[quote=Eugene]There must be more than meets the eye here. I bet it wasn’t the first or the second time she was caught with junk food.[/quote]
I wondered about that, too, Eugene. In the article, the school superintendant is quoted as saying that “lesser penalties had failed to serve as a deterrent.” Whether he was speaking in reference to Amber Brazda was not clear.
There’s no question that this is another case of school administrators creating and enforcing boneheaded rules, and what makes it even more egregious is that it was a clear case of misinterpretation of the Texas Dept. of Agriculture regulation (I looked it up; it’s clearly stated).
That being said, it was a rule, and the student was aware that it was a rule, and she disobeyed it. While I think that, based on the news story narrative, it was an extreme punishment, I might feel differently if this was a case where the same student had blatently disobeyed the rule, in much more significant ways (like bringing whole boxes of Twinkies to school), for the month prior to that.
But that’s the point: I don’t know the whole story. I know only what the news media (who increasingly appear to have done internships on the staffs of the National Enquirer or World News Daily) told me, with a very un-Cronkite-like enthusiasm accompanying the report. As I mentioned in my posts on the Cinco de Mayo debacle, why is the press even involved? And why do I, who live about 1500 miles from Brazos, need to know? This should be handled between the parents and the school district.
I think that members of the press should have to spend a month teaching in their local public schools. Imagine having one of those kids you see on Supernanny (or just your local McDonald’s) in your class, and trying to teach 20 to 30 other children, who aren’t all that thrilled to be there in the first place. Now multiply that little satan’s spawn by 5 or 6 or 7 (because the number of parents who feel that guiding behavior is definitely not a parental responsibility is rising rapidly), and figure out how long you’d stay on the job. Today’s teachers and school administrators can’t teach; they’re too busy trying to get the disruptive kids to stay quiet. But these kids know that they’ll be backed up by their parents.
I’m not a teacher, never have been, and can’t imagine having enough courage to be one. But I need them to teach my children, and I’m grateful to them for doing so. Therefore, I’m going to give them my support. If my kids are breaking the rules of the school, they’re going to pay the price. If I truly believe that a rule is idiotic, I’ll take it up with the school administration (like the big girl I am, and the responsible parent I’m supposed to be). But I will not encourage or endorse my child arbitrarily breaking rules he doesn’t like. And I won’t be running to the press with my “outrage”.
How the hell are these kids ever going to function in the workplace?!
[quote=scaredycat]bad food is way more dangerous than drugs. as long as we’re gonna nanny the people ond rugs, we might as well nanny em on crap food.[/quote]
[quote=scaredycat]bad food is way more dangerous than drugs. as long as we’re gonna nanny the people ond rugs, we might as well nanny em on crap food.[/quote]
[quote=scaredycat]bad food is way more dangerous than drugs. as long as we’re gonna nanny the people ond rugs, we might as well nanny em on crap food.[/quote]
[quote=scaredycat]bad food is way more dangerous than drugs. as long as we’re gonna nanny the people ond rugs, we might as well nanny em on crap food.[/quote]
[quote=scaredycat]bad food is way more dangerous than drugs. as long as we’re gonna nanny the people ond rugs, we might as well nanny em on crap food.[/quote]
