And it’s precisely because no rule can be made to fit every situation that exceptions are made on a case by case basis. Look, suppose the policy had said " Arrangements can be made for the children of service members serving overseas" but they forgot to mention that exceptions can also be made for students with a terminally ill family member, or students who are parents themselves or for any of the (possibly) hundreds of other legitimate reasons why a high school student might need to receive a phone call during the day. Then you run into the assumption that if the rule allows exceptions for situations A & B , but doesn’t mention C & D those situations will not qualify for the exception. And putting a general statement that exceptions can be made in special cases doesn’t improve things any- if a student doesn’t realize that it is possible to ask for an exception without being told, then why assume he would realize that his situation qualified as a special case without being told?
I think it gives you a more biased view, because your sense of which rights students deserve may have become clouded by the practical considerations of what makes a teacher’s job easier.
Thank you Hippy Hollow for that post. Now, would you do me a favor? In some of my posts I described the management style, and the discipline style I used. Would you say it is more correct than simply laying on the rod? Would you agree that it allows for improvement, maintains control, and let’s the “target of wrath” keep some dignity? I ask you because SOME people are willfully ignoring my more “relevant” remarks and refuse to answer my questions with anything but constant repetition of the mantra “Obey obey obey”. Lastly, would you agree that the “special provisions” that were bandied about for this instance should be amended to The Rule, in writing? So far, they haven’t and it doesn’t seem to bother them (the don’t make exceptions camp).
Let me be very rude here and say that is a very very very poor answer/question and a worse evasion. Management (District, administrators, etc) are paid to plan. They are paid to consider the “what ifs”. They are paid to adapt. That is their job. If they are unwilling and/or incapable, they should look for an easier job, more in line with their “skills”. For instance, if they “forgot” the terminally ill situation, and refused “compassionate leave”, and then the school refused it too, then rule or no rule they should be fired on the spot. Now, I am tired of the “what-ifs” and the legalistic questions. Why don’t you all (ah talk reel gud anglish) start answering some questions.
Start with this gem…
Excuse me, but if that is your attitude, you will go very far, and garner a lot of respect. (NOT). My question is Where Did You Get That Idea, And How Would It Fly At The Next Performance Review Or PTA Meeting? That quip hangs you right there. Students are not prisoners. In the parlance of private industry they are customers. They are entitled to an education and a certain minimum respect. You are being paid to do that. You are not their warden. It is ironic that a genuine prison official (Little Nemo) has an opposite approach and opinion to yours. If you worked for me, you’d be in very hot water for that sort of “philosophy”.
Furthermore, how can people keep saying in one breath that there must be no exceptions, and then say they will be made on a case by case basis?
Sorry, but this is my take on the general attitude - not necessarily directled at you except to drive home a point. I see being repeated here. Students are not prisoners or evil beings who must be kept under the thumb. Administration/management is paid to manage. Inflexibility, which seems to be all the rage now, is useless, as is the unwillingness to adapt and make “course corrections”. I banged on the “prisoners” bit, because that is exactly how some people in this thread would treat them. No leeway. No provisions. Not one inch. Obey. Might makes right. See what I’m getting at? I would bet money that those who are screaming for “vengeance” got their share of leeway when they were “coming up”, so why begrudge it to anyone else?
Good lord, you’re a moron.
No cellphones means no cellphones UNLESS you have gotten an exception to that rule from the administration. In other words, there are no exceptions explicitly stated within the rule, but exceptions may be granted by the administration.
Take this board for example. The rule is “No charity threads.” Over the past several years, there have been several exceptions made. In other words, if you just post a charity thread, it will be locked. On the other hand, if you go to the administration first, they might grant you an exception and allow you to post your thread.
I am not going to waste my time on you anymore, Garfield. A very old friend once said about me “he doesn’t suffer fools lightly” - his exact wording. He was right. You are a stubborn, ignorant, stupid, probably very inbred moron. You are stuck on No Phones. You ignore the talk about amending/correcting the rule itself. You ignore the faintest possibility that there are any options exept absolute control. You ignore that I repeatedly said the punishment given for the outbirsts was fine. You ignore the possibility that maybe there was no way to know if a provision was required, possible, or needed. You ignore Hippy Hollow’s excellent take on discipline as corrective action vs. discipline as show of power. It’s all no phones no phones no phones. You’re the damn Song That Never Ends, Get a new song. You are an idiot. You are apprently educated beyond your intelligence. Is sumwun elss spelin all dem hard wurds fer ya? Come back in a few years when you grow up, and have learned how to do more than parrot that no phone shit. I bet you were a perfect little angel all the time. If you say yes you were, I will call you a damn liar.
We left No Phones quite a while ago. Having a problem keeping up are we?
Asshole.
