I've detected in the recent reports of violence on the High School property that officials from both the school district and local LE have a certain disdain for the students capability to communicate with each other and their parents.
I'd like to hear others response to this position. First though, having had the perspective of my students report to use in my decision to balance past incidents, she were allowed not to attend the day after the fight in question.
If the capability to message a parent is available there should be no problems from the gestapo.
__________________
"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." == Winston Churchill
I do believe that the High School policy doesn't allow you to display or have your cellphones on, but you can still have them...could be off here I may have been misinformed. I think that a policy like that would be effective, meaning if your phone is heard or easily notice (i.e. out on your desk or something to that effect) then you should be punished, but don't take them away because they are very useful tools is times of crisis (although I suppose that could also work the other way around cause more of a crisis)
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" -- Winston Churchill
How was the use of a cell message of impending violence considered a terroristic threat? That was the message I received, I just don't know if I'ts OK anymore if my students (and mine), to disregard information.
Let's jump off this and say that the chief's kid could do as much or more damage while intoxicated, if he has a problem with my child skipping a day because of gang activity, he needs a pair of bifocals.
In case anyone has noticed, this town is not making any positive improvement.
__________________
"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." == Winston Churchill
I think the problem with the cell phone usage doesn't stem from student to parent contact, but from student to student contact. Through exaggeration and word of mouth, issues tend to grow until they become bigger and worse than they were ever intended (like the rumor that there would be a school shooting...perhaps?). Whats so wrong with your students keeping their cellphones in purses/lockers and then if an issue arrives calling a parent? Or further...why couldn't they use an office phone? I'm not saying during the middle of something going down they should run down and use the office phone, pull out your cellphone then of course, but if they don't feel like staying at school is a good idea just go down to the office and ask to use the phone to call a parent.
Onto your comments about the chief's "kid", really a cheap shot that is not necessary. Let's remember that this kid is around 20 yrs old so you can't really hold his father responsible anymore. Also, I don't see where you draw the argument that he could cause as much damage while intoxicated, wouldn't that apply to any person who is intoxicated? Also, knowing the circumstances he was not participating in any activities that would lead to serious damage to others (i.e. driving a car) or stupidly drunk.
I believe that Chief Wallace's problem with allowing kids to skip a day is almost the same reason why they don't cancel school as soon as a bomb threat is received. If kid's knew that rumors would lead to getting let out of school, then guess what starts happening once a week. This would also greatly decrease the schools/police chance of stopping a legitimate threat.
Look at the numbers, fighting hasn't been more or less of a problem then it has been in the past. I have talked with numerous students at the high school, and after hearing about these "huge gang fights" and then hearing actual accounts of what happened, I do not believe that there is quite as big of a gang problem as students would want their parents to believe.
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" -- Winston Churchill
The point I'm trying to make is that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. I'm uncertain that the chief is qualified to make a redoubt of my scepticism.
If the school district was serious about informing parents they could easily im(Instant Message) their concerns to parents. It has been proven as a modern means of communication on many college campus.
__________________
"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." == Winston Churchill
The two issues are unrelated and in no way correlate, even if you win your whole argument about his son it doesn't make the other things you say more or less true, which is why I stand by my call of 'cheap shot'.
I can tell you that I'm 99% positive his son was there, he wouldn't send his own son to school if there were really a problem.
The reason why IM works on college campuses is because a majority of students are the ones being contacted about problems...I mean if your parents are x hours/miles away it doesn't really matter how instant the school gets in touch with them, there's not much they can do.
Also, I'm not sure how IM works...do you consider text messaging an IM? I know that campuses have text alert systems, but as for what I consider an IM they don't. At any rate, this would also feed the argument that student's don't need cell phones in school, because their parents could be contacted easily.
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" -- Winston Churchill
This post interest me, because I am a firm believer cell phones have no "positive" effect in the High School. I was under the impression that they were banned, but I was wrong. Why does a student need a cell phone at school? It's not like they need to receive a phone call. I attended HS 20 years ago, where the only phones were the ones in the office, and in the Commons Area (a pay phone). You only used the phone if there was a call for you (a parent), or you needed to call a parent to come get you. If you were caught using the pay phone anytime other than before or after school, or at lunch, you most likely had detention that night. The above poster was correct about IM and/or texting in collage. The IM/texting works well in a collage setting because colleges are usually open campus, with many buildings and dorms. ACHS is a single building (except fo the tech building behind), with a central PA system. No need to send out a IM/text to 500 students, who are all in the same building (imagine 500 text "chirps" going off in the classrooms). People complained because they weren't notified of a possible gun threat. Well, if it were really credible, don't you think they would have locked down the school? Yes, they had the cops there that day, but I am pretty certain because the Admin Staff got many calls the night before from concerned parents, because the child go multiple texts from other kids saying the threat was more credible. I know this, because my daughter had a HS friend over that night, and she had about 30 texts throughout the night, starting with someone saying someone heard about a gun threat, to the last one saying the school was being shutdown because of the confirmed gun threat from the KBI, and they were going to have the local cops, sheriff, KBI, bomb-sniffing dogs, and the bomb squad from Wichita, and the school was shutdown until further notice. Kids were feeding off each other.
It's sad that the administration and local law enforcement have such problems with people communicating, regardless of the nature of the communication or the truth of the communication.
Why is that Yossarian? It is really that sad that a school administration would take issues with students communicating blatantly false allegations as truths to their parents? Especially considering the magnitude of said allegations, that there was confirmed reports of a school shooting on the next day? I mean look at the results off all the BS that little high school boys and girls spout out, the next day the school was at maybe half of its normal size.
