No. She didn't respond to a teacher by what I gather. The teacher told her to put her phone/device away. She apparently refused.

 

Is the phone disrupting class? If the teacher says "OK - we'll handle this after class" and moves on how is the class being disrupted? Did she yell? Did she starting singing? I have read nothing to indicate that she was truly disruptive.

 

Society is based on rules and laws. For there to be a productive society, we must follow those rules and laws.

 

The moment she refused to comply with the teacher, she became disruptive. No teacher worth their salt is going to ignore a student not complying with a directive.

There are many different definitions. Yours is one.

 

If she said "no" and the teacher said "OK - we'll deal with this later with the principal" and moved and the student sat there quietly then class was not disrupted. It definitely wasn't disrupted like it was as soon as you call the SRO.

 

Wins: Teacher gets to teach class. Students are not disrupted. Students KNOW that punishment is forthcoming just in case they think they can get away with it.

 

Bringing in the SRO is a last resort and should only be used if a student is TRULY disrupting or is violent. Schools handled this before SROs were ever around.

 

Exactly how are they going to know this Clyde? They will not witness any punishment. Quite the contrary, IMO the students would think it was OK for them to take their phones out and ignore the teacher.

He did not have to remove her from the chair. He could have just as easily slid her and the chair out the door by dragging the chair across the floor. Saw it many times when I was in high school with stubborn kids. She was wrong; force was excessive, and we just have to wait and see how it plays out beyond him being fired.

 

To add to my comment, today parents are not allowed to physically discipline their kids unless being "attacked". What give this officer the right to "physically to the point he took" remove her from that seat when she was posing no physical threat (as far as we can see)?

 

As to the bold, you are not correct. Corporal punishment is still allowed by law. As a Family Court Judge said to me, "There is a difference between a spanking and abuse and competent adults know the difference. Spanking is fine."

First bolded. I see it as exactly the opposite. She is given instructions, she doesn't follow them, she stays on the phone...she is in control at that point in time. Other students see this and think...hummm, maybe I'll get on my phone too.

2nd bolded. I don't know how to answer this really, cause in my day you just didn't decide to not follow directions. And if you refused to leave a classroom when told...well you really didn't have an option cause you were going to leave the classroom.

 

Me, personally, were I the SRO in this situation, I probably would have left the class room after confronting this young lady so it wouldn't have devolved into what it did...let her know that if she didn't want to come now, I would be waiting for her in the hallway when class was over and that I wound NOT be very happy with her, and that what ever punishment she was going to receive she was only making worse by not leaving now. Heck, maybe this is the same thing as waiting her out, I don't know, but she would not have looked forward to class ending and coming out into the hallway to see an unhappy SRO waiting to escort her to the office.

 

Point 1: The others won't do that when they see she is suspended for her actions. The actions that were taken turned her into a martyr. The actions that could have been taken would have provided discipline, punishment and not created a martyr.

 

Point 2: It's not your day or my day. It is TO - Day. For better or worse, time changes for everything and everyone. The issue is how to handle it today.

 

I like your ending paragraph. It would have been better and easier and less disruptive. Add to that, the martyr is diffused. :thumb:

Sorry but the teacher is the dog and the student is the tail and the tail sure as heck don't wag the dog.

 

I think you are seeing this in terms of pride and absolutes.

 

The issue isn't who is wagging. The issue is a civil way to resolve the conflict and not create an issue that blows up. Diffusing the bomb is better than exploding it.

 

Just my take Wireman.

He did not have to remove her from the chair. He could have just as easily slid her and the chair out the door by dragging the chair across the floor. Saw it many times when I was in high school with stubborn kids. She was wrong; force was excessive, and we just have to wait and see how it plays out beyond him being fired.

 

To add to my comment, today parents are not allowed to physically discipline their kids unless being "attacked". What give this officer the right to "physically to the point he took" remove her from that seat when she was posing no physical threat (as far as we can see)?

 

 

Offered that solution earlier. Someone decried kicked shins or things.

She disobeyed 2 rules in front of the class. First of all, she had her phone out after everyone was instructed NOT too, hats strike 1. 2nd rule, she was told because of breaking the rule first to leave and report to the office. She refused, multiple times. Strike 2. That is being both disruptive and defiant in my book. If you don't think so then our definition of disruptive is different and we aren't going to agree on this.

 

So the answer is to create a scenario where it is even more disruptive and more defiant?

Society is based on rules and laws. For there to be a productive society, we must follow those rules and laws.

 

The moment she refused to comply with the teacher, she became disruptive. No teacher worth their salt is going to ignore a student not complying with a directive.

 

The rule of law prescribes punishments for the breaking of the law.

 

She receives that right after the class without the bomb going off. There is a prevailing attitude it seems that somehow "she got away" with something. No. She is punished. The problem is that she is now punished by the SRO in such a way that she is a martyr.

Exactly how are they going to know this Clyde? They will not witness any punishment. Quite the contrary, IMO the students would think it was OK for them to take their phones out and ignore the teacher.

 

So you want public flogging?

 

They witness her absence. That is what they see as the punishment. I totally disagree with your assumption about the kids who were in the class.

 

Now, after the officer has escalated the situation, they have a view that she is a some anti-hero.

So you want public flogging?

 

They witness her absence. That is what they see as the punishment. I totally disagree with your assumption about the kids who were in the class.

 

Now, after the officer has escalated the situation, they have a view that she is a some anti-hero.

 

I deal with disruptive kids all the time. 9 out of 10 WANT to be suspended. Gives them more time at home to do what they want. That is straight from the horses mouth.

The rule of law prescribes punishments for the breaking of the law.

 

She receives that right after the class without the bomb going off. There is a prevailing attitude it seems that somehow "she got away" with something. No. She is punished. The problem is that she is now punished by the SRO in such a way that she is a martyr.

 

Who's to say she would have left at the end of the class? Seems many of you posters think she would have just got up and left like nothing had happened and would have quietly made her way to the principals office to face her punishment.

 

How are the unicorns doing over your way?

 

Offered that solution earlier. Someone decried kicked shins or things.

 

She punched him in the face when he tried to remove her from the chair. If he grabs the desk with both hands to pull it out, his face would have been right there for the taking.

I deal with disruptive kids all the time. 9 out of 10 WANT to be suspended. Gives them more time at home to do what they want. That is straight from the horses mouth.

 

So in what way does your suggestion make them not want to be suspended? Seems they will just get suspended anyway whether we dump them out of the chair or not? How does that relate to your idea that she "Somehow got away with it?"

Who's to say she would have left at the end of the class? Seems many of you posters think she would have just got up and left like nothing had happened and would have quietly made her way to the principals office to face her punishment.

 

How are the unicorns doing over your way?

 

She was to be escorted out of the class at the end of it all. Escorted straight to the office and punished. After the kids are out of the room.

 

BTW, I think your "quick on the trigger" insults (passive aggressive must be your middle name) are part of the problem the SRO displayed.

She punched him in the face when he tried to remove her from the chair. If he grabs the desk with both hands to pull it out, his face would have been right there for the taking.

 

And she would be the person facing assault charges and he probably wouldn't be filing unemployment right now.

 

Which scenario is better? Which really accomplishes the real purpose?