In all fairness, it is a pretty catchy song. 
First of all, I am not a teacher. Secondly , read the remark in context. Someone said lunch time should be free from school policy time and that students are not prisoners. I said they might be sort of prisoners and noted that they are often not permitted to leave the school grounds and return during the day.
Find me one single quote where anyone said their could be “no exceptions” to the cell phone policy.
I said nothing about compassionate leave at all, much less refusing it. You’re the one who wants everything explicitly spelled out in advance in the policy, because after all, the entire world is like you and doesn’t know that a person can ask for an exception whether it’s mentioned in the policy or not. Did anybody ever really work for you? Did you have a written policy regarding attendance and leave? Did it include any provisions for blackouts, blizzards or terrorist attacks? All those issues have come up while I’ve had my present job- and all of them resulted in exceptions to the normal policy. But I guess management was inept because they didn’t put " If the entire eastern seaboard loses electrical power employees may be absent without charge to leave credits" right in their policy and instead , made such exceptions based on the situation.
Excellent post, Hippy Hollow.
The school says they are reviewing the policy. They could use some pointers from you.
“I said they might be sort of prisoners and noted that they are often not permitted to leave the school grounds and return during the day.”
It would be frowned on if I skipped in and out too, but there is no connotation of being a prisoner or ”sort of prisoner” at all. I and anyone pulled at random from here would find it offensive to be referred to like that, and being mostly ex-military, would blister your ears with abuse for it.
“Did anybody ever really work for you?”
Yes they have. Want a list?
I was the E-5 in charge of the electronic repair shop in the Army (Army Security Agency). People did what I told them to do.
I was the acting duty sergeant for a while, when the “real” one was on leave. Again, I told people what to do, right down to when they get up, what the UOD was, and what details they were getting.
I am currently the government engineer for software and electronics at Boeing Canoga Park (soon to be Pratt and Whitney). I “pass judgment” on the technical merit and contractual compliance of various documents. I review policies, procedures, and plans for technical and contractual accuracy, adequacy and completeness. Sometimes I even write them. I have on occasion been authorized to speak for and make decisions for NASA. I’ve never been countermanded. In short, I can tell people what to do. I’ve written various policies, procedures, plans and descriptions. They flew, with only very minor editorial changes.
I’ve done audits and been audited. We had an IOA audit (a biggy, where they look at everything). My area of responsibility passed easily. The rest of the Agency got reamed.
In my spare time, I’ve collected a box full of QSI’s, SSP’s and various other awards, getting me to the top step of my pay grade years ahead of schedule. I have a few “noteworthies” posted here and there for doing something in a smarter and more efficient way than other entire Agencies. My management values my experience and my opinions. I am almost always right. Not perfect, but good enough that higher ranking people pay attention. I have boldly stated when I felt a new reg or procedure was stupid, and had the satisfaction of seeing it die (I was right again). I enjoy reminding the “experts” that they were wrong (again).
For admin we have written policies for everything. They cover more than you could ever imagine – blackouts, earthquakes, terror attacks, atendance, annual leave, military leave, emergency leave, sick leave, fire, riots, strikes, all of it. They do get updated and revised as needed, and are subject to regular review for adequacy and completeness. They have forms for the express purpose of making suggested changes and corrections, which get reviewed and possible rolled into the next revision. There are names and phone numbers for the points of contact whose purpose is to disseminate information, answer questions, and act as a “clearing house” for any unexpected developments.
One of our quality documents (for example) is one called SSP41173 Revision J. It’s been updated a “few” times, as needed. I had input to it, and helped “plug up” some of the holes.
Now, on to what schools etc cover in their policies and procedures. I went to school in New York. We had clear policies for the following, for example: fire, blizzard, blackout, and atomic attack (yes, we did the hide under the desk drill). Now, they probably have terror drills and policies.
With your talk about not being able to cover this or cover that in your policies and procedures, I would suspect that it is because they are seriously inadequate. If you are in then northeast, you better have instructions for blackouts and blizzards. If you are in D.C. you better have terror and security instructions. I hope your company does not hold a government contract, and you better hope nobody from my group audits you. We would probably destroy you before the first morning was out.
And does your sick leave policy list every possible diagnosis and the amount of sick leave that can be taken for each, or is that determined on a case by case basis? Does it list every possible reason why a person can be granted emergency leave or can that sometimes be determined on a case by case basis? Suppose someone needs emergency leave for a reason that no one anticipated? Is it denied simply because the policy doesn’t address it? boy, I’d hate to live in your world- one in which people don’t know they an ask for exceptions( a concept my children learned almost as soon as they an speak) and one in which every possible decision must be determined in advance and writtten down. So tell me, since your policies are so comprehensive , how much paid leave without charge to leave credits do you get if one day, one of your co-workers come in and kills two other coworkers? What is your attendance policy regarding blizzards and terorism attacks? Important words- attendance policy Not drills, evacuation plans etc. Just attendance
First of all , what do instructions for blackouts and drills etc have to do with an attendance policy? If you really believe that an attendance policy is inadequate because it fails to list any situation in which an agency head might grant time off without charging leave credits, then I suppose you would refuse a extra week’s vacation because the policy didn’t provide for it.
