We all know times have changed. Back when I was in elementary school, a trip to the principal's office could mean a meeting with a big paddle. (Never for me, of course. I'm just giving an example.) My how things have changed. For fear of irate parents and crazy lawsuits, plus the injection of massive liberal "feel good" policies," schools began to cut back on discipline. The results came as no surprise: No discipline enforcement means poorer child behavior.
But have we now come full circle? Schools are adopting "zero tolerance" policies in order to take the guess work out of discipline. Rather than leaving it to the teacher or administrator to deem whether an incident warrants discipline, they just follow a script. Of course, when thinking and common sense are taken away from the equation, stupidity rules. Just look at what happened in Chicago to the kids involved in a food fight...
As noted in a story on ABCNews.com, students involved in a food fight at Chicago's Perspectives Charter Middle School were "rounded up by police, arrested and charged with misdemeanor reckless conduct." The students ranged in age from 11 to 15.
According to a post on OpposingViews.com, "Diana Shulla-Cose, president and co-founder of Perspectives Charter Schools, told The New York Times that (the food fight) kept escalating, to the point where an on-campus police officer called for backup. That resulted in a heavy police presence that eventually led to the large number of arrests."
Did the campus go overboard? Because of system relaxation of disciplinary standards over the course of decades, children began to get out of control. Violence increased, and thus schools adopted these "zero tolerance" policies. But where is the logic or common sense? I don't think it does an 11-year-old any good to be taken to jail for throwing food.
"My children have to appear in court," said Erica Russell, the mother of two eighth-grade girls who spent eight hours in jail. "They were handcuffed, slammed in a wagon, had their mug shots taken and treated like real criminals.
"They're all scared," Ms. Russell said of all of the arrested students. "You never know how children will be impacted by that. I was all for some other kind of punishment, but not jail. Who hasn't had a food fight?"
What do you think? Should the school have used these kids as an example? I wonder if that campus will experience another food fight any time soon. Yes, children need discipline, and too often, that discipline is lacking. But actions and policies without common sense are just crazy. Is it too much to ask for school officials to actually think through a situation and come up with a remedy that seems appropriate. Does that place too much personal responsibility on them? Maybe so. Maybe that's why they simply adopt a zero tolerance policy. Zero tolerance equals zero thinking equals zero accountability. "Don't blame me, blame the policy."
Comment by Panama1944 November 13, 2009 @ 10:35 am
Why not a military-like punitive system? If one person acts up, everyone is punished. The punishment could be something simple like the cancellation of a school activity or extended school hours or it could be severe such as confiscation of cell phones or iPods or any of the electronic gizmos that appear in schools these days.
It makes the culprit beholden to their peers - not the administration. That would be a turnaround wouldn't it?
Comment by zenith012 November 13, 2009 @ 10:49 am
No - that sounds ridiculous that I need to be responsible for other peoples actions.
Very Soviet.
Comment by donna rose November 13, 2009 @ 10:54 am
What ever happened to keeping the kids after school and write on the blackboard a 100x's I will never throw food again[. The parents ground the kids as well for a couple of weeks with no tv radio ect. Chores around the house and no phone calls. When the kids see Mom & Dad mean business I don't think they would be so quick to get in trouble again. It is the Parents right to take care of their own cnildren. If they do not then the rules change.
Comment by Carol from So Cal November 13, 2009 @ 11:23 am
I hope the kids had to clean up after the food fight. That would be a just and practical punishment.
Comment by Kurt November 13, 2009 @ 11:30 am
When I was a teacher in a public school, we used a system called Love and Logic. That system was just the opposite of zero tolerance. Teachers were encouraged to wait a few hours, or a day or two, after a student infraction to tell the student his or her punishment. Teachers were encouraged to get creative and make the punishment fit the crime. All that time to make a decision was beneficial in a couple of ways: it gave you time to ask other teachers for disciplinary ideas and the "not knowing" was usually a worse punishment to the kids than the actual punishment. I heard from fellow teachers that the year after I left that school, the new principal went to a system of non-punishment -- talking to the students about their behavior was deemed good enough. About three years later -- when kids were literally leaving school for the day without telling anybody and the teachers were ready to quit -- the school hired a new principal and decided to get strict again. I haven't heard the results.
