OT: More wacky school admin

[briansd1]

[quote=poorgradstudent][quote=CA renter]IMHO, it is ALL about the exercise — or lack of it, as the case may be today.[/quote]
Actually the research suggests with kids it’s pretty much all about increased calorie consumption:
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-parenting/2009/5/11/todays-kids-are-fat-why-they-eat-more

Minimally there’s excellent evidence kids today as a whole eat a lot more calories than kids did 30 years ago. The obesity epidemic is interesting and tricky from a statistics point of view because the mean is often pretty useless. With most average weights you have a lot of people a little bit under it and group of “overachievers” waaaay over it, which also is where most of the health problems come in.

Personally I’m generally in the “nudge” camp when it comes to the “personal responsibility” vs. “nanny state” arguments. Although with kids those nudges can be a lot stronger. As I recall, kids are stupid, or at least very foolish. They need to be protected from themselves. This penalty was overly harsh, but I’m a lot more upset when jerk principals cancel prom because homosexual students want to attend together.[/quote]

poorgradstudent, your posts are always most reasonable and make the most sense.

I think it’s fun to observe the conservatives hang on to little things to get riled up over. It’s like they are constantly on the lookout for small things to prove that their rights are being trampled over so that they can feel outraged.

Listen to the conservatives talking-heads. It’s all about hate and outrage. Nothing positive ever drives them.

[an]

Last I checked, CAR is far from conservative.

[an]

Last I checked, CAR is far from conservative.

[an]

Last I checked, CAR is far from conservative.

[an]

Last I checked, CAR is far from conservative.

[an]

Last I checked, CAR is far from conservative.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Hobie]Compliance with this school policy ensures the district gets reimbursed under the federal nutritious lunch program. Of course, I not thrilled with the fed holding the states over a barrel like this but it is not a new idea and that is a different issue. Same with the parents contacting the idiotic press.

I am however troubled in the way the principal choose to handle it. The kid is in the 3rd grade. Sending her home on detention really doesn’t change behavior. It just escalates the situation.

[/quote]

Hobie, the school administrators misinterpreted the policy. I don’t believe that they should be fired for the idiotic disciplinary action, but I do favor them being demoted (several levels) for lacking the basic reading comprehension skills necessary for their positions. The policy is extremely easy to read and interpret. I’ve attached links to the state policies below.

Agree with your view on the parents contacting the press. I want to call them up and say, “Get over your fear of the principal’s office, and take care of this problem like a responsible adult and parent should.”

But that wouldn’t change a thing. When you compare the gratification of resolving your child’s problems in a calm and mature manner (causing the least amount of trauma to the child) with the instant fame you get from having your kid’s sad face and story smeared all over the news, it’s no contest. Not only that: now Amber will have a leg-up on the other 8- and 9-year-olds in the “Little Miss Perfect” pageants. This story should prove a real 3-handkerchief tear-jerker with the judges.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=4&pt=1&ch=26&sch=A&rl=Y

Look under Section 26.6 (referred to by school administrators in the Brazos case). An 2009-2010 amendment to the policy is linked below.

http://www.squaremeals.org/vgn/tda/files/2348/13440_TPSNP%20SY_09-10.pdf

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Hobie]Compliance with this school policy ensures the district gets reimbursed under the federal nutritious lunch program. Of course, I not thrilled with the fed holding the states over a barrel like this but it is not a new idea and that is a different issue. Same with the parents contacting the idiotic press.

I am however troubled in the way the principal choose to handle it. The kid is in the 3rd grade. Sending her home on detention really doesn’t change behavior. It just escalates the situation.

[/quote]

Hobie, the school administrators misinterpreted the policy. I don’t believe that they should be fired for the idiotic disciplinary action, but I do favor them being demoted (several levels) for lacking the basic reading comprehension skills necessary for their positions. The policy is extremely easy to read and interpret. I’ve attached links to the state policies below.

Agree with your view on the parents contacting the press. I want to call them up and say, “Get over your fear of the principal’s office, and take care of this problem like a responsible adult and parent should.”

But that wouldn’t change a thing. When you compare the gratification of resolving your child’s problems in a calm and mature manner (causing the least amount of trauma to the child) with the instant fame you get from having your kid’s sad face and story smeared all over the news, it’s no contest. Not only that: now Amber will have a leg-up on the other 8- and 9-year-olds in the “Little Miss Perfect” pageants. This story should prove a real 3-handkerchief tear-jerker with the judges.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=4&pt=1&ch=26&sch=A&rl=Y

Look under Section 26.6 (referred to by school administrators in the Brazos case). An 2009-2010 amendment to the policy is linked below.

http://www.squaremeals.org/vgn/tda/files/2348/13440_TPSNP%20SY_09-10.pdf

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Hobie]Compliance with this school policy ensures the district gets reimbursed under the federal nutritious lunch program. Of course, I not thrilled with the fed holding the states over a barrel like this but it is not a new idea and that is a different issue. Same with the parents contacting the idiotic press.

