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.
Who wants to make the grammar joke?
"heinous case of texting without permission."
I think it has more to do with refusing bit than the texting bit.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Students shouldn't be texting in class. If a student refuses to follow the rules, you have to do something. In our lawsuit-happy culture, calling the police is pretty much the only option. If you were being insubordinate at work, you would be fired and they'd have security escort you from the building. If you refused, you would be arrested.
I think you mean "yore". Next time pay attention in school instead of sending texts.
Like oh mah gawd how can they do this is so unfair like people shoudlnt like be so mean to people who are like doing their own thing like what wrong with the world?
I can recommend. I'll even cut y'all in on the finders fee.
Hmm, this "phone in the butt" story appeared just after the bar of soap phone story... cue jokes about bending over.
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts
Fixed it for ya. Seriously, they are in school to pay attention and learn, not sit there an text people.
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?
"No more butt-dialing!"
Oh wait you said butt not vag.
You are mandated to shut up, not text or do anything. Lest the cops come in and frisk your ass (and subsecuently finds a not-illegal item).
Poor kids.
Its good they have no rights. This way they can find out early that "rights" are not for everyone. Hell, as time passess, it seems they are for noone.
NO SIG
First offense, confiscate the phone and give it back at the end of the day.
Second offense, give her in detention, confiscate the phone and require the parents to pick it up in person if they want it back.
Subsequent offenses, repeat step two. The parents will get sick of this pretty quickly, and she will find herself without a phone.
It's not that hard.
The teacher asked the student to stop. Is there some other action a school is allowed to take with a student who refuses to follow instructions?
I think you are supposed to give them a trophy or something.
It helps with their self esteem;-)
noone doesn't get them either
You out the part where you had to fight through the guard dogs just to make it to class in Soviet Russia.
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.
And no mention of a warrant >> Charges thrown out...
Why would you need a warrant? She was arrested on disorderly conduct and frisked. Unless something has changed recently, it's standard procedure to frisk the person you're arresting.
Had this been another country, one more serious about education, and parenting, this character would have been given an immediate failing grade and forced to repeat. But this is America, and we molly coddle our kids, who generally end up laying an egg when it comes to technical topics in high school.
This is about the punishment - not the crime. What the hell is wrong with you. Do you tie your shoes in little nazies. In an age where we find Judges being paid to send kids to jail we should be questioning every single one of these incidents. What's the motive here? And how did we come to this?
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.
Your mandated to be in schools. Your not mandated to pay attention.
Who wants to make the grammar joke?
His statement speaks for itself. That's the joke here.
Aside from the humor, he does make a valid point.
Disclaimer: The opinions and actions of the US Gov't are in no way representative of those held by this author or its ci
Good move! Save time for the important things in life, like self-indulgent narration of things you didn't do.
I don't get it. You have some 15 yro's that go and murder someone, and they have hangups about trying them as adults, yet a teen girl, acts up in class....and she get slapped with charges by the police? How fsked up is that? Geez...give her some detention, but, it doesn't sound like she committed any offense that required being charged with a crime?!?!?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Before everyone goes spouting off about how we're becoming a police state, has anyone (including submitter) bothered to read the linked police report? The cop refers to "prior negative contacts" with this person for both him and the administration. The chick ignores the teachers, lies to the cops, and brazenly continues to text in class. It's too bad the cops had to waste cycles getting involved, but judging from the police report the school personnel were at the end of their rope.
-R
Indeed because, as we all know, refusing to comply or follow orders in a non-military school is indeed a crime against all of society punishable by a sentence decreed in a court of law!
Snowflake had hidden the 'phone in her underwear so having Police present is the only way to avoid a lawsuit.
No sig today...
Fixed it for ya. Seriously, they are in school to pay attention and learn, not sit there an text people.
There fixed it even more for ya. It has been my experience that in most cases where kids misbehave or do things for attention its usually the fault of the parents for either not taking an active enough role in their child's life or for not properly reprimanding them when they act out.
I never did shit like this in school, and if I had, one call to my mother and my ass would have been in a sling.
Her favorite line "I brought you into this world, I can take you out!"
spare the rod and spoil the child indeed.