Comment by onewildman November 13, 2009 @ 11:48 am
Zero tolerance is 100% stupidity. They had the paddle when I went to school and of course detention. I was paddled a few times between First and eight grade. The same with detention. There is no mental scaring. If that were to cause anyone mental scaring, then perhaps there are some other mental problems with people like that. It's just like the issue of spanking. The people against this confuse spanking with beating. I got whooped with a switch by our black maid as a child in Birmingham, Alabama. That was absolutely the worst punishment I ever received, that to me is the equivalent of being beaten. Even that didn't scar me.They use to say let the punishment fit the crime. I agree Carol from So Cal. They should have been punished by having to clean the mess. I'll go one step further I would have cleaning for at least two weeks. That gives you time to think about what you have done, and leave you thinking was that worth this.
Comment by Amerongen November 13, 2009 @ 11:58 am
Interesting, the government establishes "SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAMS" with our tax dollars. Then "these kids" decide to have a food fight with the food.
If the kids were paying for the food they might not be so eager to throw it t others.
Lovely conduct!!
Comment by Patriot November 13, 2009 @ 12:18 pm
The problem is not just with the children but with the parent who should be teaching them respect and responsibility.
Here is my 2 cents worth. The parents should have been called to the school. They should have been given the option of helping their children clean up the mess, supervising their children clean up the mess, or paying out of pocket for the mess to be cleaned up. Any child whose parent didn't show up, should be taken into custody until the parent showed up to pick them up, pay their share of the clean up, and sign them out that they are taking responsibility for their child.
Sometimes to educate the child you have to teach the parent.
Comment by AmericanPatriot November 13, 2009 @ 12:22 pm
In cases like that the parents are the ones who need the punishment. Young people will never feel responsible for anything until their (irresponsible) parents get with the program and teach them right from wrong. Not holding my breath for any revelations there....too many generations of "It's not my fault" and parents who think schools are simply baby sitters has made for a (mostly) irresponsible society and schools which have completely given up on any sort of discipline. How's that for insanity?
IMHO, a healthy dose of fear is not something to be sneered at. I got through my teenage years remembering to toe the line because I was "afraid" of what my parents would do if I strayed from the straight and narrow. I think I was 40 before I had the sense to thank my folks for their wisdom and by that time I was using those "lessons" on my own children.
Comment by wardjh November 13, 2009 @ 12:47 pm
Zero tolerance is the cowards way out. If you were house breaking a puppy, the first time he messed up you would shoot him under zero tolerance model. Stupid way to raise a dog? That is how we are treating children.
Comment by Publius98 November 13, 2009 @ 12:52 pm
At times I feel like a dinosaur.The truth in the adage, "The trouble with common sense is that it isn't as common as it used to be!" is just as apparent as is the fact that its eloquence goes right over the heads of most educators.
In the mid 90's, I was in Chicago attending a National Empowerment Television conference with my wife. Paul Weyrich (of the Free Congress Foundation, Heritage Foundation, etc.), William Bennett (former education czar under Reagan), Jeffrey Coors (owner of Coors Brewery) and others were in attendance. One of the speakers was William Lind, author, student of history and head of the Free Congress Foundation's Center for Cultural Conservatism. Mr. Lind made one statement that hss remained with me. In discussing problems and solutions in education he said that liberal activists and educators, especially those in the NEA, seem to think that they have to paint us a picture of new solutions to old problems. " We don't need them to paint a picture; we have a PHOTOGRAPH of what works : our memories of education in the 50's and 60's."
