Posts Tagged ‘Education’

No Place for Ambulance Chasers at our Schools

April 23, 2012

Our children have been unfairly dealt with thanks to the rise in litigation. No longer are they able to climb on outdoor equipment, play ball games with balls made of anything more substantial than felt or even do cartwheels in the playground. Occupational Health and Safety in schools has gone from responsible to absolutely over the top! This not only causes great stress to Principals and staff but it clearly diminishes the few freedoms our children have been known to enjoy at school.

Why has there been such a significant upgrading of Occupational Health and Safety requirements in our schools? Perhaps this example explains it:

A 13-YEAR-OLD schoolgirl is being sued by a classmate over a tennis court mishap at one of Queensland’s top private schools in the latest blow to playground fun.

The legal claim, over a bruised eye, has raised concerns that “litigation-crazy” parents could threaten the future of school sport by forcing up insurance costs.

It may also force parents to take out third-party accident insurance for their children.

Several Queensland schools have already banned activities including tiggy, red rover and cartwheels because of injury fears.

The legal stoush has embroiled the daughters of a leading Gold Coast cardiologist and an architect, and the prestigious Somerset College.

Cardiologist Guy Wright-Smith said he was “gobsmacked” to receive the damages claim, addressed to his 13-year-old daughter Julia, at his rooms on Friday.

The claim alleges Julia had hit classmate Finley Enright-Burns in the eye with a tennis ball during a tennis lesson at the Mudgeeraba school last October. It alleges Julia was “smashing” balls back to Finley on the baseline when the incident happened.

Finley did not go to hospital but is alleged to have suffered an eye injury which needed medical treatment.

The claim, filed on behalf of Finley by her architect father Paul Burns, also names Somerset College and its Jay Deacon’s Tennis School as defendants.

“It’s bizarre … beyond belief,” Dr Wright-Smith told The Courier-Mail yesterday.

The claim says the tennis school failed to provide adequate supervision or protective eyewear and allowed Julia and Finley to stand too close together  and Julia to hit two balls at once.

Somerset College also breached its duty of care, the claim alleges.

Damages have not been specified but the Wright-Smiths are required to respond within 30 days.

“I couldn’t believe it when I opened this legal letter addressed to my 13-year-old daughter,”  Dr Wright-Smith said  yesterday

School Gets Tough on Misbehaviour and the Parents Vent

April 22, 2012

Whatever used to work when it comes to behaviour management methods (including the awful practice of corporal punishment) no longer does. Suspensions are distributed like handouts and are becoming increasingly meaningless. Detentions have never successfully changed attitudes or reformed students.

I have argued for a while that schools need to address their culture. They need to become more interested in the types of offences their student body commits both within and outside of school. They need to work with the parents and support them, even when the problem is not considered a school responsibility. This shows that the school really does care about the welfare of its students and has a desire to see that its children are making healthy lifestyle choices at school and at home.

It is sad that when a school does take these steps, they are often met with a “a tsunami’’ of outrage:

A new school policy that would hold students accountable for their actions year-round has generated a storm of opposition, according to Dedham officials, and has been put on ice until it can be reviewed and possibly rewritten by a newly established subcommittee.

The policy, which was approved in late March by a majority of Dedham School Committee members, spells out school penalties for violence and drug or alcohol use, even if the actions occur off school property when school is not in session.

It also calls for punishing youths who are at the scene of, but not participating in, such activities. Selectman Paul Reynolds said his board was in the dark about that aspect of the new policy until selectmen were overwhelmed by “a tsunami’’ of outrage.

“I sympathize with these parents,’’ said Reynolds, who will sit on the subcommittee that examines the document with Selectman Carmen Dello Iaccono, Police Chief Michael d’Entremont, and several School Committee members.

“Holding a club over kids’ heads 52 weeks a year with increasingly punitive sanctions sends the message that we suspect the worst of them, instead of expecting the very best from them,’’ said Reynolds.

Actually, I think it’s the parents that try to block this sensible policy that are sending the message that they suspect the worst of their children, instead of expecting the very best from them.

