Tag Archives: students

PARENTS: Out of Control Schools Teachers Not Disciplining Students

National School Safety Taskforce

Ask anyone who has worked in some of America’s failing public schools and nearly all of them will tell you the same thing: The biggest problem isn’t the quality of the teachers. It’s the behavior of the kids; angry, disruptive, disrespectful kids whose behavior is out of control. This is true not only in the poor schools in the inner cities, but in schools in the largely white rural parts of the US as well. The kids themselves are only partly to blame — students, after all, are what adults make them.

In the year I spent as a substitute teacher in some of the toughest schools in inner city Los Angeles, chronicled in my new book “Sit Down and Shut Up: How Discipline Can Set Students Free” (St. Martin’s Press), I was threatened and cursed by students more times than I could count.

One kid called me an “Urkel-looking motherf–ker.” That part was the kid’s fault (or maybe that of his parents). But what happened next wasn’t. I called the hall monitor and had him taken to the principal’s office. But soon after, he came back into my class with a note that read, “Okay to return to class.” There was no apology, no detention, no one called at home. He didn’t have to write a letter explaining why he’d erupted so angrily, and he most certainly wasn’t suspended.

This was the fault of the adults in the school. In the course of a generation, this behavior from kids — coupled with either no reaction or an overreaction by adults — has gotten worse.

It wasn’t always thus.

After a particularly difficult day, a teacher who had also attended the school as a teenager remarked to me, “This school was always tough, but we used to fight each other; [now] they fight the teacher.”

What happened between the time that teacher (and I) were kids to now to mark such a dramatic shift? I spent a year trying to unlock that mystery.

One culprit is the United Nations, and the notion of children’s rights.

My first encounter with the idea of children’s rights was at a middle school where the students were so unruly that at least a half-dozen teachers had quit from exhaustion, including the one for whom I was substituting. A group of kids was roughhousing and cursing as others were trying to complete work. Because of one student’s foul language and because he’d launched an eraser in my general direction, I threatened to hold him in for recess — a punishment teachers have been doling out to kids since recess was invented.

But he and his friends, none more than 5 feet tall, told me that I couldn’t do that because they “have a right to play.” Having schooled me to their satisfaction, they promptly went back to swinging from the rafters and ignoring anything else I said that day.

I thought it was a joke until the assistant principal reprimanded me when I tried to make good on my threat.

An international treaty called the Convention of the Rights of the Child, which was adopted in 1989, defined the notion of what a child is and is not entitled to. It would become the most ratified treaty in UN history. The treaty is smart and wise in many ways, insisting that children have a right to shelter and the right to be protected in war. My favorite part states that children have a right to a name. That’s both beautiful and sad: Imagine what it must be like to be a child and have never been given a name.

But it doesn’t end there.

The UN treaty insists that young people be given the right to freedom of speech and the right to practice their own religion or no religion as they see fit. (I shudder to think what would have happened had I told my preacher father that I had a right not to go to church when he was dragging me out of bed on Sunday mornings.)

Maybe you think that 30-year international law — which, by the way, the US never ratified — has had no impact on America’s public schools. Think again. Article 31 says, “State Parties recognize the right of the child to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child.” There it is: the right to play. Schools have taken it upon themselves to spread to these students that they have inalienable right to play, even when they misbehave — and the kids have taken it up with gusto.

Legislators in California have been trying to pass a children’s rights bill similar to the UN treaty, enshrining at the state level what Congress refused to do 30 years ago.

In another instance, I tried to send a kid to the office for being disruptive. Surely that wasn’t outlawed? Wrong again. An administrator chastised me that they don’t allow teachers to send disruptive students to the office. Instead, they “let the students decide when they want to take a break,” because, according to her, sending students to the office takes away the student’s autonomy.

The policy was specific to that school, not a politically organized desire to follow the convention, but the effect was powerful nonetheless — and poorly reasoned. Since when has a middle-schooler who is having the time of his life with his friends and ignoring everything a teacher says, suddenly stopped and thought, “You know what, let me step outside on a break and then go back in and focus on the homework I didn’t do last night”?

I don’t want to overstate the issue. There are more factors at play than just a UN charter — including the rise of charter schools and the elimination of basic forms of discipline like detention and suspension.

