This isn't about "sagging", wikilink.
Three APS high schools will attempt to do what has never been done before; end sagging in an APS high school.
This isn't the first time its been tried. In the late 80's early 90's "sagging" was specifically and explicitly prohibited in APS School Board Policy. The leadership of the APS then did their best to get kids to pull up their pants; they're still sagging.
KRQE reports, link, Eldorado, La Cueva and Volcano Vista High Schools will try once again to enforce dress codes that prohibit, among others fashion faux pas, sagging.
Wish them luck.
Saggers, all well versed in Constitutional law, point out that it's first amendment issue, and they will resist on principle. They will resist as well, to remind adults who is in charge.
If adults at a school establish a rule and students ignore or deliberately disobey it, who is in charge, the adults or the kids?
The out of control in schools, the lack of authority of adults over children, interferes with education, yet we never talk about discipline in schools when we talk about reform. Why not? Who benefits from the lack of attention paid to student discipline and its effect on test scores and graduation rates?
Administrators and school board members are the only players I see, who have an interest in keeping the lid on the truth about discipline in schools. Creating district wide discipline policies is specifically a school board responsibility. Enforcing those policies is an administrative responsibility. The failure to establish and enforce effective discipline policies is an administrative and executive failure.
As I first pointed out, this isn't about "sagging". It is about the permission of prohibited behavior. It is about telling kids
they can't do something, and then letting them get away with
doing it anyway.
The costs of acculturating children to believe they can ignore rules at will, is enormous, link.
Students won the last sagger war; they will win this one.
They will
prevail because the leadership of the APS lacks
fortitude in dealing without of control students, link.
Ask any teacher.
As easy as it is to blame teachers for student discipline issues, it would be unfair. If a teacher sees a student doing something wrong, they are obliged to ask the student to stop doing whatever it is they are doing. If the students response means "no", the problem is no longer one of educating the student, it is one of managing the student; baby sitting the student. If you want to use teachers for teaching, then you have to use somebody else for "babysitting" chronically disruptive students. And that is an administrative responsibility.
Their priorities are confused. The administrative priority isn't eliminating student (and adult) discipline problems, it is hiding them, link.
Their strategic plan to end sagging falls short; they haven't asked "what if" enough times.
Q. what if a kid sags?
A. we're going to call his parent(s)
Q. what if that doesn't work?
A. uh, well, we'll suspend them (in school or out) further complicating graduation and test score issues.
Q. what if that doesn't work, what if kids still sag?
A. uh, well, ...
In rekindling the sagger war, the leadership of the APS is picking a fight they haven't the stomach to win. These principals will find they're on their own; the higher they go up the chain of command, the less support they will find. The Board and administration aren't willing to do what must be done, to re-establish the authority of adults in schools.
Students will push dress code to the limit and adults have to be ready to push back. Writing rules and then allowing students to break them, just trains students to ignore rules.
At some point you have to be willing to stand on the property line and turn away saggers, chronically disruptive students, and any other students who won't obey the rules and who won't submit to the authority of adults on campus.
Adult authority over children in schools is under siege. It doesn't help that Supt Winston Brooks places so little importance on kids obeying adults. Given the opportunity to categorize misconduct for middle school students, Brooks came up with this;
Level One (the likes of); tardiness, horse play, profanity, violations of the dress code.
Brooks included in Level One; the least consequential misconduct; insubordination, defiance of authority.
Level Two (the likes of); profanity toward staff, bullying, cheating, and vandalism.
Level Three (the likes of); theft, possession of alcohol or drugs, fighting and gang related activities.
He tells teachers to enforce rules they have no part in establishing,
and then tells kids he doesn't care all that much, if they ignore or disobey adults.
Some people would call that clueless, and utterly unfair to teachers and other
adults working in schools.
We never talk about student discipline, link, because the Board and administration have the wherewithal to keep their failure hidden; not the least of which, Kent Walz and the Journal, and the NM Broadcasters Association affiliates. If Kent Walz and the Journal or any of the TV stations were inclined to investigate and report upon discipline in schools, parents and community members would learn how out of control APS schools really are. Walz, the Journal, KRQE, KOAT and KOB are not so inclined.
photo Mark Bralley
2 comments:
Take care of the little things and the big things don't happen. Unless of course, you promote insubordination.
It doesn't matter wether the ban is on sagging, chocolate, public kissing, gang colors... we all have rules we have to live by.
Defiant kids are not employable, nor are they pleasurable to know or be around in any situation!
We're breeding a bunch of future hostile jail birds!
Post a Comment