Student suspended for writing Newton shooting poem

[amigocabal]

Student suspended for writing Newton shooting poem

On Dec. 30 the "Today Show" reported the story about San Francisco high school senior Courtni Webb. Webb, 17, is facing “possible expulsion” for writing a poem about the Newton, Conn., Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Courtni wasn't trying to be dark and depressed in her poem, but she didn't write memorials to the victims either.

Instead, Courtni wrote a poem about Adam Lanza and what she saw regarding his drive to a mass murder in a children's classroom. She didn't write about flowers and rainbows. She wrote, “They want to hold me back……I understand the killings in Connecticut. I know why he pulled the trigger…. society won’t take the blame. We're full of a society of haters and blamers”

What some might see as a child’s way of speaking out and dealing with such a tragedy, others are seeing as part of a zero tolerance approach to violence within Courtni Webb’s San Francisco high school. Webb didn't turn the poem in as her assignment; it was something she had written for herself. However, the teacher discovered it in her personal notebook and turned it over to the principal.

Continue reading...

What the fuck is wrong with these people? Sometimes I wonder why we even have public education with this kind of shit going on.

[Simon_Jester]

So which "these people" and "this kind of shit" are you referring to?

Or is this just an omnidirectional inflammatory remark intended to tick off all people with all possible views on the issue?

[Eternal_Freedom]

I would think part of the grievance is what the teacher was doing going through a student's personal notebook. That and the rather silly idea of a "zero-tolerance approach to violence."

Hell, I wrote and posted a poem online about a sniper's thoughts, should I get suspended from college for that? Arguably I would be a better choice since I actually posted mine for people to see.

EDIT: Amusingly, upon reading the thread title I thought it was a poem about shooting Sir Isaac Newton.

[amigocabal]

So which "these people" and "this kind of shit" are you referring to?

Or is this just an omnidirectional inflammatory remark intended to tick off all people with all possible views on the issue?

The suspension of Courtni Webb and the people behind it.

[weemadando]

Not to mention this kind of "zero tolerance" stuff can lead to things like this: http://www.vice.com/read/i-was-a-suspec ... ol-shooter

[JLTucker]

Hell, I wrote and posted a poem online about a sniper's thoughts, should I get suspended from college for that? Arguably I would be a better choice since I actually posted mine for people to see.

Well, for one thing, you have more academic freedom during post-secondary education. High school is different. I wrote a seven page essay on how religion is nothing but superstition in college and received very high marks. If I wrote that in high school, especially in Georgia, I'd likely be given a failing grade, suspended, have a stern talking to, or even a mixture of all three. I guess what I'm saying is that comparing the two levels of education and reactions to certain writings is dumb.

Sometimes I wonder why we even have public education with this kind of shit going on.

I am confused about this statement. What are you implying here? Are you saying public education is a waste because stories like these pop up?

[Eternal_Freedom]

Hell, I wrote and posted a poem online about a sniper's thoughts, should I get suspended from college for that? Arguably I would be a better choice since I actually posted mine for people to see.

Well, for one thing, you have more academic freedom during post-secondary education. High school is different. I wrote a seven page essay on how religion is nothing but superstition in college and received very high marks. If I wrote that in high school, especially in Georgia, I'd likely be given a failing grade, suspended, have a stern talking to, or even a mixture of all three. I guess what I'm saying is that comparing the two levels of education and reactions to certain writings is dumb.

When I wrote the poem and posted it i was in secondary school, but here in the UK we seem to be a little less mad about it.

[Knife]

Yeah, I don't see this helping one bit. Much better for kids to repress such feelings, cause that won't bite us in the ass or anything.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Wouldn't the smarter thing be to require x number of visits with a therapist as an alternative to punishment?

[Scrib]

Wouldn't the smarter thing be to require x number of visits with a therapist as an alternative to punishment?

That would be about helping people. This is basically the high school equivalent of "tough on crime", there to make the teachers feel better and cover their asses. This way, if she is imbalanced enough to shoot kids it won't be in their school.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, for one thing, you have more academic freedom during post-secondary education. High school is different. I wrote a seven page essay on how religion is nothing but superstition in college and received very high marks. If I wrote that in high school, especially in Georgia, I'd likely be given a failing grade, suspended, have a stern talking to, or even a mixture of all three. I guess what I'm saying is that comparing the two levels of education and reactions to certain writings is dumb.

In college, the default assumption is that we're all well-adjusted adults, so if you want to say something I disagree with, I have neither the right nor the need to 'correct' your opinion.