Both a Parents’ Best Friend and Worst Enemy

April 21, 2012

I witnessed a 10 year-old boy having a major meltdown at the shoe shop last Sunday. He acted in an obnoxious way and completely embarrassed his mother. Kicking out in obvious frustration, he berated his mother for taking him to the shop (even though she took him because he needed new shoes!) He screamed out on a number of occasions, “This is so boring!”

It took a while for the mother t0 react decisively. At first she tried to reassure him, then sweet talk him. Finally she decided to threaten him. Nowadays, when a parent threatens their child there seems to be a standard “go to” consequence – the use of the family game console. The mother said, “That’s it! No more Playstation for the rest of the day!”

And then she paused, if only to reflect on what she had just done and whether she was comfortable with the challenges that come with setting such a punishment.

“What?” came the boy’s reply. “No Playstation? For the whole day? Why?”

“Because of your tantrum. I’m fed up with it!”

“But that’s not fair! I was just bored, that’s all!”

And then, as if the penny dropped, the mother realised what she had done. In a haste to punish her child, it dawned on her that she had in fact punished herself. She realised that her child is tolerable in front of the Playstation and a considerable challenge away from it. So she scrambled for an “out clause.”

“If you behave for the rest of your time here I might reconsider.”

Unfortunately, this is becoming standard practice among parents. As much as they hate watching their children becoming couch potatoes and gaming addicts, as much as they wish that they could get their attention quicker and steer them away from these distractions when it’s time to do homework, they have come to rely on it for peace and quiet. Here this mother had the perfect punishment for her son’s terrible exhibition. Following through would certainly be a “game changer.” It would make the statement that if you want to misbehave like that in public again it may come at a major price.

But no, this parent wasn’t prepared to risk ruining the rest of her Sunday for the sake of this statement. She probably wanted her son to be out of sight and mind for the rest of the day and there was no way that was going to happen with the punishment she nominated.

I am not trying to judge this parent. We have all breathed a sigh of relief as our child has camped in front of television or computer screen at some stage.

I am merely commenting on the stranglehold this technology has over parents, children and families.

6 Strategies for Promoting Healthy Food to Kids

April 19, 2012

 

It is very difficult task to ensure that your child is eating the right foods and is not overdosing on unhealthy, preservative ridden rubbish. It can make me feel quite despondent when my daughter’s lunchbox comes back with the chopped up vegetables and apple untouched.

I appreciated reading Casey Seidenberg’s tips for helping kids have a heathy relationship with food:

1 Food, especially unhealthful food, shouldn’t be used as a reward. The common incentive used by parents “Eat your vegetables so you can have dessert” clearly communicates to children that vegetables are to be avoided and desserts are to be desired.

2 Food should not be used as a punishment either. Taking away dessert as discipline teaches kids that dessert is the prize.

3 Labeling a food as “bad” can cause children to feel guilty or bad themselves when they eat it. Instead label unhealthful foods “sometimes foods,” as they really are the foods we should eat only sometimes.

4 Unhealthful foods shouldn’t be labeled “treats” either. Wouldn’t it be great if our kids perceived a delicious ripe peach or a slice of summer watermelon as a treat?

5 A child forced to eat may not learn what it feels like to be hungry or full, or how to listen to his body. Sometimes kids are not hungry. That’s okay. Don’t then force them to eat five more bites.

6 Teaching children that a holiday or celebration is about spending time with friends, participating in a fun activity or being active together, instead of simply consuming a lot of food and drink, is an important message. When our kids are teenagers and win a sports championship, or when they are adults and receive a promotion, we hope they will understand that celebrating does not need to be focused on excessive consumption of food and drink.

So as much as I’d love to tell my children that they should never eat at McDonald’s and always refuse soda and fluorescent food products, that’s not a healthy message. And knowing most kids, it might make them more determined to get their paws on those forbidden fruits!

So what is the right message to our kids?

