From the NY Daily News: Schools tackle new threats
Yes, more rules is what we need. We definitely need to further take the focus off learning and put it on stupid stuff like cell phones that aren't cell phones, MySpace, and those deadly PSPs. The only good thing in this whole matter is the idea of it being required to contact the state if parents don't make their kids get to school. That's more of what we need, but you see that it's not the main focus, right?
We don't teach anything to students by banning and forbidding things. If anything, that just makes them want to do it more. Want to make NYC schools safer? Improve the education they get. Teach students to resolve conflicts appropriately. Banning and forbidding teach absolutely nothing! What's going to happen when they leave us? What tools are they going to have when they are in the real world and have a conflict with someone? If we teach them how to deal appropriately with issues - the REAL issues - they will learn something. Banning and forbidding only turn them into criminals and the quickest way to get criminal behavior from our students is to treat them like criminals.
Schools are for teaching!
UPDATE: Okay, so I actually read the proposed changes instead of just rushing to judgment based on a NY Daily News article. Some of it is a waste of time. Banning PSPs and other electronic entertainment devices seems as useless as banning cell phones. Shouldn't we be teaching them to use them at appropriate times? And, why is lying to teachers a Level 2 (Disorderly Disruptive Behaviors) infraction? What kid hasn't lied before? The problem with some of the infractions is that there are varying degrees of severity of all this stuff. Is a kid telling you his dog ate his homework really a Level 2 infraction? Or perhaps we teach students why one shouldn't lie and that there are different kinds of lies. Just a thought.
Extensive suspensions - from 30 to 90 days - are added to the most disruptive behaviors. I'm not sure how much this helps solve the problem. In effect, it may actually make the situation worse by further alienating the student from the educational process. I agree that severe circumstances warrant removing a child, but I don't think I share the same definition of severe. I've had several students who were suspended and they never get/do the work assigned. When they come back they are further behind and even more angry. Again, punishment doesn't always offer solutions.
What does seem kind of promising are the "Guidance Interventions" that are to be used in addition to the "Discipline Response". This is what I'm talking about. I like the idea of the Pupil Personnel Team - which works with students who are having trouble fitting into the school culture appropriately. But, I fear that this will be like other DOE strategies - a good idea lost in the bureaucracy. People will focus on the "Disciplinary Responses" and ignore the "Guidance Interventions", when really the "Guidance Interventions" should come first. This is the difference between teaching and forbidding/banning/punishing. Let's see if the DOE offers sufficient support to schools so they do this.
Comments