I know this is true, just as surely as I know the punishment for a food fight (which never happened then, but thanks to Hollywood is all too common today) would be that the participants, in detention, would have to clean up the mess -- floors, walls, ceilings, furniture, windows -- and then be subject to the wrath of their parents who likely would confine them to their rooms for an indeterminate length of time "until they learned respect for the property of others" and their belt wounds healed.
Recently in Des Moines, IA, an example of the stupidity of Zero Tolerance policies was shown. An 11 year old girl had attended a Western Shoot over the weekend with her father and picked up the empty hulls from blanks fired by double barreled shotguns. She took a couple of them to school for
Show and Tell. The teacher reported it to administration, police were called and she was arrested, cuffed and taken to jail. Now this "A" student who never had been in trouble has a record which could prevent her from getting scholarships. I wrote a letter to the principle which is excerpted here:
"
I remember older students bringing their collections of antique swords, bayonets, knives, flintlocks and progressively more modern weapons to school for exhibitions, demonstrations and gun safety education. No guns were fired. No one got stabbed. No one got killed or wounded. No one opened fire in the dining area, classrooms or hallways. To my knowledge, no one in my high school class or the two classes ahead and behind us ever died in a hunting accident or used a gun in the commission of a crime. Several died in Viet Nam, however.
I'm sure you're not interested in an historical trip down memory lane recalling my action heroes, but you will be interested in my conclusions because they represent a perspective and a mindset difficult to have if you haven't lived through this time. (Cont.)
Comment by gibbie November 13, 2009 @ 12:56 pm
"Should the school have used these kids as an example?"
This is precisely the wrong question. The right question is: "Why do we continue to send our children to government monopoly bureaucracy schools?"
This is our fault!
Comment by Publius98 November 13, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
(Cont.) It was a time when it was easy to tell right from wrong, the good guys from the bad because the lessons were reinforced in the media we watched and in our associations daily: (1) The good guys always wore white hats [and if they didn't, they rode white horses], (2) The law, lawmen, women, parents, teachers and adults in general were to be respected, (3) Good guys would never stab or shoot someone in the back, (4) You never pointed a gun at or in the direction of anyone or anything you didn't intend to shoot, (5) You don't do anything to or say anything untrue about anyone that you wouldn't want done to or said about you, (6) Good guys go to church on Sunday, (7) Sex is always about procreation, not recreation, (8) Lead by example, (9) Life is about learning, (10) You stop learning when your brain dies. Most importantly, these were the days of the two-parent family. Neighborhood moms and dads helped raise your kids by reporting indiscretions and those reports were not only welcome but acted upon.
It's a good bet that you didn't know Jazmine Martin any better than I did prior to this incident. Your reaction to it, irrespective of any existing "Zero Tolerance" policy, demonstrates a lack of grounding in principle, because one grounded in principle wouldn't stand for "policies" or any other rules which do NOT allow for discretion in their implementation for a person in your position. The stupidity of "Zero Tolerance" policies and the fallaciousness of the position in which you consequently allowed yourself to be placed are aptly demonstrated as a result. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I am almost certain you as an individual are NOT happy with how this makes you appear both to people within and without your school district. If you are NOT, the anger at your embarrassment is correctly directed at the misguided policy, and your efforts should be directed at changing it. That would show your regard for Jazmine's good intentions and simultaneously recognize how the law of unintended consequences is doing irreparable harm here.
When a school district, school administration or board assumes the roll and acts in loco parentis, it creates an atmosphere in which confusion may reign in the minds of students, parents and those who have assumed the mantle of "parent".
With the teaching of ideas built on the philosophy of moral relativism, policies which blur the lines between right and wrong are implemented as a result. Inane policies like the one which treats spent shotgun shell casings (which in no stretch of the imagination present a clear and present danger) with the same level of antipathy as a handgun, whose unauthorized presence would indicate a possibly nefarious role.
His response? "When you have worked 37 years educating children, as I have, then I’ll give credence to your decisions about who the good guys are. Have a nice day.
