If school policy is to not allow parents to wander the halls/accompany their children to class, then the teachers in the hallway were absolutely right to stop the OP and ask what he was doing, because as far as they knew, he wasn’t supposed to be there. Sure the office issued the Visitor badge, but those could be stolen or faked, and he was there under unusual circumstances that went against what all the other teachers knew to be the policy. So good on them for doing their job.
I happen to think the policy makes sense, because having non-employees and non students wandering the halls of a school is a liability. That person could be a non-custodial parent or someone with intent to harm a child or a drug dealer or simply lost or… it’s true that most of the time, a parent is a parent and they only want what’s best for their kids, but unless the school verifies that this is the case, then other possibilities arise, as has been shown through countless past events at other schools across the country.
In this OPs case, what the school should have done is have someone from the office accompany him and his child to the new room, both to be polite and because it would prevent other teachers from having to interrupt whatever they were doing to ask why he was there.
As for punishment: at face value, I think punching someone for pulling your hair is a little over the top, and since the likelihood of getting the whole story from the two girls is rather slim, I think punishing both for breaking a “no fighting” rule is warranted. Especially for 6 year olds, who are still learning proper social interaction and need to learn that responding physically is not appropriate (this is true of the hair puller too…she may have done it because she was jealous of the pullee’s pencil case or something irrationally child-like like that!). There are alternatives to fighting that children need to learn, and this is a good time to teach that. Naturally common sense needs to be applied if the situation escalates to full out assault, but even then, there are appropriate levels of self-defence and inappropriate ones, and even adults are punished if they use inappropriate ones, no matter who “started it”!
I absolutely think the school is correct not to reveal the name of the girl who got in a fight with the OP’s daughter. I went to school in an area with a lot of gang activity, and I could imagine that the school wants to prevent all outside retaliation - IE, you could hypothetically tell someone you knew to go attack the girl your daughter fought with or a member of her family.
I disagree, because self-defense is not even illegal in the United States. While maybe a punch in the face is a little much, it’s unreasonable to ask that this 6 year old girl sit there and let another girl torment her.
If the school has had a problem with people stealing or faking visitor badges, then they need to address that issue. If they haven’t, they why play the ‘what if’ game? I mean, you can do that all day. “What if the teacher asks him what he is doing and he uses Jedi mind tricks on them?”
The point of having visitor badges is so that a person can go through the process of getting one and then be in the school and everyone knows they are there legitimately. If if doesn’t let the person walk in the school without being bothered, what is the point of visitor’s badges in the first place?
He wasn’t there against “what all the other teachers knew to be the policy,” he was there with the little dorky badge on that let’s everyone know he is supposed to be there.
It drives me crazy when schools give the song and dance about valuing families and wanting involved parents, and then treating them like the enemy when they dare to actually be involved.
My kids don’t have ID badges, but in elementary and middle school, they have pre-paid debit cards for lunch. The parent puts a certain amount on it (a month’s worth of lunches, for example) and the kids use that to buy lunch. You can buy lunch with cash, of course, but the debit card system is what the majority of the kids use. No need to worry about lost lunch money, and it cuts down on the amount of cash that has to be reconciled at the end of the day.
I don’t think a 6 year old girl should just sit there and let another girl torment her, and I never said that. I said that she needs to 1) learn what an appropriate response is and 2) use that first. For example, if Girl A pulls Girl B’s hair then B can try the following
a) ask A to stop
b) move to another seat
c)tell the bus driver/monitor/other responsible person to intervene
d) tell a teacher/parent once off the bus
e) firmly push A’s hand away
All before escalating to the level of punching A. I don’t believe that those options will always work, but for a 6 year old, they are the things she needs to learn to try to do first. I can understand punching back, and at one point it might be the best option, but it is not her first choice and B needs to learn that. So “no fighting” punishment means A gets punished for pulling B’s hair (and subsequently scratching) and B gets punished for punching before trying other tactics which may have worked. An appropriate punishment for that age would probably involve a discussion about what happened, why, how to prevent it in the future, etc.
