MyAnimeList.net

Forums

Recent Posts | My Watched Topics | My Ignored Topics | Search

Honor student with two jobs gets jail time for missing school
MyAnimeList.net Forum »» Current Events »» Honor student with two jobs gets jail time for missing school

Pages (4) -3 -2 [-1] 0 1 » ... Last »
05-28-12, 5:02 PM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 11208
NicoleB said:
Monad said:
TravSavage said:
So I found this interesting story today. What say you guys on this topic?

http://abcnews.go.com/US/texas-honor-student-jobs-jailed-missing-school/story?id=16437893#.T8O_QMWwUo4


It depends. The article says that her father is working late. That means he also brings money to the family. So does she really need those two jobs? We don't know because we weren't there.


How many people do you know who work 2 jobs if they don't need too?


Well i know people that work from day to night and they don't even need to work so who knows. Maybe she wants extra money and stuff. The thing is that i can't really say the judge is stupid without knowing what evidence were presented in-frond of him.
More ridiculous is the law by itself. Jail for missing school? Aren't jails supposed to be for criminals?
Modified by Monad, 05-28-12, 5:06 PM
 
05-28-12, 7:39 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2317
hentai_proxy said:

First of all, I used prison and jail interchangeably, sorry; I meant jail, of course.

You say 'that is not what I said at all' and then you conclude the paragraph by saying "But to treat every truant with those measures is resource and time consuming when the bottom line--that truancy will be punished--- has been made clear in numerous ways." which describes exactly the refusal to allocate resources that I was criticizing.

You say 'they have no responsibility'; then why do they have the power to punish a truant student in this form? In the first place, who is the student harming other than themselves by not going to school? If this punishment is designed to prevent a student from harming themselves, they are implicitly assuming responsibility anyway; and since they are doing so, it is perfectly valid to examine the effectiveness of the measures they are taking. I am finding these measures horribly ineffective and so far I have not seen a counterargument.

'Schools do have guidance counselors, but adopting a school policy for (for lack of a better word) dealing with every truant as you've suggested is too much of a hassle.' And again that is my criticism: throwing them in jail is not too much of a hassle, so let's do that. That is not a defense of the practice in any way. And I acknowledge that individuals do try to help; but such an attitude by the establishment certainly does not help them help the students.

Finally, I never said that every truant goes to jail. I am criticizing the existence of this treatment as well as its enforcement in this particular case; and I would like to see a positive argument showing that jail time is either effective or reasonable.

I still have not received an answer: what happens if, after jail time, the student keeps being truant?


That's not what I said at all Bbecause I didn't say that schools don't have the resources to use. Obviously they have staff, but staff is busy the entire day already and usually there are only one or two guidance counselors on campus. Two isn't enough to handle all of the habitually truant and those that are constantly excused-absentees. Despite having staff members, the school shouldn't have to devote anymore of them who aren't guidance counselors and who already have busy schedules, nor should they have to hire any new counselors on their low budgets when students are already aware of the consequences and of their actions. That is my argument.

Punishments need to be given out because what is the law without punishment or damages to it?
It is the law that all minors go to school unless they meet one of the few exempting circumstances that their state deems acceptable, and if they are habitually, there is a set of procedures that public schools must follow because they are under the jurisdiction of the state.

" And again that is my criticism: throwing them in jail is not too much of a hassle, so let's do that. "
Except that this ISN'T common practice. Throwing a truant student in jail since it's "not a hassle" isn't something that has been done in the past, not will it be frequently used in the future. Like I've stated before, and like the Judge his/herself has said, it was to make an example of this truant student to discourage anyone else. If people think that since this "honor" student can play truant anytime they want, then it'll be fine for anyone too.
Furthermore, since I've never heard of someone getting any jail time, I wouldn't know what the next punishment would be. I am not a judge nor am I a Texan. I only know that in my state, usually fines or community service is what's awarded, but there's also more severe punishments like a truancy prevention program (which I imagine would be like a DUI traffic program--hell) and a revocation of any driver's license or permits.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 7:58 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1569
pendragonuzumaki said:
the school shouldn't have to devote anymore of them who aren't guidance counselors and who already have busy schedules, nor should they have to hire any new counselors on their low budgets when students are already aware of the consequences and of their actions. That is my argument.


