Buffalo school officials seek answers on how to cope with disruptive students
Buffalo school officials are seeking ways to counter a recent series of violent incidents in city schools but conceded Wednesday evening that they have no immediate answers.
"It's a scary time in our community as far as safety is concerned," Yvonne Hargrave, the interim superintendent, said at a meeting of the Board of Education where several teachers made the case of re-establishing alternative high schools.
read the complete story HERE in the Buffalo News.
The School Board has to bite the bullet, put all the politically correct notions about self-esteem and warped-psyches aside, and deep six policies such as the mandatory "social promotion."
(As I understand it this is the absurd local requirement that 16-year old eigth graders can not be held back and must be promoted, regardless of their acheivement or skills.)
I know I will be questioned but one good crack on the butt never hurt anyone. If kids believe they won't pay for thier actions they don't care. They are not accountable for what they do. This probally cares into thier adulthood.
An indication of what type of adults they are about to become? Absolutely!
They are not accountable for what they do
It's a combination of 3 factors- the children, the parents and the teachers.
Granted, there are children in school who want to learn, there are parents who want a good quality education for their children, teachers that enjoy teaching their students... but then there are classes of each that really don't care. Some teachers are only there to get a paycheck and medical benefits, some kids are just there because they have to be and parents who can careless where and what their children are doing as long as they don't have to hear about it. I have seen both scenarios many times in the Buffalo Schools.
In order to 'change' the schooling system you have to begin with all three at once, not little by little or one at a time. All schools all under the same set procedures, so that when one kid gets kicked out of a place he/she can't go to a different school with a different set of rules and manage wrong behavior.
Since it's up to the school board to institute such changes, they should drop by any school at any given time to get a visual perception of what's going on. Undercover and Unannounced! Catch a lot of people off guard, and those whom are doing things right everyday have nothing to worry about.
Originally posted by Night Owl
They are not accountable for what they do
It's a combination of 3 factors- the children, the parents and the teachers.
Granted, there are children in school who want to learn, there are parents who want a good quality education for their children, teachers that enjoy teaching their students... but then there are classes of each that really don't care. Some teachers are only there to get a paycheck and medical benefits, some kids are just there because they have to be and parents who can careless where and what their children are doing as long as they don't have to hear about it. I have seen both scenarios many times in the Buffalo Schools.
In order to 'change' the schooling system you have to begin with all three at once, not little by little or one at a time. All schools all under the same set procedures, so that when one kid gets kicked out of a place he/she can't go to a different school with a different set of rules and manage wrong behavior.
Since it's up to the school board to institute such changes, they should drop by any school at any given time to get a visual perception of what's going on. Undercover and Unannounced! Catch a lot of people off guard, and those whom are doing things right everyday have nothing to worry about.
For petes sake the solution is simple...... Incorporate a disciplinary point system for each student that would reflect if the student succeeds and moves on with his/her education. Kid accumulates a lot of bad points then the kid fails the course. Kid has to retake the course until he/she succeeds. Kid fails to many courses the kid gets held back a year. Kid's parents may or may not raise an eye brow if their prize kid is held back a year. repeat until kid gets the message to behave in school. If up to three held backs the kid loses the right to attend said school. Going to a public school is a privilege not a right. Oh then the kid will simply drop out. Ok, kid loses any and all benefits for welfare or aid of any type. No basic education no money or aid for you. Sound tough well T.S.!!! My cousin use to sub at Buffalo Schools and he had plenty of horror stories to tell. The kids are very bad.
For petes sake the solution is simple...... Incorporate a disciplinary point system for each student that would reflect if the student succeeds and moves on with his/her education. Kid accumulates a lot of bad points then the kid fails the course. Kid has to retake the course until he/she succeeds. Kid fails to many courses the kid gets held back a year. Kid's parents may or may not raise an eye brow if their prize kid is held back a year. repeat until kid gets the message to behave in school. If up to three held backs the kid loses the right to attend said school. Going to a public school is a privilege not a right. Oh then the kid will simply drop out. Ok, kid loses any and all benefits for welfare or aid of any type. No basic education no money or aid for you. Sound tough well T.S.!!! My cousin use to sub at Buffalo Schools and he had plenty of horror stories to tell. The kids are very bad.
