I guess the big question here to everyone is are you in support or not of this school policy? And what can we do to change it? My son is only an infant but I highly don’t support this because it is open to too much interpretation and can do more harm than good. What do we need to do to get the ball rolling to either amend the wording in the school policy or cancel it all together? In my opinion it is just too much interference with our children’s lives and takes the role away from parents raising their own children! Bottom line, if the policy remains I would anticipate future lawsuits against the school(s) that would probably end up successful on the parents part.  How long as this policy been in effect?  v/r, KATY

This policy is very similar to those enacted across the country.  It is an effort to give these kids a reason to not participate in activities that involve drugs and alcohol.  I dont believe that anyone filing a lawsuit would get very far for two reasons.  First, extracurricular activities are just that.  Extra.  The district is not required to provide them by any law or statute.  The laws are federal stuff requiring equal access.  Second, the parents and student both sign an agreement indicating that they understood the rules. 

The school cannot enforce what your children do while off the school grounds.  However, they can decide who they allow to participate in after school activities.  The code of conduct is a tool that helps them with this. 

The comparison between sitting down at home and having a beer after work while your kids are around, and a student at a party where alcohol is being served to minors is unrealistic.  Why not take a long hard look at what this policy is all about before simply deciding it is all big brother tactics.

In the first place, God made idiots. That was for practice. Then he made school boards.
—Mark Twain

JustPlainC - 24 April 2008 09:33 PM

This is probably not going to be a popular statment:

The board was wrong to back off. 

Here are my reasons for this:
There is a code of conduct involved.  Each and every one of the kids signed it in order to participate in the extra curricular activities.  The code is pretty clear.  Violate it, and you lose out.  So what have we just taught these kids?  They were taught that if you cry hard enough to the right people, with the right backing, then there are absolutely no consequences to your actions. 

Great lesson for kids that are supposed to be role models.

JPC,

I usually agree with you, but...............

While I would agree that a Code of Conduct was signed by the students involved, I really feel that the school board and district is out of line feeling they have a right to enforce their will on students after school hours, and off of school property.  This is the responsibility of the parents and the parents only.  We have a school board that in the past by most accounts can not walk and chew bubble gum at the same time, but we as citizens should allow them to dictate after hours activities and actions to the students?  I don’t think so.  When they get the education portion of the education game right and test scores are above the State average across the board then maybe they can worry about other things.  Even then I am not sure they should worry about what kids do after hours.

DISCLAIMER: Before the flaming arrows start flying my way.  I believe the current school board and district staff are going in the right direction, and I support them.  My little stab about walking and chewing bubble gum was aimed at previous administrations, and I believe that is where this code of conduct policy was generated.

I agree with you.  To a point.  The actual behavior of the students is the responsibility of the parents.  But when parents abdicate responsibility, or are unaware of the behavior of thier kids, then I do think that someone needs to pay attention to that.  The biggest concern I have with all of this isnt so much the conduct policy.  That is simply the rule that was broken.  My issue is with the message sent by the board vacating thier punishment. 

The kids that were involved in this are supposed to be role models.  The kind of kids that the younger ones look up to.  This used to be important in our world. 

C

JustPlainC - 28 April 2008 01:48 PM

I agree with you.  To a point.  The actual behavior of the students is the responsibility of the parents.  But when parents abdicate responsibility, or are unaware of the behavior of thier kids, then I do think that someone needs to pay attention to that.  The biggest concern I have with all of this isnt so much the conduct policy.  That is simply the rule that was broken.  My issue is with the message sent by the board vacating thier punishment. 

The kids that were involved in this are supposed to be role models.  The kind of kids that the younger ones look up to.  This used to be important in our world. 

C

We do agree on this, but it is just a matter of who should be doing the monitoring.  I hate to see that responsibility on the one’s who primary responsibility is educating the kids.  I remember the “good ole’ days” when adults looked out for each others kids.  When a phone call from a neighbor to my mom and dad that said that I was misbehaving was as deadly as being caught in the act by them first hand.