Finally some good news.
Just wanted to chime in and say thank you to Hippy Hollow for that insightful post. Hope you keep posting around here.
“Did you have a written policy regarding attendance and leave? Did it include any provisions for blackouts, blizzards or terrorist attacks?” – your words
“First of all , what do instructions for blackouts and drills etc have to do with an attendance policy?”
You brought up blackouts, blizzards etc. I answered. So, don’t raise it and then put it on me to justify where it came from. For the record, a massive blizzard or blackout might affect attendance (?). Ya think?
As to sick leave:
We do not list all diseases and diagnoses, and that is a strawman, because it is neither our desire nor is it our authority to make a diagnosis, prescribe treatment, or to decide how long it takes to recover. Sick leave covers diseases and injuries. If we take sick leave, we take sick leave. Period. No, there is no table of allowed days per type of disease. There is no need. Neither is there any need for a case by case basis. Sick leave is sick leave, period. So, we don’t need special permission or any case by case anything.
We have provisions for emergency leave too. I’ve taken emergency leave. I got a call from the family (the reason is not any business of anyone here). I told my boss I am taking emergency leave. I stated why. NOTICE I did not request it, I notified and took. It was covered. No need for any case by case.
The instructions for terror attack, earthqueak, alien invasion, plagues of Egypt, are all the same. You keep your butt at home and call in. If anyone answers, you tell them the situation. If nobody answers, well nobody answers. When it gets sorted out, we have a Pyramid Alert system. People know who to call, and who is to call them, so everyone is accounted for. There have been quakes and riots and fires here. The system we have worked. Again, no need for a case by case, no confusion, no asking for special considerations. Covered.
Besides, what the heck does leave or attendance have to do with the whole subject of this thread anyway? Where did that come from?
If things are covered, they are covered. Some things are left to the discretion of the individual. We do not have to beg for special dispensation. We do not have to worry about breaking any rule we didn’t know about. There either is, or isn’t a rule/policy. If we don’t know, we are told and corrected. No punishment, no suspension, no confiscations. At least not for that first infraction of that rule. If I had to beg for special permissions or provisions or exceptions every time there was any doubt or lack of guidance, I’d call the union. If I had to completely research the far reaching ramifications of whatever I want or need to do, and be held accountable (while any boss in the area was able pass immediate judgment on a whim), I’d call the union.
I’m getting bored with being the one having to answer questions. I’m still waiting for the answer to the question
that Fear_Itself asked.
Nobody has seen fit to answer.
I’ve even played games around the disabled parking detour. It’s over. No more anwering stupid questions and strawmen.
What is next?
What if Ayatollah Khomeini comes back from the dead, hands you a bazillion dollars, kidnaps you, drags you off to Vegas, and forces you to spend it on booze and poker? But wait, there’s more! On the way back, Colonel Sanders orders an airstrike and you have the only bag of Kryptonite left on the planet?
As for how sad you think my world is, my world is just fine. Peachy keen. As for the whole world being like me, well heck. I’m happy as hell with the way I am, and you can’t argue with success. I’m good lookin’ too
By the way, when I was in school, I did well - mid to high 90 percents in everything. Somehow, with my bad attitude, I didn’t get in trouble either. Catholic school. They were supposedly strict. But I pity people in schools today. My school was not a prison, or sort of like. We were allowed to be kids and to make mistakes. We were allowed to keep a bit of dignity, compared to what some people here would have. We were not expected to be walking lawbooks. If something was expected, but we didn’t know because nobody told us, we weren’t blamed or punished for it.
And yes, if you are depending on some “specal situation” thing to cover so many basic things, the policy is bad and to expect anyone to be able to comply with it is an open invitation to trouble.
First, thanks for the kind comments SteveG1 and Dead Alive. Never thought I’d get props in the Pit!
SteveG1, I think I found your post and I’ll attempt to respond to it.
Yep, definitely you and I are on the same page here. I think the grabbing incident escalated the entire affair, begat the cursing - which the student should be held accountable for - but with the understanding that the “adult” in the situation set this whole ugly scene into motio.
Definitely - this is a commendable approach and one I would endorse. Personalities differ, so SteveG1 may respond as “the heavy.” That’s fine. Ostensibly, the student violated a school policy so this is the premise for the interaction. This approach is educative and assumes that the student wants to comply with policies, is a good kid, etc. Most importantly, I agree that the student is able to feel respected, as is the teacher.