The adolescent chaos that comes from economically depressed communities has many sources. We are all rightly horrified by the extreme punishments meted out to students by aggressive adults: a kid thrown to the ground by a cop simply because she refused to surrender her phone, another kid put in juvenile detention for four days because of a dress-code violation. But going too far in the other direction — allowing kids greater freedoms without thinking of the unintended consequences — makes them into adults before they are ready to think and behave as adults.

This is surely what led former dean of Harvard Law School Martha Minow to write that “advocates of children’s rights use the same rights . . . to place them in the same legal category as adults.” Turning kids into adults in this way, and allowing them to behave however they choose without reasonable consequences for those actions, turns children into slaves of their impulses. This is the opposite of freedom.

By Cinque Henderson

PARENT ALERT: More Than 2,000 Weapons Seized From Schools

Leeds teacher Ann Maguire was stabbed to death by a pupil in 2014

Samurai swords, axes and air guns are among the 2,579 weapons seized from schools in England and Wales, Freedom of Information requests have shown.

 

Press Association analysis of data from 32 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales said the weapons had been found in two years to March 2017.

Police chiefs said there had been a “worrying” increase in young people carrying knives.

There are about 25,850 schools in England and Wales.

Heads said children’s safety was their top priority and that schools worked closely with police to protect pupils.

In 2016-17 alone, 1,369 weapons were found – a rise of almost 20% on the previous year.

A fifth of the overall incidents related to knives or swords.

Other weapons confiscated included at least 26 guns, including air guns and an imitation firearm.

More unusual seizures included a police baton, a rolling pin, a can of beer and a 15in (38cm) metal rod.

At least 47 children below the age of 10 – the age at which someone can be prosecuted – were found with weapons.

This included three five-year-olds, one of whom was caught with a knife, while another was found with a “missile” – typically a brick or a rock.

The Metropolitan Police and Greater Manchester Police were among the forces to respond to the survey.

Police help

Chief Constable Alf Hitchcock, the National Police Chiefs Council lead for knife crime, said: “Carrying a weapon of any kind in schools is not an issue for a school to deal with alone; police and partners will always be willing to work with them and take appropriate action.

“We have recently seen an increase in young people carrying knives, and this is worrying.

“We are responding to this trend by targeting those who carry them illegally and working with retailers to reduce the sale of knives to under-age people, through nationally co-ordinated operations.

“Police involvement in schools, whether it be officers delivering talks and interactive sessions or based in schools themselves as part of the Safer Schools Partnership, helps us to educate young people and explain why carrying a weapon illegally is never acceptable.”

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “Schools work closely with the police to protect and educate their pupils, and in some cases police officers are stationed in schools.

“Where appropriate, schools conduct searches and use metal detectors, and they implement robust disciplinary procedures against anyone found in possession of a weapon.”

The figures come amid a crackdown on knife crime in schools by some forces.

Earlier this month, the Metropolitan Police announced officers would be working with schools to highlight the potential consequences of carrying a knife.

It follows the case of Ann Maguire, who was stabbed to death at Corpus Christi Catholic College in Leeds in April 2014 by a 15-year-old pupil.

The following year, teacher Vincent Uzomah was seriously injured when he was stabbed at Dixons Kings Academy in Bradford by a racist pupil.

BBC.com

 

 

Cameras Make Schools Unsafe – 3 Myths About School Safety

ALERT school violence schools
ALERT school violence schools

One of the great frustrations we at SERAPH have had in our work with securing school environments over the past 20 years is the obsession many school board members and school administrators have with security equipment such as cameras.
In this article we will set the record straight about security equipment; when is it useful and when it increases security problems?

After the Columbine massacre on April 20, 1999 the school spent an obscene amount of money on security equipment for the high school. Six months later a student walked through these systems with a loaded handgun. The school administrators didn’t understand school safety before April 20th and they had learned little after it. Human beings must manage other human beings!

Myth 1: Security cameras can provide a low cost monitoring system for each school in our district.

Wrong: Security cameras record an incident they cannot prevent it. Even if a school has a monitor in the front office [which is a good practice] or in the principal’s office [also a good practice], someone must see the problem and initiate a team of properly trained human beings to respond.

Security cameras do not have peripheral vision or cognitive function. They cannot see what the human eye can see and they cannot make a decision.

Myth 2: Cameras will prevent students from acting up. If they know they are being watched they will be more likely to behave.

