Monday, December 06, 2010

Students need grown up mentors

argued the Journal editors this morning, link.

"Athletes need positive role models who set high standards and then help them reach them — not adults who want to be their friends or look the other way."
Of course, the editors only mean that student athletes need role models who don't pay for strippers to entertain them on road trips. The editors would concede also that student athletes need role models who don't allow them to drink alcohol on the bus on a road trip.

The editors apparently don't get that it isn't just student athletes who need role models, and they don't just need role models of self restraint. All students have a need for, and right to, role models of a broad range of personal attributes.

Which makes it all the more confounding that the editors, Kent Walz et al, don't see any problem with the leadership of the APS abdicating as role models of the APS Student Standards of Conduct. They saw nothing wrong when the school board voted unanimously to remove the role modeling clause from the standards of conduct that apply to board members and administrators; the clause which read;
In no case shall the standards of conduct for adults,
be lower than the standards of conduct for students.
Journal editors see nothing wrong with adults holding children accountable to a higher standard of conduct than that to which they will hold themselves accountable. The accept apparently, do as I say, not as I do as a workable premise for guiding the personal development of young people.

Either that, or Kent Walz
pretends to not get it,
only as an excuse to let
Marty Esquivel
off the hook
for his corrupt and cowardly
failure as the senior most
role model of student
standards of conduct.

If the Walz asked the
many members of the leadership of the APS if they, individually, were willing to hold themselves honestly accountable to the same standards of conduct that apply to students, the would answer, no. They would not actually say "no" of course, they stonewall the question.

Stonewalling means, no.

Any answer except yes, means no.

Count on Kent Walz to do everything he can to keep the subject of administrative and executive role modeling of student standards of conduct, off the table and out of the discourse,
at least until after his crony Esquivel runs for re-election.

frame grab Mark Bralley


Anonymous said...

winston brooks in ABQ Journal, December 4, 2010 regarding the La Cueva football coaches who were put on leave for alleged misconduct:"We take these allegations very seriously, and we owe it to the community to conduct a prompt and full investigation so that we can take appropriate action."
winston brooks in ABQ Journal November 16, 2010 regarding Ruby Ethridge's allegations against him:"I have little time for this kind of behavior and certainly do not want to place my complete trust and confidence in a person who(has)made these types of allegations."
So, this individual will promptly investigate any allegations that are not made against him, but he will quickly dismiss you from your current position if you dare to attack his "character." Who will investigage anyone's allegations against him? How transparent is he? Does he think we are all stupid to not see his true colors? He keeps mentioning the word "trust" when removing honest, hard working veteran APS administrators from their positions just because they questioned or challenged him in some way. When honest people in the former Soviet Union challenged Stalin, they ended up in Siberia. We all know where brooks sent Ruby. The former Sandia administrators were shipped out as well. How about principals from Highland, West Mesa, McKinley, Ernie Pyle, John Adams? All women! See the pattern here...

Anonymous said...

The La Cueva principal was forced to take a position at JCMS, knowing she would retire before accepting Brooks eliminated her as well.

Anonymous said...

A 7-11 clerk gets a $5000 fine and a court date for selling alcohol to underagers.
Yet these 3 "role model" coaches get less than 2 weeks pay taken out and can't coach at APS anymore.
And the players get 45 days prohibited from extra-curricular activities.
The MS teacher who's son sold pot got fired immediately.
OTher kids who bring alcohol on campus get fired immediately.
Alcohol is prohibited by law on buses for kids or adults... it's consider to be DUI, no matter who's drinking.
A teacher who gives alcohol to any student is immediately labled a predator, and fired immediately.
So what is this Winston? Sucking up to athletes once more, like the stinkin' good ole boy you are?
And now you enforce and change the laws of our city as you think fit?
Who the hell do you think you are? What kind of person are you? What golden throne do you imagine yourself to sit on?????

Anonymous said...

The BS from the LACueva community is that they are blaming a "disgruntled parent" for ratting out the coaches about drinking on the bus.
You LaCueva people who want to protect these coaches and feel they are "picked on", why didn't your crappy alcoholic-imbibing kids "rat out" the coaches in the name on honor, law, and "role modeling"?
Was this whole bus of athletes and coaches so lacking in honor, integrity and moral fiber that it takes a "disgruntled parent" to come forth and ask that laws and decency be observed?
Is part of the LA Cueva community so arrogant, so out of touch that they feel the law does not apply to them?
Kudos to the "disgruntled parent" that did the right thing! the rest of you scumbags that knew that alcohol was on the bus should be suspended, terminated, and ashamed of yourselves!

Anonymous said...

Let me ammend my last statement. I just read on the KOB website that the Parents and Chaperons of the La Cueva band have always checked the sacks and backpacks before field trips and games.
So parts of the La Cueva community DO CARE! I apologize for lumping everyone as the same as the crappy members of the community that have surfaced recently.
Who's the role models now scum bag La Cueva athletics department?

Anonymous said...

And now the Teacher's Union, ATF, says to transfer the scumbucket coaches is a violation of their contract.
I agree.... don't transfer them...... FIRE THEM!
way to go ATF. Turning yourself into the enemy of the people again. You are as out of touch as Brooks is!
and by the way... I am an ATF member. They don't care what the members think... much like APS teachers and Brooks.

ched macquigg said...

For the record, I have not seen or heard anything that warrants calling anyone a scum bucket.

I suspect that their contract has been disrespected, and that is intolerable whether they have done anything wrong or not.

If all they did wrong was not catch kids being deceptive, firing seems excessive. If you really want to guarantee that high schoolers won't drink in circumstances such as these, you would have to put an adult between every two of them.

You can't determine whether kids are trustworthy or not, if you never trust them.

My biggest gripe with union is that they let Brooks strip teachers of any meaningful participation in decisions that affect their interests, without a fight.

There is probably near a hundred thousand years of teaching experience in the district, and no seat at the table where the future is planned.

Anonymous said...

The whole community anger against the LCHS coaches is Brooks fault.
If he came forth and said hypothetically that the coaches didn't know the alcohol was there because the kids hid it well, I think all ABQ adults could understand kids are deceptive sometimes. Then the community would be in support of the coaches, I think.
If, hypothetically, the coaches were "looking the other way", or thinking it was the "manly thing to do", then if Brookes revealed that, I think we could all say..."OK, they're punished, 11 days wo pay fits".
However, Brooks is doing the worst diservice to the coaches and ABQ community by keeping so mum about the whole thing, as if it's some "dirty secret" involved (which I doubt).
Brooks secretive and arrogant nature makes the whole event seem slimy and dirty... more than it probably is.

Anonymous said...

The LCHS coaches have been unfairly villanized, as none of know what the circumstances are, beyond a vague statement by APS.
Most likely the coaches are threatened not to talk about it either, because APS loves for things to "just go away", whether handled justly, or not.
If, and only if, the coaches knew about the alcohol before and during the incident, should they be punished because kids are amazing at hiding things.
We'll probably never know for sure.

Anonymous said...

the APS community (teachers) is divided in this issue of the coaches around the water cooler this week.
one thing we all pretty much agree on is Brooks poor handling of the issue.
No consitency, no transperancy... seems unfair to coaches and unfair to other teachers in the near past with similar issues who recieved harsher punishments...