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
Seriously? She didn't obey a teacher. WTF did she expect to happen these days? Since you want to draw unrelated comparisons, what happens during a fire and she decides she's not gonna obey her teacher then? She's a kid. She's supposed to obey her teachers. If she doesn't like the rules, ask mommy or daddy to withdraw her. Actions have consequences.
That's just plain wrong...
Your(singular) = "Y'all are"
Your(plural) = "Alls'y'all is"
Alls'y'all better get off'n my lawn!!!
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.
Apparently you did not read the criminal complaint. The student was "known to the security officer" as a problem , and had "negative contacts" with the administrators in the past. Sounds to me like a problem child, who continued to act out, from a broken home, had repeatedly ignored the rules, assuming that she could skate out of all trouble. And since it was school she probably could, but in this case, they decided to file the charges. Finally she is forced to have a little accountability for her actions.
Not only did she lie about her actions, she repeatedly gave false numbers to the school for contacting her parents, and wasted several hours of the school employees time. She ought to be billed by the school district for the amount of time wasted by her.
Treat teenagers like adults they act like adults. Don't and they will always act like little children.
- No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades really cramps his style.
I've personally been involved in situations where a student's refusal to cooperate lead to the situation escalating far beyond what was necessary. I think sometimes they believe that if they dig in their heels, nothing bad will happen and the adult will let up. They don't understand that digging in just escalates the situation. When I encounter such a student, I usually have to explain the complete consequences of their actions (including ultimately getting cuffed and hauled out if need be), before they relent.
From reading the report, it's pretty clear that the student had multiple opportunities to come clean before being arrested, and refused to take advantage of them. Yes, I agree that arresting the girl was overkill, but the report mentions that the officer had prior [negative] dealings with the student before, so I would suspect that there is a story here that goes back a little farther than "ZOMG STUDENT ARRESTED FOR TEXTING." Arresting the girl was overkill *if* this was her first disciplinary issue. If this is one of a long string of issues, it's a different story. When sane, measured discipline isn't getting through to a kid, it may be a good time to over-react and try to get the kid's attention.
I don't know the kid, and I don't know her history, so I can't judge whether or not the officer was out of line. I can imagine plenty of scenarios where it is, and plenty where it isn't. I've had students get in a disproportionate amount of trouble for similarly stupid reasons, and it usually plays out the same way: a student with a long disciplinary history tries to press their luck over something moronic, and comes up with the short straw.
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.
As the teacher, how exactly would you enforce the confiscation?
Teacher: Put your cell phone away--no texting in class
Student: No
Teacher: Okay, give me your phone. You can get it back after school.
Student: (Sits on phone) No!
Teacher: That's it. Go to the office
Student: No!
Where would you go next?
Physical intervention? Historically, that would have been the way to go--a smack across the wrists with a ruler and dragged off to the principal's office by the ear. Not really an option anymore though. Assault charges are likely to be filed.
Go in and grab the phone from underneath the student? Molestation and sexual assault charges. Fun!
Ignore it? May be a possibility in a few cases, but my guess is that if something has already escalated to this point, then this student is a much bigger classroom disturbance than just in this instance.
Not being there, it's hard to say what the exact circumstances were, but it's quite easy to assume that the girl was being very belligerent and very disruptive. Not having any other real options of dealing with the problem, calling in the cops is probably the best option--most high schools will have at least one dedicated officer who's always on campus.
Actions have consequences.
Yes and consequences of this action should be either detention or in school suspension.
The police report stated that she was arrested for lying to a police officer. It also stated that she had "prior negative contacts" with the school administration and the local police.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
Time for reductio ad absurdum. "Seriously? That guy didn't obey the cops when they told him to rape his sister. He deserved to get shot in the forehead at point-blank range." See how absurd an appeal to authority sounds when taken to extremes?
You are right that actions have consequences; in school, those consequences rarely, if ever, escalate beyond detention---suspension if you've gotten three detentions in a row. Unless there's a lot more to this story, calling the cops because a teenager wouldn't quit texting is just plain abuse of power. Now if the teenager wouldn't quit interrupting the teacher by texting the teacher, it might be construed as harassment, but again, the right answer is to confiscate the phone, give the student detention, etc.
Either way, the teenager would have to be doing something a lot more disruptive than texting for arresting her to be an appropriate punishment. That's just plain nuts.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
In this day and age.. "in loco parente" has been crushed by all the parents suing schools and teachers..
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.
