up a substantial portion of that extra income.

Phillip Allen
12-06-2010, 08:21 AM
Good question. And the follow-up question is how much of the modern requirement for two income families is due to the huge tax burden? The answer is a lot of it.

Rubbish Popeye!
How much of the need for 2 income families is in the huge price rises that have happened for so many basic things that have not been matched by wage rises.
In 1983 we bought a house for $43,000, it needed fixing up and we did a lot of work. It has changed hands 3 times since then.
That house sold recently for $980,000. totally insane!!
Wages haven't gone up that much!!
How much of the increased demand for all the latest gadgets and the relentless advertising that is used to create this demand, has caused the need for 2 income families.
Part of the rise in 2 parents working has been the freeing of women from the plague that saw so many of them forced out of their professions when they had children. When they tried to return they never got back those sort of jobs again. this disgrace has been banished in most Western countries now and women can have a profession but it often entails childcare costs that eat up a substantial portion of that extra income.

I don't remember any more but it seems that our childcare costs almost completely ate up income from my wife's working...the answer was to work off the books as much as possible and to cheat on the childcare as much as we could get by with...a bad deal with no alternative

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 08:30 AM
Families spend approx $284,000 on a child up to seventeen... Parents making over approx 70,000 bucks.. Depending on a lot of factors. I posted this info previously Although people like rattling off stats they can vary.

Allison
12-06-2010, 08:49 AM
it seems that our childcare costs almost completely ate up income from my wife's working

That's the view that so many people had and still have.

Why isn't it that "the childcare costs almost completely ate up income from you working" why does it have to be her being at work which is the cause of the increased childcare costs. Once a child is weaned it is a moot point as to which parent is the one that could, I'm not saying should, stay home if possible.
it is only because of the discrimination against women that existed for so long and actually still does that means the majority of women earn far less than men or are present in lower numbers in management or most professions.

Phillip Allen
12-06-2010, 08:56 AM
it seems that our childcare costs almost completely ate up income from my wife's working

That's the view that so many people had and still have.

Why isn't it that "the childcare costs almost completely ate up income from you working" why does it have to be her being at work which is the cause of the increased childcare costs. Once a child is weaned it is a moot point as to which parent is the one that could, I'm not saying should, stay home if possible.
it is only because of the discrimination against women that existed for so long and actually still does that means the majority of women earn far less than men or are present in lower numbers in management or most professions.

alright, alright...touche

there is some reason to view it that way though...the original decision for her to go to work was to earn more money for the household...being as her wages were meant to add then it seems reasonable to offset her wages by childcare costs...and besides it was convienient and makes no difference in the long run...she handled all the money in the house and I had to beg lunch money from her

Allison
12-06-2010, 09:08 AM
Phillip, I was making a general point, not singling you out.|;)

Quite a few women really enjoy being at home with their kids, others want the satisfaction that comes from holding down a career but it usually means they wind up doing both roles!
I was a single parent for many years and worked but I managed to do that from home for long stretches So it varies. but lots of people and society in general have that view that it is the woman who should be staying home. There are costs to that other than just in money terms. a complicated subject.

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 09:09 AM
It's a culture thing. Centuries of expecting women to stay at home and feed the chidren. Can't help the culture thing. I'm afraid it is gonna take a lot more time for our society to really accept equality in the job market. Labor states that currently, women take in between 65 and 98 cents for every dollar a man makes.

Phillip Allen
12-06-2010, 09:10 AM
Phillip, I was making a general point, not singling you out.|;)

Quite a few women really enjoy being at home with their kids, others want the satisfaction that comes from holding down a career but it usually means they wind up doing both roles!
I was a single parent for many years and worked but I managed to do that from home for long stretches So it varies. but lots of people and society in general have that view that it is the woman who should be staying home. There are costs to that other than just in money terms. a complicated subject.

I do not think it is important which stays home but one should...and should be supported by the other moraly as well as financially

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 09:14 AM
I do not think it is important which stays home but one should...and should be supported by the other moraly as well as financially True but sometimes I think women think that men are useless in the kitchen and in changing diapers. LOL

Of course times have changed. The next generation is so much better at such things. I don't think my father ever changed a diaper.

