<<The real problem is the rules we have set up that make it impossible for teachers to stop disruptive kids. You can’t do anything to them, because their parents will sue. And trust me, one bad kid can completely take over a class. >>
You said it, Nightime. That’s the biggest problem. What I saw when my kids were in elementary school was not only that one bad kid could take over a class, but two bad kids in a class killed education for sure.
While I agree with december and Nightime that disruptive kids are a problem(and have always been), I disagree with the contention that there are rules in place that prohibit the teachers/administrators from doing anything about disruptive kids
This is akin to my kids telling me that I can’t spank them or they’ll call Children’s Services and have me arrested.
Give me a break! Schools “can’t do anything to them, because their parents will sue?” Where does this come from?
These are just examples of kids in my dad’s class (my dad is a fifth grade teacher):
One boy was always disruptive because he literally couldn’t help it. He talked way too loud, he got up during class and started singing, he would fall out of his chair, he would steal things. No matter what you told him, he would soon forget it and start disrupting the class again. Clearly he belonged in a different setting, and his mom was often told so, but she refused to let him be taken out of the class. In fact she became very angry and threatening when the subject of putting her kid in an alternate class came up. Of course I understand it is hard for her, but at the same time the other kids are suffering.
Twins in the same class, both very disruptive. Their teacher begged to get one of the twins out of his class, because it was being together that really made them start acting out. However, it is a year round school. The parents are of course unwilling to have them on different tracks, and let the school know this. These kids are also failing all their tests and should not even get to the next grade level. But the parents are unwilling to accept this and make it known that they will fight to get them promoted. (Incidentally, the parents moved these kids into a different school district where they were promoted, and plan to bring them back to the original school so they would not be held back)
A boy who really knows how to work the system. He constantly disrupts the class, steals, asks to go to the bathroom and then hangs out by the soda machine trying to get money from other kids, and always denies whatever you say he did. He is supposed to get his dad to sign something about his behavior after school every day, but he is obviously forging the signatures. Of course, calling the dad only gets an angry response in defense of his son.
I guess I don’t know for sure that the parents would sue in any of these cases. But the school is either unable to confront these problems because they aren’t allowed, or because they are scared the parents will fight it.
I should point out that the 27 other kids in the class are good kids, and it is a shame that their education is being compromised because nothing can be done about 4 problem kids. Also, the 4 kids I mentioned are not being done any favors either, in the long run.
Nightime Thanks for the informative response.
You confuse “nothing can be done” with “nothing is being done.”
Unless this is a strange school system, something “can” be done.
I’m curious now. You say it is a year-round school.. Public school, in the USA? Where?
And, I humbly apologize to the OP, Philosophocles for my continued digressions in this thread. I just can’t let statements stand that are anecdotal and IMHO wrong.
Nighttime, your example #1 describes my son. Now, unlike his parents, I was more than willing to work with the school to get something done to help him. However, I know that several kids in my son’s current alternative class are not there voluntarily. If the school “cannot” do something, it sounds to me as though the school administration is simply unwilling to try to do something.
Now, in some support of your position, I would note that the superintendent of my district noted in a talk, last year, that between 1980 and 1990 the district faced one lawsuit (over a child being injured in a school setting) but that between 1990 and 2000, the district faced an average of seven lawsuits a year.
Of course, there are several aspects of his statement that need clarification (which I have not been able to get): how many of those suits were brought over the rather messy millage proposal fights that were repeated throughout the decade? how many were brought as a result of the radical change in the community (at the opening of a new freeway, we were inundfated with yup-scale folks in a very brief time)? and for what reasons were the actual suits brought or threatened? (He also did not differentiate between actual suits filed in court and angry parents claiming “I’ll sue!” before being talked into a more rational approach.)
Society is more litigious. However, the complaint that the schools “can’t do anything” because of those suits strikes me as less than fully demonstrated.
wrenching this back to the OP, I believe that the quote given + source (ACLU) was attempting to point out to those who support vouchers (believed to be mostly Conservative white Christians - at least in my state of MIchigan that certainly followed - ie when vouchers were again on the ballot recently, the funding came from the Grand Rapids Bible Belt and the proposal had the most support over there and the least support in D-troit) that once you’ve opened the door to school vouchers for religous based schools, you cannot deny them to religions you don’t find comfortable.
my little area of Mi (the capital) has a whole host of ‘alternative’ schools - mostly charters. There’s a Catholic school, a Montesorri school, an Edison project school, a Lutheran school, a large ‘alternative’ school, and even an Afro Centric school or two.
after a couple of years, we’ve found - all but two of the schools have dropped middle /high school levels, the largest that is still doing all levels has cuts looming of 25% of it’s budget. Interestingly enough, the local paper did a project, asking several schools some basic pieces of information (what was their enrollment, average level of education for it’s teachers, salary rates for teachers, it’s ‘plan’ - a state mandated thing, and several other things). The public schools (in particular the inner city one) answered w/in short time, others needed several prods, including a letter stating that the info was part of the Freedom of Information Act, and two (both charters) refused outright, even after being told that it fell under the FOIA.
the governing body for many of the charters were out of area groups who operated on a lessez faire approach, sometimes with disasterous results (one of the charter schools is near bankrupcy, has gone through more than one principal in a year, the last one was arrested at the school on an outstanding drug warrant).
IN the meantime, the public schools (who would have had those students and the funding therein) has had to struggle w/budgeting problems.
Having watched how these charters operated, I’m not at all convinced that vouchers will improve the situation. At least w/the public schools, the public has a board they elected and can address how their tax $$ are spent and accounted for. I’m not able to go to the charter’s board and make a case, even if it’s my tax $$ supporting them.
I thought this article was interesting.
I found it rather more interesting that the little “PC Alert!” column to which you linked provided none of the relevant pieces of information to a genuine analysis of the situation, such as:
The principal is an old college basketball coach brought in to “shape up” the school;
the student is a highly prized basketball player who was recruited for the school team
the teacher and the student have had multiple earlier incidents and the teacher felt that he was not getting support from the principal.
In other words, under the cover of “PC” what we appear to have is the same old “Claim anything in the world to protect our sports wins” scenario. There has not yet been any evidence that the principal actually believes anything he is saying.
(I have not seen any indication, yet, of the principal’s ethnic background.)
So rather than a PC story, this looks to me to be a classic “jocks can do no wrong” story.