High schools have a different job description, because their students (mostly) aren't adults. They are going through a very strange and ill-adjusted period of their lives. And to be honest, our civilization really sucks at taking adolescents and integrating them into adult life- it just doesn't have the toolkit for that, because the 'job' of our adolescents is to go to a weird isolated artificial environment and learn facts and techniques. We're not asking them to actually do productive work or interface with diverse age and economic groups that might teach them how to get along.

[That may not be avoidable- but it sure isn't helping the teenagers learn to adjust]

If you're a well-intentioned, competent high school teacher, you're probably going to feel like part of your job is to make sure the students get socialization and come out talking and thinking in ways that will make them fit into society. At the very least they need to put on that mask to function outside of school- which is how you'll justify it to yourself. There is that lingering fear that the kid who "doesn't fit in" will continue to not fit in and become unable to get by in an adult world where people expect you to dress neatly and smile at appropriate times and so on.

And that doesn't even begin to address what you get out of people who are short-tempered. Or biased. Or stupider and more prone to groupthink than average. Or so preoccupied with doing the basics of their job that they don't have mental energy to care about the outliers.

[Simon_Jester]

[previous contents of post accidentally edited away, sorry]

Wouldn't the smarter thing be to require x number of visits with a therapist as an alternative to punishment?

That would be about helping people. This is basically the high school equivalent of "tough on crime", there to make the teachers feel better and cover their asses. This way, if she is imbalanced enough to shoot kids it won't be in their school.

There's also the kneejerk "holy shit you scared us we punish you" aspect, which is bad... and then there's something else.

It's a common (arguably true) belief that there are things you just should not say in polite society, even if you're thinking them. You shouldn't call someone a liar or a coward to their face (without, perhaps, extreme provocation), because it could start a fight. You shouldn't make a scene in public, it distracts people and makes their lives more difficult. You shouldn't yell at your significant other, it creates feelings in them that are much worse than whatever you were shouting about. You DEFINITELY shouldn't tell someone you want to kill them- because that can leave them looking nervously over their shoulder for days, months, or years, when for you it was the unconsidered act of a moment. And so on.

That's a real problem- people's words have consequences they do not control. Which are real, and indisputably happen, and cause real harm, whether you meant for them to happen or not. Most teenagers, and a lot of adults, aren't ready to cope with that all the time. And we suffer for it.

Teachers can easily fall into the mode of thinking that it is their duty to enforce that as a social rule. Teenagers are often totally ignorant of it, or make up justifications for not caring about it. But it's real, adults live with it every day, and somewhere in the transition between "child" and "functioning adult," human beings have to learn about it and accomodate it.

That attitude applies even to the good teachers, let alone the stupid or biased ones who just like to punish people or fear liability.

[Scrib]

[previous contents of post accidentally edited away, sorry]

Wouldn't the smarter thing be to require x number of visits with a therapist as an alternative to punishment?

That would be about helping people. This is basically the high school equivalent of "tough on crime", there to make the teachers feel better and cover their asses. This way, if she is imbalanced enough to shoot kids it won't be in their school.

There's also the kneejerk "holy shit you scared us we punish you" aspect, which is bad... and then there's something else.

It's a common (arguably true) belief that there are things you just should not say in polite society, even if you're thinking them. You shouldn't call someone a liar or a coward to their face (without, perhaps, extreme provocation), because it could start a fight. You shouldn't make a scene in public, it distracts people and makes their lives more difficult. You shouldn't yell at your significant other, it creates feelings in them that are much worse than whatever you were shouting about. You DEFINITELY shouldn't tell someone you want to kill them- because that can leave them looking nervously over their shoulder for days, months, or years, when for you it was the unconsidered act of a moment. And so on.

That's a real problem- people's words have consequences they do not control. Which are real, and indisputably happen, and cause real harm, whether you meant for them to happen or not. Most teenagers, and a lot of adults, aren't ready to cope with that all the time. And we suffer for it.

Teachers can easily fall into the mode of thinking that it is their duty to enforce that as a social rule. Teenagers are often totally ignorant of it, or make up justifications for not caring about it. But it's real, adults live with it every day, and somewhere in the transition between "child" and "functioning adult," human beings have to learn about it and accomodate it.

That attitude applies even to the good teachers, let alone the stupid or biased ones who just like to punish people or fear liability.