If the girl doesn't leave, and the teacher shouldn't call the campus police, that leaves very few options:
1) Leave the girl alone - this is highly undesirable, as her behavior will continue to harass the remaining students, and foster the idea that classroom disruptions are okay. I would not have my tax dollars spent on an (even more) ineffective education system.
2) Physically remove the girl from the classroom - this is extremely undesirable, as the teacher/school can be slapped with a lawsuit that will cost us orders of magnitude more tax dollars in defending the case, than the cost of having the campus police remove the girl and setting an example.
It probably goes like this. 1) School officer has no legal authority to "frisk" students without their conent. (If they try, they risk a law suit), 2) Student refuses to consent to frisking, and refuses to cooperate. 3) Police are called, at which point school has no more say in the matter 4) Police are pissed off at having been called, and decide to charge student with disorderly conduct and being a pain in the ass.
At step 2), we don't know why the school couldn't handle this internally. I'm sure that they would have if they could have. No school principal / board wants this kind of publicity if they can avoid it!
We don't know this, but I suspect that this girl has a long history of being disruptive and uncooperative at school. The school has probably tried all sorts of other things in the past, to no avail. The principal probably (very bravely IMO) figured that calling the police might actually get through this girl's thick skull that being a disruptive pain in the ass is a REALLY BAD IDEA. And it might get her parents' attention as well.
Finally she is forced to have a little accountability for her actions.
It's still a bit harsh for the actual offense, arbitrary accountability isn't going to curb her immaturity, she's just going to think "The adults here are idiots." And rightfully so, criminal charges for this are ridiculous even given her troubles.
Treat teenagers like adults they act like adults. Don't and they will always act like little children.
Given some adult idiots and their cell phone behaviors (like, say, talking about sex lives on a crowded bus), I wouldn't say this is acting like a child, I'd say this is acting like an adult with a cell phone.
Parents are either unwilling or unable to parent. Teachers aren't allowed to use that paddle any more, the one with the holes drilled in it to reduce the air cushion that made such a loud smack sound. How the hell else are you supposed to get their attention. Basically, the only thing left when students refuse to follow instructions is to call a cop and charge them with something.
Like the back of a Volkswagen?
Wrong.
"Disorderly conduct" is what the cops use when they want to arrest you but can't name an actual crime. Did you honestly not know this already?
Case in point: the cops never saw her use the phone, because they had to frisk her to prove that she had one.
I hate to tell you this, son, but the school and the cops went nuclear way too soon, and have asked for a lawsuit.
That's a heck of a generalization. If I remember my middle/high school days at all correctly, there's usually not much to do in class. And texting is not disruptive to others... so if you're that bored, why not do something instead of staring at the clock?
I really feel like if teachers would actually focus on education and stop worrying about discipline for discipline's sake, students might actually have a chance at being engaged in lessons.
How much of everybody's time was wasted because the teacher felt obligated to deal with texting instead of math?
The real question is, was it set to vibrate? Inquisitive minds want to know.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
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.
1. What makes you think it would do much? If a student is _that_ disruptive, to the point of flat out refusing to cooperate or obey in any form or shape, not to mention the attitude to the cops bit, I'd say the parents aren't too involved in her education, one way or another.
Best case scenario: it's some single mom who threw in the towel long ago. You might make the mom unhappy a bit, she'll sob on some friends' shoulder, but she's not going to even know where to start to discipline her daughter.
Second worst: the parents don't really give a flying fuck in the first place. They just hope that their daughter grows up without much attention, like the tree in the back yard. Or that if someone has to do things right, it's the teacher, society, whoever other than them.
Absolute worst: the parents actually are proud of that antisocial behaviour and encourage it. Behind many a sociopathic school bully is a parent who's proud that his son/daughter looks out for number one and puts those losers in their place. Behind many, "bah, learning is for loser nerds. Who needs it?" attitudes is some parent who slipped through school on the exact same attitude, and still rationalizes it as the right thing.
2. If she refuses to leave class or stop, what are you going to do? Let her sit there and keep making a point of being a git until the parents get there? Even if the parent immediately drops everything and comes over, you're realistically looking at another hour fucked up before they actually get there.
I know people, heck, work with people where the dad commutes half way across the country, the mom commutes two cities away, and either of them can't get home in less than two hours even if they wanted to.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Lying is not a crime.
