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 is how school rules worked in my day also, I do not understand how some of these "kids" can continue to act out without any repercussions. Go back to the old rules and if that does not work, send them to an "alternative" school or completely expel them from the system.
Oh, and just so ya know, you dated yourself with your post
I date myself with my username. The 68 is my birth year. I graduated high school in 1987. The things they did then only worked if the kid wanted to do alright in school. If they didn’t care, they just dropped out. The school districts are judged now on how many they graduate so they couldn’t do anything to push kids out like automatic failure for too many unexcused absences. Now school funding is tied to that and they’d rather have kids be violent and disruptive than drop out.
There's so much uninformed bull**** being thrown around in this thread it's almost breathtaking.
From "schools lose taxpayer funding if they expelled kids" to "put them in alternative schools" to "suspensions are unexcused absences".
For expulsions you don't lose funding you lose your school. NCLB and its follow ons all put penalties on schools and school systems for not meeting expulsion targets, which decreased every year. Expulsions, rather cutting them, are one metric out of several, on which schools are judged effective or ineffective.
Start looking at issues of disparate impact where one or another cohort was expelled for a particular behavior and that behavior was redefined, usually at the state's Department of Education level, as not one that merited expulsion. In Maryland one such behavior that changed from automatic expulsion to a 5 day suspension was physical attack on staff. Another was bringing a weapon to school.
In addition once again, studies right down the line have shown that kids who are suspended often typically drop out or don't finish in 4 years. Two more metrics upon which school systems and individual schools are rated.
Alternative schools are great. They're also incredibly expensive. Most " taxpayers " talk the talk but, when push comes to shove, won't walk the walk when it comes to funding those alternatives.
Add to that the fact that legislation at both the state and federal level have encouraged school systems to not do alternative placements, once again because kids placed in them tend to eventually drop out.
A school imposed suspension was redefined as excused, again because unexcused absenteeism, or rather absenteeism entirely, is yet another metric for rating schools.
You don't have to like or agree with any of this, and I really don't, but that's the reality of things.
You obviously didn’t read my post right if you thought I said expulsions are unexcused absences. I said expulsions used to be unexcused absences. Everything else you wrote we already know. It was the point of my post that they don’t do that anymore. I just didn’t get into the weeds of why they don’t anymore because it’s well known already.
You obviously didn’t read my post right if you thought I said expulsions are unexcused absences. I said expulsions used to be unexcused absences. Everything else you wrote we already know. It was the point of my post that they don’t do that anymore. I just didn’t get into the weeds of why they don’t anymore because it’s well known already.
Yes, I obviously did. You were talking about suspensions being unexcused absences and how there never used to be In-School Suspensions. Both are correct, to some extent. By the time I started teaching in 1984 suspensions were excused. That would have been in your time frame of school attendance.
If "everything" I wrote everybody already knows then why do those people who supposedly "know" keep repeating incorrect information?
Ok. So you would rather that they not be required to go to school at all?
A person would have a remarkably higher chance of ending up on welfare their entire life without compulsary education.
and pushing them through the grades, even though they are not performing at said grade level is smart???
too many thugs being graduated from HS, and cant read, balance a check book, or do basic math.
Being an Instructor for the Army for years, I have seen plenty of so-called HS grads that didn't even have basic living skills like knowing how to wash their own clothes,
Too many graduates are as dumb as rocks.... and we push them through school all in the name of numbers
Yes, I obviously did. You were talking about suspensions being unexcused absences and how there never used to be In-School Suspensions. Both are correct, to some extent. By the time I started teaching in 1984 suspensions were excused. That would have been in your time frame of school attendance.
If "everything" I wrote everybody already knows then why do those people who supposedly "know" keep repeating incorrect information?
They had ISS, back in the late 70's here in NY....I graduated in 80
They had ISS, back in the late 70's here in NY....I graduated in 80
Yeah, a lot of school systems did. It really didn't become almost mandatory to have it until NCLB and RT3 when penalties were attached to suspensions and absenteeism.
Over 45 public school teachers in Harrisburg resigned due to an unsafe environment. They begged the school board for help with trouble students. These "kids" keep attacking teachers and other students and breaking property. But the district won't do anything about it.
Unfortunately due to the Obama admin listening to wacky fads from academia many of our schools have become dangerous. The Obama admin sent out word that the disparity among the races in suspensions was unacceptable and schools where this existed would face the consequences. To the Obama admin. the disparity could only be explained by vicious racism.
Schools wanting to avoid being called racist implemented measures to avoid suspending students except for the most egregious circumstances. Curse out your teacher? That's ok. Some schools implemented restorative justice where kids would be sent to talk about how they hurt someone.
Anyway these are the results. Betsy DeVos has a lot to clean up but she needs to address this now. It can't wait.
Who wants to work in an environment that puts them in danger? Where they fear that they can be assaulted and beaten?
Yet some will complain that their children are owed an education. What about the teaching staff? Aren't they owed students who respect their elders and show up for class in a respectful well behaved manner? All kids have their moments. I can't imagine a job where I show up and I am threatened with violence. Kids who beat up or threaten teachers are not likely to become role model citizens. The parents are to blame. They raised those kids to be who they are.
PBS's Race Section, Code Switch, ran a series about an new type of school that would save black boys. They followed this new all-boy, overwhelmingly black charter school. They were going to do things differently, no suspensions, just restorative justice. They were to wear suits and be referred to as "kings". The student body would be economically diverse with middle income kids, one kid of a Congressman was enrolled. Still the school would serve mostly low income. Then there was the "Care Team", a psychologists and other staff to deal with issues.
Anyway it's all very interesting and ended pretty predictably. One kid who at the beginning of the series sat with his worried mother promising to do good, ends up shot at a dice game. Another punches a staff member. Academically the kids aren't doing too well. At any rate the most shocking thing to me was a District policy that allowed kids to pass a class if they passed one quarter. This is addition to giving half-credit, instead of a zero to kids that don't turn in their homework.
The showdown that's been looming all year comes in May, when teachers learn about a pair of districtwide grading policies that will make it easier for students to pass.
The first one requires that teachers give half-credit, instead of a zero, when students don't turn in homework.
"I hate it, and my students know I hate it," says English teacher Schalette Gudger. "I think it's a play into creating a generation of students, particularly in urban school systems, that are not prepared when they get to college or get to careers to be productive."
"That's not teaching my kids integrity," says history teacher Travis Bouldin. "Low expectations are low expectations. I don't care how you cut it."
And all this tension is just a warmup for a much bigger debate that erupts over the second district policy: A student can fail three quarters out of four in, say, algebra, and still pass. All he has to do is get a C or better in one quarter.
"Are you being serious?" Greene asks at a staff meeting. "Like, students only have to pass for 25 percent of the year?"
The assistant principal, Leslie Edwards, replies, "That's policy."
Greene responds: "That's bull****."
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.