The older kids should be role models, and there are some good ones that I know personally.  I can just see the school board getting burned by someone photoshopping a picture putting a student in a bad light and being wrongly punished, and then the lawsuits would start to fly.  It just looks to me like a slippery slope when we allow the school district to act outside of their basic charter when it comes to monitoring the kids outside of school. 

You are right, someone should do it, but I am not sure it should be them.  We live in a sad world sometimes.

I agree with you.  The fact that it seems to fall to the school board to place restrictions on this type of behavior doesnt speak well for us.

JustPlainC - 28 April 2008 02:22 PM

I agree with you.  The fact that it seems to fall to the school board to place restrictions on this type of behavior doesnt speak well for us.

That says it all in a sentence!  It kinds sucks doesn’t it?

So what is the possible solutions? Recommendation for action here? Parents need to get together and overturn the current policy of schools having control of our children after hours period. Is anyone interested in taking this forward to change the current policy? I would be a willing participant. It either needs to be re-worded and modified or completely changed. V/R, KATY

You are wrong.  Why is it the School district that is wrong for at the very least trying to contain some of the problems that arise from parents that cant handle the responsibility of thier kids.  You have said many times that your child is still very young.  Give it a rest.  When you have a teenager, maybe you will look at the world a bit differently.

JustPlainC - 28 April 2008 04:58 PM

You are wrong.  Why is it the School district that is wrong for at the very least trying to contain some of the problems that arise from parents that cant handle the responsibility of thier kids.  You have said many times that your child is still very young.  Give it a rest.  When you have a teenager, maybe you will look at the world a bit differently.

The school should be able to enforce rules and policies when the child is on their premises; the parent should be able to raise/punish their child on their premises. It is taking the parental right and role away from the parent raising the child by having such a policy. Plus, from what I can see this policy is open to too much interpretation. It needs to at least be re-written. Anything off premises of the school should be enforcable by parents and the police. The school district is wrong because it takes away the parent’s responsibility. I believe teenagers should be punished appropriately for their actions but not by the school district, unless the action occurs during school hours or while on school premises. I probably will look at the world differently when my children are older, but not from the standpoint that local government beyond the police has authority over my children afterhours.  Where do they draw the line for this policy? What is the specific wording? Lets look at it again carefully and take a close look at it first. The wording, specifications and who and how many people were in charge of writing it? Do you have it available to explain to me why I’m wrong? V/R, KATY

The school district is wrong because it takes away the parent’s responsibility

In no way does this policy take the responsibility from the parents.  If the police had the same policy, would that remove the responsibility from the parents?  Absolutely not.  It simply holds the students that want to participate in extracurricular activities to a higher standard.  Nothing more.  The school district is not restricting or removing anyone’s rights.  The students do not have a right to participate in extracurricular activites.  They have the right to an education, and the school district is responsible to provide a safe place in which students can have one.

As an another example, if a player on a little league team is removed from the field by either the umpire or the coach for unsportsmanlike conduct, is that not within thier authority? Or, as the parent, are you going to be the one that decides what will happen?

Why do I get the impression that the same people that are upset about this action are the same that were incensed about the perceived lack of action at the middle school earlier in the school year. 

If you are so certain it is wrong, consult an attorney, get it changed.  I do not think you will find much support.

C

JustPlainC - 28 April 2008 05:59 PM

The school district is wrong because it takes away the parent’s responsibility

In no way does this policy take the responsibility from the parents.  If the police had the same policy, would that remove the responsibility from the parents?  Absolutely not.  It simply holds the students that want to participate in extracurricular activities to a higher standard.  Nothing more.  The school district is not restricting or removing anyone’s rights.  The students do not have a right to participate in extracurricular activites.  They have the right to an education, and the school district is responsible to provide a safe place in which students can have one.

As an another example, if a player on a little league team is removed from the field by either the umpire or the coach for unsportsmanlike conduct, is that not within thier authority? Or, as the parent, are you going to be the one that decides what will happen?