When I said 'resources', of course I meant a comprehensive counselling and monitoring system and in this paragraph you explicitly state that they refuse to allocate such resources: " nor should they have to hire any new counselors on their low budgets when students are already aware of the consequences and of their actions". If they can effectively deal with the problems by enforcing those 'consequences' (and without creating other problems along the way!), then by all means you are right. But can they?

pendragonuzumaki said:

Punishments need to be given out because what is the law without punishment or damages to it?.


We (Baman, I, Monad, others above) are questioning the soundness and effectiveness of the law itself here. And we still see no counterarguments proving that this law is reasonable or effective.

In your wording: you talk about consequences. We are questioning the effectiveness and soundness of those consequences. Baman wrote down in detail some of the flaws in the law itself and I listed several alternative measures that can and are being used.

Edit: bad edit erased half the post :( sorry. Feel free to quote any previous versions that you may have read before this one.
Modified by hentai_proxy, 05-28-12, 8:33 PM
 
05-28-12, 8:39 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2317
I believe I did answer your argument. The schools have the power to because they are required to do so. It is that simple. Public schools are under the jurisdiction of the state. They cannot ignore state mandates. I cannot be more concrete about it.

And the truant student IS harming everyone who works under the school district. Not phsysically, but in a matter of the same degree. Do you know why schools stress attendance so much? For every student who attends school, daily, the school recieves money from the state. And for each and every student who doesn't come to school each and everyday, the school loses money. That money funds teacher work pay, school supplies, district employee payments, so it's a very important source. In the economy of today and the past, public schools are amoung the institutions that are suffering the most. Last year so many teachers at my high school recieved pink slips, and many new measures have been put in place to save money.
THIS is why it's such a big deal. Those students who don't go to school are costing the school money that's ultimately in the end, going towards benefiting all the kids who are sitting in school for an education. I might be wrong, but I think it's $80 per student per day in my school district.

edit: 80, not 800.
Modified by Emmrys, 05-28-12, 8:42 PM

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 8:50 PM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 2710
Alfyan said:
That to me seems selfish from her side, surely home school is her best option which still abides by the law. To be attending just for recognition for top 10? That is nonsense considering her position

Yeah, how dare she strive to be recognized as one of the best despite her tough situation. What a selfish woman.

Sadly law is law, when it says you must attend compulsory education I'm afraid we must abide by it

Law isn't absolute, why do you think we have judges? The judge could have given her leniency considering the circumstance, but chose not to.

When the law isn't serving it's purpose of protecting the innocent, then "law is law, what can ya do?" is not an excuse.
 
05-28-12, 8:54 PM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 166
Read this on TL, it's a very rare situation that should be dealt with individually. Yes something should be done about it because it is true that you can't just let a truant be a truant, that's being inconsistent with the rules.

Something should be done, but I don't understand how this retarded judge thinks fining her $100 and putting her in jail for a night will solve anything.

-edit- There's a donation thing running for her that already raised like $30k and a ton of signatures so I wouldn't worry about her, she'll be fine, which is good because someone who works that hard for someone else definitely deserves it.
 
05-28-12, 8:59 PM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 4959
Well as unfortunate as it is, it's the State law so can't do much about that.
Apparently they wanted to make an example out of her. Harsh. . . I guess it's kind of saying "Look don't skip school this girl skipped school and had good intentions for it, but the law bends for no one." I mean hell if I was ditching school for bad reasons and find out a student in my class who went to jail for ditching but had good intentions I'd probably sit my ass back in class.

Even though it's for her siblings it is TO MUCH for a 11th grade high schooler in my opinion. In a lot of the high schools where I live you have to have a decent GPA and tell the school you will be working and can only work a certain amount of hours. Also I thought minors were not allowed to work so many excessive hours?

