But I'm glad you brought that thread up because it's a perfect example of what I was talking about. Someone (possibly you, I don't remember) suggested that MAYBE the victim was winning the fight (against multiple assailants) and then just happened to slip and fall, which is what really caused his injury, not classmates beating him up or anything. I replied politely to that one, but I was laughing out loud at its absurdity when I read it.
Someone stated that MAYBE the parents failed to get medical attention soon enough or MAYBE the medical care was inadequate. That one pissed me off because there was no known evidence of medical malpractice or parental neglect stated in the article, and the prevailing standard on this board is if it's not in the article, it's false.
And then someone made it a huge-ass point to state that the coma was medically induced, and kept repeating "The kids didn't beat him into a coma!!! The DOCTORS induced it." as though that somehow means the kids who beat him up are blameless.
All these bizarre hypothetical alternative theories abounded in that thread, but at the same time it's totes OK to assume the parents are lying assholes if they contact the media? Talk about bullshit double standards.
The school's essentially can't say shit to the media, EVER. Irrelevant. It doesn't prove the parents are ALWAYS wrong or that school is ALWAYS right.
Also, your last paragraph has no relevance to anything I said.
I never said the first one (about him winning). My initial point in the thread was that there was NO evidence that there was bullying, nothing in the article pointed to bullying other than the father saying he was bullied and the fact that the child fought with more than one student. Those two things are not proof of bullying, period. I never said I don't believe the parents in situations, I said I don't believe that used media portrayals of the events (especially when the case is still being investigated) because here is what is going to happen: Parents: HORRIBLE THINGS HAPPENED TO MY CHILD. School: We are investigating. That's it. So no, I can't form a judgement about what an appropriate punishment should be. In that case the students were suspended for one day. That is a normal suspension for fighting. I get that the child died, but at the point that the punishment was given he wasn't even in the coma yet. We still no more details about the actual situation that led to his injuries other than what the father said. I am not saying the father is lying, I am saying we heard one side of the story.
The same is essentially true here, we know the mother was unhappy with the discipline as a result of her child having a toy gun but we don't know the background and we never will. What we do know is that when she didn't like what happened she ran to the media, that in and of itself says something - and it worked, she got her way.
You don't pay attention, do you? I said possibly you, I don't remember.
You say there was no evidence of bullying, I say there was no evidence of parental neglect or medical malpractice. See how that works? If it's not OK to make assumptions about one side, it's not OK to make them about the other. Why is this concept so controversial to you?
As for the mother in this thread: again, how do you know she didn't have valid reason for not liking what happened? How do you know the reason she got her way isn't that it was the right thing to do and the initial suspension was a mistake? There's not enough info in the article to support that assumption, but you clearly think those assumptions need not be supported.
I'm not saying this particular mother is right, but in every damn thread where school vs. parent/student is discussed, there are always several comments like "DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION IN THE ARTICLE! WE DON'T KNOW THE WHOLE STORY!" followed by maybe this and maybe that. I'd like to see the same standard to be applied to parents instead of presuming them to be at fault when there's no indication of such. Just saying.
Maybe it's because about 99% of the time, it generally is a set of aw-y/bebe/dumbass parents behind the story?
I never said the first one (about him winning). My initial point in the thread was that there was NO evidence that there was bullying, nothing in the article pointed to bullying other than the father saying he was bullied and the fact that the child fought with more than one student. Those two things are not proof of bullying, period. I never said I don't believe the parents in situations, I said I don't believe that used media portrayals of the events (especially when the case is still being investigated) because here is what is going to happen: Parents: HORRIBLE THINGS HAPPENED TO MY CHILD. School: We are investigating. That's it. So no, I can't form a judgement about what an appropriate punishment should be. In that case the students were suspended for one day. That is a normal suspension for fighting. I get that the child died, but at the point that the punishment was given he wasn't even in the coma yet. We still no more details about the actual situation that led to his injuries other than what the father said. I am not saying the father is lying, I am saying we heard one side of the story.
The same is essentially true here, we know the mother was unhappy with the discipline as a result of her child having a toy gun but we don't know the background and we never will. What we do know is that when she didn't like what happened she ran to the media, that in and of itself says something - and it worked, she got her way.