I am however troubled in the way the principal choose to handle it. The kid is in the 3rd grade. Sending her home on detention really doesn’t change behavior. It just escalates the situation.

[/quote]

Hobie, the school administrators misinterpreted the policy. I don’t believe that they should be fired for the idiotic disciplinary action, but I do favor them being demoted (several levels) for lacking the basic reading comprehension skills necessary for their positions. The policy is extremely easy to read and interpret. I’ve attached links to the state policies below.

Agree with your view on the parents contacting the press. I want to call them up and say, “Get over your fear of the principal’s office, and take care of this problem like a responsible adult and parent should.”

But that wouldn’t change a thing. When you compare the gratification of resolving your child’s problems in a calm and mature manner (causing the least amount of trauma to the child) with the instant fame you get from having your kid’s sad face and story smeared all over the news, it’s no contest. Not only that: now Amber will have a leg-up on the other 8- and 9-year-olds in the “Little Miss Perfect” pageants. This story should prove a real 3-handkerchief tear-jerker with the judges.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=4&pt=1&ch=26&sch=A&rl=Y

Look under Section 26.6 (referred to by school administrators in the Brazos case). An 2009-2010 amendment to the policy is linked below.

http://www.squaremeals.org/vgn/tda/files/2348/13440_TPSNP%20SY_09-10.pdf

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Hobie]Compliance with this school policy ensures the district gets reimbursed under the federal nutritious lunch program. Of course, I not thrilled with the fed holding the states over a barrel like this but it is not a new idea and that is a different issue. Same with the parents contacting the idiotic press.

I am however troubled in the way the principal choose to handle it. The kid is in the 3rd grade. Sending her home on detention really doesn’t change behavior. It just escalates the situation.

[/quote]

Hobie, the school administrators misinterpreted the policy. I don’t believe that they should be fired for the idiotic disciplinary action, but I do favor them being demoted (several levels) for lacking the basic reading comprehension skills necessary for their positions. The policy is extremely easy to read and interpret. I’ve attached links to the state policies below.

Agree with your view on the parents contacting the press. I want to call them up and say, “Get over your fear of the principal’s office, and take care of this problem like a responsible adult and parent should.”

But that wouldn’t change a thing. When you compare the gratification of resolving your child’s problems in a calm and mature manner (causing the least amount of trauma to the child) with the instant fame you get from having your kid’s sad face and story smeared all over the news, it’s no contest. Not only that: now Amber will have a leg-up on the other 8- and 9-year-olds in the “Little Miss Perfect” pageants. This story should prove a real 3-handkerchief tear-jerker with the judges.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=4&pt=1&ch=26&sch=A&rl=Y

Look under Section 26.6 (referred to by school administrators in the Brazos case). An 2009-2010 amendment to the policy is linked below.

http://www.squaremeals.org/vgn/tda/files/2348/13440_TPSNP%20SY_09-10.pdf

[eavesdropper]

[quote=Hobie]Compliance with this school policy ensures the district gets reimbursed under the federal nutritious lunch program. Of course, I not thrilled with the fed holding the states over a barrel like this but it is not a new idea and that is a different issue. Same with the parents contacting the idiotic press.

I am however troubled in the way the principal choose to handle it. The kid is in the 3rd grade. Sending her home on detention really doesn’t change behavior. It just escalates the situation.

[/quote]

Hobie, the school administrators misinterpreted the policy. I don’t believe that they should be fired for the idiotic disciplinary action, but I do favor them being demoted (several levels) for lacking the basic reading comprehension skills necessary for their positions. The policy is extremely easy to read and interpret. I’ve attached links to the state policies below.

Agree with your view on the parents contacting the press. I want to call them up and say, “Get over your fear of the principal’s office, and take care of this problem like a responsible adult and parent should.”

But that wouldn’t change a thing. When you compare the gratification of resolving your child’s problems in a calm and mature manner (causing the least amount of trauma to the child) with the instant fame you get from having your kid’s sad face and story smeared all over the news, it’s no contest. Not only that: now Amber will have a leg-up on the other 8- and 9-year-olds in the “Little Miss Perfect” pageants. This story should prove a real 3-handkerchief tear-jerker with the judges.

http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/readtac$ext.ViewTAC?tac_view=5&ti=4&pt=1&ch=26&sch=A&rl=Y

Look under Section 26.6 (referred to by school administrators in the Brazos case). An 2009-2010 amendment to the policy is linked below.

http://www.squaremeals.org/vgn/tda/files/2348/13440_TPSNP%20SY_09-10.pdf

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN][quote=briansd1]I can see that girl turn into a 200-pound woman. 20 years from now, she’ll be on Oprah (or whoever at that time) telling us about her food ordeal.