I hope she might at least drop one job if anything. She may be doing fantastic in school still, but it doesn't mean she gets to skip/be late to class. By the looks of it she runs almost on no sleep at all. I think she's taking to much of the burden for her family as a high school student. It's amazing to see how much devotion she has though. I think one job would be enough I'm sure her dad doesn't work from morning to late at night for nothing.
Touch me, you filthy casual~
 
05-28-12, 8:59 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 8791
It's unfair/ discussion.

More importantly, I love these threads that just sound like someone is plugging words into an outlandish story generator.

"____ with ______ gets ____ for ______"
 
05-28-12, 9:00 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1569
pendragonuzumaki said:
I believe I did answer your argument. The schools have the power to because they are required to do so. It is that simple. Public schools are under the jurisdiction of the state. They cannot ignore state mandates. I cannot be more concrete about it.

And the truant student IS harming everyone who works under the school district. Not phsysically, but in a matter of the same degree. Do you know why schools stress attendance so much? For every student who attends school, daily, the school recieves money from the state. And for each and every student who doesn't come to school each and everyday, the school loses money. That money funds teacher work pay, school supplies, district employee payments, so it's a very important source. In the economy of today and the past, public schools are amoung the institutions that are suffering the most. Last year so many teachers at my high school recieved pink slips, and many new measures have been put in place to save money.
THIS is why it's such a big deal. Those students who don't go to school are costing the school money that's ultimately in the end, going towards benefiting all the kids who are sitting in school for an education. I might be wrong, but I think it's $800 per student per day in my school district.


I do not entirely understand how this system works and why exactly the school is losing money through truant students. So if a student comes to class on day A, we get $800. If they don't come, we don't get $800 that day. But what is that $800 for? If it is for the student, then the lack of these resources do not harm anybody else. If it is not just for the student, then why link all this money to the attendance or lack thereof of the specific student at the specific day? And withhold them if they don't come on that specific day? This method of funding seems to me bizarre to say the least. But your post clearly proves that, under that bizarre funding system, more people are harmed than just the student, I acknowledge that.

And here we come to the question which by now I am tired asking and still don't have an answer: do you have a counterargument showing that the law to deal with this problem is effective or reasonable? That is everybody's main complaint and nobody is coming up with a defence. I gave some alternatives and Baman gave (some of the) flaws and inconsistencies. I would go further as to how this punishment not only misses the root of the problem, but obscures it and acts as a placebo while the real issues fester underneath.
 
05-28-12, 9:03 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2317
Narmy said:
Alfyan said:
That to me seems selfish from her side, surely home school is her best option which still abides by the law. To be attending just for recognition for top 10? That is nonsense considering her position

Yeah, how dare she strive to be recognized as one of the best despite her tough situation. What a selfish woman.

Sadly law is law, when it says you must attend compulsory education I'm afraid we must abide by it

Law isn't absolute, why do you think we have judges? The judge could have given her leniency considering the circumstance, but chose not to.

When the law isn't serving it's purpose of protecting the innocent, then "law is law, what can ya do?" is not an excuse.

The law isn't there to protect the innocent. That's an attorney's job. The law is there to govern society.
And lol... this girl isn't innocent. She was conscious of her truancy.

And well, alfyan does have a point. It might've made more sense if she said valedictorian or saluatorian or even top ten percent. But either way if her situation were so dire that she needed to work two jobs, the best thing to do would have been to be to switch to homeschooling, or get a GED.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 9:19 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2317
hentai_proxy said:
pendragonuzumaki said:
I believe I did answer your argument. The schools have the power to because they are required to do so. It is that simple. Public schools are under the jurisdiction of the state. They cannot ignore state mandates. I cannot be more concrete about it.

And the truant student IS harming everyone who works under the school district. Not phsysically, but in a matter of the same degree. Do you know why schools stress attendance so much? For every student who attends school, daily, the school recieves money from the state. And for each and every student who doesn't come to school each and everyday, the school loses money. That money funds teacher work pay, school supplies, district employee payments, so it's a very important source. In the economy of today and the past, public schools are amoung the institutions that are suffering the most. Last year so many teachers at my high school recieved pink slips, and many new measures have been put in place to save money.
THIS is why it's such a big deal. Those students who don't go to school are costing the school money that's ultimately in the end, going towards benefiting all the kids who are sitting in school for an education. I might be wrong, but I think it's $800 per student per day in my school district.


