SC - Columbia - Sheriff Slams Female Student to Floor In Class - #2

[vestigare]

Sometimes easy to overlook: correlation =/= causation.

Snipped for brevity.
Bingo!!!

 

[ohreally]

BBM-- I will sit next to you, because as I posted earlier in this thread, I do believe all public schools should have at least one or two officers on duty during the school day. It is simply too controversial to try to identify and get wide agreement on criteria for "which" schools should have officers, and which don't need them. Putting officers in all public schools would set this as the norm, and removes the perception of bias and discrimination. And I do think there is a strong value on a number of levels, to having officers present during the school day. I have changed my ideas on this completely in the past 10 years or so.

The bigger question is who should pay for them-- the county or the district or the state? And where do the officers fit in on the administrative chart for the school, if at all? Who do the officers answer to? What is their chain of command, and area of authority and responsibility?

I don't think officers need to be mandated in private schools unless the schools and their parents want them, and are willing to pay for them.





I think we have to be an educated consumer of statistics. I don't think school crime has decreased, and I can dig up a bunch of evidence to show it has increased.

Anyone relatively skilled in statistics can massage and manipulate numbers of "something" to get the kind of outcome they are looking for-- or design a study to "only" look at specific things while leaving other things out.

As an example, some school districts have "decided" not to report criminal activity on K-12 campuses to "prevent" youths from having a law enforcement record-- with the SECONDARY benefit of the school district being able to triumphantly report to the community and various other agencies that "Crime has decreased in our district schools".

Just one example of this kind of re-labelling of criminal activity that was in the news recently was the efforts of a school to characterize stolen property discovered in a student backpack, along with burglary tools, as "found property."

School crime reporting is not standardized, and is considered by a number of authoritative agencies to be vastly underreported.

http://www.schoolsecurity.org/trends/school-crime-reporting-and-underreporting/







BBM

Bingo. The part I underlined happened in a school district where they have their own police department. IMO it is just a way to circumvent the system.

 

[K_Z]

I have a question for everyone. We have touched briefly on whether or not the rest of the students in the class should have remained in the classroom during the "incident".

My opinion, as I stated earlier, is that the remainder of the students should have been removed from the classroom (asked to leave), and I think that should have happened at the point that the vice principal arrived-- even before the SRO was called.

I think the teacher should have dismissed them (or gone with them) with their belongings to the library, or another appropriate location, while making appropriate notifications . I base this decision on my experiences as a university teacher, and as a long term content specialist volunteer in my local public school district. The training I've attended emphasizes that when a threat or disruption is occurring outside the classroom, shelter in place quietly with the students. When a threat or disruption is occurring INSIDE the classroom by a student (or other), make every effort early in the situation to remove the other students from the situation. I have had to actually do this twice in my career so far-- both times at the elementary level. (Once was a parent screaming, threatening the staff, and melting down at the onsite daycare program, as she received the standard notification that her child would no longer be allowed to attend the program, due to disruptive and violent behavior.)

Anyway, removal of the other students serves several purposes-- safety for the remainder of the kids, preventing them from becoming part of the situation, preventing them from the trauma of witnessing the situation, as well potentially de-escalating the situation for the disruptor, who may desire the "audience" of other students as a motivation to continue to act out, or escalate the disruption. This also allows the responders to completely focus their attention on handling and negotiating with the "disruptor". (Not unlike well-established hostage negotiation procedures.)

Several posters here have said they thought the kids should stay in these situation. I'd be interested in hearing why, if anyone wants to discuss. Or what others think about removing the kids.

 

[Hope4More]

Okay. Suspending the kid is hard to do for minor infractions; But we will arrest her instead?

Have I mentioned yet that IMO it is a really bad idea for schools to delegate administrative authority to police officers? Hmm. Yep. Repeatedly.

 

[vestigare]

Would you be so kind as to show us - by copying and pasting relevant text, linking - that other kids' having cells in classroom violates school policy.

Not in text excerpted from school dist book (briefly & generally) says students there are prohibited from using cells during class. I could have missed it. Thx in adv.

(I know a few students took cells out, used & recorded event, so violated policy, but ^ says having cell = violation. TIA)
_________________________________________________

* Richland School District Two, Back-2-School Handbook, 2015-16, page 35 addresses students' cellphone, etc.
"High school students may use ECDs such as cellular phones, electronic pagers ... before and after school, during their lunch break, within “free zones” (as determined by the principal) and as deemed appropriate by the teacher and approved by the principal for educational and/or instructional purposes only. Any other use of wireless communications is considered misuse and violations may result in disciplinary action...." bbm
Can jump to dist & SVHS books ^ from https://www.richland2.org/svh/pages/Default.aspx

Isn't recording on your cell phone USING your cell phone? Or are you claiming USING only applies to texting, peeking, or talking?

 

[human]

This is insanity. Treating students like this. Abused women should learn. If only they would listen, they would not get hit!!!

What kind of world do we live in where adult men act like that? Power and unresolved control issues with the teacher and the officer.

I post this once again in the hope that more and more schools will use this approach and not create people with rage issues

http://acestoohigh.com/2012/04/23/l...oach-to-school-discipline-expulsions-drop-85/

 

[vestigare]

How many student were in this classroom?
I keep seeing references to 35 students.
Please provide link.

 

[K_Z]

Do not misquote me and apply quotes to the incorrect subject.
The "exercising" her rights quote that you highlighted was not even about the girl who was thrown by the RO. The entire discussion if you followed it back from Jenna through EllieBee and me you will see we were discussing the girl who was arrested for speaking up against this girls treatment.

This girl was arrested for protesting and speaking out about the treatment of a fellow student. She was arrested for exercising her constitutional rights.

Ah-- she was not arrested for exercising her constitutional rights. She was arrested for interfering with the arrest and handling of the situation. Had she spoken up in a more appropriate manner, time, and place, she would not have been arrested. At the point she got involved, her behavior was inappropriate. She should not have inserted herself into the encounter.

Yet another reason why the other students should not be in the classroom when these kinds of situations are unfolding, IMO. Rmoval of the other students may have completely de-escalated the situation, and physical force may not have been needed/ asked for. At that point, with the other students gone, they could just wait out the defiance of the student as long as necessary, while trying to reason with her, explaining where they were in the process of determining what her punishment would be, etc.

 

[human]

I have a question for everyone. We have touched briefly on whether or not the rest of the students in the class should have remained in the classroom during the "incident".

My opinion, as I stated earlier, is that the remainder of the students should have been removed from the classroom (asked to leave), and I think that should have happened at the point that the vice principal arrived-- even before the SRO was called.

I think the teacher should have dismissed them (or gone with them) with their belongings to the library, or another appropriate location, while making appropriate notifications . I base this decision on my experiences as a university teacher, and as a long term content specialist volunteer in my local public school district. The training I've attended emphasizes that when a threat or disruption is occurring outside the classroom, shelter in place quietly with the students. When a threat or disruption is occurring INSIDE the classroom by a student (or other), make every effort early in the situation to remove the other students from the situation. I have had to actually do this twice in my career so far-- both times at the elementary level. (Once was a parent screaming, threatening the staff, and melting down at the onsite daycare program, as she received the standard notification that her child would no longer be allowed to attend the program, due to disruptive and violent behavior.)

Anyway, removal of the other students serves several purposes-- safety for the remainder of the kids, preventing them from becoming part of the situation, preventing them from the trauma of witnessing the situation, as well potentially de-escalating the situation for the disruptor, who may desire the "audience" of other students as a motivation to continue to act out, or escalate the disruption. This also allows the responders to completely focus their attention on handling and negotiating with the "disruptor". (Not unlike well-established hostage negotiation procedures.)

Several posters here have said they thought the kids should stay in these situation. I'd be interested in hearing why, if anyone wants to discuss. Or what others think about removing the kids.

I have done that. Little did I know the student had a horrible home life and was removed the next year. I learned later on in my career about relationship based teaching. It works.

We all want love and acceptance as people. We are the adults. We do not need power struggles. If you have a relationship with your students, you can discuass that a student is having a hard time and what can we as class memebers do to help.

This works if you have a relationship based classroom. It is beautiful. I only worked for thirty years with students from poverty

 

[katydid23]

Okay. Suspending the kid is hard to do for minor infractions; But we will arrest her instead?

Well, YES....but only because she was continuing to disrupt the class. If she had allowed the teacher to place her cell on his desk until class was over, no problem, it's all good.

But once she started resisting and being defiant, she herself is escalating things. She ,herself,is taking it into 'illegal' territory by disrupting class time.

 

[Hope4More]

Do not misquote me and apply quotes to the incorrect subject.
The "exercising" her rights quote that you highlighted was not even about the girl who was thrown by the RO. The entire discussion if you followed it back from Jenna through EllieBee and me you will see we were discussing the girl who was arrested for speaking up against this girls treatment.

This girl was arrested for protesting and speaking out about the treatment of a fellow student. She was arrested for exercising her constitutional rights.

Actually, what she was largely doing, by her own account, was screaming loudly and crying; her challenging of Fields was very indirect, at best. If he'd been a teacher he would have tried to quiet her down or have her go out to the hallway, because in that situation her hysteria, while perfectly understandable, was entirely unhelpful.

Being a police officer with a different toolkit, he arrested her instead.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I have a question for everyone. We have touched briefly on whether or not the rest of the students in the class should have remained in the classroom during the "incident".

My opinion, as I stated earlier, is that the remainder of the students should have been removed from the classroom (asked to leave), and I think that should have happened at the point that the vice principal arrived-- even before the SRO was called.

I think the teacher should have dismissed them (or gone with them) with their belongings to the library, or another appropriate location, while making appropriate notifications . I base this decision on my experiences as a university teacher, and as a long term content specialist volunteer in my local public school district. The training I've attended emphasizes that when a threat or disruption is occurring outside the classroom, shelter in place quietly with the students. When a threat or disruption is occurring INSIDE the classroom by a student (or other), make every effort early in the situation to remove the other students from the situation. I have had to actually do this twice in my career so far-- both times at the elementary level. (Once was a parent screaming, threatening the staff, and melting down at the onsite daycare program, as she received the standard notification that her child would no longer be allowed to attend the program, due to disruptive and violent behavior.)

Anyway, removal of the other students serves several purposes-- safety for the remainder of the kids, preventing them from becoming part of the situation, preventing them from the trauma of witnessing the situation, as well potentially de-escalating the situation for the disruptor, who may desire the "audience" of other students as a motivation to continue to act out, or escalate the disruption. This also allows the responders to completely focus their attention on handling and negotiating with the "disruptor". (Not unlike well-established hostage negotiation procedures.)

Several posters here have said they thought the kids should stay in these situation. I'd be interested in hearing why, if anyone wants to discuss. Or what others think about removing the kids.

I completely agree. Once he knew that it was about to get hectic. He should have cleared the room and let the vp witness the extraction to eliminate false claims.

Or better yet. Clear the room and try talking without hovering over her.

 

[katydid23]

How many student were in this classroom?
I keep seeing references to 35 students.
Please provide link.

Just an estimate going by the number in our high school classes. Most classes are full because they do not hire a teacher unless there is a full class needed.


http://laschoolreport.com/cortines-utla-class-size-reduction-lausd-priority/


Approximately 60 algebra classes — including algebra 1A through algebra 2 — enroll more than 40 students, 30 algebra classes have 46 to 49 students, and six have between 51 and 65. Foshay Learning Center has one class of 71 students.

 

[vestigare]

Maybe suspension should always be in school suspension because what are working parents supposed to do? It's like a snow day with no warning.

And what about all these work places that supposedly will fire you for using your cell phone as some Websleuthers have claimed? I would think those parents are not answering their cell phones at work either whether the school is calling or not.

 

[bluesneakers]

Would you be so kind as to show us - by copying and pasting relevant text, linking - that other kids' having cells in classroom violates school policy.

Not in text excerpted from school dist book (briefly & generally) says students there are prohibited from using cells during class. I could have missed it. Thx in adv.