And while self defense isn’t illegal in the USA, there are limits on what you can do to defend yourself. As an extreme example, if I pull your hair and you retaliate by shooting me in the face, then your response wasn’t appropriate and deserves some kind of punishment, regardless of the fact that I started it. And I deserve a punishment too for having pulled your hair.
Part of being a kid is learning how to act like an adult, and that involves learning how to respond to conflicts and deal with problems in an appropriate manner. Kids shouldn’t let themselves be bullied, but they shouldn’t become bullies as a defense.
Of course - if the badges are being stolen, that’s a problem that needs to be addressed. But this is how I understand the OP’s scenario:
-school has a policy to not ever let parents walk their kids to class except for the first day
-visitors to the school must obtain a visitor’s badge from the office
-OP convinces the office that this is effectively the same thing as a first day of school (a rational case, IMHO), and the office issues the Visitor badge despite the usual policy
-other teachers see a parent walking a child to class on a day that is not the first day, with a visitor badge
-the other teachers are aware that the school has a policy to not ever let parents walk their kids to class except for the first day, and are unaware that the OP has convince the office that this is a similar day for their child
-this is therefore unusual, and it is part of their job to ensure that the person acquired the visitor badge legitimately
-they could either assume the badge is legit, or ask the parent how they got it and why
-the second option is overall safer for the school, and so they ask
-the second, third and fourth teacher couldn’t know that one has already asked, and they reach the same conclusion, and so they ask as well
I really do think this is perfectly rational and an appropriate way for school staff to respond.
I don’t see the conflict between requiring visitor badges and requesting parent participation in the classrooms. Unfortunately there are people who have caused problems in schools, so the schools need to take measures to prevent further problems, and I think passing through the office for a badge is fairly reasonable. A parent that wants to be involved can just go get a badge and be as involved as they want, and sooner or later people will start to recognize that parent and they will be asked less often why they are there.
Fair enough, you make a good point. Looking back on my phrasing - “a punch in the face is a little much” - I realize it’s quite an understatement.
What I do think, though, is that consideration should be made as to who started a fight, and that children who do defend themselves appropriately shouldn’t be punished for fighting. And it looks like we agree there.
MitzeKatze’s story is terrifying, and I hope that - since she says her son is now an adult - things have changed in the time since the story took place.
All staff and students have ID badges. Elementary students don’t have to wear them around because the staff generally know who’s who, and who belongs where. In addition to the reasoning others have already given, it’s a lot less stressful for me because I can write a check to pay for lunch, and I know that he’ll eat lunch. Another reason for using an ID card is that it’s more dignified for students who are on the free lunch program; they don’t have to have a special card, so no one has to know. They just scan their card like everyone else in the lunch line.
Can we all at least agree that while a school is entitled to set visitor policies necessary for security and minimizing distruption they need to enforce them equally on men & women? I think it’s rather disgusting for a school to treat parents & visitors differently based on sex. There’s no more reason for it than treating black & white parents/visitors differently.
I certainly agree with that! Every parent should have to prove who they are/sign in in the same manner regardless of their sex.
I’m just curious, though, if anyone has any statistics about non-custodial parental/guardian kidnapping? I suspect it may be one of the major reasons for school security regarding visitors. I’m curious about statistics about how often it happens, and who does it (fathers? mothers?) and under what circumstances?
Yes. It was. Our local McDonalds had rows of the $.59 Cheeseburgers stacked up 10 high every Wednesday anticipating the lunch rush from the local high schools. This was pretty much a requirement since our cafeteria could only accommodate about half the student body. They just remodeled a couple of years ago, so I’m not sure if they still have open campus lunches.
No. When my sister was a senior in high school there was a thing called “senior privileges” which meant you could leave school grounds for lunch, if you were a senior without any sort of hiccup in your record. What it meant for my sister was that she couldn’t take advantage of this, as she didn’t have perfect attendance. Her only absences were excused, but of course it didn’t matter. I have absolutely no idea who COULD qualify for this particular “privilege,” but it wasn’t anyone I knew.
