Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That's easy to say if it wasn't YOUR 7 year old humiliated when he wet his pants in front of the class...The "bad judgement call" as you call it never needed to happen..it's a result of a grown woman lording her power over little children...quite pathetic, to say the least. I know I wouldn't want a teacher with her mentality (first year teaching or not) working with my children. If she can't even make the correct decision of allowing a child to use the restroom, she really absolutely should not be working with them...she had no compassion and should be looking for another job...preferably not one with young students who should be looking at her with respect...not tears and embarrassment, and shame for what she's caused.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
Never been a teacher, have you? It is not about lording power over little children. It is about trying to create a safe learning environment for all the children in that classroom. A revolving door in a classroom, with kids going in and out at will, is detrimental to creating an effective learning environment and it isn't exactly safe for the kids either. It is one thing for your 7 year-old to decide he needs to go to the bathroom 10 minutes after you leave the rest stop and quite another for thirty 7 year-olds to decide they need to go to the bathroom at various 5 minutes increments after returning from the class bathroom break. Ideally, all primary classes should have attached bathrooms, but that costs money that taxpayers don't want to pay.
Did you happen to read the story or even the thread title?
" A revolving door in a classroom, with kids going in and out at will, is detrimental to creating an effective learning environment and it isn't exactly safe for the kids either."
That is, unless the kids in question have earned enough "Boyd bucks" (yeah, this arrogant ***** actually has her own currency).
Then all bets are off and they can do whatever they like without concern for safety, order or "an effective learning environment".
If the things you mentioned were real concerns, these kids should all **** their pants together without special privileges being doled out by this control freak who seems to have found a solution to not fitting into the adult world where people will beat the snot out of you the first time you tell them they have to earn a potty break.
What happened to this innocent little boy will follow him in his memories until the day he dies.
Just like priests, sports coaches and camp councilors who are drawn to their respective fields because children are placed under there control, the dirt bag who caused this to happen has selected child abuse as a career.
Did you happen to read the story or even the thread title?
I've read this whole blasted thread and several versions of the story from different news sources.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
That is, unless the kids in question have earned enough "Boyd bucks" (yeah, this arrogant ***** actually has her own currency).
That is a technique quite a few books and manuals on classroom discipline recommend. Personally, I think it is beyond silly and just thinking about it makes me roll my eyes so hard they about fall out, but this was not this "arrogant ******'s" original ideal, including naming the money after herself. You would be amazed how many teachers, especially elementary level, use this technique. The kids are supposed to use any extras they have for rewards. And, yes, some books recommend using them to control bathroom usage. Look, I agree it's stupid, but I am sure she either read about it somewhere or another teacher recommended the system to her. And yes, she could have tweaked it so it didn't include the bathroom. I agree that she made a poor choice, but making poor choices does not mean someone is evil.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
If the things you mentioned were real concerns, these kids should all **** their pants together without special privileges being doled out by this control freak
By second grade, developmentally, most kid can have all their restroom needs met by having three regularly scheduled bathroom breaks. You'll have a few outliers, and some with occasional tummy problems, but it usually works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
What happened to this innocent little boy will follow him in his memories until the day he dies.
I know and that is awful. However, his mother creating all this publicity isn't going to help people forget it happened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Just like priests, sports coaches and camp councilors who are drawn to their respective fields because children are placed under there control, the dirt bag who caused this to happen has selected child abuse as a career.
Oh, please. She was a first year teacher who made a mistake. She wasn't trying to hurt that child, she was trying to manage her classroom. Don't worry, she will be fired, the school will have no choice but to not renew her contract.
She is a first year teacher, the union will not be able to influence her contract non-renewal for next year, which is essentially being fired. I would be shocked if her contract is renewed because of the publicity. If this was her only snafu that isn't what should have happened. She would have learned from her mistake. Teachers generally go into the profession because they like children, they don't want them to be hurt, and they especially don't want to be the one responsible for causing them pain. No, bathroom usage should not be tied to behavior, but new teachers make mistakes.
I know you people don't get it. What you don't understand is that teachers who have students out of their classroom too much get in trouble by their principals. The principals are concerned about kids being out of the class because they can not be properly supervised when they are wandering around the hallways and some kids have a tendency to get in trouble if given half a chance. If that particular child gets into mischief while visiting the bathroom, then the teacher will get in trouble, and the principal won't care that the child had to go to the bathroom, she will still be held accountable for allowing that child in the hallways. So, there is a tendency for teachers, especially new ones, to not want to allow their problem children to go to the bathroom. Most of the time, for elementary kids, a three time daily bathroom schedule is just fine. One of the things teachers get pretty good at, with experience, is reading kids, including the subtle pee-pee emergency facial expressions and moves.
Horse ****!
"She would have learned from her mistake."
She didn't make a mistake.
A mistake is when you do something to didn't intend to do.
She got caught playing god with other people's kid's bladders.
The only part that was unintended was being found out.
Stop making excuses for her inexcusable abuse of this little boy.
