Ohio Student Suspended for Staying in Class During Walkout

[Esmeralda]

So you keep saying, but the point is there’s no excuse for offering only two choices and forcing the kids to align with one or the other.

It’s really very, very simple.

Please tell me what other possible choice there could be other than "join the walkout" or "do not join the walkout".

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

They did that, they provide teachers to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral. Those teachers were in a particular set of room that the student was supposed to go to if they did not wish to join the walkout. This student choose to ignore that rule and do his own thing. Thus he got punished.

Again, I ask you, are you forced to vote either Dem or Rep?

No, but I do have a particular place I have to go to cast my vote, I do not get to choose to do it from wherever I want. Should the state accomodate me and have supervised voting in any location I want them to?

What do you think they are demonstrating to these kids?

That everyone has to follow the rules, that this kid is not special.

If schools decide to hold political protests on school premises and in school time, then they should at least have the decency to cater to those who want to remain politically neutral. It really isn’t rocket science.

That is what they did. The set aside a designated space for those not wishing to join in the politically motivated walkout. What more should they have done?

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice. Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

The school viewed the "not going to the walkout" as the neutral choice, which it was.

No it wasn’t. Not participating in the walkout is seen as being against walkout, for whatever reason. The kids in that group were referred to as ‘gun nuts’ and as being uncaring about the kids that were killed.

I really don’t understand what you’re finding so difficult to understand here. You are familiar with YES/NO/DONT KNOW type surveys, yes?

If you provide only two ‘choices’ then you are polarising, pigeonholing and labelling the kids as for or against. Simple as. I don’t believe you don’t get this, so I’m not going to bother resting it again.

It it was that big of a deal, he could have stayed home from school. Kids will do that at the slightest provocation.

 

[Tilly]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

. Study halls have never been used in the way it was being used on this issue. The students should cry fowel for being forced to appear as if they were against the supporting of the families and victims over the tragedy that had taken place, when what they were protesting actually was the anti-gun protest or second amendment protest that evolved out of the situation.

Precisely!

 

[Esmeralda]

He could have fallen and hurt hims widdle self. I understand. my bad.

You are a moron. You have a picture of militar man as your avatar but do not understand the need to follow rules. Clearly, it is just some pic you found on the internet.

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Them they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.

The study hall was supervised by a teacher or teachers. You people are really being ridiculous. Do you think schools have enough teachers to supervise every individual kid?

 

[Tilly]

First of all, don't presume to think you know that I am a "winger" of any kind, right or otherwise. Secondly, assuming that I don't want kids thinking about gun control is a gross misinterpretation. I have indicated in no way that I am against kids thinking about gun control so there's no justification for that assumption. My entire argument is that I don't think they should have held the protest on school grounds on school time. That's it.

It seems very appropriate to me as the kids who where mowed down were on school grounds during school time.

Don't be an idiot. That was beyond their control, this was not. It's not a valid excuse for interrupting regular school business with a political protest.

Political protest are a vital part of our system of government. What better way to learn about the 1st Amendment than to take part in what it guarantees you the freedom to do

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

It has to do with liability. The school is responsible for every kid. People are joking about something happening to him. Probably wouldn't. Most of us will never use most of the insurance we carry. It's there just in case. The school is liable for the safety of students. They most supervise them at all times. If something happened when the school was empty because all the teachers and students were at the rally, then the school would be found liable for that student if anything happened because he was left unsupervised. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. Probably nothing would happen, but in the event it did, the school would be liable.

Then have enough respect for the students who don’t want to be forced into supporting one side or the other by providing a teacher to supervise them.

 

[DrLove]

It was a nationwide, in fact, international event: they are not going to cancel.

I can't wait until next Saturday Esmeralda - bet they get a million kids in DC alone!

March For Our Lives - March 24, 2018

 

[beagle9]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

. Study halls have never been used in the way it was being used on this issue. The students should cry fowel for being forced to appear as if they were against the supporting of the families and victims over the tragedy that had taken place, when what they were protesting actually was the anti-gun protest or second amendment protest that evolved out of the situation.

You KNOW NOTHING about schools. Study halls are very often used for this and similar purposes. You are an ignorant blowhard.

The left is great at highjacking or creating events where people have no escape. It makes their numbers appear huge regardless of the unwillingness of the citizens to be caught up in the bullcrap. I give you the most recent example where the NFL was high jacked for the leftist agenda. Will this nation ever get a clue ??