Ok, kid loses any and all benefits for welfare or aid of any type.
Let's not assume all kids who misbehave in public school are the result of a welfare home.
I am not. I said "or aid of any type." Any type of aid can come in the form of many things. The point is the kid needs to show some level of seriouness and gumshu to succeed. Having some kids be baby sat at he expense of valuable resources is a no win situation for all involved.Originally posted by Night Owl
Ok, kid loses any and all benefits for welfare or aid of any type.
Let's not assume all kids who misbehave in public school are the result of a welfare home.
Oh, by the way when I made reference that Victor Getz could come over on weekends for sauce I meant sauce as in spaghetti dinner. Italians tipically have sauce as in italian type food on Sunday once a week or more......
Re-reading that I do not want to have creative minds wonder into a territory that was not meant......
We seem to have a running spaghetti dinner theme on this board...
I am not. I said "or aid of any type." Any type of aid can come in the form of many things.
Still to tie together the personal family finances of a stundent with losing such things on account of behavior is not only morally wrong, it is unethical as well.
Your ideas of a point system will continue to thrive on the one most important element amongst students in the public schools.. and that is maintaining the difference between poor kids and not poor kids.
Children are just that, children. They can not and should not have to be held accountable for the personal finances of their parents and to associate a point system on behalf of some stundents household income is beyond reproach.
Your missing the point.Originally posted by Night Owl
I am not. I said "or aid of any type." Any type of aid can come in the form of many things.
Still to tie together the personal family finances of a stundent with losing such things on account of behavior is not only morally wrong, it is unethical as well.
Your ideas of a point system will continue to thrive on the one most important element amongst students in the public schools.. and that is maintaining the difference between poor kids and not poor kids.
Children are just that, children. They can not and should not have to be held accountable for the personal finances of their parents and to associate a point system on behalf of some stundents household income is beyond reproach.
The point system would include lower income kids and higher income kids.
Where did you get the idea that concernedwnyer meant that?Still to tie together the personal family finances of a stundent with losing such things on account of behavior is not only morally wrong, it is unethical as well.
Your missing the point.
The point system would include lower income kids and higher income kids.
How so? With this type of pointing system, higher income families have nothing to lose, while children of lower income families would stand to get cut from "aid" . It's making the limits just for the families with less money.
IE-What would be taken away from the kids who don't need "aid" and/or welfare, benefits, etc? That is where I am coming from.Ok, kid loses any and all benefits for welfare or aid of any type.
Rich or not no one is entitled really to anything. Also, no one is entitled to be paid more than the next worker just because they feel they should be. And if they are given anything it doesn't meant it has to be top dollar either.How so? With this type of pointing system, higher income families have nothing to lose, while children of lower income families would stand to get cut from "aid" . It's making the limits just for the families with less money.
IE-
NOW i'm not stereo typing the poor... I'm just making a story.
Think about before the west was won. Did our politicians tell the first settlers who ventured forth over the rockies that they had to entitle others to thier hard work? Were wagon trains told they had to haul along others that wouldn't pull thier own wieght. Were non residents told they could go on a wagon train and have everything paid for? I don't think so. It's no difference when you take a small community and expect them to cover cost of others. The whole nation should help lower income people, not just NYS.
no, no... the point I was making was that a "pointing system" idea would be more ideal if the poor/rich stereotyping was left out.
Ok, kid loses any and all benefits for welfare or aid of any type.
Looking at it from any angle, the original idea of this 'pointing system' is in the area of being bias and unfair towards less fortunate children because if they act out things (personal familiy financial things) are taken away while if the rich kids act out there's no benefits they'd lose if the didn't have them in the first place. See what I'm saying?
Yeah, beating a dead horse here, but it seems like the difference between apples and oranges is making us confused.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote