OT again: Parents could be fined for missing school meetings

[Leon]

Think!

You are not thinking are you?

You apparently don't get it. It's not the teachers problem, is the parents and child's problem.

[Leon]

HUH?

Now you are making sense. The teacher should be able to dicepline the kids with out fear of a law suite just like a parent should be. If it goes too far then they can be punished just like any one else. Further, where did you get the notion that a teacher can demand that you show up in a certain place at a certain time? Appointments are made to suite both parties. If you make a commitment and do not show up then that again is a personal problem and deserves the fine.

There you go assuming that the teacher can call all the shots again.

[Leon]

Precicely ON POINT. The law to punish for making an appoint for your childs benefit and not showing up will like all other laws impress future parents that they have a responsibility to their future children.

Don't be so short sighted.

There you go adding BS to the proposed law.

Give me a break. Do you often post under the name of Doug?

[J. Clarke]

Not an answer. Why would any poor person living in the inner city have a car? And what makes you think that poor people living in the inner city have neighbors or friends who are any better off than they are?

Then why is the teacher harassing them?

[J. Clarke]

So why would a parent make the commitment to begin with and risk the fine?

Someone is calling the shots. If the parent has the right to refuse to make the appointment then what purpose is served by fining the parent who for whatever reason manages to miss one? All you're accomplishing is to guarantee that nobody in their right mind will ever make such an appointment.

You keep saying "liberals this" and "liberals that". The hallmark of liberalism is more and more laws that intrude more and more into our day to day lives. If you want to espouse a _conservative_ solution then ditch the forced bussing and the parent will be able to walk to the school. But you're too busy trying to find new ways to harass people who already have too much on their plate to be bothered with doing anything like _that_.

[Swingman]

Hey, Bubba ... watch it! It's a statistical fact that most of the folks now residing here in Texas are not "Texans". ;)

Besides, I won't defend the "educators" because they themselves are often the product of a successive generational increase in parental irresponsibilty which currently, and clearly, manifests itself in public schools in this country, and not just in Texas.

The proposal is unquestionably distasteful, but it is an attempt to address a problem that is growing here to the point it that it will take distasteful action to solve.

Got any alternative suggestions/solutions?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for keeping government out of daily life, but let's look at it at another angle:

I just paid $6.3K and some change in 2006 HISD school taxes two days ago ... believe me, with a kid in college, it hurt financially to do that public duty, which I have no philosophical problem with doing.

Now, you tell me why irresponsible parents, whose kids disrupt the classroom so no others can learn and thereby rob me/my kids of the value of my hard earned tax dollar spent on education, should NOT have to pay in some manner for their irresponsible parenting?

... and _particularly_ when they REFUSE to show up to discuss the problem!

Hell, you fine someone for not showing up at traffic court, why not a parent/teacher conference?

Which is more important?

That something has to be done is unquestionable ... got any alternative suggestions?

BTW, this is NOT personal, Morris ... the fact that you're a good guy shines through all the BS on both sides. :)

[Leon]

I am comfortable, retired at 40, 12 years ago, but certainly have not got a high income. I quit my job to be at home for my son when he started attending public schools. During the first 3 years of my retirement my family had a negative cash flow every month. Needless to say, making ends meet was difficult those 3 years.

My son, now 19, is an Honors student and has a 4 year academic excellence scholarship that he earned that pays for 85% of his tuition at the University of Houston. Additionally, he works part time and has had the same job for most of the last 3 years.

The HS that he went to in SW Houston put up with no crap from the students. Poor conduct resulted in the student being immediately transferred to one of the other schools. Parent involvement at the school in this middle to lower income community was high.

I am totally in touch with reality. I am just not one to sit around making excuses for why I can't do this or can't do that. No one handed me anything.

People that sit around blaming others, get no where. Lead, help, or get out of the way.

[Leon]

In Houston, poor people that barely have a roof over their heads drive better cars than I do.

HUH?

[Leon]

The appointmant will not be optional but will be fair to both parites.

You assume that the parent will have the right to refuse that meeting. I seriousely doubt that will be true. He will most likely be given the benefit of attending that meeting when he can do so. The parent has to play the gown up here and take responsibility for being a parent. What a concept.

NO a liberal is one that wants more and more government and laws to cover his butt, pay his way, and carry him along. A law requiring you to be a responsible parent is not liberal thinking. Go ahead and look the other way and throw stones at those trying to make a change in this broken system.

[nailshooter41]

SNIP of reference quote

Progress reports go unanswered; emails ignored; phone calls

I have a whole new outlook on teaching, teachers and parents with my pal going to teaching than I did before. Talk about a look from the inside. Simply having kids in school and claiming you understand teaching and the school system is like building a birdhouse and calling yourself a general contractor.