Phillip Allen
12-06-2010, 10:45 AM
True but sometimes I think women think that men are useless in the kitchen and in changing diapers. LOL

Of course times have changed. The next generation is so much better at such things. I don't think my father ever changed a diaper.

My daughter tells stories of me changing her youngest brother's diapers...then she laughs and does an imatation of me retching and holding a diaper at arm's length and running to the bathroom...retching all the way

Pugwash
12-06-2010, 11:57 AM
I'll just leave this here.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

BrianY
12-06-2010, 12:16 PM
If the reason that public schools exist is to educate our children, then it seems to me that booting kids out of school via suspension or expultion is not the proper thing to do. Admittedly, some...I repeate SIOME ...expulsions are warranted if the student poses a threat to his/her classmates. But even then, do we really want to say to the kid "OK kid, you've F'ed up so badly that we give up on you completely. Good luck finding a decent job with no education. Good luck learning to control your behavior without any sort of instituional support (i.e a school) around you." The problem is that these kids who get dumped out of the system are usually the kids that need the MOST help in learning how to behave properly in society. It seems to me that this is an almost certian path to a life of crime or other anti-social behavior. Wouldn't our society be better off in the long run if these kids had some sort of educational opportunity - a special school, perhaps - where they could still receive some sort of education rather than simply dumping them out of the system? Sooner or later, society has to deal with them - either as students or as criminals or as low/no income citizens.

The thing is, the list of infractions that can get you expelled is stupid. For example, my wife teaches in a public high school. One of her best students - a kid with a 3.25 average, well-liked by his teachers and peers and considered to be a "good kid" by all - was caught with about an ounce of pot halfway through his Junior year. Lilke many school districts, her's has a 'Zero Tolerance' policy due to the unthinking, mindless ravings of the general public for such policies and this kid was expelled. No diploma, no chance to complete his education, nothing. Where's the moral justice in that? Where's the logic?

Expultion should be a last resort measure, a final solution to a problem for which no other approach alternative can be found.

Suspension? That depends entirely on the parents and their level of involvemnt in the kid's life. Keeping a kid whose parents are not involved or concerned out of school is little more than a holday for the kid. Most schools in this area use "In-School" suspensions - the kids go to school, but they don't attned their regular classes and they are forced to do school work under the supervison of an administrator.

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 12:21 PM
This was good!

Phillip Allen
12-06-2010, 12:29 PM
GREAT! it seems like the vid echos what I have said...but wait...I'll bet it echos what we ALL have said at one time or another...it seems, also, that the only ones allowed to disparage mortar board intellegence are those with the mortar boards on their heads...

htom
12-06-2010, 01:04 PM
I'm about half way through it, and am about to throw the laptop out the window. If he doesn't think ADHD is real he is either an ignorant fool or an idiot or both. Set up a demonstrably false strawman and demolish it, right. Great demonstration of academic superiority and integrity. A..holes like him cost me forty years of my life.

---
Finished it.

If he'd left out the attack on ADHD, I think I might have agreed with a lot of what he says. He doesn't notice that those "divergent thinkers" he values so much are very often those with ADHD, those who have not learned -- no matter how hard and often they've tried and failed -- to conform their very thought processes to the model he detests. The drugs help us conform when we need to, such as when studying and passing academic tests. Then we can choose to go without them, and see the world as it is, and take the drugs again and cope with it. Don't tell me who he is, I don't want to know.

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 01:14 PM
I'm about half way through it, and am about to throw the laptop out the window. If he doesn't think ADHD is real he is either an ignorant fool or an idiot or both. Set up a demonstrably false strawman and demolish it, right. Great demonstration of academic superiority and integrity. A..holes like him cost me forty years of my life.

---
Finished it.

