Suspended? Really?

Quick news story out of Edmonds via the Seattle Times.

A student running for student government got suspended because he went off-script from the speech he had previously turned into the administration. (They don't trust the kids enough to tell them what NOT to say in a speech; they have to preview it?)

What could he have said? "No bra Fridays for the girls!" "Whazz up, #%*@*#%*!" I was dying to know.

He told the students not to vote because the ASB had no real power and "members are just puppets of the teachers."

That's it?

He knew that he would get disqualified for not following his speech but not that they would suspend him. (It's not clear if the students listening knew he had gone off-script.) His parents were told his suspension was based on "disrupting the educational process".

Seriously? He wanted to say that he thought student government was bogus AND knew he would be disqualified for saying it but it meant something to him to get it out.

Maybe there's more to the story than this because if this is all, then I'm with the parents - it was civil disobedience.


dan dempsey said…
Are you kidding me ???

""disrupting the educational process".

A lot of administrators and School Directors need to be suspended.

Oh pardon me, I forgot, they are just following the script.
dan dempsey said…
Wow!! ..

This is a great example:

The supposed Educational Process is not about learning or student achievement but rather control.

For further examples look at Race to the Top and the Common Core State Standards and Dr. Goodloe-Johnson.
dan dempsey said…
Hey wasn't this kid just attempting some "Disruptive Innovation" ... according to Obama/Duncan that is the key to fixing schools.

Give the kid a suspension for following the advice of the US President ... what a raw deal.
zb said…
A link?

He was suspended for not following a pre-approved script in a student election? Because he said that the whole enterprise was purely for show, and had no real meaning? Orwellian (or, perhaps, pre-Mubarak Egypt).
Charlie Mas said…
Students do not surrender their rights when they enter the schoolhouse.

The school can disqualify him from the election for violating the rules of the election, but they cannot suspend him for words which would not merit suspension in another context.

I think it's time to take a quick look at the student handbook for the Edmonds District.
Charlie Mas said…
Here is a link to the Edmonds School District Procedures and Standards Governing Student Rights and Responsibilities.

It clearly states, in Section III:
"3. All students' constitutional rights shall be subject only to reasonable limitations upon the time, place, and manner of exercising such rights."

This is the section on offenses which are punishable by suspension:

"3. Any pupil who willfully performs or fails to perform any act which materially interferes with or is detrimental to the orderly operation of a school, a school-sponsored activity, or any other aspect of the educational process of the school district shall be subject to discipline, suspension, or expulsion by authorized school district authorities. The following acts or omissions by a pupil on school premises or in reasonable proximity there to, on school provided transportation, or off school premises at any school-sponsored activity shall constitute sufficient cause for discipline, suspension, or expulsion:

* "exceptional misconduct" as defined in Section I.8.;
disruptive conduct;
* disobedience of the reasonable instructions of school authorities;
* immoral conduct;
* vulgarity;
* truancy, unexcused absence(s) or tardiness;
* intimidation;
* cheating;
* plagiarism;
* the commission of any criminal act as defined by law;
* or violation of other school or district rules, regulations, or policies now or hereafter adopted.

I think the critical modifier here is "materially" as in "any act which materially interferes with or is detrimental to the orderly operation of a school, a school-sponsored activity, or any other aspect of the educational process of the school district"

The disparagement of the ASB government as a charade does not materially interfere with the charade continuing as scheduled.
Charlie Mas said…
Here's some more language from that governing document:

"2. Rules that establish types of misconduct pursuant to this section must have a real and substantial relationship to the lawful maintenance and operation of the school district including, but not limited to, the preservation of the health and safety of students and employees and the preservation of an educational process which is conducive to learning."

Here's a good bit:

"1. A short-term suspension may be imposed upon a student for violation of school district rules adopted pursuant to Section IV, subject to the following limitations or conditions, the prior informal conference procedures in Section IX, and the grievance procedures in Section X; provided:

a. the nature and circumstances of the violation have been considered and reasonably warrant a short-term suspension of the length imposed; and

b. other forms of corrective action reasonably calculated to modify his/her conduct have previously been imposed upon the student as a consequence of misconduct; except that a short-term suspension may be imposed immediately in cases of "Exceptional Misconduct" as defined in Section I.8.

So suspension isn't allowed for a first offense; so I have to wonder, has the student done this before?
seattle citizen said…
"3. Any pupil who willfully performs or fails to perform..."

Guess they have you either way, eh?
dan dempsey said…
It is really important that they beat this kid into submission NOW lest he become like Dempsey, Mas, and others of that ilk.
Mona said…
Sorry, this is not pertinent but I don't see where to post non-pertinent information.

SPS survey on whether or not K student parents will pony up around $300 for full day (I won't). Note the interesting information about a refund.

https://www. surveymonkey. com/s/HYTDGHZ
Anonymous said…
I need a quick reminder. Is 1984 or Animal Farm still in the curriculum?
seattle citizen said…
1984 is still in the curriculum, but it's been revised by The Editor. All references to Big Brother now refer to "doing it for the kids."
dj said…
Charlie, I am a criminal lawyer, not a constitutional lawyer, but my dim memory from con law is that schools are permitted to punish students for speech where that speech disrupts the educational process (the fact that those are the exact words I recall suggests the district calked counsel). It is true that students do not shed their rights at the schoolhouse gates, but it is also true that Tinker is an old case from a different era and that courts have been clear that students can be censored and punished where speech is disruptive.

Mind you, I disagree and think that kid deserves a cookie.
none1111 said…
"disrupting the educational process" is standing on your desk and yelling so the teacher's lesson can't be heard.

"disrupting the educational process" is stuffing junk into the keyhole of your next teacher's classroom door during lunch, so no one can get in.

I could go on, but I won't!

What he did was "actively participating in the educational process". A big raspberry to the Edmonds administration, and I hope the kids give him a very warm welcome when he returns.
Patrick said…
He should run for school board. If they allow 14-year-olds to vote, maybe he'd win.

Popular posts from this blog

Tuesday Open Thread

Seattle Public Schools and Their Principals

Weirdness in Seattle Public Schools Abounds and Astounds