You don't pay attention, do you? I said possibly you, I don't remember.
You say there was no evidence of bullying, I say there was no evidence of parental neglect or medical malpractice. See how that works? If it's not OK to make assumptions about one side, it's not OK to make them about the other. Why is this concept so controversial to you?
As for the mother in this thread: again, how do you know she didn't have valid reason for not liking what happened? How do you know the reason she got her way isn't that it was the right thing to do and the initial suspension was a mistake? There's not enough info in the article to support that assumption, but you clearly think those assumptions need not be supported.
Oh FFS, I meant it to imply that I said the rest - read between the fucking lines. I never actually said those things happened, I said we didn't know if they did or didn't because we didn't know all the details, I was making a point about NO KNOWING ALL THE DETAILS and how details could make a difference.
I don't really have an opinion about what happened. She may have had a valid reason.
Personally I think that if she went through the proper channels (she goes to the principal, doesn't get what she wants, she goes to the superintendent, doesn't get what she wants, goes to the director of the school board...) then if it was the wrong decision it would have been overturned without going to the media. The fact that she went to the media, for something as small as an in-school suspension makes me suspect, because frankly, it's an over-reaction. If it was really a poor punishment then going through the proper channels would have garnered her the same result.
Oh FFS, I meant it to imply that I said the rest - read between the fucking lines. I never actually said those things happened, I said we didn't know if they did or didn't because we didn't know all the details, I was making a point about NO KNOWING ALL THE DETAILS and how details could make a difference.
I don't really have an opinion about what happened. She may have had a valid reason.
Personally I think that if she went through the proper channels (she goes to the principal, doesn't get what she wants, she goes to the superintendent, doesn't get what she wants, goes to the director of the school board...) then if it was the wrong decision it would have been overturned without going to the media. The fact that she went to the media, for something as small as an in-school suspension makes me suspect, because frankly, it's an over-reaction. If it was really a poor punishment then going through the proper channels would have garnered her the same result.
Exactly.
You want to go to the media because your kid suffered some long lasting trauma, go right ahead. But I'm going to assume you must be a damned pantywaist and an overblown drama llama if you go to the media over one day ISS. Ridamneddiculous.
Maybe it's because about 99% of the time, it generally is a set of aw-y/bebe/dumbass parents behind the story?
Do you have data to support that statement?
honestly? 12 years teaching has taught me that school discipline leads to one set of parents being upset with the results of punishment, unless the situation involves no 'victim', in which case the parents of the child being punished are usually still upset. Most of the time parents aren't happy...we rarely manage to make all parties involved happy with the end result, it is the nature of the beast. That doesn't lead all unhappy parents to be aw-y/bebe/dumbasses, but sometimes they are.
Here's the thing, I 'get' going to the media when something horrible has happened and no progress is being made or justice hasn't been done, I do understand it - that's essentially what happened in the Trevon case and I can see why it is important that it does happen.
My issue is that the article that was posted in that other thread, and again here, neither of them really provided enough details to really justify freaking uproar. I get uproar when there are sufficient details provided to actually pass judgement, and yes, what constitutes sufficient details is subjective. My point was that in my opinion those details were lacking. You disagree.
honestly? 12 years teaching has taught me that school discipline leads to one set of parents being upset with the results of punishment, unless the situation involves no 'victim', in which case the parents of the child being punished are usually still upset. Most of the time parents aren't happy...we rarely manage to make all parties involved happy with the end result, it is the nature of the beast. That doesn't lead all unhappy parents to be aw-y/bebe/dumbasses, but sometimes they are.
Sometimes. Not the 99% hyperbole that was taratru's contribution. This segment you just quoted was my response to HER use of a percentage to make that exaggeration and was meant to be sarcastic.
But since you took it literally, I'll say that your 12 years of teaching is anecdotal. I have more years than that in the clinical setting that has shaped a few opinions for me in the same way your experience has for you, but that doesn't make it data. It certainly isn't accepted as such on this board.
honestly? 12 years teaching has taught me that school discipline leads to one set of parents being upset with the results of punishment, unless the situation involves no 'victim', in which case the parents of the child being punished are usually still upset. Most of the time parents aren't happy...we rarely manage to make all parties involved happy with the end result, it is the nature of the beast. That doesn't lead all unhappy parents to be aw-y/bebe/dumbasses, but sometimes they are.