 

[Esmeralda]

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

. Study halls have never been used in the way it was being used on this issue. The students should cry fowel for being forced to appear as if they were against the supporting of the families and victims over the tragedy that had taken place, when what they were protesting actually was the anti-gun protest or second amendment protest that evolved out of the situation.

You KNOW NOTHING about schools. Study halls are very often used for this and similar purposes. You are an ignorant blowhard.

One of the things 'study halls' are used for are in school detention. When kids behave badly, they can get in school detention instead of being suspended. The detention can be a certain number of hours, during the school day or after school. It is used to keep kids from classes where they have been extremely disruptive. It is used instead of home suspension so they can still be in school and learning. The supervier of the study hall helps kids with their work; the teachers supply assignment for them to work on.

Study hall isn't what it used to be 25 or 30 years ago.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

First of all, don't presume to think you know that I am a "winger" of any kind, right or otherwise. Secondly, assuming that I don't want kids thinking about gun control is a gross misinterpretation. I have indicated in no way that I am against kids thinking about gun control so there's no justification for that assumption. My entire argument is that I don't think they should have held the protest on school grounds on school time. That's it.

It seems very appropriate to me as the kids who where mowed down were on school grounds during school time.

Don't be an idiot. That was beyond their control, this was not. It's not a valid excuse for interrupting regular school business with a political protest.

Political protest are a vital part of our system of government. What better way to learn about the 1st Amendment than to take part in what it guarantees you the freedom to do

So then why did they not extend that freedom to this kid? All the other kids had the right to express themselves by walking out but this kid was not allowed the freedom to express himself by staying in the class.

Besides all that, they already have civics and social studies classes to teach them about our Constitutional rights. And, they had the freedom to express themselves after school hours. It was totally unnecessary to have it when and where they did.

It has to do with liability. The school is responsible for every kid. People are joking about something happening to him. Probably wouldn't. Most of us will never use most of the insurance we carry. It's there just in case. The school is liable for the safety of students. They most supervise them at all times. If something happened when the school was empty because all the teachers and students were at the rally, then the school would be found liable for that student if anything happened because he was left unsupervised. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. Probably nothing would happen, but in the event it did, the school would be liable.

The school increased the risk themselves by choosing to have a walkout. In fact, the risk increased exponentially when they decided to have hundreds of students milling about outside the building. That was their choice and any additional risk incurred by doing so was on them.

All those arguing in favor of the school have been speaking as if the walkout was beyond anyone's control or was necessary. They were not required to have a walkout

 

[Hossfly]

You are a moron. You have a picture of militar man as your avatar but do not understand the need to follow rules. Clearly, it is just some pic you found on the internet.

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Them they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.

The study hall was supervised by a teacher or teachers. You people are really being ridiculous. Do you think schools have enough teachers to supervise every individual kid?

The "kid" is an 18 year old adult. He does not require close supervision.

 

[Tilly]

So you keep saying, but the point is there’s no excuse for offering only two choices and forcing the kids to align with one or the other.

It’s really very, very simple.

Please tell me what other possible choice there could be other than "join the walkout" or "do not join the walkout".

All they had to do was provide a teacher to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be forced in to aligning with either side.

They did that, they provide teachers to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral. Those teachers were in a particular set of room that the student was supposed to go to if they did not wish to join the walkout. This student choose to ignore that rule and do his own thing. Thus he got punished.

Again, I ask you, are you forced to vote either Dem or Rep?

No, but I do have a particular place I have to go to cast my vote, I do not get to choose to do it from wherever I want. Should the state accomodate me and have supervised voting in any location I want them to?

What do you think they are demonstrating to these kids?

That everyone has to follow the rules, that this kid is not special.

If schools decide to hold political protests on school premises and in school time, then they should at least have the decency to cater to those who want to remain politically neutral. It really isn’t rocket science.

That is what they did. The set aside a designated space for those not wishing to join in the politically motivated walkout. What more should they have done?

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice. Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

The school viewed the "not going to the walkout" as the neutral choice, which it was.

No it wasn’t. Not participating in the walkout is seen as being against walkout, for whatever reason. The kids in that group were referred to as ‘gun nuts’ and as being uncaring about the kids that were killed.

I really don’t understand what you’re finding so difficult to understand here. You are familiar with YES/NO/DONT KNOW type surveys, yes?