And of course, the way to do this is to punish someone in such a hilariously disproportionate way. When I had school troubles my teacher sent me to the psychiatrist or talked to me.But my school was autonomous and didn't have to worry about parents or lawsuits in general. Sorry, I'm just skeptical that a certain amount of ass-covering didn't play into the decision.

[Korto]

Well, for one thing, you have more academic freedom during post-secondary education. High school is different. I wrote a seven page essay on how religion is nothing but superstition in college and received very high marks. If I wrote that in high school, especially in Georgia, I'd likely be given a failing grade, suspended, have a stern talking to, or even a mixture of all three. I guess what I'm saying is that comparing the two levels of education and reactions to certain writings is dumb.

It's a common (arguably true) belief that there are things you just should not say in polite society, even if you're thinking them. You shouldn't call someone a liar or a coward to their face (without, perhaps, extreme provocation), because it could start a fight. You shouldn't make a scene in public, it distracts people and makes their lives more difficult.

Both of which points would be a lot more valid if it wasn't for the fact that it was a private piece of writing in her personal notebook, and not something turned in for marking, or posted publicly.

Webb didn't turn the poem in as her assignment; it was something she had written for herself. However, the teacher discovered it in her personal notebook and turned it over to the principal.

I can think of quite legitimate reasons why the teacher may have read something in the girl's notebook, she may have left it open and then the teacher happened to glance at it and then read the poem to see if it could be praised or constructively criticised. That's fine. But to then suspend her for what she'd written when it (apparently) wasn't threatening to anyone and didn't slander anyone, seems to be on par with "thought-crime".
But as Knife says, obviously the best way to deal with someone's conflicted feeling is to get them to bottle it all up for fear of punishment, and not air and explore them in any way.

Mind you, I'm not going to get too worked up about this as it could all well be a media beat-up.

[Scrib]

And of course, the way to do this is to punish someone in such a hilariously disproportionate way. When I had school troubles my teacher sent me to the psychiatrist or talked to me.But my school was autonomous and didn't have to worry about parents or lawsuits in general. Sorry, I'm just skeptical that a certain amount of ass-covering didn't play into the decision.

I'd also like to add that this seems pointless on another level. Tough on crime doesn't work because the crazy kid willing to shoot up the school isn't really going to give a shit about the suspension (also, he's a one in a million student) so this only pushes other students who misbehaved once out of school.

[Simon_Jester]

And of course, the way to do this is to punish someone in such a hilariously disproportionate way. When I had school troubles my teacher sent me to the psychiatrist or talked to me.But my school was autonomous and didn't have to worry about parents or lawsuits in general. Sorry, I'm just skeptical that a certain amount of ass-covering didn't play into the decision.

I'm sure it did. And even if it didn't, there are a lot of people in the school system who think clonking someone over the head with punishment is a good way to get them to change their ways. "Comply or be punished" is often the ground state of school policy. Anything else requires a lot more caution and attention and effort to deal with the individual issues of individual students. Neither the schools nor the systems they fit into are always providing that.

It's a common (arguably true) belief that there are things you just should not say in polite society, even if you're thinking them. You shouldn't call someone a liar or a coward to their face (without, perhaps, extreme provocation), because it could start a fight. You shouldn't make a scene in public, it distracts people and makes their lives more difficult.

Both of which points would be a lot more valid if it wasn't for the fact that it was a private piece of writing in her personal notebook, and not something turned in for marking, or posted publicly.

I don't think the teacher's action was just.

I wanted to explain where I think it comes from. School officials who do this kind of shit are wrong, but they're not cartoon villains. I suspect a lot of them really do think they're doing their job, by 'driving home' that 'that is not acceptable.'

The words 'that is not acceptable' spring very quickly to the mind and lips of anyone who teaches children for any length of time, I find...

[Fiji_Fury]

Keep in mind that it is not the teacher's decision to suspend or expell a student. They refer unusual, concerning or unacceptable behavior to the office where administrators (Vice-Principals, Principal) make that sort of determination. Also keep in mind that the article does not give a clear view of:
a) whether psychological or psychiatric assessment has been conducted with student
b) whether pscyhological or psychiatric assessment is a condition of returning to school
c) whether the student has a history of disruptive or agressive behavior

It's easy to look at a snap-shot of information like was presented in the thread's source and be outraged or pass judgment but keep in mind that you may not have all of the information. Your judgment may be right that expelling a student under these circumstances is inappropriate, yet that cannot be fully understood without much more context than we have available.

