Slashdot Mirror
Student Arrested For Classroom Texting
A 14-year-old Wisconsin girl was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct after she refused to stop texting during a high school math class. The girl denied having a phone when confronted by a school safety officer, but a female cop found it after frisking her. The Samsung Cricket was recovered "from the buttocks area" of the teenager, according to the police report. The girl was banned from school property for a week, and is scheduled for an April 20 court appearance for a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge. I applaud the adults involved for their discretion and temperance in this heinous case of texting without permission.
When I was in High School, disruptive kids got sent to the Vice Principal for this kind of thing. Why did this get charged as a real crime? Don't schools have any discretion or judgment left to them anymore?
My god, what else do you think is acceptable then?
SWAT team brought in for a schoolyard fight?
Anti Terrorist squad for a stink bomb in the corridors?
Solitary detainment and waterboarding for not spilling the beans on who wrote in chalk on a school wall?
I'm disgusted that you think this is ok.
She sounds like a little shit, but that's what detention and suspension is for NOT the bloody police.
Please.
Wrong.
No basis to search the girl? You should really read the article. She was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. Hate to break it to you sport, but you get frisked anytime you get arrested.
If you were being insubordinate... you would be fired and they'd have security escort you from the building. If you refused, you would be arrested.
but you always had the choice to not show up that day at work if you felt a texting session was more important, or you could leave the work day early, take some leave, etc. The options are many within the law. School is not work, and shouldn't be compared to it. You must legally attend. That's a whole different ball game.
There is a difference between playful misconduct and willful disobedience. Historically the former was handled with detention and the latter with corporal punishment. Since corporal punishment has all but been made illegal what tool do you use? Of course I did not RTFA but from the summary it appears she was being snarky and rebellious. If she had just handed over the phone she would have landed in detention and that would be the end of it. So we either arrest them for a misdemeanor or return the power to the teacher. Unless someone has a better idea. Anyone?
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
I mean, is sneezing to loud now disorderly? Or running to the bathroom when you really have to go? Yes. My daughter got a disciplinary notice written up on her for "disobeying" and "avoiding work" because on her way back from going to the nurse's office to use her asthma inhaler, she had an attack of diarrhea and so stopped into the bathroom to use the toilet rather than walking to the other end of the school, asking the teacher first, then walking back. She's 8, but apparently yes, she requires the teacher's permission to have a bowel movement. Yes, I have complained about this, and yes, the school district has insisted the teacher did nothing wrong.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
True.
Most public schools rules, as acts of a government regulatory body within its legal area of competence, have the force of law. Failing to comply with them is breaking the law. It may or may not always be criminal, but that's another issue.
Please provide a reference to the disorderly conduct law applicable to the jurisdiction in question and provide an explanation of how the conduct at issue is not within the scope of its prohibitions. Or are you just making stuff up?
It's by design that teachers teach you to live in a prison. Public schools were designed around ideas born from the old craftsmen shops of the Industrial Revolution period.
I'm not sure I follow your solution. I don't think children are capable of making decisions regarding their education. Many parents are just as incapable. There should never be an opt-out option for school. I've known individuals who dropped out of school prior to high school with the support of their parents just cause they didn't like school, and these individuals have always regretted the decision since. Some even harbored resentment to their parents for being so ignorant to let them drop out.
My solution would be to make look at the sociology of education that has accumulated over the years since the '50s and use some modern wisdom to create school environments that encourage students. My best friend is a physics teacher at a high school. He routinely uses fun oddball scenarios to teach his kids, and they learn and have fun. I only wished my high school physics teacher had the balls to think outside the textbook.
Overreact much? Kids will be kids and any adult that expects that kind of obedience is better off being wrong. This happened in the US where much of our wealth ultimately comes from that sort of "attitude problem." Just because adults can behave in anti-social ways because of their power doesn't mean that it's appropriate to do so.
Fires are a very different matter, I can not conceive of a way in which that analogy is cogent. Like it or not in most places kids do not have the option of withdrawing from schools or moving over to other ones just because they're not being appropriately taught.