I do not entirely understand how this system works and why exactly the school is losing money through truant students. So if a student comes to class on day A, we get $800. If they don't come, we don't get $800 that day. But what is that $800 for? If it is for the student, then the lack of these resources do not harm anybody else. If it is not just for the student, then why link all this money to the attendance or lack thereof of the specific student at the specific day? And withhold them if they don't come on that specific day? This method of funding seems to me bizarre to say the least. But your post clearly proves that, under that bizarre funding system, more people are harmed than just the student, I acknowledge that.

And here we come to the question which by now I am tired asking and still don't have an answer: do you have a counterargument showing that the law to deal with this problem is effective or reasonable? That is everybody's main complaint and nobody is coming up with a defence. I gave some alternatives and Baman gave (some of the) flaws and inconsistencies. I would go further as to how this punishment not only misses the root of the problem, but obscures it and acts as a placebo while the real issues fester underneath.


(My mistake, I mistyped--80, not 800!)

I suppose it is a bizarre system, but you can take a look at this article if you want. It might clear up any confusion and also give you a look at actual numbers. http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/jun/27/chronically-absent-students-cost-county-schools-mi/

I can't truthfully say that any of the measures taken in regards to truant students are 100% effective or close. Honestly I think that if a student wants to skip school and if they don't have a parent or someone to make sure they get to school then they're going to skip. Some of them are going to get themselves excused after and some of them aren't. I do however think that they're very reasonable and that in many cases, they work. (Not throwing someone in jail their first time to court-- but as it was said, this was to make an example. And it's not one that I can actually be surprised about, seeing as it was the Judge that gave the warning to the girl. And it's never a smart decision to ignore a judge). I can't imaginge anyone who'd be willing to repeat any court-ordered community service or be willing to give up their licence for not attending school. And in cases where the parents are unaware of their son's or daughter's truancy, they are contacted by the school. If that isn't enough to make them see what kind of situation their kid is in, then warning of a court order should be.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-28-12, 9:38 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1569
pendragonuzumaki said:

I can't truthfully say that any of the measures taken in regards to truant students are 100% effective or close.


None is, but different measures can be compared and contrasted. That is what we are doing and finding jail time to be among the least effective and least reasonable.

pendragonuzumaki said:

Honestly I think that if a student wants to skip school and if they don't have a parent or someone to make sure they get to school then they're going to skip. Some of them are going to get themselves excused after and some of them aren't. I do however think that they're very reasonable and that in many cases, they work. (Not throwing someone in jail their first time to court-- but as it was said, this was to make an example. And it's not one that I can actually be surprised about, seeing as it was the Judge that gave the warning to the girl. And it's never a smart decision to ignore a judge).


An example can be made through the enforcement of any kind of measure; here we are criticizing the existence and enforcement of a particular one: jail sentence. If the news were 'student missed a year after repeated truancy', I don't think many people would be riled up. Although that may be pretty harsh to the student, too, only in a different and much more relevant way. In any case, I do not see any counterarguments to baman's list of inconsistencies with this law, nor any justification that it is better than the alternatives I listed. Your opinion "I do however think that they're very reasonable and that in many cases, they work." is respectable, but you still need to justify it and defend it gainst these arguments of ours. To repeat: our problem is with the particular punishment of jail time. Most of the other measures are common throughout all developed countries and at least I don't have a problem with them.

pendragonuzumaki said:

I can't imaginge anyone who'd be willing to repeat any court-ordered community service or be willing to give up their licence for not attending school. And in cases where the parents are unaware of their son's or daughter's truancy, they are contacted by the school. If that isn't enough to make them see what kind of situation their kid is in, then warning of a court order should be.


