I agree... Totally a socioeconomic difference... straight out of Ruby Payne's book.

I do wish something could be done to people who are rude enough to get up and leave after their person's name is called. Those who trample down the bleacher seats while other names are being called are so selfish. But selfish isn't against the law.

 

So agree. I found this to be a huge issue at my daughter's school (Ryle) this year. Ryle graduates around 400 or so. The number of people that get up and leave - and in none too quiet a fashion - after their kid's name is called is ridiculous. Our last name starts with one of the first letters in the alphabet, so my daughter was called early on. It would have been great to get up and leave at that point, but it also would have been wrong - and rude - and disrespectful. So we sat there, like the vast majority of folks, so others could have their moment as well. But the number of people who apparently had the mindset, "Well, I heard my kid's name. Screw everyone else. We're outta here" was unreal. The noise caused when a group of people tramples down bleachers is quite loud and distracting. Oh, and Ryle has no "socio-economic" issues. It just involved several selfish, arrogant people.

I believe it was the family who mad it a big deal and brought the press into it. The superintendent is simply defending the school's position. That's her job.

 

I agree, but I think there comes a point where it becomes a waste of time, and I think it has definitely reached that point.

 

I'd liken the situation to a lot of the "slip and fall on an unidentified clear liquid" lawsuits that you find against big-box stores like Walmart coming from poor people living in little podunk towns. Walmart often just opts for a small settlement ahead of time to save themselves the cost of waging a legal battle over Cletus' claims for pain and suffering after slipping in the automotive duct tape aisle of their store (after he intentionally dumped half of a bottle of water just before he "accidentally" stepped in the puddle). It ends up being less of a headache and less of a costly waste of time for Walmart to just let it go and make the settlement.

 

This superintendent should have more important matters to concern herself with. I think she should let this go and spend her time on that stuff.

So respect is a socio-economic issue?

 

Or are we, very subtly, playing the race card now? :idunno:

 

Is there one definition of "respect?"

Well, gee, maybe it's not a big deal BECAUSE 99% of the other families have actually chosen to follow the rule. We should overlook it because only 1% of the families choose not to follow it? When does it become unacceptable? When 10% of the families behave this way? 25%? Half of them? And the fact that the following student wasn't "harmed" is irrelevent. He certainly could have been had someone not held up the speaker. We all have rules we don't particularly wish existed or care to follow, but do because someone of legitimate authority established the rule. Someone of legitimate authority set this rule and for good reason. You don't want to follow it - don't go to the graduation or accept the consequences when you break it. And they weren't excited for 5 seconds. It went on longer than that. There are certain events that carry with them expected and standard levels of decorum. Graduations are one. If you think it should be akin to an outdoor concert, you have stepped outside this accepted level of decorum.

 

They would be best served to simply shut their mouths, do the community service, and move on. Interesting that apparently 3 other families were also affected, but aren't on the news complaining about the penalty.

 

 

Does the punishment fit the supposed crime? Yes or no?

Last reported enrollment numbers for Mt. Healthy High School (2010) showed 853 students, so let's assume the graduating class was roughly 1/4 or 215 students. Two-thirds of the school's students are on the free lunch program, indicating some type of economic need. 70% of the students (approx. 600 total, so possibly 150 in graduating class) are black.

 

Yet only 4 students were affected by this rule affecting excessive outburst during the ceremony. We don't know the race/economic situation of these other 3 students, but just seems to me that there would have been a heckuva lot more people affected by this "socio-economic"-oriented rule. Or perhaps it just affected selfish persons who have an issue with self-discipline and respect?

 

We do not know how many kids had people cheer. All we know is that 4 were deemed excessive.

 

Doesn't change my point that you are placing your view of how one should be on someone who may be completely different than you. That's the point I'm making. We all have different perspectives on what is showing "respect" or what is deemed "excessive" and we get that based upon a lot of factors is in the socio-economic category.

 

So that that along with the fact no one "suffered" plus the punishment doesn't fit the crime and you've got an asinine rule.

Does the punishment fit the supposed crime? Yes or no?

