Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
eavesdropper
Participant[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
Participant[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?!
Participant[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?!
Participant[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?!
Participant[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?!
Participant[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?!
Participant[quote=flu]Heh heh. I’ll add one. Mother’s day flowers are pretty good deal at Costco.[/quote]
I see you’re one of those subscribers to Proper Prior Planning, flu.
You’re right, though. We don’t have Costco near us, but I get my flowers at Safeway. In fact, I told my husband that if he ever bought me roses from a florist at $75 to $100 a dozen, I’d divorce him on grounds of financial mismanagement. I can get a dozen long-stems from Safeway, in any one of 30 different colors and varieties, for ten bucks. They look better the first day, and they still look good 5 to 7 days later. The florists’ roses never open up. They stay almost completely closed until their stems start to bend, and they wilt, usually in 2 or 3 days. Tell me again why I’d spend $100?
If I stick to Safeway, I ‘ll have plenty of money left over for tacos at Jack-In-The-Box.
Participant[quote=flu]Heh heh. I’ll add one. Mother’s day flowers are pretty good deal at Costco.[/quote]
I see you’re one of those subscribers to Proper Prior Planning, flu.
You’re right, though. We don’t have Costco near us, but I get my flowers at Safeway. In fact, I told my husband that if he ever bought me roses from a florist at $75 to $100 a dozen, I’d divorce him on grounds of financial mismanagement. I can get a dozen long-stems from Safeway, in any one of 30 different colors and varieties, for ten bucks. They look better the first day, and they still look good 5 to 7 days later. The florists’ roses never open up. They stay almost completely closed until their stems start to bend, and they wilt, usually in 2 or 3 days. Tell me again why I’d spend $100?
If I stick to Safeway, I ‘ll have plenty of money left over for tacos at Jack-In-The-Box.
Participant[quote=flu]Heh heh. I’ll add one. Mother’s day flowers are pretty good deal at Costco.[/quote]
I see you’re one of those subscribers to Proper Prior Planning, flu.
You’re right, though. We don’t have Costco near us, but I get my flowers at Safeway. In fact, I told my husband that if he ever bought me roses from a florist at $75 to $100 a dozen, I’d divorce him on grounds of financial mismanagement. I can get a dozen long-stems from Safeway, in any one of 30 different colors and varieties, for ten bucks. They look better the first day, and they still look good 5 to 7 days later. The florists’ roses never open up. They stay almost completely closed until their stems start to bend, and they wilt, usually in 2 or 3 days. Tell me again why I’d spend $100?
If I stick to Safeway, I ‘ll have plenty of money left over for tacos at Jack-In-The-Box.
Participant[quote=flu]Heh heh. I’ll add one. Mother’s day flowers are pretty good deal at Costco.[/quote]
I see you’re one of those subscribers to Proper Prior Planning, flu.
You’re right, though. We don’t have Costco near us, but I get my flowers at Safeway. In fact, I told my husband that if he ever bought me roses from a florist at $75 to $100 a dozen, I’d divorce him on grounds of financial mismanagement. I can get a dozen long-stems from Safeway, in any one of 30 different colors and varieties, for ten bucks. They look better the first day, and they still look good 5 to 7 days later. The florists’ roses never open up. They stay almost completely closed until their stems start to bend, and they wilt, usually in 2 or 3 days. Tell me again why I’d spend $100?
If I stick to Safeway, I ‘ll have plenty of money left over for tacos at Jack-In-The-Box.
Participant[quote=flu]Heh heh. I’ll add one. Mother’s day flowers are pretty good deal at Costco.[/quote]
I see you’re one of those subscribers to Proper Prior Planning, flu.
You’re right, though. We don’t have Costco near us, but I get my flowers at Safeway. In fact, I told my husband that if he ever bought me roses from a florist at $75 to $100 a dozen, I’d divorce him on grounds of financial mismanagement. I can get a dozen long-stems from Safeway, in any one of 30 different colors and varieties, for ten bucks. They look better the first day, and they still look good 5 to 7 days later. The florists’ roses never open up. They stay almost completely closed until their stems start to bend, and they wilt, usually in 2 or 3 days. Tell me again why I’d spend $100?
If I stick to Safeway, I ‘ll have plenty of money left over for tacos at Jack-In-The-Box.