Until his new school super came on board, the teachers caught all the flack for poor student performance. We all know there are poor teachers, but according to him, there are also a lot of good ones.

He hasn't had to face the guy that work 2.5 jobs and lives out of district because his child was bussed and he is afraid of child protective services. Paul would probably drive out to meet that guy personally. No... it is much more mundane. The excuses he hears are "I forgot", "oh, was today?" and (my favorite) "I didn't do good at math either, so why should he?".

The best though, is when it is time to pass/fail, and the parents are sent a notification letter and very few respond. They do respond though (magically finding the time!) when they find out their kiddo will be held back a grade. Their response? No one told me. This is the first I have heard of this...

And since the teachers didn't keep records of when they sent out notices, emails, made phone calls, etc., they were held at fault by the parents. How could their little angel be put back a grade? He only missed 10 unexcused days in the whole semester... and he did turn in something for an assignment... I don't know what it was or what class it was, but I do remember that one day he was working on schoolwork...

Enough teachers received discipline notices that they pushed the principal and superintendent to come up with a new plan since they felt like they were getting blamed for problems. Now, since the school district has been SUED for not passing students, they have a system that satisfies today's litigious requirements.

They are required to notify the parents (and keep records of same) if the students start slipping in their grades, have unexcused absences, or they are tardy too many times. They parents must be notified in a time frame that allows the student to recover. If there is no response, they do it again, all documented, this time with the principal involved. If no response, they notify the parents again with the assistance of the principal's office so that the school admin is involved.

In other words, they are building a case against the parents.

And to address another aspect of suspicioned technophobia, here's how phone notification works (according to my buddy):

"We called you twice to let you know about this"

"No you didn't"

"Yes we did"

"No you didn't"

"Oh yes we did!"

"Prove it!"

Although he likes that one, he really likes the parents that wind up with the principal telling the admin staff they have never heard of Paul, much less talked to him.

The parents if these children don't feel the need to keep up with their kids, and they honestly feel like it is the job of the school to assist them in raising their kids, not just to educate them.

What is truly sad is the fact that the kids know they face no consequences from parents or school, and with a 47% dropout rate (2006 statistic as compiled by the school district) before graduation, they don't care. Paul's students have told him, "yeah dude, I gave the note to my parents but you know they won't call." He tries to do what he can, but he is now at the place in his career where he realizes you simply can't save them all. And without help from the parents - impossible. According to him, the parents are usually 75% or more of the problem.

But here is where the district is caught in the crack. If they have XX % of dropouts or fails, they will lose their State funding first, then their Federal funding, which means they are gone. Strange, isn't it? It puts them in a position of trying everything they can to keep butts in the seats, if for no other reason than to protect the jobs in the school district.

I don't want this to sound like I am 100% all pro education, though. Rest assured, I do see both sides of the arguement. If the parents don't care about education and furthering the interests and well being of their kids, who are we to say that is wrong?

And when I am trying to screw with Paul (who still has a little of that "Welcome Back Kotter" them song running through his head) I always tell him to calm down, and like water, let the situation find its own level.

We live in South Texas, and in some areas of the state business is mainly manufacturing and agriculture. So my questions to him are: if all are educated, who will pick our lettuce? Who will pick the grapefruits and pack them for shipping? Who will clean up my jobsites and load the dumpsters? Who will prime and paint the bumpers at the truck bumper plants? Who will clean the live animal pens at the meat packing plant, and who will clean the guts up from the killing and first gutting floor at the slaugher house? Who will hold the "SLOW" sign that you see when going through a small road construction project?

So if we educate them all, who will do those jobs? Certainly not the immigrants that are coming over these days. They make work the fields if they are illegals, but the legal guys that take piece work from me are educated enough to do complex carpentry work, do some really good paint/plaster work (including estimating material amounts and costs for large jobs) and some even run their own small businesses. So where would that leave us in the long run if we run out of people to take the worst jobs? In one sense, those with lesser education hold an important position in our economy. Would any of you want your kids doing those jobs to support a family - your grandkids?

Thankfully, we won't have to make that decision for a while. His school district will continue on as it has for many, many years, and we will have a steady supply of feeble minded imbeciles that simply cannot do better. Some have the native intelligence to do so, but simply not having been encouraged or disciplined to do better, they don't. These smarter guys make great drug dealers and the actual leaders of some of our local gangs.

For me, the solution is easy. If the parents don't participate and show an interest, their kids are doomed. If neither side cares, and ample time, effort, tax payer's money and teacher attention is spent, they should pull out both parents and kids from the school, and leave the teachers with the parents that give damn and kids that want to learn. There are still a few of those families out there, even in his district.