I agree. The teacher didn’t know this kid, right? Let me give you an example of why it’s important to know kids before you jump down their throats. I was pinch-hitting for a friend in an afterschool test prep session. Being a disciplinarian, I was telling the kids of the importance of following directions on assignments - write your name neatly, correct date, etc. I was saying this walking around the room, occasionally pointing out students who were doing a good job. Then I saw a kid who wrote “Mark Player” on his paper. I stopped and said, “You know, this is school. Whatever names you go by after 3:15 pm, that’s fine, but at school you write your correct full name.” One of the students raised his hand and said, “Mr. Hollow, Mark’s last name is Player.” I of course apologized to Mark, and we became friends after that shaky beginning.
Knowing the student’s history - new to school, struggling academically, one parent dead, and the other in Iraq - would permit me to approach this a little differently. In fact, if I knew he had a reputation for “being difficult,” this would give me all the more reason to take care instead of assuming he was lying or showing off to other students. I’m pretty sure one could ascertain in a few seconds that he was talking to a family member versus a friend…
This might be begging for the flames to reach higher… but, as many of you likely noticed from news reports, Kevin is an African American male. As many of you may know, several districts have found that African American students are disciplined and suspended at rates exceeding those of White students. (Here’s one.) Many districts won’t release this data because it a) points to racial inequity in this area and b) they don’t have the courage to confront the issue.
Again, moving to the world of supposition - what if the teacher saw a young African American man, dressed casually, new to the school and assumed the worst from him? What if Kevin, as a young African American man, had experienced similar treatment from other teachers in his previous years in school and exploded in frustration? (It doesn’t matter what the race or ethnicity of the teacher was. Low expectations for African American students exist for many people of many races, including African Americans - see Ray Rist’s landmark study of tracking in an elementary school in Harlem published in the Harvard Educational Review in 1970.)
I’m amazed that people are heaping so much responsibility on this young man’s shoulders… but then again, after the five-year-old girl in Florida was arrested, handcuffed and put in the back of a police car after throwing a tantrum, I heard many people comment that “she was out of control” and “the rule is that you don’t destroy school property, so she got what she deserved.” Some of the responses that refuse to acknowledge the humanity of this young man sound very much like those comments.
I never even thought to ask his race, I guess really an the “liberal Democrat” after all 
Thank you for your reply. I totally agree with your assessment. To be more direct, some people anger me with their willful refusal to see anything other than “out of control” and “broke the rules”. Along with the responsibility being heaped on him, they are so willing to not put any responsibility on anyone else, for anything at all. I’m bothered that he is expected to know all the rules and even to know what / who /when to ask when the rules are not known, while absolving the rule enforcers of any need to know what they are enforcing or to make them known. To say it is “special” or “provisonal” is a copout. To lump basic things under “discretion of the management” or "case by case"is ridiculous. You are making everything an arbitrary decision with no recourse or appeal. You have no assurance of fariness, you have the opposite. You are at the mercy of someone who may be uninterested, incompetent, or just as mean and twisted as the SOBs who are OK with the 5 year old handcuffing incident. What if that is the person who “decides your case”? Cellphone? 5 years hard labor :eek:
Yes, I have had to play the heavy, and I’m good at it, but I always leave an out, a way to back down or back off. I’ve never burned anyone for something they didn’t know and I never will. However, if I ever saw someone do it to someone else, they’d better watch out - either I or someone else will remember and give it right back to them some day. They hate when that happens, and they scream like bloody murder. All of a sudden. their rules change. “I didn’t know” comes to their lips real easy then.
So many people want and argue for Zero Tolerance. I wonder if they would like being subjected to it themselves.
As a former student who was “subjected” to “zero tolerance” policies, I did enjoy having simple, clear rules (no cellphone use during school). Knowing exactly where the line was, without complicating “except. . .” “unless. . .” “if. . .” “but. . .” clauses generally simplified life.
I also knew that if I ever had a situation which would put me at odds with the rules, I could inform the administration of my situation and ask if an exception could be made. A legitimate reason + informing them in advance when possible was generally enough for an exception to be made.
Seems to me like if “everything” was codified, it would give the administration even more of a license to be hardassed. “NOPE, it’s not in the list of OFFICIAL APPROVED EXCEPTIONS, so tough shit, kid.”
Even more reason NOT to codify every possible circumstance into a rule. Kind of like here; don’t be a jerk. Everybody has a good idea what that means, but mods have discretion to use their own judgment on a case by case basis. I know life is very threatening for those of you who need everything spelled out in black and white, with no shades of grey, but that’s the way life is. To paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld, Life is messy. Get used to it.