 

It's hardly unreasonable. Could it be less? Sure. But it's just not exactly a death sentence.

It's hardly unreasonable. Could it be less? Sure. But it's just not exactly a death sentence.

 

 

Hardly unreasonable? A family cheered along with teachers and other students , no one was harmed, and the kid doesn't get his diploma? Unreasonable? Come on.

 

$10,000 fine for speeding? Hey, it's certainly not the death penalty, son.

We do not know how many kids had people cheer. All we know is that 4 were deemed excessive.

 

Doesn't change my point that you are placing your view of how one should be on someone who may be completely different than you. That's the point I'm making. We all have different perspectives on what is showing "respect" or what is deemed "excessive" and we get that based upon a lot of factors is in the socio-economic category.

 

So that that along with the fact no one "suffered" plus the punishment doesn't fit the crime and you've got an asinine rule.

 

No, I'm really not. Sorry, but don't think you are the one seeing this one clearly. MY view of how to behave at a graduation ceremony is the time-honored, established view and the one that follows the explicit rules set forth by just about every school out there. THEIR view - and I suppose YOURS - is that everyone is free to do whatever the hell they want and then justify it because of their economic or racial status.

 

So I can assume you also feel that if someone tries to commit murder by shooting someone, but misses, the matter should be dropped because no one was harmed or suffered? You have a rule because it's important and you don't selectively enforce rules only in those situations in which someone "suffered" as a result of breaking the rule.

Hardly unreasonable? A family cheered along with teachers and other students , no one was harmed, and the kid doesn't get his diploma? Unreasonable? Come on.

 

$10,000 fine for speeding? Hey, it's certainly not the death penalty, son.

 

The kid graduated. He just temporarily doesn't have the official piece of paper. I'm sure any college considering him can easily verify the fact that he met all graduation requirements.

 

Wow. 20 hours of community service. Brutal. Almost like a life sentence on Alcatraz.

No, I'm really not. Sorry, but dont' think you are the one seeing this one clearly. MY view of how to behave at a graduation ceremony is the time-honored, established view and the one that follows the explicit rules set forth by just about every school out there. THEIR view - and I suppose YOURS - is that everyone is free to do whatever the hell the want.

 

So I can assume you also feel that if someone tries to commit murder by shooting someone, but misses, the matter should be dropped because no one was harmed or suffered? You have a rule because it's important and you don't selectively enforce rules only in those situations in which someone "suffered" as a result of someone breaking the rule.

 

 

Don't lose your mind.

 

"Whatever the hell they want?" Relating a missed gunshot to cheering for a kid?

 

Did you write the Mt Healthy policy?

The kid graduated. He just temporarily doesn't have the official piece of paper. I'm sure any college considering him can easily verify the fact that he met all graduation requirements.

 

Wow. 20 hours of community service. Brutal. Almost like a life sentence on Alcatraz.

 

Will the school send his transcripts to the college? If so, then this is nothing. If they withhold it then it's a big issue over relatively nothing.

Let this thread show I'll challenge anyone on here and not just people I don't know or that I don't like.

 

Coop and LN are in my "boys" club. They're just not always thinking rationally.

Don't lose your mind.

 

"Whatever the hell they want?" Relating a missed gunshot to cheering for a kid?

Did you write the Mt Healthy policy?

 

I'm sure you already realized this, but the analogy was to point out that an action is not serious simply because no one may have "suffered". Don't be too intentionally obtuse.

 

I wish I had written the policy. I fully support it and wouldn't back down one iota.

Let this thread show I'll challenge anyone on here and not just people I don't know or that I don't like.

 

Coop and LN are in my "boys" club. They're just not always thinking rationally.

 

I accept your gracious acknowedgement of defeat. :lol:

Will the school send his transcripts to the college? If so, then this is nothing. If they withhold it then it's a big issue over relatively nothing.

 

Out of this entire thread, I will give you this - and only this - point. Withholding a piece of paper is one thing. Refusing to send a transcript and affecting his potential to attend college is something completely different and over-the-top.