Yes it is. It's called fraud. And as part of their education children are taught that lying has consequences. When they reach adulthood the consequences may be more severe.
---
The majority of modern marketing is nothing more than an arms race to get mind share. Everybody loses except the parasitic marketing "industry".
They are making her go to court on 420? Those sick bastards
Consequences that are way out of proportion like the relevant case are tyranny.
On the other hand, as I'm fairly confident that this will go nowhere, it makes for a good story when she's older.
Free Manning, jail Obama.
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?
So the only choices to deal with the willful disobedience of a minor are physical beating or arrest by the police? Who the hell modded that insightful?
Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
There. Fixed that for ya.
Well, at least in the schools I went to, sleeping in class wasn't allowed either, and thats not disruptive.
Still, I'd see it as a preventive step. Texting in class isn't a big deal, but texting during an exam (which often happens in the same room, under similar circonstances) can have pretty dire consequences.
So tell her to go to detention.
"No."
"Ok, then you're suspended, leave school."
"No."
If someone disregards the authority of a teacher, what makes you think they'll suddenly start respecting it when the punishment is upped?
Im really interested in hearing your alternative to mandatory school, seriusly, no sarcasm (no personal attack eigther).
I live in what most people call a 3rd world country (but we are delusional about it and call it "In ways of development"), I'm currently aspiring for a master degree, have 10+ years of work experience, and I think that the biggest problem in this nation is not drug cartels, is the lack of education for the general public.
While the elementary education is mandatory by law, the reality is that just a tiny fraction of the population here actually learns to read and write. I agree that 10 years of education makes your mind work in a very "deterministic" way, but I can't imagine a worse way.
Maybe I'm wrong.
DON'T PANIC.
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.
the teacher failed to properly supervise and discipline a student under their direct responsibility
I thought the problem was that they were supervising and disciplining the child, just not the way you thought best. Unless you give the "proper" way to do it when someone flouts the rules and refuses to leave when asked, I have to presume you don't know what you are talking about.
Learn to love Alaska
The student was not arrested for texting. The student was arrested for refusing to turn over the phone and lying to the instructor and the police officer about it.
Had this student turned over the phone to the instructor, there likely would have been a small punishment, perhaps confiscation of the phone and detention. Now this kid gets a juvenile record (purged at 18), a court appearance, and will perhaps learn a lesson...
there are 3 kinds of people:
* those who can count
* those who can't
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
I suggest you read the arrest report in its entirety. Basically the officer waited till after class to ask her if she had a phone. After she said no, the officer confirmed with the teacher and two other students who had seen her with the phone. After being confronted with this, she STILL denied it. So the officer arrested her for disorderly conduct for her disrupting class and lying to him.
She then proceeded to lie to the officer regarding the phone number that could be used to contact her parents. After eventually getting in contact (presumably by requesting the information from the school records), her mother was contacted and informed that her daughter would be searched. At that point, the female officer (who had been sent) proceeded to perform the search. Where the phone which belonged to her father was found.
This is not the case of an officer immediately arresting her because she was texting. It was an officer who arrested her after he confirmed that several people had seen her texting despite being asked not to. He even stated that her arrest was partially due to her continued lying.
It's pretty clear there was no justification for the search. The disorderly conduct charge was invented specifically to "justify" the search as a search incident to arrest.
Wisconsin law provides "Whoever, in a public or private place, engages in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud, or otherwise disorderly conduct under circumstances in which the conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor."
Texting in class doesn't fall under any of the listed categories, so already you have to use the catch-all "otherwise disorderly". But what really makes it clear is that no arrest was made after the conduct was described and investigated. Instead, the arrest was made after she refused to turn over her phone, showing it was merely a pretext for which to justify a warrantless search.
I read the article, and the redacted transcript, and there's no sign of them issuing her with a detention, or a suspension. Besides which, when a child is suspended you call their parents and request for them to pick them up, not kick them off the grounds (duty of care).
In the end it's the parents you escalate to in a situation like this, not police. There's a whole process beyond that, including a school pscyh councilor, more suspension and then expulsion before you anything like this should happen.
I agree.
In this day and age, kids seem to be getting overdoses of "it's a free country and I want my rights", giving them absurd senses of entitlement over anything and everything.