I was at Costco today I couldn’t believe number of fat people out there.

Conservatives should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because we are all paying dearly for it.[/quote]
You mean liberal should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because they love to tell others what to do. Who am I to say what you eat is right or wrong? That’s your own choice. Go ahead, eat yourself to death. Just don’t make me pay to prolong your life.[/quote]

But that’s the problem: we are paying, not only to prolong their lives via health care, but for them just to exist day-to-day. There are more people applying for Social Security disability payments than there are applying for retirement benefits. Obesity is considered grounds for these payments, not to mention all of the diseases and disorders caused or exacerbated by obesity: hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, low back pain, asthma, and on and on.

In 2009, there were 2.8 millions new applications. 7.8 million individuals actually received SS disability income, along with Medicare or Medicaid health benefits. Compare this with 1999, with 1.3 applicants and 4.2 million recipients.

I’m not saying that we should control what people eat. I’m a believer in personal responsibility. But if our esteemed leaders aren’t going to do away with these programs, or at least restore them to their original status, many Americans are going to eat our country right into bankruptcy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN][quote=briansd1]I can see that girl turn into a 200-pound woman. 20 years from now, she’ll be on Oprah (or whoever at that time) telling us about her food ordeal.

I was at Costco today I couldn’t believe number of fat people out there.

Conservatives should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because we are all paying dearly for it.[/quote]
You mean liberal should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because they love to tell others what to do. Who am I to say what you eat is right or wrong? That’s your own choice. Go ahead, eat yourself to death. Just don’t make me pay to prolong your life.[/quote]

But that’s the problem: we are paying, not only to prolong their lives via health care, but for them just to exist day-to-day. There are more people applying for Social Security disability payments than there are applying for retirement benefits. Obesity is considered grounds for these payments, not to mention all of the diseases and disorders caused or exacerbated by obesity: hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, low back pain, asthma, and on and on.

In 2009, there were 2.8 millions new applications. 7.8 million individuals actually received SS disability income, along with Medicare or Medicaid health benefits. Compare this with 1999, with 1.3 applicants and 4.2 million recipients.

I’m not saying that we should control what people eat. I’m a believer in personal responsibility. But if our esteemed leaders aren’t going to do away with these programs, or at least restore them to their original status, many Americans are going to eat our country right into bankruptcy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN][quote=briansd1]I can see that girl turn into a 200-pound woman. 20 years from now, she’ll be on Oprah (or whoever at that time) telling us about her food ordeal.

I was at Costco today I couldn’t believe number of fat people out there.

Conservatives should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because we are all paying dearly for it.[/quote]
You mean liberal should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because they love to tell others what to do. Who am I to say what you eat is right or wrong? That’s your own choice. Go ahead, eat yourself to death. Just don’t make me pay to prolong your life.[/quote]

But that’s the problem: we are paying, not only to prolong their lives via health care, but for them just to exist day-to-day. There are more people applying for Social Security disability payments than there are applying for retirement benefits. Obesity is considered grounds for these payments, not to mention all of the diseases and disorders caused or exacerbated by obesity: hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, low back pain, asthma, and on and on.

In 2009, there were 2.8 millions new applications. 7.8 million individuals actually received SS disability income, along with Medicare or Medicaid health benefits. Compare this with 1999, with 1.3 applicants and 4.2 million recipients.

I’m not saying that we should control what people eat. I’m a believer in personal responsibility. But if our esteemed leaders aren’t going to do away with these programs, or at least restore them to their original status, many Americans are going to eat our country right into bankruptcy.

[eavesdropper]

[quote=AN][quote=briansd1]I can see that girl turn into a 200-pound woman. 20 years from now, she’ll be on Oprah (or whoever at that time) telling us about her food ordeal.

I was at Costco today I couldn’t believe number of fat people out there.

Conservatives should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because we are all paying dearly for it.[/quote]
You mean liberal should be condemning irresponsible eating behavior because they love to tell others what to do. Who am I to say what you eat is right or wrong? That’s your own choice. Go ahead, eat yourself to death. Just don’t make me pay to prolong your life.[/quote]

But that’s the problem: we are paying, not only to prolong their lives via health care, but for them just to exist day-to-day. There are more people applying for Social Security disability payments than there are applying for retirement benefits. Obesity is considered grounds for these payments, not to mention all of the diseases and disorders caused or exacerbated by obesity: hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, low back pain, asthma, and on and on.

In 2009, there were 2.8 millions new applications. 7.8 million individuals actually received SS disability income, along with Medicare or Medicaid health benefits. Compare this with 1999, with 1.3 applicants and 4.2 million recipients.

I’m not saying that we should control what people eat. I’m a believer in personal responsibility. But if our esteemed leaders aren’t going to do away with these programs, or at least restore them to their original status, many Americans are going to eat our country right into bankruptcy.

[Author]

Posts