Why do I get the impression that the same people that are upset about this action are the same that were incensed about the perceived lack of action at the middle school earlier in the school year. 

If you are so certain it is wrong, consult an attorney, get it changed.  I do not think you will find much support.

C

Why don’t you think I can’t find support? Because people are afraid or don’t care? Because I know it can’t be because they support such what appears to be a poor policy. Is the minor, who for instance at a family picnic where alcohol is being consumed and a photograph is taken guilty by association? There are plenty of parties that I went to as a minor where alcohol was present (family reunions, 4th of July, Christmas parties) and photographs were taken and yet this would give the school a right to not allow me to partake in extracircullar activities? Whoever wrote the policy was either smoking crack or didn’t take such things into consideration.  I think I could find a law student who might be interested in this challenge as a project.

As far as getting an impression about the same people upset...I wasn’t around then so you can’t count me in on that one.

The little league player is probably not the best example. They would probably be removed temporarily for something that occurred during the game only--not permanently. With the high school students you are talking about activities that occur not during sports after school-- totally external from the actual event. You could be a student standing next to the refrigerator in Messina’s Pizza, eating a slice of pizza next to the refrigerator that has alcohol for sale and be banned from an extracirricular activity at high school? What happens if someone you don’t even know takes a picture of your son/daughter eating pizza standing next to that refrigerator and then your son or daughter gets banned from extracirricular activities. It is open to too much interpretation. It needs to be more specific at the least. It does take the parental responsibility away.

K

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

If you are unhappy with the school board overturning the punishments, let them know. Write them letters, make phone calls, go to school board meetings. What lesson did the students learn out of this entire situation? If you threaten with a lawsuit, you can get out of anything. It shows them that, if your parents complain enough, you can get out of anything. I am sure that the school board had a hand in the original set of consequences. There is no possible way the principal and superintendent would come up with the punishment on their own. Too many students were involved and they knew that there would be a kick-back coming if they took away all extra-curricular activities. The school board had to have been consulted and granted permission. To tell both the principal and the superintendent that they could do this and then turn over the punishment is completely unacceptable.

What sort of parenting is this? There are parents that feel they want to be friends with their students before they are parents. This is not the way to teach a lesson. The school board has essentially told the students that it’s fine for them to go out and drink alcoholic beverages. The board showed them that they should not use their heads when picking their friends and the situations they are putting themselves. It does not matter what the law has to say about them not reaching the age of 21. Not one of these students has said that they were not the ones in the pictures. There are parents that had purchased the alcohol for these parties. If these students were in college and caught with the alcohol, it does not matter who you are or what you are, you are off the team. Colleges do not care if they get every parent calling them to complain that it’s “not fair” for a scholarship to be taken away. You pay a heck of a lot more to go to college (I’m sure that most scholarships do not completely cover the cost of a university) than it does to go to high school.

We need to let the school board know that we are not happy with their decision. The silent majority needs to come out and not stay silent on this decision. The school board told the principal and Dr. Shank what to do. We need to tell them that we can not go handing out punishments and then taking it away. The board were the ones that had already agreed upon the conduct that is expected of all students and athletes. To go against their own rules is the most idiotic thing. Students have not learned a single lesson. Write a letter, make a phone call, send an email, go to the school board meetings...let them know how much you completely disagree with their back-and-forth decision making skills.

The little league player is probably not the best example.

I wasnt really trying to compare the policies.  I was attempting to draw a parallel between the insistance that the only person capable of deciding when thier child should be reprimanded is the parent.  To compare the two different policies is indeed incorrect.

I dont think you would find much support primarily because I dont think there are that many people that are bothered by the policy.  The biggest complaint from members of the community that I have heard is over the board reversing it’s decision, not the policy itself.

And finally, about the guilt by association.  We are not talking about some Orwellian nightmare here.  We are talking about kids partying.  We all know it happens.  There is a dramatic difference between kids being at a Fourth of July party with thier family and kids partying on thier own with either the tacit approval of thier parents, or thier parents completely in the dark.