Seriously, society has gone mad. The concept of individual rights has been twisted into some disfigured unrecognizable mass of idiocy. We can't spank our kids any more, which is why the current generation is such a rabble of unruly, apathetic, self-centered brats. On the other hand, civil liberties are so far gone that we can't protest outside of designated protest zones.
Kids need spankings. It's worked for thousands of years of human behavioral evolution. Governments need checks. Demonstrated over thousands of years of human social evolution.
People, its time to pull our heads out of our asses.
I hate printers.
I read it too, I know it's not in there, the point is that it's an ineffective solution because there's no ability to enforce it. Since you did read it you'll know that they tried to call her parents, and she did everything in her power to make it impossible for them to make contact, of course she could have just said nothing and made it impossible.
So, given that my point what "none of that works if the child doesn't cooperate" do you have any suggestions that don't require exactly that?
Detenion: Refuse
Suspension: Refuse
Parents: Withhold the contact
councilor: Refuse
I understand that these are routes that went untried, but I think it's misguided to assume they would have had a different result given the attitude of the child in question.
Studies say that it doesn't help, but here's something I've never seen studied:
When I was a kid I was a fairly well behaved boy, one of the other kids I grew up with was not. He was spanked regularly because he frequently acted out and was violent and destructive.
Now, true, he was not helped, he's still a moron, BUT, my desire to avoid a similar fate lead me to be very well behaved. There are some kids that can't be helped, but that doesn't mean that making an example of them can't yield fringe benefits.
I don't think the parent was trying to say that she did not warrant punishment, just that it shouldn't be a "criminal" case. As annoying and obnoxious as she may have been, it does not warrant having a criminal record! This type of situation should have been dealt with at the school level (suspension, etc) but not in a criminal case.
There are kids that get physically assaulted by other students in high school and all that happens is maybe a suspension the first 3 or 4 times. For these kinds of assaults to get mere administrative punishment and a texter to get a criminal record is absolutely STUPID. It pisses me off when people complain about problems not being dealt with while big important ones get completely ignored.
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.
Research on behavior modification shows that punishment (like, say, spanking) results in escape and avoidance behaviors and usually results in people reverting to the unwanted behavior once the source/threat of punishment is taken away. Positive reinforcement for wanted behaviors (and removing the reinforcement in response to unwanted behaviors) is more effective, longer lasting, and generally results in a more psychologically healthy individual.
And, just for some anecdotal evidence, I worked for 3 years in a group home for abused and emotionally disturbed children. The ones who were physically beaten seemed to have learned from their parents not how to behave properly, but that anger and violence are the way to respond to someone who does something you don't like.
So children can be arrested for disorderly conduct when they commit the heinous crime of disturbing the tranquillity and serenity of the typical high-school classroom by the extremely uncommon and disruptive behaviour of sending a text message, obviously. It's not like America has enough people in prison already, we could always use some more.
If you have to call the police just because you have a 'disruptive' student silently texting, you won't get much teaching done either, and should be looking for a new profession.
For the same reason they probably have on site day care. Times have changed.
So its a criminal offense to text during class? I must be missing something...
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.........
There is a distinct line of difference between abusive beatings...and corporal punishment. It certainly seemed to work well with my generation, and before.
I know I'd certainly not turned out as well without it when I was raised. THAT was about the only thing that would get my attention. I wasn't a bad kid...but, mischievous. I didn't get that many spankings, but, the ones I got I deserved, and it certainly modified my behavior in a permanent fashion.
I guess if I were a kid today....rather than strike my behavior up to just 'being a boy'....they'd just drug me...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I see your studies, research and science, and raise you 10,000 years of what worked. Positive reinforcement works *as well*, it's not a binary choice where one excludes the other.
For me I got Nintendo if I ate my vegetables. I got a spanking when I set off a firecracker in my neighbor's dog house.
Sorry, spanking works. I don't give a shit what some band of idiots greedy for research grants say.
I was spanked, my parents were spanked, their parents were spanked. It works, and has worked, since forever.
I hate printers.
This is the part that confuses me...
Why are police involved at all? Is it common to have police enforcing school policy? What is this, China? Oh wait.. I bet China doesn't do that...
What part of this was criminal in any way?
Speaking as an American...
History is rarely as simple or concise as one-line rallying cries would have you believe.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is... Oops. Frank, I've got your sig again! Where's mine?