How does one argue with such logic?
Comment by Ken November 13, 2009 @ 1:02 pm
I like the ideas of Carol from So Cal, Kurt and American Patriot. Absolutely, the students AND their parents should have been required to clean up the mess together. What better way to motivate parents to be, well, parents! Let's not forget Kurt's ideas. Anticipation is a great motivator. If they had to wait a few days to learn their fate, students might think twice before repeating an infraction. More importantly, the punishment would be reasoned and not emotional. Any way you look at it, calling police and having students arrested is simply wrong and very stupid. Now we have students with a criminal record that may make their lives difficult for years to come. All for a food fight. No lesson learned there.
Comment by Ken November 13, 2009 @ 1:09 pm
I know a many active and former teachers and school administrators. They all say, "well, if it were up to me, I'd use common sense to solve disipline issues. But I have to go by the rules." Everyone says that. Who makes these "rules"? How easy it is to pass the buck.
Comment by woodworker November 13, 2009 @ 1:21 pm
When I was in High school, we had a teacher, Bud Pripp, well over 6 feet, probably 225 or so and also the baseball coach. He told us at the beginning of the year that if we got out of line he would knock us on our a&&. He meant it. Discipline problem solved....
I guess a teacher can't get away with that today. Too bad really.
Comment by TSWANNY November 13, 2009 @ 2:03 pm
Lets get this right. Its the Lawyers, Judges and anyone else that is responsible for setting the laws of the land for Zero tolerence. If there wasn't so many sue happy attorneys out there and so many no common sense judges out there we wouldn't be where we're at. I know teachers and school administrators would love to use a common sense approach, but the parent who says "You can't punish my child like that!" always gets there way, because of the law. When parents realize that their kids are not Holy Angels that is when common sense will prevail. Until then, we have to use zero tolerence, cause that shows the parents that we punish all children the same for that conduct, and they can't say "you didn't do that to their child".
Comment by Brujo Blanco November 13, 2009 @ 2:05 pm
If a student breaks the rules, even as part of a group, they should get individual sanctions. They should learn to be responsible for their own actions and not those of others. Group punishment tends to solidify a group and not teach consequences to individuals. Now we have situations in which zero tolerance requires that a student that defends himself receives punishment generally equal to that of his aggressor. The student in these situations learns that the system does not protect them. It learns that the aggressor apparently did nothing wrong because both received the same punishment.
As ridiculous as this is, it was our generation(I'm 49) that started "sparing of the rod" that now makes our kids have little or no respect for their elders, or their peers! Of course, disciplining your kid is now considered "child abuse" because, I'm sorry, but for some kids, "time outs" just don't work.
Now, my two kids never had to be punished with force, as in any form of corporal punishment, but not all kids are, or were, that way. When we stopped beating our kids,(a figure of speech, people!) they started knowing they could get away with anything and picked up guns and shot people, got mixed up with drugs and gangs. I would have NEVER thought about doing that to that degree,(yes I smoked some pot when I was a teen-big deal)and the fact is, if you don't have a short leash on your child today, you could end up with a criminal!
But sending them to jail for a food fight(?-GEEZ), where they will have a permanent record if they don't go and physically have it exsponged(sp) when they are what, 17? That's crazy! I got paddled when I acted up in school. And got it again when I got home! It kept me from growing up to be a criminal. So what do we want? Time outs and possible criminal behavior because they know they can get away with anything and NOT respect their elders(as bad as I was I would never dis my elders!) or smack them arounda bit when they needed it(figure of speech people!) a bit and end up with a good, well mannered kid? This is again, part of the PC world.
No, I'm NOT into child abuse and will stop it if I see it happening. But a child getting a couple of smacks across their backside, is NOT child abuse!
No, I don't like the idea of the school "paddling" my kids because if I never had to do it at home, no reason it needs done at school. Tell me, I'll deal the punishment out these days. I DO understand the changes to a degree, had to be made because kids ARE more violent now than they were when I was in school, but a food fight? Come on...... This ZERO TOLERANCE bullsh** has to be dealt with a little bit better control, and with some common sense.