Wrong: Please. Many years ago the practice of installing cameras on school buses was instituted in many school districts. To save money only one live [real] camera was actually working in one of the buses. Each day that real camera would be moved around to other buses [hopefully]. We have found that the students always know whether their bus has the live camera or not. This usually happens because they overhear untrained staff talking about it.

When human beings of all ages become aggressive, they usually loose focus and self control. Cameras cannot stop students from being aggressive.

Myth 3: Security equipment is school safety.

Wrong: A well managed school is a safe school! Lack of training for staff and administrators and consistent management of people is what makes your child unsafe.

U.S. Justice Dept Study Indicates Zero Tolerance Policies May Have An Adverse Effect On Students

Zero Tolerance Bad Idea
Zero Tolerance Bad Idea

A recently published research brief by Child Trends, “Multiple Responses, Promising Results: Evidence-Based, Non punitive Alternatives To Zero Tolerance,” suggests that zero tolerance school discipline policies have not been proven effective by research and may have negative effects, making students more likely to drop out and less likely to graduate on time. Instead, the brief recommends the use of non-punitive disciplinary action, such as behavior interventions, social skills classes, and character education.

KIDS, GUNS & SWIMMING POOLS: 3 Myths That Can Hurt Your Children

New York University professor Dave Kopel has written an important article about the many myths surrounding guns and kids.

“Scary Tales About Kids & Guns” separates fact from fiction. The article reveals important information that every parent should know about guns and their children.

Myth 1: People who use guns to commit murder are regular people who get angry or ‘snap’.

Fact: 90% of murderers have criminal records. The majority of gun crime is committed by criminals. [NY Times April 8, 2006 – The Baltimore Sun Jan 1, 2007]

Myth 2: Accidental shootings of children are at epidemic proportions.

Fact: Since 1950 the rate of fatal gun accidents among children has declined by 90%. In 2007 65 children died in gun accidents in the United States. [Brief District of Columbia v. Heller]

Myth 3: Being killed by guns is a leading cause of death for children.

Fact: Bathtubs kill twice as many children as guns and swimming pools kill three times as many children as guns in the U.S. each year. [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention]

The facts are clear from a comprehensive study of gun accidents [Accidents Analysis & Prevention Waller & Whorton]; people who cause these accidents have higher rates of arrest for violence, alcohol abuse, highway crashes and moving violations. Personality defects and criminal behavior is the primary contributor to gun accidents.

While gun crime is a serious issue in the United States accurate facts are critical when parents make decisions about their children’s safety.

 

JONBENET RAMSEY INVESTIGATOR BEGINS NATIONAL SEMINAR SERIES TEACHING FORENSIC PROFILING TO THE PUBLIC

Dale Yeager a Forensic Profiler, who worked for the Boulder District Attorney’s office in 1997 on the original murder investigation of JonBenet Ramsey, is teaching the general public forensic profiling in a series of national seminars.

The PROFILING YOUR LIFE Series will provide various seminars for adults and children focusing on Bullying, School / College Student Safety and Personal Safety for adults.

“I saw the potential for Mr. Yeager to teach a version of his Federal Law Enforcement programs to regular people”, states series organizer Tara Levy.  “What I saw being taught to children and adults as ‘self defense’ in the U.S. seemed lacking to me once I met Dale Yeager and heard what he knew about criminal behavior. I knew Dale could teach people reality based actions to protect themselves.”

The seminar series began in New York City. Additional seminars have been performed in New York City and Philadelphia. With plans to expand the series to the Midwest in 2016.

“As a professional I am routinely asked by parents and students about self defense and profiling and sadly what people know is ‘myths’ not facts.”, says Yeager. “The first rule of self defense is ‘ don’t become a victim’ and that requires the ability to accurately assess people for dangerous behavior.  And if you have to fight use techniques that work for law enforcement which doesn’t include kicking them in the groin like fathers’ tell their daughters to do.”

The series includes several seminars;

  1. STOP BULLYING TODAY – A child and parent seminar for children ages 4-11.
  2. PROTECT YOUR TEENAGER FROM BULLYING AND DANGER – A seminar for parents and adolescents ages 12-17.
  3. KEEP YOUR DAUGHTER SAFE AT COLLEGE – A college student focused seminar.
  4. “PROFILING YOUR LIFE” How To Use Criminal Profiling To Protect Yourself And Your Family From Violent People, Con Artists and Dangerous Co Workers – A seminar for ages 18 and up.