True in most cases; the problem is that truancy is sometimes the result of a family that falls way out of these 'most cases' and then social services are really necessary; your mentioning that social services cannot be called upon without explicit request from the student left me speechless. If the student had sufficient judgement of their situation to think about asking for help, they probably would not engage in behaviours like truancy in the first place.
 
05-28-12, 9:42 PM

Online
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 7650
How did this ended up in court in the first place? Do we seriously have nothing to do (like actually prosecuting criminals) now and we target minors?
Modified by Confucius, 06-08-12, 1:49 PM
Even when I was in crowd, I was always alone
 
05-28-12, 9:47 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1569
Confucius said:
How did this ended up in court in the first place? Do we seriously have nothing to do (like actually prosecuting criminals) now and we target minors?


pendragonuzumaki said:

And the truant student IS harming everyone who works under the school district. Not phsysically, but in a matter of the same degree. Do you know why schools stress attendance so much? For every student who attends school, daily, the school recieves money from the state. And for each and every student who doesn't come to school each and everyday, the school loses money. That money funds teacher work pay, school supplies, district employee payments, so it's a very important source. In the economy of today and the past, public schools are amoung the institutions that are suffering the most. Last year so many teachers at my high school recieved pink slips, and many new measures have been put in place to save money.
THIS is why it's such a big deal. Those students who don't go to school are costing the school money that's ultimately in the end, going towards benefiting all the kids who are sitting in school for an education. I might be wrong, but I think it's $80 per student per day in my school district.


This is probably the honest reply to your question. I have no time right now to open a discussion about the morality of persecuting a student rather than helping them in order to prevent financial loss for the school or about the absurdity of the whole funding system which is the true reason to insist so thoroughly on punishment; suffice it to say, I can only feel for the students that study under such a system.

Edit: figures fixed.
 
05-28-12, 10:38 PM

Offline
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 2317
hentai_proxy said:

None is, but different measures can be compared and contrasted. That is what we are doing and finding jail time to be among the least effective and least reasonable.

An example can be made through the enforcement of any kind of measure; here we are criticizing the existence and enforcement of a particular one: jail sentence. If the news were 'student missed a year after repeated truancy', I don't think many people would be riled up. Although that may be pretty harsh to the student, too, only in a different and much more relevant way. In any case, I do not see any counterarguments to baman's list of inconsistencies with this law, nor any justification that it is better than the alternatives I listed. Your opinion "I do however think that they're very reasonable and that in many cases, they work." is respectable, but you still need to justify it and defend it gainst these arguments of ours. To repeat: our problem is with the particular punishment of jail time. Most of the other measures are common throughout all developed countries and at least I don't have a problem with them.

I'll have to disagree--for an example to be made, the usual punishments aren't going to be enough. If an example's to be made then the punishment needs to be extreme.
And I think that having the student repeat a year would be much more detrimental to the problem than do anything to solve it. Taking this case, an honor student who's earned straight A in all their courses previously are going to have no motivation to re learn any year's worth of material that they mastered in the past. They would probably feel more inclined to skip out on lessons than retake them, especially if they harbored bitter feelings about earning the grade and then losing it. And I think that most people might even chose to spend a day in a jail cell than repeat an entire school year, be forced to make new friends, and miss graduating with their class.

While I think that the jail sentence was excessive, it would more than likely end up being the most effective measure if it were to be commonly given. Being behind bars for any time is serious. But as to where Baman says:
Baman said:
And that same limited time also clearly cuts down the effectiveness of individual prevention, as someone that purposefully skips school would be unlikely to give a shit at all. Similarly, the fear of 24 hours behind lock probably wouldn't scare the ones that are inclined to skip school because they don't give a shit.


I'll have to disagree greatly. After all, kids that have better time to spend outside of school will of course have better time to spend outside of a jail cell. At least in school they have freedom to walk around in a space bigger than 8 feet, and not be totally surrounded by shady characters, or in solitude.
But as to where he/she said In Tran's case, I'll agree that this was not effective at all. For her case the most effective and appropriate punishment to give out probably would have been community service, that would have prevented her from working. With the reduction in her pay, she probably would've figured out that it would be smarter to go to class and put work second and still get paid fully, than get community service again if it ever came to that.