If you provide only two ‘choices’ then you are polarising, pigeonholing and labelling the kids as for or against. Simple as. I don’t believe you don’t get this, so I’m not going to bother resting it again.

It it was that big of a deal, he could have stayed home from school. Kids will do that at the slightest provocation.

No. He shouldn’t have to miss school. If schools are going to hold political events, then they need to show equal respect for the kids who want to remain apolitical on the issue and provide equal supervision.

If that is beyond their organisational abilities, they have no right holding these events in the first place.

 

[Esmeralda]

And that option in the OP kid's case was study hall - Why is this so difficult for you?

My public schools did not have "study halls"---------but they did have libraries. I consider the suspension REALLY IDIOTIC----the kid did not want to walk out

You didn't have study halls? Really. We did it was a non-credit option to fill a period when a student had enough credits to graduate but was still taking classes.

My son has study hall for his last quarter this year as the school district is stupid and requires 5 quarters of PE and the only other 1 quarter class is health and he took that in summer school

. Study halls have never been used in the way it was being used on this issue. The students should cry fowel for being forced to appear as if they were against the supporting of the families and victims over the tragedy that had taken place, when what they were protesting actually was the anti-gun protest or second amendment protest that evolved out of the situation.

You KNOW NOTHING about schools. Study halls are very often used for this and similar purposes. You are an ignorant blowhard.

The left is great at highjacking or creating events where people have no escape. It makes their numbers appear huge regardless of the unwillingness of the citizens to be caught up in the bullcrap. I give you the most recent example where the NFL was high jacked for the leftist agenda. Will this nation ever get a clue ??

You're an idiot. No one, absolutely no one was required to attend the rally.

 

[Esmeralda]

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Them they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.

The study hall was supervised by a teacher or teachers. You people are really being ridiculous. Do you think schools have enough teachers to supervise every individual kid?

The "kid" is an 18 year old adult. He does not require close supervision.

Why are you so stupid? Legally the school is responsible for him. It is their liability. Legal liability.

 

[Tilly]

You are a moron. You have a picture of militar man as your avatar but do not understand the need to follow rules. Clearly, it is just some pic you found on the internet.

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Them they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.

The study hall was supervised by a teacher or teachers. You people are really being ridiculous. Do you think schools have enough teachers to supervise every individual kid?

If they can not provide supervision for those who don’t want to labelled and forced into support/don’t support, then they shouldn’t be holding political events. It’s that simple.

 

[Esmeralda]

Please tell me what other possible choice there could be other than "join the walkout" or "do not join the walkout".

They did that, they provide teachers to supervise those who wished to exercise their right to remain neutral. Those teachers were in a particular set of room that the student was supposed to go to if they did not wish to join the walkout. This student choose to ignore that rule and do his own thing. Thus he got punished.


No, but I do have a particular place I have to go to cast my vote, I do not get to choose to do it from wherever I want. Should the state accomodate me and have supervised voting in any location I want them to?

That everyone has to follow the rules, that this kid is not special.


That is what they did. The set aside a designated space for those not wishing to join in the politically motivated walkout. What more should they have done?

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice. Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

The school viewed the "not going to the walkout" as the neutral choice, which it was.

No it wasn’t. Not participating in the walkout is seen as being against walkout, for whatever reason. The kids in that group were referred to as ‘gun nuts’ and as being uncaring about the kids that were killed.

I really don’t understand what you’re finding so difficult to understand here. You are familiar with YES/NO/DONT KNOW type surveys, yes?

If you provide only two ‘choices’ then you are polarising, pigeonholing and labelling the kids as for or against. Simple as. I don’t believe you don’t get this, so I’m not going to bother resting it again.

It it was that big of a deal, he could have stayed home from school. Kids will do that at the slightest provocation.

No. He shouldn’t have to miss school. If schools are going to hold political events, then they need to show equal respect for the kids who want to remain apolitical on the issue and provide equal supervision.

If that is beyond their organisational abilities, they have no right holding these events in the first place.

He did get equal respect. It was a 17 minute event. He had the opportunity to take his book and study in the study hall. You people are so ridiculous.

 

[beagle9]

Two choices clearly weren’t enough. They should have provided supervision for those who did not fit into their two choices.
Are you forced to vote for one of two political parties or can you abstain or vote for an independent etc?
If schools are going to host political demonstrations, then they should respect the kids views. Things are rarely black and white, so it’s not difficult to anticipate that there will be some kids who agree with neither of the imposed two choices and don’t want to be forced to.