GEEZ!
Comment by widelink November 14, 2009 @ 3:46 pm
I think they should have been expelled and then enrolled in private school or home school. The only things the government school teaches are America sucks and the polar bears are dying because of capitalism or pollution. These kids should get used to the inside of a jail because they will probably see the inside of it a few more times due to lack of parenting. How much education do these kids need anyway. The welfare office can fill out the public assistance forms for you!
Comment by headcookie November 14, 2009 @ 9:24 pm
One of the big problems is that the parents don't support the schools and don't punish the children at home when they get in trouble at school. I've had several parents take their kids shopping and buy them clothes, electronic devices, etc after they get in trouble at school because they don't like to see the kids upset. There's nothing more frustrating to a teacher than to have a student display physical aggression at school, be disciplined for it, then come to school the next day showing off the new things the parents went out and bought them. That happens more than one would think!
Comment by Publius98 November 14, 2009 @ 10:04 pm
The PC "Zero Tolerance" policy, it strikes me, is a cop-out on the part of the school administration and faculty. It's the result of philosophies like moral relativism, situation ethics, secular humanism and values clarification failing the logic test.
After all, it's a lot easier to blame both parties in a physical dispute than to determine who started it and punish the aggressor, especially when the influence of Biblical standards of behavior (like not bearing false witness against your neighbor) cannot be included in curricula, even if expressed in different terms. Instead, we are not allowed to "impose" ethical standards of any stripe on the student population, lest their minds be poisoned by "someone else's morality".
It really gets down to the Liberal view of morality (which has been proven wrong since the Garden of Eden) which assumes that a child is born "good" and left to his/her own choices, will do the right thing. There is no fear of consequences because the idea of accepting personal responsibility for one's actions being a thing of the past reinforces this.
Reward for good behavior should play as large a part in personal development of the child as punishment for bad behavior. That's known as positive reinforcement, and emphasizes the positive aspects of character.
Comment by msamericanpatriot November 16, 2009 @ 11:19 am
Hey I was a special ed student back in the 1970's. I got paddled not only at school but at home too. It wasn't until junior high that I finally figured out that if I said, "Not without my parents permission" that I could get out of them. Then again I was also mainstreamed and the only female in the special ed classes so trouble was never that far away because I was constantly bullied and had no one but me to stand up for me which caused me to be spanked. I say all this liberal handling of children is stupid because it raises them to think there are no such things as boundaries in life when there is. That is why we have laws,edicts and the like to set up boundaries. The millennials don't even understand the meanings of such words like: you loose, no, you can't do that and the like. I have learned the mean of no and know that it means that it can't be done for one reason or another. Man our country needs to go back to it's Christian roots where morality reigned. Sometimes I wonder if I wasn't born at the wrong time or something.
Comment by javajillate November 16, 2009 @ 3:32 pm
They could have blown whistles to get the kids attention. Got the kids calmed down, and then had the kids clean up the mess with maybe detention added. Or even given the kids the job of cleaning the whole school after hours. That would have served better and they would have learned from it. To be arrested for a food fight is totally ridiculous! The punishment should fit the crime.
Liberals are totally out of control.
Comment by PecosBob November 17, 2009 @ 5:43 pm
No,No..NO. These are young children. Ages 11-15. They have no business sending them to jail. They acted childish, but they are NOT CRIMINALS. It's just like when they make a mess in their bedrooms. Parents come in and make them clean up (tidy up) their room. I feel they should have punished them first by making them clean the cafeteria. Then have them come in for 2 saturdays and pick up trash around the school campus. Also have the children explain to their parents why they have to go pick up trash at school on saturday. Kids will be Kids. We all had fun somehow, did'nt we?
Add Bobby as a Friend on Facebook
Follow TeamGOPUSA on Twitter