Nevertheless, this was a single case, and with no doubt, I'd say that Judge Moriarty is receiving plenty of mail from outraged senders right now.

hentai_proxy said:

True in most cases; the problem is that truancy is sometimes the result of a family that falls way out of these 'most cases' and then social services are really necessary; your mentioning that social services cannot be called upon without explicit request from the student left me speechless. If the student had sufficient judgement of their situation to think about asking for help, they probably would not engage in behaviours like truancy in the first place.


Well, the student doesn't actually have to request it. Of course they should, but once they consciously share it with any of the staff, the staff is free to take the appropriate measures to resolve the problem(s). The student could mention it in conversation, or in a journal that can reasonably be suspected that the teacher will read.
And just to point this out, the California Truancy policy also says that parents of habitually truant kids are liable for subjection to greater fines and referrals to mental/health services, counseling.. the list goes on.

G-O-L-F-dub-A-N-G
 
05-29-12, 6:09 AM

Offline
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 44
lol the judge wanted to make an example of her.

I dont think he even looked over her file, just got told shed been missing school.

Moriarty you crack wizard...
 
05-29-12, 6:58 AM

Offline
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1473
yet again why I hate this country so much.
 
05-29-12, 8:57 AM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 2566
Ok, I have to say one thing: Is good that a person gets a job to help siblings, but at the age of the student school is also important.
 
05-29-12, 11:02 AM

Offline
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 113
In my country (Bulgaria), truancy is viewed very leniently, not by the system but by the teachers. Pre-high school I went to a local institution (and my first two years were in yet another school, where there were only 8-10 students per year), then I got top 50 in the country on both of the mandatory placement exams and am now attending literally the best, highest rated state high school. In all three schools, from the rural one with barely any students to the most elite high school in the country, teachers rarely mark absences - if you were to skip a week because of a cold, you'd get 3-10 absences out of a possible ~48. The teacher responsible for your class handles sick days/etc, and is generally happy to excuse any absences you do get, even without a note from the doctor. Oh, and habitual truants often have an entire stack of "sick notes", which they fill in themselves, without going for a checkup, every time they skip school. I've never touched such a stack, but if I wanted, I could go to my doctor and ask her to give me an excuse for this week's absences, and she'd cheerfully do it without asking questions. Note, nobody bothers with this usually, because, as I said, absences are excused en-masse by the teachers themselves.

Sadly, most truants are just lazy and don't have good academic performance. There are other methods to punish bad grades, and they kick in even with our lax system. I've never skipped school, but I could do it at any point, and the only one who would be able to stop me would be my parents. At my current gymnasium, there are several students who come for only a third of the classes, and most of them do it not because they're overly busy, just because they prefer to use the free time. Sure, they get some negative looks, but in the end, it doesn't matter, as long as they're getting the grades THEY need (many of us are straight A's, but let's face it, you only need as much as your university demands for entry, everything else is wasted effort; I'll forget that Literature bullshit as soon as I'm out, and I only want to retain my Maths and German knowledge).

So..yeah. As long as someone is getting the grades they need, absences don't matter. You could make a case for schools getting money or something else, but that's a system flaw - there's no point wasting my time just because bureaucracy says so. For most subjects, I can accomplish more in the same time by motivated self-study anyway.
 
05-29-12, 11:06 AM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 1569
pendragonuzumaki said:

I'll have to disagree--for an example to be made, the usual punishments aren't going to be enough. If an example's to be made then the punishment needs to be extreme.
And I think that having the student repeat a year would be much more detrimental to the problem than do anything to solve it. Taking this case, an honor student who's earned straight A in all their courses previously are going to have no motivation to re learn any year's worth of material that they mastered in the past. They would probably feel more inclined to skip out on lessons than retake them, especially if they harbored bitter feelings about earning the grade and then losing it. And I think that most people might even chose to spend a day in a jail cell than repeat an entire school year, be forced to make new friends, and miss graduating with their class.


