In a speech on Ralph Waldo Emerson, a Wisconsin high school student ripped pages from a Bible. He was suspended and told he can’t return to class without being cleared by a psychologist.
(Classmate Elle Jacobson said:) “He said he was going to do something that our little stupid minds wouldn’t be able to comprehend. He took the Bible and pulled it out in front of the class and first he started ripping out pages, and then he started ripping out sections. Everybody looked stunned. I was stunned. I was shocked.”
Parker Principal Dale Carlson says the boy was suspended for “other behaviors” in addition to ripping up the Bible.
The boy may have intended to illustrate Emerson’s condemnation of conformity, points out Liz Ditz at I Speak of Dreams. Perhaps he knew that his home town, Janesville, Wisconsin, is the home of the Bible-distributing Gideon Society.
The story makes it obvious that they threw the child out based on his opinion of the bible. Why were the people “shocked?” It’s just a book make of paper.
I bet you a thousand bibles that if he had ripped up Leaves of Grass and called it “crap” and without “reason” he would not have been refered to the admin.
It was the CONTENT of his speach that got him thrown out and that is the downfall of the admin.
The boy and his family have alrady won a victory. The issue now is how much will it cost the school system.
For christians to be this thin skinned is remarkable.
This is a good thing. It will teach this person about survival in modern America: shut up and don’t even make symbolic gestures against authority or you’ll be punished and sent to a psychologist who will determine if you plan to shoot up the school.
Sounds like a wise-assed little fart was taught manners.
He would’ve gotten into even more trouble if he’d READ from it.
Well, Miller, I’m a committed Christian, and I don’t care if someone rips up a Bible in front of me. As long as it’s not MY Bible, it’s no offense to me.
Ripping up a Bible is psychopathological behavior.
Of course, somebody could say it was a form of expression, and that’s why we have to allow it on the street corner.
But in this case, it wasn’t expression, it was simply bad behavior and the student should have his butt kicked out of school for good.
> Sounds like a wise-assed little fart was taught manners.
Agree with the characterization, disagree with the conclusion.
Since there’s no courage involved in the act - it’s not as if roaming gangs of Christian thugs are going to set fire to his parent’s house - the only risk is a couple of hours of tedious psychological evaluation. He grunts a few of the right noises and he’s back in. What’s to learn?
Christians kicking butt?! Christians teaching manners?! Wow! Didn’t see that one in their book…must have been ripped out…
The best part of the story was the christain admin being dishonest about the suspension. They said they couldn’t talk about the reasons for the toss of the student, BUT they said it was for more than ripping the bible-talk about dishonest! If you can’t speak about why you tossed the kid, then don’t say it was for other reasons.
Maybe we need to teach some christians some manners, eh Walter?
I’ve seen students who perform the same behaviors - they’ll do anything to challenge the authority of the teacher and any established organizations. These students are often backed up by outspoken parents who will believe their child is a misunderstood angel, and will go to extremes to protect their child from the big, bad school district. Often, the parents have a lawyer or are lawyers themselves.
I don’t know enough about this case to make a judgement, but it seems that this may have been the straw that broke the camel’s back, and the suspension was rightly deserved.
I didn’t really finish my thoughts on the original post –
1. If I’d been the young man’s teacher, I would have hoped to have advanced warning that the presentation might be confrontational or upsetting to some students.
I wish we could have heard from the young man in question, or better yet, his teacher.
2. all the reporting has been from the POV of the Jacobson family who seem, well, easily offended, but quite good at public opinion manipulation
This article,
http://www.nbc15.com/home/headlines/12751397.html
has three accounts claiming to be eyewitnesses (everybody on the Web could really be a dog…):
“As a member of the class and a witness to what happened, i’d just like to say this. im outraged, not by what chris did, but by how everyone is reacting. im not surprised drama elle had to make a scene, but wow. Thank “god” praying has been taken out of schools. I look at myself and wonder, what if i was religious, oh what a mess I would be. This is sick, he is a threat to no one, but is instead a well spoken, outgoing, friendly individual. He did what sometimes many of us wish we could do, make a valid point. If only he would have seen all this drama and these outrageous statements”
”
As a student that saw the speech personally like Elle. I find her reaction quite over the top. The student talked about here is not a threat what-so-ever. Elle is more of a threat then he is. He expressed his views on both sides and said which side he is, irreligious. He ripped the bible to show that in fact it does not hold him and he will not instantly die or something. He was simply following the guidelines for the speech and received a B on the speech. The student was removed and got the review, and then was allowed back into school. Where people started throwing the idea around that he was going to start a shooting and was unstable is beyond be. Just because he doesn’t believe in god? It is quite frankly ridiculous and for everyone that says he’s ‘attention seeking’, he declined to be interviewed from everyone cause he isn’t seeking ”
“Parker High School Classmate
Elle’s actions were over the top. He is not a ’sociopath’ he is a brilliant student that is not a threat what-so-ever. He didn’t threaten any of us in the class when he gave the speach. Just expressed how the people hold to the bible without questioning it and that he didn’t believe it. But the fact that Elle said that he ripped ’sections’ is completely false. he ripped several pages at max. He was not official suspended, just forced to get a evaluation. Thus deemed not a threat allowed to return to school. He is not atheist he is Irreligious. He completed his project/speech with a 20/25. For them to call him a sociopath is outrageous and false.”
Not to be patronizing, but I think he’s an impulsive teen who got exactly what he wanted, which is a strong reaction. Who knows how he actually feels about any of the important issues connected to his behavior (freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of expression).
Personally, I definitely lean more toward agnostic/liberal Christian than anything else, and I live in an area where conservative Christianity is the choice of the majority. Sometimes it can be difficult or uncomfortable to live here and NOT be a conservative Christian. However, difficult and uncomfortable are a far cry from persecuted, and even in times of persecution (whether of Christianity or non-Christianity), how effective flamboyant acts ultimately are is questionable.
I think having to be cleared by a psychologist is absurd, though, - for those inclined that way, this is typical teen behavior. It’s disruptive to the learning process and should be treated as such. If this were my child, she’d most likely prefer to deal with the school authorities over mom …
What’s to learn?
When you set out to offend, don’t be surprised when those you offend react.
He got a B on the paper Walter.
If you don’t want a kid’s opinion, don’t assign an opinion paper. Don’t have illegal opinions either Walter.
If the post above your is accurate, the christians reacted to hurt a non-christian. How…unchristian.
He was removed due to his opinion and told to get a psych evaluation based on-what? Welcome to Walter’s new Christian Stalinism. You will believe or be sentenced to the crazy ward!
Zuzu - if this is part of a pattern of behaviors, as the school suggests, the behaviors might signal an underlying anger issue. Unfortunately in today’s school climate, the school must act on it. And if the parents are uncooperative, then that forces the suspension with the conditional return.
Miller-
How was this an opinion piece? All the info I have seen has said this was a report on Emerson - not an assignment on the students’ personal beliefs.
As for the claims of “Christian Stalinism,” none of us were there at the time of the incident or any times previously. This could have simply been the latest in a long string of disruptive behaviors by the student, in which case the suspension is well deserved.
I welcome students to speak freely when appropriate, but I have no qualms quashing their attempts if I feel it will disrupt the class. While it is not mandated by law, common sense dictates that free speech be tempered by a sense of responsibility.
I have a bit of sympathy for this kid, but I do think the school is acting on firm ground in saying that he crossed a line in what is allowable in the classroom and what is not. In a recent comment about a student in trouble for wearing striped tigger socks to school against the dress code, I argued that the rights of students in school are not identical to the rights of adults, and they should not be. I think it is entirely appropriate to make it very clear that students are not allowed to burn anybody’s flag at school, or to insult anybody’s religion, or to insult classmates, or to pick their noses, or to spit on the floor, and a zillion other things. But it seems to me that the first response to this should simply be a reprimand. Suspension would be justified only after repeated violations.
Which brings me to a second point. I can certainly believe the school when they say this is not the only thing he is being suspended for. My experience is that problem kids push the line a lot before they finally go over it. But it is only the final incident, the straw that breaks the camel’s back, that reaches the general public.
But I would argue stongly that the school is on very slippery ground in sending him to a psychologist. The incident, as described - and I just granted that there may be much more that we don’t know about - calls for a reprimand, not a psychologist. There was no threat, no intimidation, no coercion involved. Haven’t these people ever heard about the old Communist technique of using mental hospitals for political ends? Isn’t there some pretty egregious violation of something there?
What would’ve happened if he’d ripped pages from a koran in front of muslim students?
SuperSub, then why did he get a B?
He did not threaten anyone.
He did not behave in a threatening manner towards anyone.
His act and speach are constitutionally protected and very very proper.
The policy that the school system had that forbid the degradation of a person’s religion is an illegal policy. Just read the F.I.R.E. website a bit to get a good taste of just how illegal the school has acted.
The school system put him out, then allowed him back, then put him out again. Why?
Why was a psych eval a condition of his return? By what right and indication did the school system demand a psych eval?
The police made it very clear to the school system that the student did not break any laws whatsoever.
Why did the school illegally make students remove t-shirts with supporting slogans for the tossed student? At no time has such type of slogans ever been determined to be “disruptive” under the law or any case in the United States.
What responsibility does anyone have to a christian other than to physically leave them alone? I WILL NOT repect you. Period. And I will demonstrate my disrespect as I wish absent a threat to you AND you WILL live with it and suck it up.
Rude and Lori, the student has the right to bring a bible or koran to school everyday and rip it to pieces for all to see. He just has to not make a mess.
When I teach evolution and christian child asks if I believe in god and I say that that has no place in my class to be asked, and then the student expresses that I am likely to go to hell-do I have the legal right to have them tossed and not return until they have gone to a psych eval?
I, as a teacher, have the legal right to express my disrespect for any religion and destroy my copies of any religious books as I wish without any interference from anyone. You may express your displeasure with me all you wish, BUT you may not punish me using the forces of the government. You guys, for some reason, need to put a gun in that kid’s face because he insulted your flithy religion.
Religion poisons everything.
//I argued that the rights of students in school are not identical to the rights of adults, and they should not be.//
I think I agree. It’s why my kids don’t go to school and won’t ever have to.
“What would’ve happened if he’d ripped pages from a koran in front of muslim students?”
Some Imam somewhere would issue a fatwah?
-Mark R.
Chances are it was not a pattern which needed addressing and they used that to justify their actions. If it WAS a pattern which needed addressing, A - why not do it quietly and discreetly, affording an angry teen (if that is the issue) the opportunity to “save face” and begin recovery faster and B - why decide now that the pattern is dangerous? I agree that concerns with children cannot be ignored. I get tired of rogue handlings of concerns becoming fodder for news reports which reflect poorly on the school system as a whole. It seems easier to quit providing fodder than anything else.
What surprised me most about this is that it occurred in Wisconsin. My impression of WI is that it’s so leftie that they’d give the kid a medal for ripping up a Bible–but send him to counseling for ripping up a Koran.
Mr. Smith, you have the legal right to express disrespect for any religion?
And to spew racial slurs? And call your female students sluts? To be generally offensive and idiotic?
Maybe you do have the legal right to be grossly insensitive, but wouldn’t your school board regard that as unprofessional conduct?
And don’t they have the legal right to fire you?
Miller-
As I’ve stated multiple times already, the school’s statement to the media reveals that the student was suspended not for the content of his actions, but for the disruptive behavior itself. I like Aerosmith’s music, but would have problems with a student belting it out in class.
As for the psych evaluation, this could be justified by a pattern of behaviors that has not been corrected by standard disciplinary means. This could easily have nothing at all to do with religion, and since none of us were there, we can only rely upon the limited information provided by the media. Stop making this a personal “crusade.”
Zuzu-
“Chances are it was not a pattern which needed addressing…” - have you gotten this from another source that has not been linked, or is this an assumption based upon anti-establishment views?
Dawn-
Do you give your children the rights of adults at home?
It’s an educated guess based on years in a public school system, SuperSub. Hence my modifier, “Chances are,” followed by a qualifying statement for my suggestion if it had been a pattern which needed addressing. The school’s statement sounds like one used when a school anticipates criticism of this type of action.
I think what is the most frustrating is that none of the reactions - the school’s to the child’s behavior (in it’s swiftness and strength), the news’ to the entire story (reporting it toute de suite, focusing on the punitive measures), and the public’s reaction to the story - are a surprise. The latter two should have been anticipated by the administration, whose job is it is to ensure that school “goes on” as smoothly as possible so that learning can take place. With that objective in mind, this was handled poorly. Yes, the impulsive, acting out teen is the initial cause - but it remains a good administration’s job to deal with impulsive, acting out teens in such a way that school goes on.
That being said, I’ll bet that school IS going on - once winter break is over. It’s just frustrating to see so much time and energy spent on something which could have been handled better.
> I get tired of rogue handlings of concerns becoming fodder for news reports which reflect poorly on the school system as a whole.
Yeah, what could be more important then adroitly handling incidents which might reflect poorly on the school? Maintaining parental confidence is important enough that they shouldn’t be burdened with an excess of complicated facts. It’s the job of the administration to decide what parents ought to know about the schools their children attend.
No, allen, what could be more important than learning taking place. 2-5% of the school population should not have the power to dictate what the focus of their fellow students, their fellow students’ parents, or the general public focuses on. The best means to that end is effective administration since the other parties involved have little interest, obviously, in learning taking place in public schools.
Zuzu said:
“…since the other parties involved have little interest, obviously, in learning taking place in public schools.”
You can’t make these sweeping statements, Zuzu. You really can’t.
“Learning taking place”? Where? If that were true, the US wouldn’t be doing so poorly when compared to the rest of the world.
Here’s an article that says the Japanese are looking at the Indian education system because of its rigour - see the comments on rote memorisation of multiplication tables etc.:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/business/worldbusiness/02japan.html
And lastly, since you complained about Allen’s syntax, perhaps you’d take a look at the first two sentences in your last post?
Don’t you mean shouldn’t instead of can’t? You’re right, I shouldn’t. But actually, I can and did.
And yes, all SORTS of problems with my first two sentences, both grammatically and syntactically. Every once in awhile I plant those to see if you’re really paying attention.
Idiom, Zuzu, the bane of the English teacher.
And no, there is a sense in which I can properly say “can’t” rather than “shouldn’t”. What sense? Left as an exercise…
“And yes, all SORTS of problems…”
Nice try.
What, no comments about the Japanese? If only the US took education as seriously, instead of wallowing in constructivist pap and stopped blathering about “creativity” and originality!
Oh yeah, “Every once in awhile…” should be “…a while”, nein?
R, who you calling an idiom?
> Every once in awhile I plant those to see if you’re really paying attention.
How drearily cunning of you. But if it’s people’s attention you’re after I’d suggest directing more effort to content.
Respondents who indulge a preference for gratuitous attention to grammar and such are vulgarly, if accurately, described as chicken-sh*t grammar cops.
You don’t have to wave your great, big EdD around to impress people, just say what you’ve got to say. That way your condescension doesn’t become the topic.
> No, allen, what could be more important than learning taking place.
Sparing board members and administrators embarrassment? Sparing those same the trying exercise of facing angry, upset parents who can’t be ignored en masse quit as easily as they can be individually? Avoiding the implicit admission of responsibility by responding to the situation?
There are lots of things more important then learning. That’s what’s fueling the substantive changes to the public education system like NCLB and charters.
Mr. Wright,
Mr. Smith, you have the legal right to express disrespect for any religion?
[Yes. And I do it often. When we have the prayer group in the morning before classes start, I have the atheist club as well in another room. We express disrespect for religion on school grounds as is our legal right. Why? Because the school allows religious groups to meet before school for the expressed purpose of forwarding their religion and the law is very clear that my group must also be accommodated. ]
And to spew racial slurs?
[Never made any such claim. Though black teachers are allowed to teach racial slurs about whites in my school district. Very strange.]
And call your female students sluts?[Never made any such claim]
To be generally offensive and idiotic? [Yes and no. Being an atheist is “generally offensive and idiotic” to most of the christians. As for what you mean by “generally offensive and idiotic” you would have to define. How about this, when in the faculty lounge a female christian made comments to me about "coming to christ" and I told her that I wasn't that stupid to believe in such crap. She ran to the principal and told what I said. The principal called legal and was told that I had every right to respond the way I did in that room at that time. Which one of us was being "generally offensive and idiotic?" I say she was and I was just defending myself from a person being “generally offensive and idiotic” towards me.]
Maybe you do have the legal right to be grossly insensitive, but wouldn’t your school board regard that as unprofessional conduct? [It must be narrowly defined and-since I am working in a government entity-completely constitutional. Check out the F.I.R.E. website for full details on the law and court decisions. Many admin types think they know the law. One did and gave me a big payday when he messed up trying to punish me for protected speech.]
And don’t they have the legal right to fire you? [No. Again, check the law. This is a GOVERNMENT run school system. Only a very narrow range of behaviors can be forbidden. Just because someone expresses displeasure of your religion-or lack thereof which so often happens to me-does not allow ANY disciplinary action.]
[And finally, the school system did not toss the student until he engaged in protected speech and made it clear that the student was doing other things that they did not toss him for. You may not toss for protected speech and then use previous bad behavior as backup to your illegal action. You may not toss for a sting of protected actions that you find “generally offensive and idiotic” and say that the string adds up to behavior you may punish.
If you have no right to hurt me just because you know I hate you. In fact, for a bunch of christians to purposefully hurt someone because they hate Christians is un-christian…according to your book, that is. Maybe you should rip out those parts so your desires to hurt the atheist make sense…]
As always when the issue of religion comes up, Miller Smith can be counted on to be positively venomous in his opinions. A militant atheist can be as off-putting as any fundamentalist religious zealot.
I agree that, if the student was punished for destroying a bible and not for those other unnamed transgressions, that was a huge overreaction. He should be allowed to destroy any book he owns. I cringe when I see any book destroyed, but it’s his right.
On the other hand, my understanding of Emerson’s views on Christianity make it seem that he would not be in line with destroying the bible. Although Emerson didn’t think a lot of how faith was practiced in churches, he seemed to feel that the answer was look at the teachings of Jesus with fresh eyes rather than conforming to old traditions. He encouraged divinity school graduates to “breathe new life into the old forms of their religion, to be friends and exemplars to their parishioners, and to remember ‘that all men have sublime thoughts; that all men value the few real hours of life; they love to be heard; they love to be caught up into the vision of principles.’”
Doesn’t seem like someone who would go along with tearing up a bible. If that’s the case maybe the kid might have deserved the B.
I suspect that if he had tried to hold a rally for LSU he would have been arrested for inciting.
Walter E. Wallis, you obviously missed the court cases on flag burning and koran trashing. They are protected free speech.
And just how would a torn up bible “incit[e]” a christian? Operative word is ‘christian.’ You one of those dangerous chrsitians, Walter?
And “venom?” You bet. That is how I feel about christians who love to tell me I’m going to hell. They never seem to think that their condemnations of hell towards me are “venom.” Must be a very strange form of love.
Mr. Wallis would be well-advised to remove the beam in his own eye.
Miller, I would guess that not all Christians you interact with (or even most) are eager to tell you that you’re going to hell. Yet you insist on lumping all Christians together with what I believe to be a small number of obtrusive, offensive people who have taken it upon themselves to declare your fate.
I don’t know–maybe your life experience is radically different than mine. Maybe all the Christians you meet come across as rabidly zealous in their beliefs as you do. For me, my friends, family and co-workers include people with a wide range of religious–and non-religious–beliefs, and none of them, whether devout church-goers, absolute atheists or anywhere in-between would think of getting in someone’s face and being so rude as to declare them idiots or pass judgment as though they had a direct hotline to God. A few of them on either extreme might think it, but they wouldn’t behave so badly as to voice their views. I guess that’s why I find the vitriolic nature of your posts so difficult to understand.
If somehow your only experience with Christians has been so terribly negative, I’m sorry to hear it. But please bear in mind that your situation may not be indicative of the world as a whole.
For flag burning I apply the pillow case rule. If you can legally burn a pillow case, you can legally burn a flag under the same circumstances. The political or religious content of an act may not make a legal act illegal nor an illegal act legal. In that specific case, the supremes never satisfactorily explained what kept a punch in the nose from being symbolic free speach. I seldom fully concur with the supremes. I grieve that congress has failed in their duty to limit the jurisdiction of the courts.
While I do not meet any contemporary definition of Christian I do consider my ethics to be Judeo-Christian in nature. I consider there is an obligation on gentlemen to behave, and I consider myself to be a gentleman except when circumstances require otherwise. Smith and Poet, your freedom of conscience is safe with me; is mine with you?
I think it is quite likely that the tearing of the Bible is what brought about the suspension. But my guess is that he did, in fact, have a history of other behaviors that the administration had simply been letting ride because it was too much trouble to deal with.
I taught once at a school where a student was continually disruptive. He drank on school field trips, spit tobacco on new school carpets, and did other more normal disruptive behaviors like talking and getting up without permission.
It was not until the administration heard the student say, “I can get away with anything. They won’t punish me.” that anything was done to the student.
I wouldn’t be surprised if this student said something of the sort.
Allen, I’d rather be drearily cunning than just plain dreary. I was joking. It was an honest error on my part, the result of typing away and posting without re-reading for errors. As usual, however, it’s your tone which gets my attention far more than your content, although sometimes the two are indistinguishable. While we wait for NCLB and your postings to take effect in their efforts to reform all of public education, if it’s okay with you, a few of us who are professionals and actually good at what we do would like to fight with the army we have and see if all the possible learning could take place, in the meantime.
Please don’t tell me that no learning is taking place under the tutelage of individuals like myself, as my students, from those who arrive well prepared to those who do not, are making it through just about every hoop NCLB has placed in front of them. It would not be dreary, but a little sad to think that anyone would prefer learning not take place, ever, just to prove his or her initial hypothesis.
Zuzu said:
“…my students, from those who arrive well prepared to those who do not, are making it through just about every hoop NCLB has placed in front of them.”
How well are they doing on TIMSS/PISA etc.? That there’s the crux of the issue.
I submit that they ain’t doin’ all that well; in fact I submit that they’s a-failin’ miserably. They be learnin’ AAVE and constructivist math, the current fads of the Ed schools and the idiots who dwell therein.
Not so, Zuzu?
Walter E. Wallis needs to have the Supreme Court to tell him why, “a punch in the nose…[is not]… symbolic free speach.” He does not understand. Seemingly, his christian orientation has failed likewise to instruct him as to Why as well.
The kind of christianity that would allow a physical attack for a non-physical insult is not the brand of christianity that is safe from me. The type of christian you are, Mr. Wallis, is my sworn enemy.
Mr. Wallis, your Torquemada is showing.
Dhanson, the kinds of christians that would hurt a Child over a non-threatening insult to their brand of religion are the filth to which I refer.
You gentle types never cause me problems since I never hear the kind of foul garbage has seen demonstrated here.
I’ll be honest, R, I don’t have those numbers. I do have National Merit Scholars, attendees at Oklahoma School for Science and Mathematics (look that one up), and a bunch of other names I could drop. Of course, I’m not responsible for their math learning (but, since you asked …). YOUR assumptions based on …? are interesting, though. What part of TIMSS/PISA would test your scientific/”logic” reasoning as you’ve applied it to my students?
My judgement is rationalist, with a Judeo-Christian overlay and an engineering education and experience. You misread. I make no claim to being a Christian, I claim to be an ethical rational gentleman who can, when necessary, torture and kill. I know where groceries come from and why I would never go into a coal mine. I can understand your hatred of Christians, it approaches my hatred of Luddite Warmies and Gorites. I aspire to Heinlein and Hoffer, with a Randian touch, out of the dust bowl. I am, by any measure, a better man than Miller-Smith.
Zuzu,
I looked up OSSM. What I saw in the “Mission Statement” seems to indicate that it’s a step in the right direction. The problem is figuring out how the OSSM students do in comparison with their peers across the world.
This is the heart of the matter. To do so, we’d have to test them against the “gifted” (yet another disgusting cliche!) from other countries. Right?
What we do have are the TIMSS/PISA results, which test a representative sample from each country. The results are quite clear; US students do poorly when compared to the rest of the world.
This is the problem.
One final note: here’s what OSSM has to say about itself:
“Admission to the Oklahoma School of Science and Mathematics is a highly competitive process initiated by written application. Approximately 70 to 80 students are selected each year from an applicant pool of three hundred students.”
In other words, roughly 25% of the applicants are admitted. That isn’t competitive, Z, this is a walk in the park. There are exams in which approximately 500 applicants are chosen out of a pool of 100,000. That’s competition.
Walter, it’s not Miller-Smith, it’s Miller Smith. Miller is my first name.
You still don’t understand why you shouldn’t beat up people who only insult you.
I guess that makes you the better man.
Beat me, Walter.
I’ll work on that, R. I think it’s going to entail increasing the population of Oklahoma, but hey - I’m up for most challenges.
Seriously, I appreciate the input on OSSM as well as the time you took to look it up. I come to this site primarily to gain perspective, and in all sincerity, I appreciate your input because it helps me do that.
I guess having a last name for a first name warps you, like the Boy Named Sue. Nowhere did I advocate physical violence against somone for expressing an opinion. Under some circumstances an insult is precursor to an assault and a prudent person prepares. When did you start hating your father, Miller?
Walter, you wield that alliteration like a left leaning poet ;).
> I’d rather be drearily cunning than just plain dreary.
They’re not mutually exclusive.
> As usual, however, it’s your tone which gets my attention far more than your content, although sometimes the two are indistinguishable.
That certainly relieves you of the burden of addressing the content of my posts. I can understand that response though. When you depend on public apathy and public confusion there’s really no percentage in encouraging any perception of human falability.
> While we wait for NCLB and your postings to take effect in their efforts to reform all of public education, if it’s okay with you, a few of us who are professionals and actually good at what we do would like to fight with the army we have and see if all the possible learning could take place, in the meantime.
You’re good at what you do? How do you know? Was there some objective measure of your performance or is the question sufficiently impertinent as to be beneath notice?
You know, your attempt to see to it that all possible learning takes places isn’t quite the same thing as sufficient learning taking place. That’s the point of NCLB which was necessitated in no small part by a whole segment of society that enjoyed the privilige of self-defining success. The privilege was abused and now it’s been circumscribed. Don’t make the cut now and there’s an ugly possibility of repercussions.
One of the nice things about having to meet standards is that the excresences stand out in bold relief. Makes them easier to plane off which, to quote Burt Rutan, improves performance by adding lightness.
Mr. Miller, I appreciate your response. Thanks. But I think you’re confusing a couple issues.
Atheism is an unpopular belief and some people find that the expression of that belief offensive. I agree with you that that happens to be their problem.
You could have been more polite to that colleague who offered you the chance to come to Christ, but I don’t think you were out of line. Your speech was a match for hers, just at the opposite pole.
In a public school where the Bible is read, the works of Christopher Hitchens should also be allowed. Atheism should have equal time with Christianity.
You seem to think that the student was suspended for being an atheist and for expressing that view. If that were the case, I’d be on his side myself. But that’s not what he did. He didn’t quote from Bertrand Russell or from Christopher Hitchens.
He didn’t wave a copy of the Bible and declare, “This book is full of nonsense and lies. It justifies slavery and prejudice. It’s been the cause of war and bloodshed for centuries. We’ll be better off when the day comes when we see this book for what it is and reject it totally.”
No, what he did was deface a sacred text. Though that act might be expressive, it goes far beyond words in impact and intent.
Name calling, too, is expressive, but it’s not the kind of free speech that should be protected in a school. Name calling is a substitute for criticism, a lazy one, and is done simply for the purpose to offend, not to express a belief. Ripping pages isn’t speech; it’s a stunt done to offend. Though speech should be protected, mere offensiveness should not be.
If this student is motivated to offend, he should be required to do it with words and ideas. Real speech. If he doesn’t know how to do that, he should watch the O’Reilly Factor on Fox.
Let’s say there’s a student who has the view that whites have higher IQ’s than Blacks. Should he be allowed to express that view in class? I think so. If he talks about statistics and genetics and quotes research, what he says can be discussed and rebutted. But if he stands at the podium and simply cracks racist jokes, no, I don’t think a school should tolerate that. Do you?
Speech should be protected, not offensive behavior, especially when the two are needlessly linked.
Expecting discourse to be civil in the classroom is not unreasonable.
Allen, like most teachers I know (undoubtedly none you’re acquainted with), I would welcome access to even more correct, objective measurements of my students’ learning. As it is, I rely on ACT, SAT, AP, and State tests. A strong majority of my students perform at acceptable to above-acceptable levels on these tests. Because I DO know what I’m doing, it would only strengthen my position to have even more valid feedback on the effectiveness of what I do. Testing at the district level, done seven times a year and in alignment with state required objectives, also provides valuable feedback for what should stay the same and what should be revised (kaizen, perhaps?).
Of course, your tone indicates to me that my students could graduate after my 9th grade English class alone, go on to an Ivy League, solve world hunger, cure cancer, and make space travel commonplace, and you would remain unconvinced that they actually learned anything in my class. That’s the luxury of your UNscientific method. Sad, not dreary, but nonetheless, unscientific. I just wish it were satire.
One of my prides is that I was a VIP, Voyager Important Person, a backer of the Voyager Round The World on one tank of gas flight. See what free men can do. I shook the hand of Wrong Way Corrigan at the VIP celebration.
> I would welcome access to even more correct, objective measurements of my students’ learning.
And I’d welcome access to even more correct, objective measurements of your competence.
Who’s the better teacher, you, your next-door neighbor or the guy across town? Human variability dictates that teacher competence fall along a bell curve and I just don’t see any value to the public in paying the people at one end of the bell curve the same as people at the other end or paying them at all. Even less do I see any value to the public in paying people whose contribution to the education of children is tangential or illusory.
My tone, since you seem so interested, indicates I don’t give much credence to sniffing dismissal or thin-lipped disapproval as substitutes for measurements of competence. I don’t really care how much you venerate your own magnificence, I only care what objective observation and measurement prove.
In case you’re unclear on the concept it’s proving your assertion that’s at the core of science, not the Doctor of Thinkology degree on your wall.
allen,
Please provide an example of correct, objective measurement of teacher competence. If there is a different tool you deem effective for measuring student achievement (if teacher competence is separate from student achievement - I honestly can’t tell if you see the two as separately measurable or not), please provide that example, also. I’m interested in an existing tool or in one you could describe, based on your own qualifications for said tool (in case, as may BE the case, it doesn’t exist yet).
Seriously. I’d appreciate it.
z
Of course student achievement and teacher competence are separate. But if you want objective measures of teacher competence you’re just going to have to wait until the concept of professional competence goes from controversial, rather borderline hysteria-inducing, to the perfectly obvious.
Until fairly recently about the only professionals who had much of a clue about, or interest in, school/district quality were realtors. When educational quality becomes an equally important consideration for educators you’ll see methods of separating the sheep from the goats. Until then you’ll just have to comfort yourself with your presumptions.
I’ll take that as a very long, but not as convoluted as usual, “no, i do not have a practical answer for measuring student success or teacher competence.” That definitely makes your position easier to maintain. Still not a very good example of scientific method. That’s cool. As I said earlier, in the meantime, while we wait for NCLB and/or your posts here to take effect and improve educators and therefor the learning that takes place in schools, I think I’ll fight with the army I have. I’m comfortable with that presumption, and while you obviously aren’t comfortable with it, until you can at least offer a measuring tool for improvement, you’ll have to live with it. I mean, technically, you are living with it … you’re alive, it’s what’s happening right now. And that is a logical assumption.
