Why don't schools teach children about taxes and bills and things that they will definitely need to know as adults to get by in life?
Departments of education and school districts always have to make decisions about what to include in their curriculum. There are a lot of life skills that people need that aren't taught in school. The question is should those skills be taught in schools?I teach high school, so I'll talk about that. The typical high school curriculum is supposed to give students a broad-based education that prepares them to be citizens in a democracy and to be able to think critically. For a democracy to work, we need educated, discerning citizens with the ability to make good decisions based on evidence and objective thought. In theory, people who are well informed about history, culture, science, mathematics, etc., and are capable of critical, unbiased thinking, will have the tools to participate in a democracy and make good decisions for themselves and for society at large. In addition to that, they should be learning how to be learners, how to do effective, basic research, and collaborate with other people. If that happens, figuring out how to do procedural tasks in real life should not prmuch of a challenge. We can't possibly teach every necessary life skill people need, but we can help students become better at knowing how to acquire the skills they need. Should we teach them how to change a tire when they can easily consult a book or search the internet to find step by step instructions for that? Should we teach them how to balance a check book or teach them how to think mathematically and make sense of problems so that the simple task of balancing a check book (which requires simple arithmetic and the ability to enter numbers and words in columns and rows in obvious ways) is easy for them to figure out. If we teach them to be good at critical thinking and have some problem solving skills they will be able to apply those overarching skills to all sorts of every day tasks that shouldn't be difficult for someone with decent cognitive ability to figure out. It's analogous to asking why a culinary school didn't teach its students the steps and ingredients to a specific recipe. The school taught them about more general food preparation and food science skills so that they can figure out how to make a lot of specific recipes without much trouble. They're also able to create their own recipes.So, do we want citizens with very specific skill sets that they need to get through day to day life or do we want citizens with critical thinking, problem solving, and other overarching cognitive skills that will allow them to easily acquire ANY simple, procedural skill they may come to need at any point in their lives?
How do you feel about a school system threatening disciplinary action against students for “peacefully assembling” during a walkout to protest gun violence in schools?
Most schools have policies against students just walking out of class without permission. So, yes, the students should be penalized for breaking school policy. Their intentions don’t matter. They made a choice, they take the consequences.Let’s turn your question around - should students have the right to walk out of class on some random day to protest in favor of the civil right to own and carry firearms? How about to protest against abortion? How about to protest against illegal immigration? How about to protest against socialist influence in education? How about to protest the corruption of the teacher’s unions? How about to protest against rampant political correctness?
If a student takes their own life due to receiving procedural disciplinary action from their school, can their school administrators be held liable and sued and/or prosecuted?
IANALI feel like it would depend on whether what the administrators did was unethical or malicious.If the suit is to be believed, they:locked a 17-year old, minor child in a room for over two-hours,grilled him like a criminal,intimidated him into making and signing a written confession under duress,falsely and without any legal leg to stand on told him he would be committing the crime of perjury if they subjectively decided he was lying (basically, write down what we say or you’re going to jail),then told him he’d be expelled (which would likely mean he couldn’t join the Air Force)As a veteran myself who joined the Navy at 17 and shipped out straight after high school, I can tell you that at that age, had this happened to me, I would have been despondent. I’m triggered and angry just reading this, and I didn’t know the kid.This poor kid probably thought his life was over. And over what? A snap? Even if it was racist, it doesn’t justify this type of emotional and psychological terrorism directed at a minor child.If this were a child of mine, even if he hadn’t died, I would be livid. Did they even call the parents before they did all this?If that were my son, they’d probably have had to arrest me when I found out. And that’s without him committing suicide.To subject a child under your care to extreme levels of emotional and psychological trauma, intimating that his future was now in ruins, and then just sending him away, alone, strikes me as both flagrantly irresponsible and grossly negligent.Doing any of this at all, without the parents being present and aware of the situation, strikes me as child abuse.Locking him in that room stikes me as potentially false arrest or even kidnap.Unless this lawsuit is completely frivolous (by which I mean no less than 180 degrees off from what it alleges), if the actual sequence of events even remotely resembles what is alleged, these two people should be in jail and that district should be sued into bankruptcy.
Is it a violation of privacy rights if a school employee speaks to a friend (who has no relation to the school) about disciplinary action taken against a student?
In Canada, this is only an issue with violation of privacy if someones privacy has actually been breached.So if the teacher comes home and has a glass of wine with friends, then discusses her day without using names, ages, or distinguishing descriptions, then the suspended childs privacy has not been breached. So if she says “oh what a hard day, one of the students did this and this and this in a class so we had to decide to suspend them. It was a hard decision, and frustrating for us to deal with before we decided it had to come to that.” Here you dont know who was directly involved or if the whole staff was, if tge student is male or female, or even what class(es) this occured in. Aside from what school, the child has anonymity.However if she says “Johnny was such an fbomb today! He did this and this and this, but thankfully he got suspended for the week and now I dont have to deal with him for the next 5 days! Whoop whoop!” this is total breach. Here you already know the childs name, his age, and class if you knkw what the teacher teaches, how long hes gone for, and her feelings towards the child.Anything in between the 2 would be breach.
If I'm called a racial epithet by a student on campus, and I report the incident, is the school obligated to take disciplinary action against said student?
First, I assume you’re on a campus in the United States. There are two interpretations of your situation.Is the school legally liable to take disciplinary action?Probably not. The only time it’s actually considered illegal to discriminate by race is when it’s actual discrimination that will prohibit you from accomplish a task (e.g. giving a white person a higher stool in the library simply because they’re white, and unfortunately, even that is hard to prove it’s racist unless they said “you’re not getting it because you’re black”). Places where it’s also illegal may be at work (if you work on campus). There are most likely other areas where it’s de jure illegal, and you’ll have to check those areas individually.Will the school take disciplinary action?Probably. Jonathan Haidt explains this well (look this up on YouTube).In the 1980s, child rearing changed dramatically. It changed from children being able to play freely in their neighborhoods to having parents legally required to watch over them. This happened because of child abductions during that time period. This sense of “overprotection” has changed the way a child views a situation where he feels threatened - in the 1970s and before, the child would just punch the other child if the other child called him/her something. Now, the child runs to his/her parent, who goes talk to the other child’s parent. Today’s children have developed this sense that they can go to any authority whenever they feel threatened. This has expanded to college campuses, and deans have backed themselves into a corner by responding, “Yes, we’ll take care of it” every time someone feels offended. This article explains this “moral dependence” college students have.