And by the time I hit senior year, they’d done away with the whole thing. Probably all for the best, seeing as no one was perfect enough to qualify, anyway. :rolleyes:
I was rereading the OP and I think the last line in this snippet is very telling
So enforcing security rules is being a pain in the ass? Or is the OP using tortured grammar to say he was the pain in the ass saying he knew it was against the rules but he deserves special treatment?
If my old school ran according to his reasoning, I would have had two students abducted by non-custodial parents and one student assaulted by another parent. I would like JT to answer one simple question: would it have been worth it just so he could move some Hello Kitty pencils from one room to another? Pencil the teachers would have moved anyways?
Those students themselves may not know, which I think is neat. My school (back then private, now it gets some government money) has had a 10% of “no tuition” students since its creation over 300 years ago; the one time someone started making fun of a classmate because she was probably one of those, the teachers and us “troublemakers” (ie, the students who were more goat than sheep) fell on the attacking student like a ton of bricks. She was used to being every teacher’s darling, so she certainly hadn’t expected four Saturday mornings of detention.
Clearly, we are miles apart on this issue which is why I ducked out, but I will answer your question. I meant that I was being a general pain in the ass until the staff relented.
I don’t believe that in a free society, I receive “special treatment” by walking my daughter to class. Are there bad and evil parents? Of course, but if we take your logic to its endpoint, we should keep kids in a locked, airtight room to protect them from all evils of the world.
My wife works at a preschool near my home. Infants through 4 year olds. Parents are told, and even encouraged to drop in unannounced at any time to sit in on a classroom session to observe the teachers in action.
In fact, one of the points in a handout here states that when choosing a day care, if a daycare has any objection to this, then you should immediately cross them off of your list.
Why? There are custody issues with young kids and there are evil parents of young children. That abductor could just as easily get the kid at the mall, the movies, the park, a friends house, or break into the child’s home with a gun.
By pretending to set up a “safe school” by excluding parents, you simply have the illusion of security while getting rid of the one thing that school administrators themselves say is an ESSENTIAL part of a successful school: parental involvement.
I don’t understand the purpose of this security anyways:
School Staff Member: May I help you, sir?
Deranged Parent: Yes, I am here to kidnap my child, and murder several students.
School Staff (checking policy): I’m sorry, sir, that is not a permissible purpose to visit the school.
Deranged Parent: Ah, well, thanks so much. Have a nice day, then.
Amen.
So, you agree that the badges are worthless? So why the extra expense and hassle of making the parents stop in the office and register to get them? Just cut that part out and default to having the teachers harass every visitor. Just more window dressing for the illusion of school security.
No, I don’t think the badges are worthless - I think they show that visitors to the school have passed by the office and have permission to be there. In your case, however, you were there under unusual circumstances - the school bent the rules for you (which I’m ok with), but the teachers couldn’t know that and so they stopped you to ask about it because it was unusual for you to be there under those circumstances, even with a badge, because you are the one and only occurrence of this event.
That’s what people are supposed to do, isn’t it? Report/verify suspicious activity? The teachers were doing their jobs.
In the example of a pre-school, I presume there’s something like a 1:10 teacher to kid ratio or even better, and probably only 20-50 kids. It becomes very easy to learn which parent belongs to which kid(s), but I’m sure even they have the names on file of who can and cannot take a kid out of the pre-school, and probably policies about a parent’s involvement with a child that isn’t their own.
In an elementary school, it’s probably more like a ratio of 1:25 or 1:30. In a smallish school of 300 students, there are. what, 600? 800? 1000? parents, step-parents, grand-parents, adult siblings, baby-sitters, therapists and other guardians who may all have a legal and legitimate reason to want to see a student or take them out of class. Do you really expect every single teacher in the school to know who every parent/guardian is, and what kid(s) belong to them? You have the easier job - do you know every single teacher in the school? There are fewer of them, and if you saw one walking down the hall with your kid, would you automatically know they were a teacher and were justified in being with them?