I'm preempting that you'll try and justify your comment (seeing as there is no such justification for it yet) by saying something along the lines of 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech or communication and all that jazz. That is all fine and dandy, but most people forget that these freedoms of communication stop when the things being said are false and can cause widespread fear or panic (or hatespeech, but thats a different matter) which is what we had in these incidents and which is generally the case with most high school stories.
More to come later if I have time.
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" -- Winston Churchill
Well, I guess I just need to admit my denial that all the children of the current generation are heathens and belong behind bars.
If this had been an advent in the workplace, many adults would have taken the next day off, without consentual permission.
Why was I not informed of anything that could allow a decision that would reflect my confidence of the situation was under control? Thus said it could only reflect uncertainty on behalf of the administration and LE officials. Would it be better proposed that we provide escorts and bodyguards?
__________________
"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." == Winston Churchill
As a child of the current generation, I would regret that.
If this were an advent in the workplace, such gossip and lies would not have spread and transformed so fluently without regard to the potential consequences that the telling of these rumors would create.
As for you being informed, you have a point there, the parents should have been informed one regardless of the circumstances, if not for the mere fact that a monster had been created out of one little rumor. I think the administration bit the bullet with this one though, if I recall correctly from an article I read they said something to the effect of 'by the time we were aware that there was a situation of rumors being spread so much it was too late to inform the parents.' I think it even said they weren't aware of the problem until late Thursday night.
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" -- Winston Churchill
[Click here to start writing your quick reply.]As a child of the current generation, I would regret that.
That explains the ranting, I was under the impression it was a bitterness. Contemplate bottling a little exuberance and allow it to ferment into a fine wine, my little grasshopper.
__________________
"I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals." == Winston Churchill
"Is it really that sad that a school administration would take issues with students communicating blatantly false allegations as truths to their parents?"
False. Were the students communicating blatantly false allegations as truths to their parents? Obviously people took them seriously, and if half of the school did not show up, I imagine students believed they had some truth behind them. Therefore, I would disagree about students blatantly lying to their parents. However, let's assume there was blatant lying going on by every student who did not attend. Communication between friends and family members is a private matter, not subject to the jurisdiction of overzealous law enforcement. I don't see how students lying to parents falls under the watch of Johnny Law. Finally, I'm assuming the majority of this communication took place at homes, away from school. Thus, the school should have no say in the matter, since the original point of the topic was the use of cell phones at the school.
"Especially considering the magnitude of said allegations, that there was confirmed reports of a school shooting on the next day?"
ESPECIALLY considering the magnitude of the allegations. This is how rumors spread, unfortunately. At some point it turned into a confirmed report. However, if the reports had been true, I assume communication would have been appreciated.
"I mean look at the results off all the BS that little high school boys and girls spout out, the next day the school was at maybe half of its normal size."
No bias there:).
"I'm preempting that you'll try and justify your comment (seeing as there is no such justification for it yet) by saying something along the lines of 1st Amendment rights to freedom of speech or communication and all that jazz"
Nope, I think people misunderstand their fundamental rights all too often. This goes beyond First Amendment rights. This isn't political speech. This isn't hate speech (By the way it is protected, (R.A.V. v. St. Paul)). This is private speech, which is certainly covered by the First Amendment, but anyone who needs amendments to tell them their rights as humans should go read Hobbes.
"That is all fine and dandy, but most people forget that these freedoms of communication stop when the things being said are false and can cause widespread fear or panic (or hatespeech, but thats a different matter) which is what we had in these incidents and which is generally the case with most high school stories."
Fair enough, and I understand that when speech INCITES illegal activity it itself becomes illegal. However, how are the local law enforcement going to track down who started this? Looking through phone records? Doing excellent interrogations and pinning it on the usual suspects?
"As for you being informed, you have a point there, the parents should have been informed one regardless of the circumstances, if not for the mere fact that a monster had been created out of one little rumor. I think the administration bit the bullet with this one though, if I recall correctly from an article I read they said something to the effect of 'by the time we were aware that there was a situation of rumors being spread so much it was too late to inform the parents.' I think it even said they weren't aware of the problem until late Thursday night."
That's comforting. More reason to impose on communication wherever possible.
Ah so we have come full circle, we shall disregard the arguments in light of other outlets. Ah well, I guess that is to be expected. For what it's worth, I'm not as young as you're probably assuming, I'm just willing to bet that I'm closer to the current generation than any of the other people who have chimed in on this situation.
__________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" -- Winston Churchill
Ok, so back to the main issue; which I am assuming is whether the use of cell phones should be permitted in school. It has been a few years since I graduated, but if I can recall there policy is basically don't make it look like you have a cell phone. I do not deny that in some extreme circumstance (an intruder entered the school and a student used a cell phone that was on their person to make a phone call to the police) that having a cell phone would be useful. Other than that, students have no need to have cell phones out of their purses, lockers, backpacks, etc. Students texting during class diminishes the school environment.
If the high school has policies on cell phones and a system in place if a students needs to contact a parent (they fill out their agenda and go call them in the office) then I am assuming that some teachers either don't say anything if they see a student with a cell phone or they simply ask them to put it away; in which case they get it out in the next class and most likely repeat the process over the next day.
Basically, students are either not using cell phones in school, they are really sneaking, or the teachers are not enforcing the school policies.
As far a cell phones being the source of violence and rumors, teenager can communicate whichever way they want. Ultimately, its the teenager, not the medium. A cell phone on a student is a distraction from the class room, which in my opinion, is why they should not be allowed in school.