The scary thing is that this sort of thing happens every generation and yet we've yet to get even a single generation that doesn't get drunk on power when it's their turn.
Actually it's adults acting like children, probably because they never got smack down as a child.
Reminds me of a time when I was sitting with an old friend in a coffee house. The friend was a former DEA undercover, who looked about 10 years younger than he was, so they would send him into schools to bust drug dealers. We're having our coffee while the group of teenagers behind us is talking about the pot they scored next door in the alley. After listening to them for about 20 minutes or so, my friend casually leaned over and said, "You know, I don't care if you want to screw with your own mind, but you do realize that everyone here could hear every word you said?" When they replied, "So what?" He pulled out his badge, flashed it, and said, "Cause you never know when they guy next to you works for the DEA. You get one pass, next time be a little brighter."
I had never before seen people piss their pants in public before, but MAN did they move getting the heck out of there.
- No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades really cramps his style.
Education is not required by law school attendance is.
The reason for school is to cage all the kids, free up more adults for the workforce and to train the next generation of worker bees. Follow orders blindly, do as everyone else does, do not question imposed authority etc is what you are taught in school. But most of all do not think for yourself, do not hold independent ideas and do not think you know better than those in charge.
As an adult with a honors degree etc and 20+ years of work experience in engineering I am 100% against mandatory schooling the damage done to the young mind is devastating and in the majority of cases irreversible.
Your post would seem to show a remarkable lack of thinking on just what School is and is for. I would suggest you read how and why mandatory schooling was introduced in the US.
This isn't exactly true. In some countries, like Japan, the school personnel are not allowed to do any form of punishment that keeps a student from going to class, it is a right that they are expected to have. They also can't be held back a year or otherwise kicked out. This allows many students to goof off and do practically whatever they want. Yet there are many who still strive to learn as much as possible and excel in those classrooms. In reality if a student isn't paying attention if means the teacher is boring for one reason or another, the teach should be trying to engage the students and if there are a scant few who still refuse to pay attention then just let them fail, part of the problems with our educational system is that instead of trying to get everyone to excel and show us their potential we cater to the lowest common denominator who may or may not want to be there in the first place.
Not quite sure what you mean by a case "coming to court." If someone sues a school district, they have to pay a lawyer to defend them. Sure, a judge could dismiss the case, but these are often fact-sensitive inquiries. Here is a case from Wisconsin that might explain the school's policy. Child attacked teacher. Child's mother complained to the sheriff who(rightly) did nothing. Mother complained to the DCF who investigated and didn't find anything. Mother then sued for not providing a proper educational environment. Here is an excerpt:
Alex R., ex rel. Beth R. v. Forrestville Valley Community Unit School Dist. No. 221 375 F.3d 603 C.A.7 (Ill.),2004.
On October 11, Alex began pacing in the back of his classroom and speaking loudly. He swung his backpack near students and desktop computers and charged his individual aide, striking her. Alex then began rolling around the room, first near students' desks and then near the legs of a folding table holding computer equipment. School staff removed Alex to another classroom, where he imitated karate-style chops and kicks. He also charged his teacher, ramming her into the classroom door, clawing her, and, as a photo taken by the District reveals, leaving scratch marks on her chest. Beginning on October 12, Alex served a five-day suspension for this incident. Also after this episode, Alex's mother filed a charge with Illinois Department of Children and Family Services, alleging that Cheek kicked Alex without justification during these events. The ensuing investigation did not find that the teacher engaged in any wrongdoing. Alex's mother also complained to the sheriff's department, but the investigation by law enforcement resulted in no charges being filed against the teacher. In the wake of these events, school superintendent Lowell Taylor wrote a memo to staff members, dated October 16, in which he instructed that "[f]light risk will be responded to by summoning law enforcement. Faculty and staff should not put themselves or others at unreasonable/substantial risk because of Alex's violent tendencies."
As you can see, a litigious parent can cause lots of trouble if the teacher ever gets involved physically.
Label me what you want, but I still don't see how the education of the class would be impossible if the girl is allowed to text. As long as the ring doesn't sound, what's the big deal? You can't force her to be interested or learn. In college people text all class, play video games on their laptops, surf Facebook, etc. i.e. do whatever they want, and honestly it works out fine. As long as someone isn't being noisy let them do whatever the fuck they want. Sleep, surf the web, text what does it matter? It's her own loss when the test rolls around.