Visitor badges have a purpose, but they aren’t perfect. That’s why there’s the extra step of having teachers ask people with the badges when they appear to be somewhere they shouldn’t be, which is what you were doing, from their point of view.
I’m not allowed to go past the front office to pick my daughter up from special ed. pre-k. I have to pick her up early twice a week for therapy and every single time I have to show my ID, then they have to look up my signature in some book to make sure they match and that there really is a therapy excuse order. Every single time.
They say after kindergarten age, parents aren’t allowed to enter the building at all except on PTO or conference days. I don’t like that at all.
Last week I got a form for permission for her to join in the holiday party. I offered to be a parent volunteer. Despite going through a background check after registration day I was told parents weren’t allowed to attend the party. When my other daughter was in school they loved to have parents help out. I was excited about being able to finally do this since I’m not working these days. Nope, can’t come in. I’m welcome to join in on field trips but no in-school volunteers these days.
Which if you think about it is exactly why you got the treatment you received.
Principal: May I help you, sir?
JT: I need to go to my daughter’s old classroom and move some pencils to her new class.
P: That’s very unusual sir. We normally do not allow parents on campus to do that and we have staff . . .
JT: You don’t understand. I have to move those pencils.
P: I know sir, but our teacher can move those pencils for your daughter.
JT: Listen. I have to move those pencils RIGHT NOW!
You were not invited there by the teacher and your reason although reasonable TO YOU is not reasonable to the staff. The fact of the matter is that you did not have to be there to move the pencils and when told this you insisted on proceeding anyways, so why shouldn’t the principal assume there may be another reason for you to be roaming the halls?
And I will point out (since you convienently chose to ignore it) that there were situations similar to yours where the security stopped a potential incident. And guess what, in none of those cases did the adult say, “I’m here to abduct a child.” or “I’m here to beat up a student.”
And I again challenge you to answer the question: if you have your way and the doors of the school are thrown open to parents and because of that a child is abducted, would it be worth you moving those pencils?
No, you were being unreasonable. Six is an anxious age, I’ve got a youngun in one of the few Elementary schools in PBC that has the Gifted program (well, if one can still call it that considering what the Superintendent has done this year) so I understand completely what was likely involved.
The school was in the right to dissuade you, each teacher was right to double-check you. There are at least 800 students at the school and the people 100 or so screened and back-ground checked adults who should be there know what they are doing and why. More and untrained adults disrupt the flow, no matter who they are or why they think they need to be there. Between the regular buses, the special busses, the VPK drop off line, the elementary drop off line, and two or more biker/walker entrances, that’s called smart security redundancy.
If you have had her in VPK on a county school campus and K on campus and 1st grade for the first quarter of this year, you should have taken some time in the past 2.25 (or 1.25) years to learn how the campuses work. You want to be there, you sign up every summer to be a volunteer in the county (2 weeks to allow for background check), and you learn what the system is and how it works.
Imagine the scenario differently: You get your child tested for gifted. She gets accepted. You speak to the school a few days before she transfers rather than a few minutes and ascertain the protocol. Don’t like it? Talk to the old and new teachers. Sign up to be a volunteer helper for part of the day with her teacher or in the Media Center, and as part of it, do the escort and swap. That would be significantly more appropriate than barging in and making things go your way when you didn’t bother to educate yourself on how they system works, much less care why.
Your comments about Daycares are completely irrelevant. No daycare in Palm Beach county is rated for more than 250 attendees (not counting school-based summer camps or YMCA/JCC type day camps). Every daycare facility (not home-based) I have toured has an encoded door lock, only one entrance door, and it doubles as the only exit-to-the-street-under-normal-circumstances. Daycare facilities also have at least one or two people beyond that locked door to confirm that you are who you say you are, even if you are a twin to the parent who normally picks up the child (which has happened in my case - twin was rightly required ID, and had a signed note from me, and I had called ahead to the school to warn them she was coming - even though she was already on file as an approved pick up person).