Stop minimizing what she did.
There is no excuse for what she did.
She is a psycho control freak who shouldn't be allowed near any child...end of story.
A mistake is when you do something to didn't intend to do.
She got caught playing god with other people's kid's bladders.
The only part that was unintended was being found out.
You think she intended for the kid to wet himself? In her classroom? Her classroom that she can't leave? Which means either she has to wait near a puddle of pee for the janitor to clean it up or clean it herself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Stop making excuses for her inexcusable abuse of this little boy.
Stop minimizing what she did.
There is no excuse for what she did.
The excuse is that she was a first year teacher who misjudged the urgency of the child's bathroom needs. If she is a typical first year teacher that means she is 21-22 years old and single without children of her own. She made a mistake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
She is a psycho control freak who shouldn't be allowed near any child...end of story.
At this point I really think you are either..... Never mind.
I suppose your child never wet themselves after they were out of diapers? If they did, then by your rationale, you need to grab that psycho freak crown too.
And some people should not be parents. What's your point
Your right some people should not be parents, until someone has a child that has been bullied by a teacher and classmates you will never understand the hurt it does. If it truly was a very stupid mistake on her behalf then she will learn not to do it again. If she does this to another child she needs to be fired from her job. The story is sad, and I feel for the mother and he boy because I have been in a similar situation with my oldest son.
A mistake is when you do something to didn't intend to do.
She got caught playing god with other people's kid's bladders.
The only part that was unintended was being found out.
Stop making excuses for her inexcusable abuse of this little boy.
Stop minimizing what she did.
There is no excuse for what she did.
She is a psycho control freak who shouldn't be allowed near any child...end of story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldhag1
You think she intended for the kid to wet himself? In her classroom? Her classroom that she can't leave? Which means either she has to wait near a puddle of pee for the janitor to clean it up or clean it herself?
The excuse is that she was a first year teacher who misjudged the urgency of the child's bathroom needs. If she is a typical first year teacher that means she is 21-22 years old and single without children of her own. She made a mistake.
At this point I really think you are either..... Never mind.
I suppose your child never wet themselves after they were out of diapers? If they did, then by your rationale, you need to grab that psycho freak crown too.
"You think she intended for the kid to wet himself?"
No.
I think she intended to play head games with seven-year-olds.
"In her classroom?"
It's not her classroom.
The classroom in question belongs to the community it serves.
"Her classroom that she can't leave?"
Teachers leave classrooms all the time and they don't have to balance a ball on their nose to earn the privilege.
"I suppose your child never wet themselves after they were out of diapers?"
Suppose whatever you like but I've never told a child they could not use a restroom and I definitely never made one earn the privilege of using indoor plumbing.
I think she intended to play head games with seven-year-olds.
She intended to manage the movement of the children she was in charge of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
It's not her classroom.
The classroom in question belongs to the community it serves.
It is her classroom, as in she is responsible for it, the contents in it, and the minor occupants who use it. It is her classroom the way an apartment is considered a renter's. Let something costly happen to that classroom or apartment, due to the teacher's or renter's negligence, and they will be forced to pay for it. It is the teacher's classroom in the eyes of the principal and the school system - oh, and the community.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Teachers leave classrooms all the time and they don't have to balance a ball on their nose to earn the privilege.
They can't leave any time they wish. And they certainly can't leave alone, most of time when a teacher leaves her classroom it is with 25-30 little people in tow. If she leaves the classroom at an unsheduled time you better believe that principal and staff will want to know why, and it better be a good reason. Moving kids out of the classroom means the scheduled instruction is not going on, it disrupts other classes, a place has to be found to put the 25-30 kids, and it interupts the flow of the whole school. A puddle of pee on the floor will not be considered a good reason, just like vomit on the floor isn't. The teacher is expected to move everyone to one side of the room and continue teaching like it isn't there. I have done it more than a few times with vomit on the floor - NOT FUN.
Quote:
Originally Posted by momonkey
Suppose whatever you like but I've never told a child they could not use a restroom and I definitely never made one earn the privilege of using indoor plumbing.
Get it through your head - she wasn't trying to control access to plumbing, she was trying to control movement in and out of the classroom. Having too many children out in the hallways during class time is commonly something first year teachers have trouble with, and if they don't get it under control, it is often given as one of the example of why their contracts are not being renewed the next year.
It is clear you have never tried to manage the behavior of a large number of children at one time for an extended period of time. At the end vacation bible school it is amusing how many moms come up to me afterwards and say they don't know how we teachers manage it without going crazy. I am nice enough not to say "Yeah, well most of these kids are well behaved, intelligent ones who want to be here, you've just struggled with the cream of the crop. Imagine this with about twice the kids and some of the added ones have zero self control or desire to be there." Instead I tell them another truth, that it gets much easier with experience. Something the new teacher, who you know nothing about but are willing to villianize, did not have yet.
Last edited by Oldhag1; 08-09-2013 at 08:39 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