Your points on fear driving rushed or poor decisions even in a school are well worth considering though. Teachers and administrators have a lot of responsibilities, especially in light of the debate around what schools need to do to keep students safe. This particular case may or may not be an example of excessive disciplinary action.

[Civil War Man]

That would be about helping people. This is basically the high school equivalent of "tough on crime", there to make the teachers feel better and cover their asses. This way, if she is imbalanced enough to shoot kids it won't be in their school.

It's not to make the teachers feel better. Teachers in general hate zero tolerance policies because it completely ties their hands when dealing with problem kids and bullying. They exist solely to cover the administration's ass and make it look like they are being proactive.

[amigocabal]

That would be about helping people. This is basically the high school equivalent of "tough on crime", there to make the teachers feel better and cover their asses. This way, if she is imbalanced enough to shoot kids it won't be in their school.

It's not to make the teachers feel better. Teachers in general hate zero tolerance policies because it completely ties their hands when dealing with problem kids and bullying. They exist solely to cover the administration's ass and make it look like they are being proactive.

My biggest problem is how such policies are interpreted.

Zero tolerance does not stop creative application of policies. Zero tolerance does not mandate punishing a student who bites a pizza slice into the shape of a gun.

[Mr. Coffee]

I think I see the problem here...

On Dec. 30 the "Today Show" reported the story about San Francisco high school senior Courtni Webb. Webb, 17, is facing “possible expulsion” for writing a poem about the Newton, Conn., Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.

School officials in California being zero tolerance loving, knee jerking reactionary fuckwits... Nope, totally did not see that one coming at all, no sir.

[Terralthra]

Worth noting that Life Learning Academy isn't a public school, it's a charter (read: private in all but funding source) school which serves "high-school aged youth who have been involved in the juvenile justice system, or who face challenges including serious school failure, gang involvement, poverty, abuse, and substance abuse."

Life Learning Academy students are referred by probation officers, community-based programs, themselves, friends or families of current Life Learning Academy students, and by other schools. Prior to enrollment at LLA, many of these students have been truant or dropped out of school completely, most have a failing grade point average, report regular drug or alcohol use, and many have a history of arrest and come from families that are involved in crime.

The standards there for what is and is not acceptable may differ somewhat.

[Ahriman238]

Huh, a charter school for problem children. That's pretty far outside my experience, which is that charter schools "reassign" students who become discipline problems or don't do well on tests, sending them back into the public system while they keep top performers and everyone wonders why public schools are getting lower test scores.


I seem to remember a case about 2 years after 9/11, a high school kid found a text sample on a school computer "If the order to evacuate is given, you must obey it immediately. Your life depends on it," and felt inspired to write a short story/ series of instructions for carrying out a school bombing. It was found, he was arrested for planning a violent act and it made the evening news when he went for appeal. This wasn't even on a school computer, but in a personal notebook. I don't see where the administration has a leg to stand on.

[Aaron MkII]

Is this...I'm not sure what the term is, loco parentis maybe? Where the school essentially has the same power over a student that I do over my kids?

[Simon_Jester]

Huh, a charter school for problem children. That's pretty far outside my experience, which is that charter schools "reassign" students who become discipline problems or don't do well on tests, sending them back into the public system while they keep top performers and everyone wonders why public schools are getting lower test scores.

I would argue that it's not just that. Public schools could probably get drastic improvements in performance just by kicking out disciplinary problems. 40-50 years ago, they used to do that. If you kept acting like a punk who was content to keep an eighth-grade education while harassing the people trying to learn in the 9th through 12th grades, you got thrown out of high school and someone said "OK, you want to act like your eighth-grade education makes you big and bad? That's all you're getting, then."

Stopping the schools from doing that means that everyone else in the building has to work harder, and less learning happens. The biggest difference between a magnet/gifted/'excelling' school and a 'troubled' school is the lack of freedom to decide who will and will not attend, and to keep out children who are unwilling to learn or allow learning in others.

Eh. Maybe I'm just grousing.

[Ralin]

Is this...I'm not sure what the term is, loco parentis maybe? Where the school essentially has the same power over a student that I do over my kids?

Specifically I believe (note: I have no education background, though I am a teacher) loco parentis means that the school is acting in place of the parents while they're on school grounds.

Which makes me wonder why I hear about kids getting in trouble for things said on Facebook and such, but I'm going to chalk it up to some school administrators being authoritarian pricks.

Eh. Maybe I'm just grousing.

I have entire classes I fantasize about having kicked out of school. The happiest moment of my teaching career was when I was told I would get to give a final exam and assign semester grades after all.