But your arguments actually demonstrate how much more effective repetition of a year is in preventing truancy in the first place. Indeed, repeating a year is in some aspects much harsher than any 24 hour condition, and thus gives the student much greater incentive to avoid it; real incentive. Jail time, on the other hand, is pretty lax on students that don't care too much (whatever, 24h in jail, big whoop, to paraphrase Baman) but very harsh on students that do care or are sensitive etc. and are truant due to practical reasons, like the student in this case. In any case, repeating a year was just one of many alternatives that work from within the school system, no need for justice to get involved.

The problem I have with your position is that you keep talking about measures of punishment while I support measures of prevention and of reform. In the end, is it the goal to punish students for truancy or to keep them from being truant? Jail time does the former but I do not see how it helps with the latter. Punishment by itself does not guarantee reform. Not in the least. In fact, even if a student is scared out of truancy in this way, the underlying causes of truancy do not go away. They are simply hidden away because of the threat of jail. How does this help anything (apart from the school budget of the current fiscal year)?

pendragonuzumaki said:

While I think that the jail sentence was excessive, it would more than likely end up being the most effective measure if it were to be commonly given. Being behind bars for any time is serious. But as to where Baman says:
Baman said:
And that same limited time also clearly cuts down the effectiveness of individual prevention, as someone that purposefully skips school would be unlikely to give a shit at all. Similarly, the fear of 24 hours behind lock probably wouldn't scare the ones that are inclined to skip school because they don't give a shit.


I'll have to disagree greatly. After all, kids that have better time to spend outside of school will of course have better time to spend outside of a jail cell. At least in school they have freedom to walk around in a space bigger than 8 feet, and not be totally surrounded by shady characters, or in solitude.


As you are writing these words, do you do it with the conviction that you are actually supporting the case for a jail sentence? " At least in school they have freedom to walk around in a space bigger than 8 feet, and not be totally surrounded by shady characters, or in solitude." would be enough justification in any civilized state to abolish the practice, not justify it. Scaring or scarring somebody, especially a minor, into reform is contradictory to say the least. Remember: as you try to fix one problem, make sure you do not create another one.

pendragonuzumaki said:

But as to where he/she said In Tran's case, I'll agree that this was not effective at all. For her case the most effective and appropriate punishment to give out probably would have been community service, that would have prevented her from working. With the reduction in her pay, she probably would've figured out that it would be smarter to go to class and put work second and still get paid fully, than get community service again if it ever came to that.

Nevertheless, this was a single case, and with no doubt, I'd say that Judge Moriarty is receiving plenty of mail from outraged senders right now.


So even a layman (teacher?) such as yourself can come up with a better and more reasonable response to the student's truancy than the particular judge. Community service seems fine to me as a last resort, especially if it is accompanied by educational opportunities. When dealing with students, I think it is important to insert positive elements even in punishment. School is meant to educate students and to me, jail time is the ultimate admission of defeat in that goal. The only thing you are teaching the student is that might is right and the mighty have spoken; the student must abide. I would not want my own students to get such an education.

pendragonuzumaki said:

hentai_proxy said:

True in most cases; the problem is that truancy is sometimes the result of a family that falls way out of these 'most cases' and then social services are really necessary; your mentioning that social services cannot be called upon without explicit request from the student left me speechless. If the student had sufficient judgement of their situation to think about asking for help, they probably would not engage in behaviours like truancy in the first place.


Well, the student doesn't actually have to request it. Of course they should, but once they consciously share it with any of the staff, the staff is free to take the appropriate measures to resolve the problem(s). The student could mention it in conversation, or in a journal that can reasonably be suspected that the teacher will read.
And just to point this out, the California Truancy policy also says that parents of habitually truant kids are liable for subjection to greater fines and referrals to mental/health services, counseling.. the list goes on.


That seems very reasonable.
Modified by hentai_proxy, 05-29-12, 11:15 AM
 
Top
Pages (4) -3 -2 [-1] 0 1 » ... Last »
Help     FAQ     About     Contact     Terms     Privacy     AdChoices