The right message is that certain foods nourish our bodies, make us strong and help us feel good. We should fill our bodies with those foods when we are hungry at a meal. Other foods don’t do those wonderful things for us, so we should eat them on occasion. All food should be enjoyed.

Then, if you are like me, hide your grimaced face and keep your mouth shut when they dive into those Spider-Man snacks because “sometimes foods” are absolutely okay sometimes.

Seidenberg is the co-founder of Nourish Schools, a D.C.-based nutrition education company.

Police Handcuff a 6-Year Old Student

April 18, 2012

I wasn’t there so I should be careful not to be too critical, but I can’t help but wonder how calling the police on a 6-year old having a severe tantrum is the right way to go. I feel this drastic step is a very bad look for the school. It gives the message that all is not right at the place where parents trust that their child is safe and well cared for. When a 6-year old presents such a risk that police are required, it doesn’t say a great deal about the school’s capacity to deal with problem students, especially older ones.

Police in Georgia defended their decision Tuesday to handcuff and arrest a 6-year-old elementary student after the school called to report a juvenile had assaulted a principal and was damaging school property.

Milledgeville police said they were called to Creekside Elementary School on Friday for an unruly juvenile, who was allegedly throwing a tantrum.

According to their report, when the officer arrived, he observed kindergartner Salecia Johnson on the floor of the principal’s office screaming and crying.

The officer stated in the report that he noticed damage to school property and tried numerous times to calm the girl, who eventually “pulled away and began actively resisting and fighting with me.”

“The child was then placed in handcuffs for her safety and the officer proceeded to bring her down to the police station,” said Chief Dray Swicord.

Despite the girl’s behavior, her family said police should not have been involved.

“I don’t think she misbehaved to the point where she should have been handcuffed and taken downtown to the police department,” Johnson’s aunt, Candace Ruff, told CNN affiliate WMAZ.

The girl was released to Ruff after numerous attempts to reach her parents failed, the police report said.

Swicord said his department still has not heard from the girl’s mother or father.

But the parents have spoken to reporters.

“Call the police? Is that the first step?” Johnson’s mother, Constance Ruff, asked.

Johnson’s mother said she wondered if there was “any other kind of intervention” the school could have used to help her daughter.

“They don’t have no business calling the police and handcuffing my child,” said Salecia’s father, Earnest Johnson.

I also wonder why the school couldn’t have dealt with this in-house, or at least call a family member before resorting to getting the police involved.

Having said that, I feel that the parents should have declined interviews and resisted finger-pointing, and instead focussed on the behaviour of their child. That child needs to know that her behaviour was unacceptable and dangerous. By focussing on the school’s handling of the incident, the parents seem to be sending the message that this behaviour was somehow excusable.

I am also quite comfortable with the police’s handling of the situation. Once called, they have every right to use handcuff should they deem it necessary to subdue the child.

There are millions of loving parents out there with often a lack of choice when it comes to the schools their child can go to. They need to have the confidence that if an incident erupts the school has the wherewithal to deal with the problem in a calm and thorough manner.

By calling the police on a 6-year old, I wonder what message that sends to parents who have no choice but to trust that their child’s school is capable of looking after its students.

Where are the Teachers When a Fight Erupts?

April 17, 2012

Either it’s just me or the quality of yard duty supervision is severely lacking. In the short time I have been working on this blog, I have encountered many cases of schoolyard bullying occurring amongst a crowd of student onlookers, yet without a teacher anywhere in sight. Either this has to do with an awareness issue among teachers or schools that have yet to properly address the supervision requirements for their school. There should be sufficient numbers of teachers on duty to deal with incidents as well as to patrol potential blindspots.

Here is but one example of a fight that occurred without being picked up by a teacher:

Marshall Brooks’s cheekbone was broken in two places and his eye socket shattered when one of his classmates gave him a vicious beating last week just outside their Westwood Senior High School yard.

But what was most horrifying to the seasoned police officers and school principal who viewed video footage of the attack in Hudson is that not one of the 50 or so students looking on tried to stop the beating or bothered to call 911.