Robert

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Part of parenting is to see that the children are educated so they will not have to live in a cardboard box.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

That is a HUGE part of the problem, not just for teachers, but many parents are reluctant to punish their kids.

Scenario: Jack pulls into school parking lot with rifle in gun rack.

1956 - Vice Principal comes over, takes a look at Jack's rifle, goes to his car and gets his to show Jack. 2006 - School goes into lockdown, FBI called, Jack hauled off to jail and never sees his truck or gun again. Counselors called in for traumatized students and teachers. ++++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fist fight after school.

1956 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up best friends. Nobody goes to jail, nobody arrested, nobody expelled.

2006 - Police called, SWAT team arrives, arrests Johnny and Mark. Charge them with assault, both expelled even though Johnny started it.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Jeffrey won't be still in class, disrupts other students.

1956 - Jeffrey sent to office and given a good paddling by Principal. Sits still in class.

2006 - Jeffrey given huge doses of Ritalin. Becomes a zombie. School gets extra money from state because Jeffrey has a disability.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his father's car and his Dad gives him a whipping.

1956 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2006 - Billy's Dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy removed to foster care and joins a gang. Billy's sister is told by state psychologist that she remembers being abused herself and their Dad goes to prison. Billy's mom has affair with psychologist.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Mark gets a headache and takes some headache medicine to school.

1956 - Mark shares headache medicine with Principal out on the smoking dock.

2006 - Police called, Mark expelled from school for drug violations. Car searched for drugs and weapons.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Mary turns up pregnant.

1956 - 5 High School Boys leave town. Mary does her senior year at a special school for expectant mothers.

2006 - Middle School Counselor calls Planned Parenthood, who notifies the ACLU. Mary is driven to the next state over and gets an abortion without her parent's consent or knowledge. Mary given condoms and told to be more careful next time.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Pedro fails high school English.

1956 : Pedro goes to summer school, passes English, goes to college.

2006 : Pedro's cause is taken up by state democratic party. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that teaching English as a requirement for graduation is racist. ACLU files class action lawsuit against state school system and Pedro's English teacher. English banned from core curriculum. Pedro given diploma anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he can't speak English.

+++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers from the 4th of July, puts them in a model airplane paint bottle, blows up a red ant bed

1956 - Ants die.

2006 - BATF, Homeland Security, FBI called. Johnny charged with domestic terrorism, FBI investigates parents, siblings removed from home, computers confiscated, Johnny's Dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.

+++++++++++++++++++++

Scenario: Johnny falls while running during recess and scrapes his knee. He is found crying by his teacher, Mary. Mary, hugs him to comfort him.

1956 - In a short time Johnny feels better and goes on playing.

2006 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces 3 years in State Prison.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Is something wrong here????

_________________________________________________________________

[J. Clarke]

If (a) people don't need someone else to solve their problems, and (b) it's the parents' and child's problem, not the teacher's problem, then how is it the teacher's business?

You're the one making up the rules, if you can't live with them you need to work on your value system.

[J. Clarke]

So you're saying that the parent doesn't have the right to refuse to attend and can be subjected to criminal penalties for failing to do so.

Make up your mind, can the teacher order the meeting and cause the parent to be fined for failing to appear or can't she? You can't have it both ways.

If the teacher can order it then the teacher is in effect issuing a subpeona or arrest warrant, if the teacher can't order it then the parent isn't going to risk the fine by agreeing to it.

So how are such "liberal" programs as Welfare and national health insurance "covering the butt, paying the way, and carrying along" the liberal Congresscritters who already _have_ all that?

Says the liberal trying hard to pretend to be a conservative.

If you want to fix the system, arresting parents is not the way to do it.

[J. Clarke]

Why don't you just arrest everybody who has a kid without having a certain income then instead of coming up with yet another petty annoyance.

Hey, you're the one who proposed it.

Hey, if you don't like the doctrine that has been well established by the courts that the schools stand in loco parentis to the students, then you should be worrying about getting legislation enacted to change that, not finding new ways to harass parents. Sticking your little ostrich head in the sand and denying that that is the law isn't going to help anybody.

And I have no idea who this "doug" might be. Probably someone in my killfile, who you have just joined.

>

[J. Clarke]

If you are retired at 40 then you have by the standards of someone on Welfare or holding down a minimum-wage job, a high income.

A poor person doesn't have the luxury of three years of negative cash flow. Three weeks would be pushing it. If you think you know poor you've got another think coming.

In other words they had no clue how to discipline the kids so they cherry-picked and gave the problems to someone else.