“I decided to make the seminars family focused – working together and learning together,” explains Yeager.  “The idea was to bring quality and reality to the issue of personal safety whether it was a third grader or a senior citizen.”

TRAVEL ALERT: 50 Most Violent Cities In The World – Surprise!

 

  • Latin America is home to 41 of the 50 most dangerous cities in the world
  • Caracas in Venezuela is now the most violent, according to homicide rate
  • Took the top spot from San Pedro Sula, in Honduras, now in second place
  • Drug trafficking, gang wars, political instability and corruption are blamed
  • U.S. cities St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit and New Orleans are also named 

By Imogen Calderwood

THE 50 MOST DANGEROUS CITIES IN THE WORLD – BY HOMICIDES PER 100,000 INHABITANTS IN 2015

1. Caracas, Venezuela – 119.87

2. San Pedro Sula, Honduras – 111.03

3. San Salvador, El Salvador – 108.54

4. Acapulco, Mexico – 104.73

5. Maturin, Venezuela – 86.45

6. Distrito Central, Honduras – 73.51

7. Valencia, Venezuela – 72.31

8. Palmira, Colombia – 70.88

9. Cape Town, South Africa – 65.53

10. Cali, Colombia – 64.27

11. Cuidad Guayana, Venezuela – 62.33

12. Fortaleza, Brazil – 60.77

13. Natal, Brazil – 60.66

14. Salvador, Brazil – 60.63

15. St Louis, Missouri, U.S. – 59.23

16. Joao Pessoa, Brazil – 58.40

17. Culiacan, Mexico – 56.09

18. Maceio, Brazil – 55.63

19. Baltimore, Maryland, U.S. – 54.98

20. Barquisimeto, Venezuela – 54.96

21. Sao Luis, Brazil – 53.05

22. Cuiaba, Brazil – 48.52

23. Manaus, Brazil – 47.87

24. Cumana, Venezuela – 47.77

25. Guatemala City, Guatemala – 47.17

26. Belem, Brazil – 45.83

27. Feira de Santana, Brazil – 45.5

28. Detroit, Michigan, U.S. – 43.89

29. Goiania, Brazil – 43.38

30. Teresina, Brazil – 42.64

31. Vitoria, Brazil – 41.99

32. New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S. – 41.44

33. Kingston, Jamaica – 41.14

34. Gran Barcelona, Venezuela – 40.08

35. Tijuana, Mexico – 39.09

36. Vitoria da Conquista, Brazil – 38.46

37. Recife, Brazil – 38.12

38. Aracaju. Brazil – 37.7

39. Campos dos Goytacazes, Brazil – 36.16

40. Campina Grande, Brazil – 36.04

41. Durban, South Africa – 35.93

42. Nelson Mandela Bay, South Africa – 35.85

43. Porto Alegre, Brazil – 34.73

44. Curitiba, Brazil – 34.71

45. Pereira, Colombia – 32.58

46. Victoria, Mexico – 30.50

47. Johannesburg, South Africa – 30.31

48. Macapa, Brazil – 30.25

49. Maracaibo, Venezuela – 28.85

50. Obregon, Mexico – 28.29

SERAPH Travel Safety Emergency Help for Families Churches & Corporations

 

 

 

 

IRRESPONSIBLE PARENTS? 7 Questions For Every Parent With A High School Or College Student Traveling Overseas

635942209324568998-AP-Belgium-Airport

by Dale Yeager SERAPH

The terrorist attacks in Brussels, Belgium have brought the issue of travel safety and students to the national spotlight. Families of murdered or injured students thought that Western Europe was safe. They were wrong.

It never ceases to amaze me how many parents trust the most valuable humans in their lives to teachers, principals and college administrators.

I routinely hear these statements when I speak about travel safety;

“Oh Dale, the high school teacher has a lot of experience traveling.” or “The College / University has a lot of experience with semesters abroad.”

You are trusting people with your children’s lives, remember Natalee Holloway? Irresponsible school administrators and parents – without a travel safety plan – allowed teenagers to manage themselves and the result was forever devastating for the Holloway family.

I have some questions that every parent reading this should ask themselves:

  1. Where is the contact list of doctors and dentists that meet U.S. standards in the country your child will be traveling in? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  2. How will the trip leaders get Real Time [Live] updates on severe weather, terrorist threats, disease, riots, etc.? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  3. What happens if they close the borders? Where is the plan of action to evacuate your child to safety? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  4. What happens if your child loses their medication?
  5. What police or hotel / hospice security are in place to prevent sexual assault or violence to your child? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]
  6. How will the U.S. embassy know where your child is?
  7. Have the leaders of your trip been trained in Travel Safety and do they have a Travel Safety Plan? [How will they prove it to you as a parent?]