If he'd left out the attack on ADHD, I think I might have agreed with a lot of what he says. He doesn't notice that those "divergent thinkers" he values so much are very often those with ADHD, those who have not learned -- no matter how hard and often they've tried and failed -- to conform their very thought processes to the model he detests. The drugs help us conform when we need to, such as when studying and passing academic tests. Then we can choose to go without them, and see the world as it is, and take the drugs again and cope with it. Don't tell me who he is, I don't want to know.

I think he used ADHD as an example. He even stated that in the clip

Pugwash
12-06-2010, 01:34 PM
I'm about half way through it, and am about to throw the laptop out the window. If he doesn't think ADHD is real he is either an ignorant fool or an idiot or both..

He didn't say it wasn't real. He said that it wasn't an epidemic and that, in his opinion, as a "diagnosis" it has been over used.

Regardless of your anger, there is some compelling evidence that the unintended consequence of the "Thud" experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenhan_experiment) was the rise of market driven self diagnosis and the widening of diagnostic boundaries.

ADHD is one of those that generates large sums of money for the pharmaceutical industry and, as a bonus, is a convenient fall back for incompetent teachers.

htom
12-06-2010, 01:37 PM
...the modern plague of ADHD, as misplaced, as fictitious, ... I don't mean to say there is no such thing, I'm not qualified to say that, a great majority of psychologists and pediatricians think there is such a thing, but it's still a matter of debate. ...

No, it's not. You can as well tell someone shaking in a grand mal seizure to "stop that trembling" or tell someone who's colorblind to "notice the difference in colors", as tell someone with ADHD to "control their focus". The brain structures that do that just haven't grown. We can learn to imitate them, somewhat, but it's always an imitation of that structure.

Yes, it's frequently over-diagnosed, and even worse, mis-diagnosed. Not an epidemic, it's not contagious. Another strawman.

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 01:43 PM
...the modern plague of ADHD, as misplaced, as fictitious, ... I don't mean to say there is no such thing, I'm not qualified to say that, a great majority of psychologists and pediatricians think there is such a thing, but it's still a matter of debate. ...

No, it's not. You can as well tell someone shaking in a grand mal seizure to "stop that trembling" or tell someone who's colorblind to "notice the difference in colors", as tell someone with ADHD to "control their focus". The brain structures that do that just haven't grown. We can learn to imitate them, somewhat, but it's always an imitation of that structure.

Yes, it's frequently over-diagnosed, and even worse, mis-diagnosed. Not an epidemic, it's not contagious. Another strawman.

Exactly what he said on the clip.

Pugwash
12-06-2010, 01:47 PM
Yes, it's frequently over-diagnosed, and even worse, mis-diagnosed..

So you agree.

I see no argument here...moving on.

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 01:53 PM
I wish Tim had seen the entire segment.

I especially liked the association between the industrial revolution and education. or more aptly perhaps Ford's approach to education. An assembly line approach. not mentioned just a tie-in

Ed Harrow
12-06-2010, 02:00 PM
Answer to the question. "NO!"

Shang
12-06-2010, 03:55 PM
I've spent several terms on our college's Judicial Board, two faculty members, two administrators, and two students.

The only cases of misbehavior we found to be "expellable" included an occasional student who habitually cheated on exams, to the point where none of their work could be assumed to be legitimate.
And there was a case that involved students doing something that endangered other students, then lying to the J-Board to try covering up. However they were not aware that the event had been video taped.

A lot of the cases were just plain funny:

A student who kept a pet tarantula in her dresser drawer, much to the discomfort of her room mate. A biology professor offered a good home to the tarantula in a large aquarium in his lab.

It's a dry campus since most of the students are under drinking age, so a student was surprised while pouring a glass of vodka just as the college president walked in. The student said, "Somebody told me the president was visiting, but I thought they were kidding!"

Or a student who was observed carrying a tombstone up to her dorm room:
"I found it out in a field."
"Were there others in the field?"
"Oh yes, there were lots of them!"
However she was not expelled, instead we arranged for her to spend the next four Saturdays raking leaves in the cemetery under the direction of the local Memorial Society.

S.V. Airlie
12-06-2010, 03:58 PM
Being a boarding school brat.. I use the term expelled differently. We didn't use the word suspended. I probably should have used the term suspended but.