Actions have consequences.
Yes and consequences of this action should be either detention or in school suspension.
If she had surrendered the phone upon the 1st request by the campus officer then detention would be appropriate. Since she continued to claim that she did not have a phone and further concealed it. She escalated it beyond detention or in-school suspension. I think that a fine is correct in this case. If you read the transcript of the officer's report, this student is known to the administration as a "problem".
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.
I believe that it's wrong to assume that the reaction was completely unjustified given that the people on the ground probably have a lot more history and context to work from than anyone armchair quarterbacking on Slashdot does.
I would argue that there's as much evidence to suggest that this is where things were headed regardless as there is to a believe that that similar appeals to authority would have been effective.
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.
Lying is not necessarily fraud. Nor would it be fraud in this case. Lying to the police can be a crime, in most jurisdictions this is called Obstruction of Justice. But the girl was not charged with that.
What baffles me the most about this case was the rigamarole everyone went through to determine that she had a phone. Why did it matter? If the teacher saw the phone, that's the end of it. Give the pupil the appropriate punishment. (detention, suspension, saturday school, etc) Why did it have to be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that she did in fact possess a phone? What if she had passed the phone off to a friend before the officer arrived? Would they have then had to let her go unpunished? The incident originally wasn't about her committing a legal crime, it was about breaking school rules. When you're talking about breaking school rules you don't need evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to get a "conviction".
You sure are missing something... like, the whole story.
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
The AC was half-right. Your friend is actually sounds fairly lenient in individual punishments and likely doesn't see himself as an asshole. But, he does work to restrict people's freedom to use drugs as they see fit.
He himself may not publish misleading propaganda equating pot with crack, or confiscate vehicles from casual pot smokers, or jail people whose only crime was to make their own alcohol, but he's part of the same industrial machine and has to be considered as an interchangeable, equally-guilty part in activities that he ignored, if not participated in.
The war on drugs is pretty much a scam, where it isn't outright fraud. What that makes people who participate in it is an exercise for the reader, but it doesn't get much better than 'unwitting patsy' and goes all the way up to 'complicit in murder for terrorist goals'.
That DEA officer, like any officer in the various branches of the police, has as his job to enforce the laws that were put into place by congress, whose members were democratically elected by the american people. So I'd say he shares about the same amount of blame as....pretty much anyone?
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Buddy,
Despite how you feel about drugs, it's illegal. It doesn't matter one iota your feelings, there's no "freedom to use drugs as you see fit". Especially since the law states otherwise.
You see, the way the world workss is that the laws are changed to reflect the society it protects. You're view on whether it's right or wrong means you have the ability to perform civil disorder, however you will be facing the legality portion much like everyone else that has taken that route. It's necessary, and done with anything worth fighting for.
Enjoy your fight :)
-- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
.... 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
If I refuse to turn off my phone during a meeting at work, they can fire me, but they can't criminally charge me.
But I know, this is kids, we've got to fuck them as hard as possible, so bring in the people with guns!
It's been a long time.
America has insane attitudes towards children in criminal justice.
An adult who molests a 8 year old is entitled to a rehabilitation program that's based on a scientific consensus, and a fair trial. A child who molests another 8 year old will be sent to a re-programming center where discredited techniques meant to "cure" homosexuals in the 30s are used.
This is just another case of the same thing. If I refused to stop texting at work, I'd be fired. They couldn't call the police before even taking that step.
But hey, if you're going to fuck your kids to the tune of 12 trillion dollars, why not fuck them in a totalitarian sense too?
It's been a long time.
The price of freedom for police is the law, and there's this perverse attitude that when it comes to kids, police don't have to follow the law.
In ten thousand years, my boss could NEVER get the police to come to my workplace and frisk me because I didn't stop texting after he told me to stop. It's not against the law, for one thing. For another thing, if the administrators hadn't bothered to try any other remedies, then they hadn't met the standard that an adult would be charged under.
We're just fucking kids at this point. Either they're kids and the school has to deal with them, or they're adults and the police have to deal with them and they should be afforded every single protection an adult is granted under the law.
It's been a long time.
If you were a native American. The white people were mostly British subjects. It was their government and as legitimate as any other.
Do you carry a gun? Are you a state sanctioned agent legally mandated to assist in restricting the rights of citizens?