(I know a few students took cells out, used & recorded event, so violated policy, but ^ says having cell = violation. TIA)
_________________________________________________

* Richland School District Two, Back-2-School Handbook, 2015-16, page 35 addresses students' cellphone, etc.
"High school students may use ECDs such as cellular phones, electronic pagers ... before and after school, during their lunch break, within “free zones” (as determined by the principal) and as deemed appropriate by the teacher and approved by the principal for educational and/or instructional purposes only. Any other use of wireless communications is considered misuse and violations may result in disciplinary action...." bbm
Can jump to dist & SVHS books ^ from https://www.richland2.org/svh/pages/Default.aspx

I will be so kind to show you - by copying and pasting the comment I was replying to:

Thanks to the disruptive student's disruption. I've seen no reports that the teacher was having any difficulty enforcing the no-cell-phones rule until the disruptive student disrupted the class with her cell phone usage.

The commenter said the teacher was not having trouble enforcing the "no-cell-phones rule." We know this was not the case. It doesn't matter to me if the rule or policy exists, the point is the student who was assaulted by the officer was not the only student in the classroom with a cell phone.

 

[vestigare]

Okay. Suspending the kid is hard to do for minor infractions; But we will arrest her instead?

We will bring in a person whose only authority is for detainment and arrest as well....

 

[bluesneakers]

And what about all these work places that supposedly will fire you for using your cell phone as some Websleuthers have claimed? I would think those parents are not answering their cell phones at work either whether the school is calling or not.

If you get fired you get to stay home with your suspended kid! Win-win.

 

[bluesneakers]

Actually, what she was largely doing, by her own account, was screaming loudly and crying; her challenging of Fields was very indirect, at best. If he'd been a teacher he would have tried to quiet her down or have her go out to the hallway, because in that situation her hysteria, while perfectly understandable, was entirely unhelpful.

Being a police officer with a different toolkit, he arrested her instead.

Shouldn't he have reassured her and tried to calm her down? I thought SROs were all about protecting our children.

 

[katydid23]

I have a question for everyone. We have touched briefly on whether or not the rest of the students in the class should have remained in the classroom during the "incident".

My opinion, as I stated earlier, is that the remainder of the students should have been removed from the classroom (asked to leave), and I think that should have happened at the point that the vice principal arrived-- even before the SRO was called.

I think the teacher should have dismissed them (or gone with them) with their belongings to the library, or another appropriate location, while making appropriate notifications . I base this decision on my experiences as a university teacher, and as a long term content specialist volunteer in my local public school district. The training I've attended emphasizes that when a threat or disruption is occurring outside the classroom, shelter in place quietly with the students. When a threat or disruption is occurring INSIDE the classroom by a student (or other), make every effort early in the situation to remove the other students from the situation. I have had to actually do this twice in my career so far-- both times at the elementary level. (Once was a parent screaming, threatening the staff, and melting down at the onsite daycare program, as she received the standard notification that her child would no longer be allowed to attend the program, due to disruptive and violent behavior.)

Anyway, removal of the other students serves several purposes-- safety for the remainder of the kids, preventing them from becoming part of the situation, preventing them from the trauma of witnessing the situation, as well potentially de-escalating the situation for the disruptor, who may desire the "audience" of other students as a motivation to continue to act out, or escalate the disruption. This also allows the responders to completely focus their attention on handling and negotiating with the "disruptor". (Not unlike well-established hostage negotiation procedures.)

Several posters here have said they thought the kids should stay in these situation. I'd be interested in hearing why, if anyone wants to discuss. Or what others think about removing the kids.

You are probably right. But here is why I have a problem with removing the others. IMO, once we start 'teaching' the students that if they are rude and defiant, then they can clear an entire room, and the powers that be will come in and negotiate with them, we will have a troubling trend. IMO, it will create a lot more of these types of situations. Is there a big test that day? Let's just be defiant and clear the room. Then they will come and deescalate the situation, reason with me, and class time is over.

IMO, it gives too much power over to the defiant student. they suddenly have the power to make evryone else leave the room, make the teacher stop the lesson, make the admins come running....that could be a very dangerous precedent to start on a campus, imo.

 

[bluesneakers]

We will bring in a person whose only authority is for detainment and arrest as well....

You know the story about the scorpion? I think it applies here. If you put a cop in a school you need to know he will behave like a cop.

JMO.