Instead, they captured the action on their cellphones, eager to upload the drama to the Web. Only after the damage was done did someone step in.

“I saw the video and can’t believe no one intervened, or called police or even tried to help the young man,” said Sûreté du Québec spokesperson Sgt. Bruno Beaulieu.

“It was an unfair fight, like between David and Goliath, with the attacker at least twice the size of the victim.”

A 17-year-old student at the school, who can’t be named because he’s a minor, was charged with assault causing bodily harm and was released to his parents on a promise to appear in court at a later date.

He’s not allowed on school property for the rest of the academic year.

Brooks, 17, is recuperating at his Rigaud home after having reconstructive surgery at the Montreal General Hospital. Doctors feared he might lose the sight in his left eye, but, fortunately, it has returned – albeit a bit blurry.

“The kids didn’t seem to get that what they were watching was something dangerous,” said Brooks’s mother, Tina.

“Some were his friends and didn’t or couldn’t do anything and instead of calling 911, they were creating something cool and funky for Facebook.”

Brooks said he remembers being put in a headlock, pulled to the ground and punched repeatedly. But he said the fact that no one came to his rescue – and worse, recorded his suffering – doesn’t surprise him.

“It’s high school tradition to record everything and every fight,” he said.

“And compared to what you can find on TV or the Internet, a fight is nothing.”

The video of the beating has since been taken down from YouTube.

Australia has very strict procedures and regulations when it comes to yard duty. Perhaps these standards should be adopted worldwide.

Kids and the Choking Game

April 16, 2012

A dull, dormant life can not be fully responsible for the rise of the infamous “choking game” played largely amongst kids, but it surely must be a contributing factor. The constrictive and restrictive nature of school, regulations, non-active lifestyles and anti-socialised extra-curricula activities must be factored into the increased popularity of this dangerous game.

Although the choking game is not new, very little research has been done to investigate how often it happens or which kids are more likely to try it. But the new study published today in the journal Pediatrics gives a snapshot of who is engaging in this risky activity.

Researchers surveyed nearly 5,400 Oregon eighth graders, and 6.1 percent reported playing the choking game at least once in their lives. Among those who had played, 64 percent had played more than once and 27 percent had done it more than five times. Boys and girls were equally likely to have participated.

The researchers found that kids who participated in the game commonly engaged in other risky health behaviors. About 16 percent of boys and 13 percent of girls who reported using alcohol, tobacco or marijuana on the health survey also reported playing the choking game. Girls who reported being sexually active were four times as likely to participate in the choking game as those who had never had sex.

Robert Nystrom, adolescent health manager at the Oregon Public Health Division and one of the study’s authors, said it’s significant that kids who play the choking game are also experimenting with alcohol, drugs and sex.

“Risk-taking is a part of normal adolescent development. The fact that a lot of adolescents are participating in these behaviors shouldn’t surprise us,” Nystrom said. “What we want to do is prevent it.”

Nystrom noted that the choking game is different from autoerotic asphyxiation, where the goal of near-strangulation is sexual gratification. In the choking game, kids simply seek the rush that comes from passing out.

Before adults become hysterical about this growing trend, I ask them to consider the life of a standard teenager and reflect on what we can do to help them appreciate the real thrills that life has to offer.

Middle-Class Children and Alcohol

April 15, 2012


Long thought to be a largely lower socio-economic problem, alcohol abuse seems very much alive and well among middle-class children. This presents a very gloomy picture for what the future has to offer.

More than one in three of those born in professional households had downed a full glass before reaching their teenage years, the statistics show.

The 35 per cent figure among the middle classes is almost twice the level found among 12-year-olds across all economic groups.

Experts said that most children who had drunk alcohol at such a young age were getting it from their own homes.

While some were secretly raiding well-stocked drinks cabinets, many more were being allowed to drink by parents who believed that it would help them to develop more mature attitudes towards alcohol.

The Ipsos Mori poll for charity Drinkaware, which is funded by the alcohol industry to promote sensible drinking, surveyed more than 500 parents from the social groups ABC1 and their children, aged between 10 and 17.