Police are serious fucking business. If you're going to be using them to enforce school regulations, then kids deserve full rights under the law. If that were the case, the police could not ask for the phone because no crime had been committed.
It's been a long time.
This absurdity I would assume stems from what's called "resist, obstruct or delay" around here, but similar statues are common across the country. Basically this gem of the legal system makes it illegal to lie to a cop, or not give them any information they ask for. Apparently the right to remain silent doesn't apply until you're actually under arrest.
I personally have had the misfortune to be arrested and charged with this. I was at a friends house, and was taking a nap on the couch while they had gone out to the store. They came home while I was asleep and didn't wake me. I awoke to a loud pounding on the door right next to the couch. I got up and opened the door to see a cop standing there. They asked if my friend was home. I said "I don't think so" and looked over my shoulder. While my head was turned the cop said "I'm going to look around" and walked right past me into the house and into my friends bedroom. They found him laying on the bed and arrested him (he had a warrant for a failure to appear), and then walked back into the living room, looked at me and said "I'm arresting you for resist obstruct or delay" and handcuffed me and took me to jail where I spent the next 2 days.
I got the charge dropped after shelling $600 out on a lawyer and doing 24 hours of community service, all for saying "I don't think so."
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
There are kids that get physically assaulted by other students in high school and all that happens is maybe a suspension the first 3 or 4 times.
Uh, what?
I'm 31 now, so this happened a moment ago, but when I was in Jr. High school I was a mama's boy who didn't know how to stand up for himself. I would get in fights regularly, just minor scuffles really, but nobody ever got in trouble for picking on me. One day a kid actually picked a one-on-one fight with me and I beat the crap out of him and got immediately expelled. Went across town where it all happened all over again, except nobody ever picked a one-on-one with me again. Went to a high school where it happened some more, stopped doing all my classwork, got straight Fs and got expelled some more.
Most kids that pick on, beat up, or otherwise physically harass others never get in any trouble AT ALL. It is part of a pervasive culture of violence supported by school officials who look the other way even when they know who, what, when, where, and how. The why is simple: because they can. Is it a coincidence that all of these schools had sports programs and nearly all of the bullies are jocks? Fuck no, it is not.
Sending children to American public school is child abuse. It is a critical element in the perpetuation of our one-sided system.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I read this article yesterday. The student got arrested for not stopping an action after class was stopped and the supervisors where putting school on hold waiting for her to stop doing an action. I don't like police states myself, but I like lame-ass attention-whores trying to pump up their ad revenues just as little.
Being arrested for not obeying an authority is not the same thing as being arrested for texting. mmkay?
One thing you have to understand, this is not the school and legal system I grew up in nor my parents grew up in.
I am guessing here but what probably happened, is that the twit was cheating on her Math test. Teacher caught her. Twit hid phone. So now it is Teachers word vs hers. In my day you would get sent to Principals office, teacher would inform of infraction, and punishment would then be done, probably just a talking to or perhaps a suspension if serious enough. Now a days, if twit gets suspended, and no proof, then school gets sued by parents.
Teachers do not have right to "frisk" students. See parental suing above. So what does teacher do, call the cops and have them frisk her, find phone, proof of cheating. Normally this would end the same way where the Principle would be the one giving out punishment. However refusing to comply with a Teacher is one thing, refusing to comply with police is another. It could be that once an incident has taken place the police are obligated to follow through and have no choice. It could be that they just pissed off the officer. More likely they are just using the incident to scare the bajesus out the twit in hopes of impressing on her some respect for authority. Who knows, not enough detail to determine. Anyway it is likely the report is sensationalistic and they just want to grab a headline, odds are it is really nothing.
I need people to pour my coffee, pick up my garbage, and scrub the toilets I use each day.
I applaud their decision to opt out of education. We need to nurture people like this. We should provide them with additional distractions beyond their phone. Once they've shown a disinterest in education and the disdain for authority to go with it, we should issue them a portable game unit and a headset.
She didn't obey a teacher. WTF did she expect to happen these days?
Today's authorities are incompetently authoritarian. Back when I was in school (no cell phones but...) it would have been detention, or swats.
And how can a society that passes laws against disorderly conduct or "drunk and disorderly" seriously call itself a free country?
Free Martian Whores!