There were only two possible choices, join the walkout or do not join the walkout...what other possible choice is there?

Don't have a ******* walkout.

Not on students time. Like I said the high jacking of citizens against their will was the goal, and it worked because these were impressionable kids. It must be the leftist last frontier, because they have been figured out now.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Them they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.

The study hall was supervised by a teacher or teachers. You people are really being ridiculous. Do you think schools have enough teachers to supervise every individual kid?

The "kid" is an 18 year old adult. He does not require close supervision.

The "kid" is a student in the care of the school, he requires the exact same supervision as every other student. The fact he is 18 does not prevent him from misbehaving.

 

[beagle9]

No, the hall they provided was not for those wanting to exercise their right to remain neutral, it was the only choice given for those not supporting the march.

If you only offer two choices, then they are perceived to be either for or against, naturally.

Many of the kids in the hall were there because they are pro second amendment and were against the protest.

The kid who was punished for not wanting to join them also said they were perceived to be unsympathetic to the kids that died, and he didn’t want to be seen in that way either.

Had the teachers wanted to be fair to all the kids, all they needed to do was provide a teacher to supervise the kids who wanted to remain neutral - the third choice. Again, it’s hardly rocket science.

The school viewed the "not going to the walkout" as the neutral choice, which it was.

No it wasn’t. Not participating in the walkout is seen as being against walkout, for whatever reason. The kids in that group were referred to as ‘gun nuts’ and as being uncaring about the kids that were killed.

I really don’t understand what you’re finding so difficult to understand here. You are familiar with YES/NO/DONT KNOW type surveys, yes?

If you provide only two ‘choices’ then you are polarising, pigeonholing and labelling the kids as for or against. Simple as. I don’t believe you don’t get this, so I’m not going to bother resting it again.

It it was that big of a deal, he could have stayed home from school. Kids will do that at the slightest provocation.

No. He shouldn’t have to miss school. If schools are going to hold political events, then they need to show equal respect for the kids who want to remain apolitical on the issue and provide equal supervision.

If that is beyond their organisational abilities, they have no right holding these events in the first place.

He did get equal respect. It was a 17 minute event. He had the opportunity to take his book and study in the study hall. You people are so ridiculous.

You defend the indefensible...

 

[Tilly]

You are a moron. You have a picture of militar man as your avatar but do not understand the need to follow rules. Clearly, it is just some pic you found on the internet.

Yeah, I figured as much. You are just one more fraud on here. There are lots like you on here

The schools have a responsibility to supervise all students at all times. If something happened to this kid because he was unsupervised, you can bet your life these RWrs would be vilifying the school for not doing their job. In this country, educators cannot win no matter what they do. RWrs hate teachers and schools.

Them they should have provided a teacher to support the kids who wanted to exercise their right to remain neutral and not be herded into either group.

The study hall was supervised by a teacher or teachers. You people are really being ridiculous. Do you think schools have enough teachers to supervise every individual kid?

Had they provided the option for those who wanted to remain neutral, it probably wouldn’t have been a single kid.

What’s wrong with respecting the kids who don’t want to be forced into your draconian support/don’t support nonsense and providing them with supervision too?

What do you think you are illustrating to them?

Why is this very simple concept beyond your understanding?
And you’re a teacher? Lol.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

It's not a reasonable choice if he did not wish to express himself that way. The fact is they did not allow him the freedom to express himself his own way as they did the other students.

Every student in the school was given two choices, that is not an unreasonable thing to do. The school has to maintain positive control over the children put in its charge during the day. That is why kids are not allowed to sit in classroom alone with no teacher any other day of the year.

There are no finite number of choices for true freedom of expression. Either they are all given the choice to express themselves in their own way or they can all just go back to class.

That is just stupid. Kids are allowed a finite number of choices for true freedom of expression when it comes to what they were, what they say, what they bring with them to school. Or do you think there should be no rules in school and the kid should just do whatever they want?

Of course not. But if they could not guarantee that ALL students would be able to express themselves in their own way in this case then they should have cancelled.

It was a nationwide, in fact, international event: they are not going to cancel.

Maybe they wouldn't have cancelled but the important question is: could they have cancelled? Yes.

 

[Tilly]

they can get in school detention instead of being suspended.

‘They can get in school detention’?

You’re a teacher telling other posters they aren’t educated enough to comment in this thread?
Lol.