"Middle to lower". In other words middle class.

If you think that being able to afford a "negative cash flow" for three years is poverty then you are _not_ in touch.

Uh huh. Sure.

[J. Clarke]

And you think the public schools are going to accomplish that by fining the parents if they don't come to meetings?

[Morris Dovey]

Yes I do; but I don't know of any _quick_ fixes. Parents who don't believe or who don't recognize the importance of education for their offspring constitute the /solvable/ part of the problem - the ones who just don't give a damn constitute a part of the problem for which the only solution is a change of parents.

The solvable part of the problem lies in a prior failure to properly educate the parents to understand the importance of their kids' education. It seems to me inappropriate to punish a person for being inadequately educated. The quickest solution might be to remedy the prior failure to educate the parent - but I'm not sure how that might be accomplished; and I'm almost certain that the effort would not be universally effective.

The longer term and IMO more effective solution is to ensure that all students are imbued with an understanding of the importance of knowledge - and of _why_ they are taught what they're taught - and what value that knowledge has in their world beyond school. /This/ is what too many parents missed out on; and it's what _must_ be remedied in teaching their kids.

Need evidence? It's really easy to come by - just ask kids what courses they're taking; then for each course ask each kid: "Why're you studying /that/? What's it good /for/? How will knowing /that/ change your life?" Every "I don't know" you hear identifies a candidate for the next generation of non-believing/non-recognizing parents.

The problem is _not_ solved by criminalizing the parent nor by imposing $500 worth of hardship on the family.

|| Also sounds as if Rep. Smith hankers to appear important/powerful || by criminalizing and (perhaps further) economically handicapping || those who don't do what he thinks they should. | || Since justice has to do with equity (hence the scales in Justice's || hand - along with the sword), it would be interesting to hear Rep. || Smith expound on the justice of his bill - and to establish that || $500 is, in fact, a fair and reasonable valuation of the stood-up || teacher's time. Perhaps that valuation could be used, in turn, to || arrive at a new salary schedule for Texas teachers. \ || I'm not sure that I think much of that criminalization stuff, tho. || But then, perhaps the Texans - or the Texas Legislature - feels || that they really do need more citizens with criminal records. || Presumably, a person with a criminal record is easier to || intimidate and control... | | Don't get me wrong, I'm all for keeping government out of daily | life, but let's look at it at another angle: | | I just paid $6.3K and some change in 2006 HISD school taxes two | days ago ... believe me, with a kid in college, it hurt financially | to do that public duty, which I have no philosophical problem with | doing.

Only because you recognize that there is an adequate degree of equity. You forked out $6K and seem to feel that in return the HISD provides a fair return - for which your hard-earned money was well (if painfully) spent.

| Now, you tell me why irresponsible parents, whose kids disrupt the | classroom so no others can learn and thereby rob me/my kids of the | value of my hard earned tax dollar spent on education, should NOT | have to pay in some manner for their irresponsible parenting?

Ok. I'll be glad to tell you as soon as you explain to me how each of those irresponsible parents came to be that way. Clue: It isn't simple ornryness.

| ... and _particularly_ when they REFUSE to show up to discuss the | problem! | | Hell, you fine someone for not showing up at traffic court, why not | a parent/teacher conference?

Because the person summoned to appear in traffic court stands accused of having violated some law - which is a very different situation than not showing up for a meeting. Not showing up for a mutually agreed-upon meeting is an inconsiderate display of bad manners; but it's not a crime.

| Which is more important? | | That something has to be done is unquestionable ... got any | alternative suggestions?

I agree that something needs to be done. I'm neither legislator nor educator; so my suggestions don't carry a great deal of weight - but they're listed above.

| BTW, this is NOT personal, Morris ... the fact that you're a good | guy shines through all the BS on both sides. :)

I taught high school math for about six weeks as a substitute (one of the most exhilerating experiences of my life) and managed to get all four years of students excited about coming to math classes every day. I found out after the fact that a couple of the classes had asked for a meeting and crowded into the Principal's office to ask that I be made their permanent math teacher. The only thing I did differently was to make sure they understood _why_ we studied each topic and how mastering the course material might affect their lives. That tiny bit extra was all they needed!

We're all mostly good guys/gals - the essential difficulty lies in finding out what the problems really are; and in trying to puzzle out how much of each problem /can/ be solved.

-- Morris Dovey DeSoto Solar DeSoto, Iowa USA

[Edwin Pawlowski]

No, but not showing up for other reasons is not good parenting either. Fines or not, parents must take some interest and responsibility for their children's education.

[J. Clarke]

Do you see fining them for not showing up for meetings to be the way to do that?