Participant[quote=Navydoc]This thread reminded me how much I miss being able to buy wine at Costco (or the supermarket, convenience store etc.) Damn Maryland State Stores. Do you guys know how much of a pain in the ass it is to be an alcoholic in this state?
Oh, and my favorite deal under $50 is 12 months of Xbox live for $49.99. Shooting my friends is such great stress relief.[/quote]
You’ll get over it, Navydoc. You just didn’t follow the correct transfer sequence. I moved here (Annapolis) from Pennsylvania. Now that’s a pain in the ass for which you’ll have to consult a proctologist. They sell wine and hard liquor at State Stores. However, if you want beer, you have to go to a quaint little business called a “beer distributor”. I don’t know about now, but when I lived there, drive-in windows weren’t permitted.
Back to the State Stores: They really ARE state stores. The state owns them, state employees “run” them (after a fashion), and even worse…state employees decide what’s sold there. So choice of neighborhood isn’t just about keeping up with the Joneses. It’s about being able to get a wine other than Almaden chablis, Boones Farm, or Manischewitz Concord Grape. At Thanksgiving and Christmas, they usually carry a full complement of Gallo wines (or, as I prefer to call them, Gall-O).
So, count your blessings, Navydoc. Maryland at least has individually-owned wine stores, and some of them have selections that are quite good. Many have staff that know a little somethin’-somethin’ about wine. And they can be fairly competitive in price (another little problem with the Pennsy system. I used to hate having to pay top dollar for my Mateus rose.)
Participant[quote=Navydoc]This thread reminded me how much I miss being able to buy wine at Costco (or the supermarket, convenience store etc.) Damn Maryland State Stores. Do you guys know how much of a pain in the ass it is to be an alcoholic in this state?
Oh, and my favorite deal under $50 is 12 months of Xbox live for $49.99. Shooting my friends is such great stress relief.[/quote]
You’ll get over it, Navydoc. You just didn’t follow the correct transfer sequence. I moved here (Annapolis) from Pennsylvania. Now that’s a pain in the ass for which you’ll have to consult a proctologist. They sell wine and hard liquor at State Stores. However, if you want beer, you have to go to a quaint little business called a “beer distributor”. I don’t know about now, but when I lived there, drive-in windows weren’t permitted.
Back to the State Stores: They really ARE state stores. The state owns them, state employees “run” them (after a fashion), and even worse…state employees decide what’s sold there. So choice of neighborhood isn’t just about keeping up with the Joneses. It’s about being able to get a wine other than Almaden chablis, Boones Farm, or Manischewitz Concord Grape. At Thanksgiving and Christmas, they usually carry a full complement of Gallo wines (or, as I prefer to call them, Gall-O).
So, count your blessings, Navydoc. Maryland at least has individually-owned wine stores, and some of them have selections that are quite good. Many have staff that know a little somethin’-somethin’ about wine. And they can be fairly competitive in price (another little problem with the Pennsy system. I used to hate having to pay top dollar for my Mateus rose.)
Participant[quote=Navydoc]This thread reminded me how much I miss being able to buy wine at Costco (or the supermarket, convenience store etc.) Damn Maryland State Stores. Do you guys know how much of a pain in the ass it is to be an alcoholic in this state?
Oh, and my favorite deal under $50 is 12 months of Xbox live for $49.99. Shooting my friends is such great stress relief.[/quote]
You’ll get over it, Navydoc. You just didn’t follow the correct transfer sequence. I moved here (Annapolis) from Pennsylvania. Now that’s a pain in the ass for which you’ll have to consult a proctologist. They sell wine and hard liquor at State Stores. However, if you want beer, you have to go to a quaint little business called a “beer distributor”. I don’t know about now, but when I lived there, drive-in windows weren’t permitted.
Back to the State Stores: They really ARE state stores. The state owns them, state employees “run” them (after a fashion), and even worse…state employees decide what’s sold there. So choice of neighborhood isn’t just about keeping up with the Joneses. It’s about being able to get a wine other than Almaden chablis, Boones Farm, or Manischewitz Concord Grape. At Thanksgiving and Christmas, they usually carry a full complement of Gallo wines (or, as I prefer to call them, Gall-O).
So, count your blessings, Navydoc. Maryland at least has individually-owned wine stores, and some of them have selections that are quite good. Many have staff that know a little somethin’-somethin’ about wine. And they can be fairly competitive in price (another little problem with the Pennsy system. I used to hate having to pay top dollar for my Mateus rose.)
-
AuthorPosts