For what? She goes home and says "they suspended me for nothing because the teacher doesn't like me." Well, the parents go to the school and ask what happened. The teacher says that she saw the child texting. The parents say "but you could have taken away the phone" and the teacher says "I didn't find any."
So, you have a child suspended for texting with no phone, and you expect the parents of this little drama queen to believe the evil teacher over their little angel? Yeah, that will work well. If the teacher calls the cops, they at least get to keep their jobs, even if the little liar manages to tell one lie too many and piss off one too many people and ends up in jail.
Learn to love Alaska
You are under the mistaken belief that every student can learn just from listening to lectures. It is incorrect. Learning requires participation, which requires the students' attention.
If the student had provided the phone immediately, the disruption would have been minimized and confiscation would have been the punishment. The student, by refusing to give the phone to the teacher further disrupted the classroom. I had it happen a lot as a teacher. Amazingly often. 3 to 4 times a week security would have to be called to confiscate a phone. The students learned they could stop the class by refusing.
From Wikipedia: "In the broadest sense, a fraud is a deception made for personal gain or to damage another individual."
Does the rule of inclusion elude you? Fraud is performed through lying, but lying does not necessarily imply fraud. Just as a DUI requires you to be driving, yet driving is not illegal.
And those laws don't say that possibly causing minor disruption to class is not justification for an inside-underwear search?
FGD 135
Anecdotal evidence of course, but, it sure kept my young ass in line. I respected authority, I learned to avoid an ass whuppin' by doing what I was supposed to.
I've noticed too...there seems to be a steady decline of child discipline and respect for adults and authority since we stopped corporal punishment.
Hell, back when I grew up, it wasn't just your parents...ANY parent in the neighborhood could full well swat your ass if you acted up, and they'd call your parents (who were thankful for the help) and you'd likely get another one when you got home.
Try that today..and the parent/neighbor is a criminal....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
If a student is _that_ disruptive, to the point of flat out refusing to cooperate or obey in any form or shape
What's "disruptive" about wanting to be left alone? Where's the evidence that this girl typing text messages on her phone was actually interfering with anyone else's education -- that is, before the teacher put class on hold to have her searched and arrested?
Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
Not disruptive, uncooperative. Nobody's said that she disrupted any classes, or called anyone any names, or raised her voice, or been cheeky, or threatened anyone, or encouraged anybody else to rebel. We aren't told that she refused to cooperate "in any form or shape", only that she refused to cooperate on this one point of handing over the phone, or doing anything that might result in her being forced to hand over the phone.
As for her "attitude to the cops", we aren't given evidence of that. We have an allusion to her having crossed paths with one particular officer, who coincidentally (or not) also happened to be the officer who was called in this case. We don't have information telling us whether her attitude to this particular cop was justified or not, or why the same cop was involved in both incidents. Is he assigned to the school? Had they actually ever met before, or has he gotten his info from a teacher he knows socially, who may or may not be the same teacher who called him?
We don't have the information. You could construct a scenario in which she's obviously a shoplifting drugtaking gang-leading con-shagging product of a broken home, running wild, or I could construct a scenario in which she's a model student whose sick granny is ill in hospital and on the point of death, and who is beside herself with grief and anxiety, and texting desperately every hour for news.
We don't seem to have any information at all about the circumstances except what's in the police report, and that doesn't paint the adults involved in a very inspiring light, regardless of the circumstances. So all we can really comment on it what the adults actually did, according to the official account written by one of them. Saying "I'm sure that the kid did something else to deserve it", and then going on to blame the parents seems a very kneejerk response.
Eric Baird
As a teacher I do think that perhaps what is unsaid is probably the bigger cause of this. I know there are a lot of slashdotters that are all about 'students rights,' and I agree to an extent they have to be there. But, when you're dealing with a classroom of students and attempting to teach state mandated material to students, maintain discipline, and manage to teach kids everything else in between (including often times being someone that they're more willing to talk to than their parents,) there has to be rules in place. (That's of course not including any daily fun you have with parents, politics, and whatever else comes up in your daily routine).