How do you protect your children when they travel out of the country?

  • Train your children and yourself in Travel Safety. Even if you have traveled extensively you will be surprised what you will learn.
  • Register your child with the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program [STEP]  . This program protects your child from most safety and security issues and provides a no cost solution to travel safety.
  • Have a Travel Safety Plan Of Action. A copy should be placed in the lining of your child’s bag, a copy should be on your child at all times and you should have a copy at all times.

Travel safety is a deliberate act!

Rape On College Campuses: The Harvard Dirty Secret

stop_sign_women-defend-yourself

Many parents are unaware of what is really happening on college campuses in the U.S. related to their daughters safety. They are inundated with inaccurate information from news sources and talk shows.

What is really going on? This op-ed is a must read:

Harvard to Girls: Go Where The Rapes Are

by Naomi Schaefer Riley

Want to know why students supposedly experience sexual assault with “alarming frequency” at Harvard University?

A special task force set up by the school’s president to address the question blames, at least in part, its Final Clubs — the university’s nonresident version of fraternities.

There is, according to a report released last week, “a strong sense of sexual entitlement within some of the male Final Clubs, stemming in part from the members’ control of social spaces that are imbued with a certain historical tradition and that elevate members’ social status on campus.”

In other words, blame the frats.

It’s not clear how the geniuses who wrote this report can draw a direct line between historically imbued social status and incidences of rape, but this is just the university’s latest in a series of public statements that will make people wonder whether Harvard’s reputation as being a place with smart people is at all deserved.

The school has spent the better part of two years and God knows how many hundreds of thousands of dollars to study the “sexual assault” problem on its campus. First it conducted a shockingly bad student survey — full of unclear and leading questions that put asking someone on a date and complimenting someone on their looks in the same category as rape.

Then its president sent a letter to the community citing the shoddy evidence, noting “the alarming frequency with which our students, especially but by no means only our undergraduates, experience incidents of sexual assault.”

And now there’s a report from the president’s task force detailing steps the college should take to address the problem.

It turns out that other than dorms, Final Clubs are the most likely place for students to experience sexual assault. Well, aside from dormitories, they’re pretty much the only private space on the campus. If you’re going to assault someone, the cafeteria is not a great idea. And the English Department offices are usually locked after hours.

Perhaps this sounds flip, but most of these assaults aren’t assaults at all. They’re unwanted sexual contact between intoxicated people, as the report demonstrates. But the idea that these all-male institutions, which exist independent of the university, get to admit women to parties based on their looks has goaded liberals for so long that they are going to use “rape culture” as an excuse to make them co-ed or shut them down altogether.

Newsflash: Even if women were in “positions of power,” drunken sexual encounters and even sexual assault would still be a problem at these clubs.

Across the country, fraternities were forced to go co-ed in the ’80s and ’90s. Administrators thought they would “introduce the civilizing force of women into fraternities,” as Caitlin Flanagan explains. Flanagan, who has written extensively on the problems caused by fraternities on campus for the Atlantic, notes that “college women are no longer a civilizing force. They drink really heavily and they love to prove that they are just as gross as the guys.”

Middlebury forced all of its fraternities to go co-ed and become “social houses.” At one, I recall, when Madonna’s “Like A Virgin” started playing at any of its parties, all the women in the room would spontaneously remove their shirts. The patriarchy didn’t make them do it.

Of course, the idea that admitting women to all-male clubs is going to solve the problem of sexual assault is absurd. As Flanagan argues, “if these outfits are actually such centers of sexual assault, why in God’s name would the university recommend that its female students join one of them? ‘Women get raped at this location. We must send more women to this location.’ What’s next? Sending women students to areas with a high murder rate?”

If these task force members really believed that women were being regularly raped at Final Clubs, the university president would be on the phone with local police. Harvard men would be escorted out in handcuffs.

But no one really thinks that. They just believe Final Clubs are the location for a lot of drunken hook-ups. And they are.

If the college wants to protect women from such encounters, the best response wouldn’t be to force more women on the boards of these institutions but to suggest a boycott instead. That’ll teach ’em.