Sometimes. Not the 99% hyperbole that was taratru's contribution. This segment you just quoted was my response to HER use of a percentage to make that exaggeration and was meant to be sarcastic.
But since you took it literally, I'll say that your 12 years of teaching is anecdotal. I have more years than that in the clinical setting that has shaped a few opinions for me in the same way your experience has for you, but that doesn't make it data. It certainly isn't accepted as such on this board.
You are just a peach, aren't you? I am done walking in circles...we both know I wasn't actually trying to provide data, I was providing my opinion on why she made the comment she did...you are being petty.
Sometimes. Not the 99% hyperbole that was taratru's contribution. This segment you just quoted was my response to HER use of a percentage to make that exaggeration and was meant to be sarcastic.
But since you took it literally, I'll say that your 12 years of teaching is anecdotal. I have more years than that in the clinical setting that has shaped a few opinions for me in the same way your experience has for you, but that doesn't make it data. It certainly isn't accepted as such on this board.
You are just a peach, aren't you? I am done walking in circles...we both know I wasn't actually trying to provide data, I was providing my opinion on why she made the comment she did...you are being petty.
Wow. Nope, sorry, I don't have data. Nor do you have any to warrant us taking our time to form a judgment.
Go teach, will ya? For more than a few years. Like, maybe...18? Then you can come back and tell rugby and I how all our experiences are anecdotal and not worth considering. If there's anything true in education, it's that statistics and quantitative data never EVER tell the whole story. It's because the largest variable is people.
Nor was I trying to provide actual fact. I was trying to point out that HERE, on THIS board, when stories like this are brought up, we tend to judge the parents harshly because they are indeed, doing what we think, nearly all of the time. You obviously understood that, since you pointed out my use of hyperbole. So what exactly are you so upset about?
Post by fluffaluff on Mar 23, 2013 22:44:25 GMT -5
I've never had a kindergartener, but worked with enough kids that it doesn't surprise me that he would take toys to school..especially something a five year old would be particularly excited about, like something he just got on vacation. This is a rediculous over-reaction by the school. When I was in elementary if we brought anything that turned into a distraction, the teacher would keep it until recess or something. There's no mention that it's been an issue in the past.
But since you took it literally, I'll say that your 12 years of teaching is anecdotal. I have more years than that in the clinical setting that has shaped a few opinions for me in the same way your experience has for you, but that doesn't make it data. It certainly isn't accepted as such on this board.
You're still upset that people didn't accept your opinion that all addicts are soulless manipulative drug-seeking monsters deserving of zero sympathy or compassion.
You are just a peach, aren't you? I am done walking in circles...we both know I wasn't actually trying to provide data, I was providing my opinion on why she made the comment she did...you are being petty.
Wow. Nope, sorry, I don't have data. Nor do you have any to warrant us taking our time to form a judgment.
Go teach, will ya? For more than a few years. Like, maybe...18? Then you can come back and tell rugby and I how all our experiences are anecdotal and not worth considering. If there's anything true in education, it's that statistics and quantitative data never EVER tell the whole story. It's because the largest variable is people.
Nor was I trying to provide actual fact. I was trying to point out that HERE, on THIS board, when stories like this are brought up, we tend to judge the parents harshly because they are indeed, doing what we think, nearly all of the time. You obviously understood that, since you pointed out my use of hyperbole. So what exactly are you so upset about?
I'd say "offended" is more accurate than "upset", but to answer your question - it's the presumption that parents are assholes until proven otherwise. And the double standard that forbids assumptions about schools/teachers but actively encourages them about parents. Fuck that bullshit, and fuck you and rugby wife for defending said bullshit. Nowhere else but a school thread on P&CE would a presumption of guilt 99% of the time be tolerated.
(Edit: The above I have already explained upthread, just in case you wanted to be objective)
The knee-jerk defensiveness and the uncalled-for personal insults displayed here pretty much confirm my suspicion of an anti-parent bias in some of you. Also, on what other subject would someone, in the absence of evidence, say something like "It might be wrong and judgy of me, but whenever someone does ______ I assume _____" and NOT get the shit flamed out them on this board?