Cell phones in particular are a real big hot button in the education setting right now. At my school as long as we don't see them or have evidence they're there we leave well enough alone. I teach band, I'm down right happy for cell phones when I come back from trips - they keep me from waiting till 2 in the morning for parents to show up! The issues of photos, bullying through the phones, and much more importantly emergency management are causing this kind of stuff to begin being mandated to us by district lawyers. Word for my campus is next year they're not to be here at all - automatic consequences.
In the past I have had students outright say that they'll not listen to me on that issue if there's an emergency lock down or something. That kind of break down in discipline at that kind of time is something that can't be tolerated. Now I know that there are none of these circumstances being mentioned here - but please get off the high horse about students should be able to have every disruptive device and use them at all times.
Most importantly with this, I'd be willing to bet the student in question was blatantly disrespectful to all of the authority figures involved. At a certain point the student probably limited the options available to them. Perhaps there were mistakes, but due to privacy issues you will never hear the school side of the story.
Try that today..and the parent/neighbor is a criminal....
What was the crime you think they should be spanked for? I might agree if they beat someone up and someone spanked them, in a limited fashion, with witnesses, etc.
But if you did what I imagine many would do and try to hit them for swearing... Well fuck. I don't consider it a crime and would be mighty displeased to find someone beating one of my family members for their choice of words.
Perhaps it was the more homogeneous ethics of the 50s largely-christian USA that allowed this communal punishment to work...?
As for age, I've never said to a child that age conveys anything other than wrinkles, nor would I ever suggest that they defer to anyone because of age on anything except bus seating and other physical concessions. For any given person age usually correlates to intelligence, reasoning ability, even temper, and so on, but for all of that I can point to any number of people of any age that are untrustworthy, dumb, panicky, or any other failure that would keep me from wanting to advise a child to trust them. I'd never assign permission on anything other than a personal basis. One teacher, cop, friend, or relative is not the same as another.
.... the girl was arrested BEFORE the police attempted to contact her parents. I don't know what kind of totalitarian hellhole you live in, but here in Australia the schools don't call in the cops for disruptive students. The girl should have been taken aside by a senior teacher, and her parents contacted from the numbers on file.Seriously what kind of shit hole do you live in that the police can arrest you for not cooperating with their investigations into your own behaviour? I don't even have to identify myself to police here, and that is the way I like it.
This will get kicked out in court and this dumbass cop will get a rap on the knuckles and some bad press.
N.W.A. said it best (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiX7GTelTPM).
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
Wrong. They are not allowed to "handle the kids". Parents like you make it impossible to do so by teaching their children that it's okay to violate school rules. Any time a teacher does anything, parents run crying to principals and superintendents and school boards and lawyers until the teacher is overruled by someone who just doesn't want to deal with the shit. Schools are powerless when it comes to dealing with kids because of lawyer-happy parents JUST LIKE YOU, so they've resorted to bringing in police to deal with discipline problems.
Around here, it's in the school handbook that USE OF A CELL PHONE GETS THE PHONE CONFISCATED. Period. Any involved parent should be aware of this, as any involved parent would make it a point to know the rules. You know, maybe if your kids would follow the rules in the first place, they wouldn't need to refuse to give up their phone.
Maybe, just maybe, if parents would support the people who work for a penance trying to educate 20+ kids at a time while putting up with the politics of a school board and the pettiness of a hundred different families and the person issues of a hundred different kids, maybe we wouldn't have these discipline problems in schools. Maybe if parents would stop believing whatever their kids say as the gospel truth, maybe if they would assist in dealing with their kids' behavior at school, maybe if they would just attempt to participate in their child's education, schools would work the way they used to.
But sadly, no. Parents are going to continue expecting teachers to coddle their kids, make them feel good about themselves, make exceptions for everyone, and then wonder why our nation's children are increasingly ignorant of the world around them and point the finger at the schools they refuse to support. But hey, that's the school's job, right? Why should parents have to do anything to educate their child?
120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.