Zuzu said:
“I’ll take that as a very long, but not as convoluted as usual, “no, i do not have a practical answer for measuring student success or teacher competence.””
Two words: TIMSS and PISA.
Those aren’t words, they’re acronyms. :). However, in all sincerity, I remain very appreciative of your input, R. I would welcome - as would most teachers worth their salt - any additional effective, correct feedback regarding how my students (and by extension, my teaching methods) are doing.
Just curious, R - agreed, completely, that 500 out of 100,000 is competition. Where, however, do the other 95,500 go?
Two short paragraphs is “very long”, hey?
That puts your grammar cop pose into perspective well enough. The preference for style over substance indicates a dearth of both.
> Two words: TIMSS and PISA.
Yeah, they do measure attainment but I was thinking more along the lines of earned run average and runs batted in: individual skill measures that contribute to the overall - team - goal. Until individual skills are measured there’s no way to differentiate, objectively, the good from the bad.
allen, imnsho, R *is* unhappy with public education in the United States. That’s fine. Not to the same extent, but nonetheless, still, so am I. I think some people *want* to be unhappy with public education in the United States. There’s an important difference between being and wanting to be (some would call it tone) whenever you’re considering data or the lack thereof, or possible.
Two paragraphs instead of two letters, yes, I’d say perspective, in terms of relativity, has a lot to do with the former seeming long. The best write with style and substance. I don’t claim to create it, but I can spot it.
Zuzu said:
“Where, however, do the other 95,500 go?”
They get into the second tier, the third tier, and so on. It applies equally to schools and jobs. It’s pretty brutal, but my point is that here in the US we’re constantly treated to self-congratulatory crap about how competitive X, Y or Z is. Most of the time it’s nothing of the kind, and it devalues effort (and intelligence and ability).
The self-esteem crap that we have to listen to - “I AM SPECIAL”, “WE IS SPECIAL” etc. - has a lot to do with devaluing effort, IMHO. You listen to this rubbish, and then you see people who are genuinely smart and hardworking, and many of them are the humblest around. Quite a contrast
Allen, I take your point. Unfortunately even the SAT/ACT are being dumbed down, plus of course they don’t provide a longitudinal record, and NAEP is pretty dumb.
Excellent point on the perspective lacking due to self-congratulatory crap as well as the self-esteem psychobabble. That ties into the whole topic of how the god of marketing has affected the mindset in the U.S. (at least, maybe other places, but I’m not sure). What seems real is more important than what is real, and instant gratification over anything else. Very ineffective across a number of fronts.
or possible SOLUTIONS. SOLUTIONS. edit, z, EDIT.
No Rags, I don’t think you do get my meaning and I’ll take responsibility for that since my observation about the lack of any measures of teaching skill is simply one link in a chain of occurrences/circumstances.
To flog my baseball analogy a bit more, imagine the effect on individual player incentive if only team final placement were important. No statistics wonks toting up hits, runs, bases stolen, strike-outs, etc. Just the team standing once a year.
What’s the incentive to work on your skills if everything you do gets homogenized into the team and spread over a whole year? The incentive to improve skills disappears because, other then the spectacular play or the spectacularly gifted player, the distinction between good and not so good disappears. What’s the point of spending lots of time improving your skills if the before and after difference isn’t measured or in terms of team annual standing, measurable?
There is a point to trying to improve your skills of course but it springs from internal resources. Pride might drive you to improve your skills even if there are no external reasons to do so.
Trouble is, the skills that aren’t being measured are the skills that are least likely to draw what official recognition exists. There’s your explanation for the self-esteem movement, whole language and all the rest of the dreary panoply of edu-horse shit that afflicts the public education system. If you can’t be good then you can be distinct, at the cutting edge, you can toss around impressive jargon, you can assume the moral high ground, land a nice, fat grant. The lack of substantive measures of teaching skill creates an “attainment vacuum” that charlatans rush to fill and professionals in need of some means of distinguishing themselves are eager to lap up.
There are other factors of course. The district system exacerbates the situation. Inter-district comparisons can be ignored to a large extent because of the political independence of districts. Intra-district comparisons don’t have as much value as they might because the identity of the school is diluted due their immersion in the district.
The repercussions don’t stop at the district level though.
Since teaching skill isn’t measured as a function of professional performance, i.e. how good a teacher you are isn’t that important, measuring the indicators of potential teaching skill isn’t that important. There’s no value to the district in hiring graduates from a good ed school versus graduates from a lousy ed school. That doesn’t mean there are no good ed schools but it reduces the value of being a good ed school. Once again, it’s pride that maintains quality, to the extent it’s maintained, since quality isn’t rewarded overtly.