gmalivuk wrote: morriswalters wrote:
The Zero Tolerance policy is punitive in nature and it is designed to be. The policy is published and it is clear. The advice I have been given over time by professionals about children is be consistent, don't say one thing and do another. What message do you send if you don't follow the policy? The message becomes he won't do what he says he'll do if I challenge him. And kids will challenge you, it is why the high school years are so difficult. So again we fall to a matter of opinion. I state that my reasoning is clear and well supported, rhetorical flourishes aside.
Your reasoning applies equally to beheading. Explain why immediate expulsion is the penalty the school has to apply to be consistent.
Oh, is there a school policy on beheading? In any case the policy is there. If you don't like it , change it. Until you do, live with it. Try this with your kids and see how this works. Tell her/him to clean up their room and then don't enforce it every time the issue arises. See how that works for you.
Did anybody bother to read the notification to parents of the Zero Tolerance Policy I posted? It seems fairly straight forward. And any discipline meted out by the school is always reviewed. My daughter ran afoul of the school systems Zero Tolerance policy on drugs, and spent a year in alternative placement. And the alternative placement may be a safer place for him depending on how it is handled and if it is offered.
This from the Indianapolis Public Schools
Consequences for violation of rule infractions
Consequences for rule violations are presented to encourage proper behavior and the safety of all
students. If a student fails to follow the rules, policies, and procedures of the school, consequences
will range from a warning to suspension. School #79 has a “Zero Tolerance Policy” for drugs, alcohol
and weapons. Students who violate this policy may be expelled for up to one (1) full school year.
This is the exact policy
if you are interested.
So now with that out of the way.
Princess Marzipan wrote:If gang violence is the leading cause of death among black males, it's likely it has more to do with their economic situation and the daily oppression they face. Their race is an element here, but you're quite ignorantly attributing the entirety to it in your statement.
If people don't like my phrasing I'll apologize for that, but like it or not, ...Hold on, I think I swallowed a gerbil. Okay. What was I saying? or not, that is the way it is. I offer this
from the CDC. Had his mother been concerned and smart she would have looked for an alternative placement in a school that could have been less dangerous for her child. The point is that he is already at a statistically unreasonable risk of dying by violence, how could anyone think it is wise to increase the level of danger for him. By the way in another link that I am not going to waste my time with, cites arguments as the leading cause of homicide among black males, not gang violence.
Griffin mostly I agree, but this is a well thought out policy choice, it's not a spur of the moment thing. The only difference of note between this and bullying is that this is clear cut and unambiguous. Bullying is very hard to ferret out because you have competing agendas and stories. I used to get pounded on at school and outside of it, it ran the gamut from being made fun of and excluded to physical abuse. But the whole process is ephemeral, most of the time there are no witnesses, no obvious damage. Any other kids who might have been there didn't want to help or were passive participants, sniggering and laughing while it went on. The older you get the worse it is because opportunities increase since the supervision decreases. What is it exactly that you want to happen? Do you think because Principals are Principals that they are any smarter or wiser than you? My grandmother had a plan for my father and uncle, if one is guilty than they most must be guilty was her plan, so she punished both. Very Solomon like. How do you think that would work?