This also reminds us that we are not doing nearly enough to remedy the problem.

Children Outsmart Their Parents Online

April 14, 2012

They keep on telling us that this is the age of computer technology and that online skills are vital to success. Why then does our standardised tests not recognise this very theory. Standardised testing worldwide ignores the very skills our students are told they need to obtain.

Perhaps it is because our kids are fast outsmarting us when it comes to online activity:

MORE than half of Australian children are smarter than their parents when it comes to going online, enabling them to outwit adult restrictions.

Fifty nine per cent of children have ways of hiding what they’re doing online – and their parents know it, a survey by internet security specialist McAfee has found.

Of all age groups, children are the most adept at managing their “digital footprint”, or how they appear online.

“Children are far better at managing their profile controls and what their identity looks like to others,” Young and Well Co-operative Research Centre CEO Associate Professor Jane Burns said.

In a thetelegraph.com.au survey, one in four people said they had been left behind by their children’s online knowledge and one in three were worried they weren’t able to protect their children from web dangers.

Associate Professor Burns said that, rather than be embarrassed about asking for help, parents should embrace their children’s cyber smarts.

“There is a great capacity for them to be a teacher for you,” she said.

Building trust and rapport early was the key to being a parent in the online age: “Young people are far more technically savvy than their parents.

The reality is, even if parents think that they have control of what their children are doing online, they are pretty savvy and eventually the shift will occur. Children will tell them to back off.”

She said parents should treat internet conversations the same way they first taught their children to cross the road or play in the park.

“The first time you do this you make sure they’re with you and they’re holding your hand and you explain to them why it is important,” she said.

“If you’ve got the rapport it becomes a lot easier to ask your children to show you how they keep themselves safe – and they can teach you things as they get older.”

She said parents trying to start a conversation with their children should understand that they saw the web in completely different ways.

“Technology is now so embedded in children’s lives that they don’t differentiate between online and offline worlds,” she said.

“There is no distinction – you are creating relationships, full stop – and they can teach you things.”

“If you’ve got the rapport it becomes a lot easier to ask your children to show you how they keep themselves safe – and they can teach you things as they get older.”

“If you’ve got the rapport it becomes a lot easier to ask your children to show you how they keep themselves safe – and they can teach you things as they get older.”

Whilst this survey clearly presents a worrying case when it comes to cybersafety issues, it also goes to show that our young are very confident online. Why shouldn’t their skills be taken into account like all other skills currently contained in National standardised tests?

Should Schools Be Allowed to Fire Pregnant Unmarried Teachers?

April 12, 2012

I believe that religious schools, within reason, should be allowed to enforce extra regulations on their staff as they see fit. This is of course provided that the staff are made fully aware of the rules before they are employed.

The question still remains. Is it reasonable to fire teachers for falling pregnant outside of marriage?

A teacher and coach at a private Christian school in Texas fired for an unwed pregnancy wants to set the record straight about who she is for those who question her fitness as a “Christian role model.”

“I’m not just some teacher that went out to a bar and go pregnant and went back to school saying it’s okay,” Cathy Samford told ABCNews.com today. “I was in a committed relationship the whole time and probably would have been married if things had gone differently and this would be a non-situation.”

Samford, 29, was in her third year as a volleyball coach at Heritage Christian Academy in Rockwall, Tex., and her first year as a middle school science teacher when she discovered she was pregnant in the fall of 2011.

She and her fiance had been planning to get married at the end of the summer, but a series of events had delayed the wedding.

Samford said she never dreamed she would be fired for her pregnancy and went into her conversations with the school thinking their biggest concern would be her missing part of the basketball season since she was supposed to coach.

When she was told she was being terminated, Samford was “totally shocked.”

“I didn’t think I would lose my job,” Samford said. “I was in shock and devastated and that’s when I said, ‘If this is the problem, I’m willing, and so is my fiancé, to go ahead and get married. That wasn’t the issue. We were going to get married regardless.”

The school denied her offer.