Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Loren Pechtel · 08-08-2003, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Beetle
Part of the reason for the usual "suspend everybody" policy might be that school administrators just don't have the time to conduct an investigation of every fight that takes place. If students are allowed to claim self-defense, then the school has to determine if they really have grounds for that claim. One kid could start punching another in the face and when caught claim falsely that the other kid started it. Now the school has to play Columbo. So it's simpler (not necessarily better) for them to just send everybody home.

Kill them all and let God sort them out.

Who is that a quote of?

The Other Michael · 08-08-2003, 09:05 PM

Hi Loren,

From the first google hit (manbottle.com):

Quote:

It is attributed to Arnaud-Armaury, the Abbot of Citeaux, and "spiritual advisor" to the Albigensian Crusade.

Pope Innocent III ordered the Albigensian Crusade, to purge southern France of the Cathari heretics. It began in the summer of 1209, with their first target - the town of Beziers. The Catholic faithful in Beziers refused to give up the Catharis among themselves. The crusaders invaded. When Arnaud-Amaury was asked whom to kill he replied "Kill them all. God will know his own." They did. The crusaders slaughtered nearly everyone in town, over 20,000, either burned or clubbed to death. Thus they achieved their goal of killing the estimated 200 heretics who were hiding in the town among the Catholic faithful. The brutal crusade continued on for the next twenty years. Eventually the Catholics devised a new approach for dealing with the remaining Cathari heretics in France. It was called "the Inquisition".

cheers,
Michael

enfant terrible · 08-09-2003, 08:32 AM

Quote:

Pope Innocent III ordered the Albigensian Crusade...

My nomination for the new national anthem of the United States:

"We are all Innocent"

Purple Smartie · 08-12-2003, 09:28 AM

I don't know if it is a policy where I live to send both kids home if they fight, but I can think of two reasons why it might be appropriate:

- it's more likely to make parents aware of the situation than sending a note home and having the kid forge a signature

- it gives everyone time to 'cool off' especially those who were not involved directly in the fight but might feel like getting revenge on behalf of their brother, cousin, boyfriend etc after the fact

For example my quiet, shy, skinny nerd neighbour was pushed around and had food thrown at him on the bus for a long time and just ignored the people doing it. Finally one day a pudding cup must have hit him too hard because he punched the thrower in the jaw. They were both suspended from school for 3 days, right before winter break, because that way it gave the cousin who hadn't even been on the bus but was making threats almost 3 weeks to cool off.

Calling the parents in to a meeting works some of the time, and I know if MY parents had ever been called to the school I would have been in more trouble than I could ever handle. But if the parents can't get along any better than the kids, or the parents just don't care, making them stay home for a few days is one way you can get a point across.

Usually there is a reason for any policy or rule, like the "no refunds without receipt" policy at most stores. It is an effective way of dealing with those who would abuse any system that is in place. No receipt, no refund. No witness, no self defense.

enfant terrible · 08-12-2003, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Purple Smartie
Usually there is a reason for any policy or rule, like the "no refunds without receipt" policy at most stores. It is an effective way of dealing with those who would abuse any system that is in place. No receipt, no refund. No witness, no self defense.

But your example undermines your argument. Almost every store will in fact give you a refund (or at least store credit) without receipt, even if their announced policy says they won't. Seems that merchants have more common sense than teachers.

Phoenixstar · 08-12-2003, 12:56 PM

As a teacher I see both sides of the argument. When it comes to fighting, most of the time the teacher does not see who threw the first punch or what not. Then you have to deal with the he said she said of the students who saw the fight. Now that is when it gets complicated. The goal of the school is to educate students in the basic/core classes. Though discipline comes along with our many resonsibilities, there is simply not enough time in the day to handle a classroom/teach and investigate every fight. Is that fair to faculty or to the students no, but is simply the way it is. Teachers have no time, as well as administrators to handle the situations, so the Zero-Tolerance policy was put into place to deter conflicts, which it has in my school.

The policy does punish those that do nothing but defend themselves, but usually a fight is a culmination of events that lead to the confrontation. There are channels that students can go through that can protect them if a fight does occur, which no one has mentioned here on this boad. We have a system in place here that if a student reports what is happening to them before a fight occurs, then if the and when the fight does happen that student has proof that says that he/she was trying to avoid conflict and they are then handled by a case by case situation. Sad thing about this is that most studnets are too scared of being called a coward to do this.

Just my experience.

Loren Pechtel · 08-12-2003, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Phoenixstar

The policy does punish those that do nothing but defend themselves, but usually a fight is a culmination of events that lead to the confrontation. There are channels that students can go through that can protect them if a fight does occur, which no one has mentioned here on this boad. We have a system in place here that if a student reports what is happening to them before a fight occurs, then if the and when the fight does happen that student has proof that says that he/she was trying to avoid conflict and they are then handled by a case by case situation. Sad thing about this is that most studnets are too scared of being called a coward to do this.

We didn't have anything like that when I was in school. The one time I got sent to the principal's office over fighting, though, the principal took one look--he had never seen me, he had seen the other guy a lot. Trivial decision.

Nostalgic Pushhead · 08-12-2003, 06:58 PM

I got into a minor altercation the last week of 8th grade.
A friend of mine was being an asshole, I walked away from him, he pulled me into a teacher. Teacher spilled hot coffee all over himself. We both got suspended. THE LAST DAY OF SCHOOL.

My mom fought the suspension, but it didn't work. I don't know how it happened, it was in a crowded lunch room and they didn't even bother trying to find out what happened. I missed the last day of school because I let myself get pulled into a teacher, and because he happened to be holding coffee. Yay.

08-12-2003, 08:14 PM

Quote:

The policy does punish those that do nothing but defend themselves, but usually a fight is a culmination of events that lead to the confrontation. There are channels that students can go through that can protect them if a fight does occur, which no one has mentioned here on this boad. We have a system in place here that if a student reports what is happening to them before a fight occurs, then if the and when the fight does happen that student has proof that says that he/she was trying to avoid conflict and they are then handled by a case by case situation. Sad thing about this is that most studnets are too scared of being called a coward to do this.

I'm in New Brunswick, Canada currently, and went to school in Nova Scotia as well as here, and I can attest to the same policy, though it was rarely enforced.

I remember, as a child, continually being told to approach the teacher if I felt threated, sensed that someone was going to try and beat me up, or had reason to believe that someone else would be attacked.

Unfortunately, as you said in the first part of your post, conflicts brought to the teacher's attention often dissolved into a he said, she said scenario. Since I was always in the office, for one reason or another, because I was beaten up, or felt threatened, I was viewed as either a troublemaker, though I was not. I was just following policy, so to speak.

On one particular occasion, I had a kid waiting for me outside, and I brought this to the attention of the Principle, who hauled us both in. It was after school, and he was understandably frustrated. Neither of us were suspended, but he told me point blank, that if I defended myself, these kinds of things probably wouldn't happen.

Two weeks later, I defended myself, and almost killed another kid. Both of us were suspended as a result, though the other spent the remainder of his "sentence" in the hospital.

Crazy, the way things work out, eh?

Purple Smartie · 08-13-2003, 05:44 AM

Another New Brunswicker

I think schools here still have that Zero Tolerance thing for everything from drugs to fighting. In a way it is fair because although teachers may watch a bit of Law & Order in the evenings, they are certainly not detectives and shouldn't be expected to investigate every dispute. Teenagers who can't resolve problems in appropriate ways should have to complete some sort of conflict resolution program, not sit at home playing violent video games on their "day off". Teachers can't possibly shoulder responsibility for any more than educating on core topics. In a perfect world where they make a lot more money and work less hours maybe, but the conditions for teachers at least in this province don't allow for any extra duties.

What are guidance counsellors for, if not to listen to students' concerns and mediate disputes?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-12-2003, 09:28 AM	#14
Purple Smartie Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 46	I don't know if it is a policy where I live to send both kids home if they fight, but I can think of two reasons why it might be appropriate: - it's more likely to make parents aware of the situation than sending a note home and having the kid forge a signature - it gives everyone time to 'cool off' especially those who were not involved directly in the fight but might feel like getting revenge on behalf of their brother, cousin, boyfriend etc after the fact For example my quiet, shy, skinny nerd neighbour was pushed around and had food thrown at him on the bus for a long time and just ignored the people doing it. Finally one day a pudding cup must have hit him too hard because he punched the thrower in the jaw. They were both suspended from school for 3 days, right before winter break, because that way it gave the cousin who hadn't even been on the bus but was making threats almost 3 weeks to cool off. Calling the parents in to a meeting works some of the time, and I know if MY parents had ever been called to the school I would have been in more trouble than I could ever handle. But if the parents can't get along any better than the kids, or the parents just don't care, making them stay home for a few days is one way you can get a point across. Usually there is a reason for any policy or rule, like the "no refunds without receipt" policy at most stores. It is an effective way of dealing with those who would abuse any system that is in place. No receipt, no refund. No witness, no self defense.

08-12-2003, 12:56 PM	#16
Phoenixstar Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: USA Posts: 73	As a teacher I see both sides of the argument. When it comes to fighting, most of the time the teacher does not see who threw the first punch or what not. Then you have to deal with the he said she said of the students who saw the fight. Now that is when it gets complicated. The goal of the school is to educate students in the basic/core classes. Though discipline comes along with our many resonsibilities, there is simply not enough time in the day to handle a classroom/teach and investigate every fight. Is that fair to faculty or to the students no, but is simply the way it is. Teachers have no time, as well as administrators to handle the situations, so the Zero-Tolerance policy was put into place to deter conflicts, which it has in my school. The policy does punish those that do nothing but defend themselves, but usually a fight is a culmination of events that lead to the confrontation. There are channels that students can go through that can protect them if a fight does occur, which no one has mentioned here on this boad. We have a system in place here that if a student reports what is happening to them before a fight occurs, then if the and when the fight does happen that student has proof that says that he/she was trying to avoid conflict and they are then handled by a case by case situation. Sad thing about this is that most studnets are too scared of being called a coward to do this. Just my experience.

08-12-2003, 06:58 PM	#18
Nostalgic Pushhead Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: So. Burlington, Vermont Posts: 4,315	I got into a minor altercation the last week of 8th grade. A friend of mine was being an asshole, I walked away from him, he pulled me into a teacher. Teacher spilled hot coffee all over himself. We both got suspended. THE LAST DAY OF SCHOOL. My mom fought the suspension, but it didn't work. I don't know how it happened, it was in a crowded lunch room and they didn't even bother trying to find out what happened. I missed the last day of school because I let myself get pulled into a teacher, and because he happened to be holding coffee. Yay.

08-13-2003, 05:44 AM	#20
Purple Smartie Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Canada Posts: 46	Another New Brunswicker I think schools here still have that Zero Tolerance thing for everything from drugs to fighting. In a way it is fair because although teachers may watch a bit of Law & Order in the evenings, they are certainly not detectives and shouldn't be expected to investigate every dispute. Teenagers who can't resolve problems in appropriate ways should have to complete some sort of conflict resolution program, not sit at home playing violent video games on their "day off". Teachers can't possibly shoulder responsibility for any more than educating on core topics. In a perfect world where they make a lot more money and work less hours maybe, but the conditions for teachers at least in this province don't allow for any extra duties. What are guidance counsellors for, if not to listen to students' concerns and mediate disputes?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.