Student Suspended For Piercings... [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 05:33 AM

...From http://www.wsbradio.com

<table border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" height="1323" width="373"> <tbody><tr><td class="pgsubhed" align="left" valign="top" width="50%"> Henry County Student Fights Piercing Suspension </td> <td class="txtspons" align="left" valign="top" width="50%">
</td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="2" align="left" valign="top" width="100%"> (WSB Radio) -- Corey Rager and his mother moved from Fort Meade, Maryland to the Atlanta area on September 11 of this year. The reason? Better schools. But they were not expecting the welcome they receive at Corey's new school. Corey has been put in in-school suspension at Dutchtown High School, the school system's version of solitary confinement. Why? He has a pierced eyebrow and a pierced lip.

http://wsbradio.com/images/nationalnews/rager.jpg "Body piercing jewelry, or the facsimile of, on any visible area of the body, including the tongue, other than the ear, is prohibited," says Henry County school spokesperson Cindy foster. The decision has left Corey frustrated and his mother outraged.

"He feels as if he has the individual right, as a citizen, to wear his piercings," Kati Monahan tells WSB. She says when Corey was placed in suspension, it wasn't due to bad behavior, or for talking in class. He was simply told he cannot attend his classes. "He didn't do anything. He simply sat in the room and the teacher asked him to leave."

Monahan says she tried to get answers from school officials, but was told it was a rule, and that was the reason for the suspension. She believes the rule is unfair, and the suspension unjustly harsh.

"He's not being provided an education," she says. "He's being segregated from everybody else. He's not being given the chance to meet anybody." His mother says the 10th grader is naturally shy, and, with the move to a new state, and a new school, the suspension has made a difficult adjustment impossible.

"He's place in a room with cubicles, and he has to stare at a wall all day. For eight hours he sits there and does the work given to him by teachers," she says. "He's not allowed to talk to other students. He's given bathroom breaks and gets lunch. And, he has to bring his lunch back to his room, and must go to the cafeteria 10 minutes before other students, so he doesn't see anyone then either."

Monahan says Corey did remove his piercings on his the first day of school, but felt as if he needed to take a stand, and returned the next day with his piercings in place. That's when he was suspended. For Monahan, who came to Henry county on the advice of a friend, this was not what she expected.

"My son wants an education in Henry County and we came here because Henry County has a good school system. We came 700 miles just to get here."

Monahan has hired an attorney, but says she would like to see the issue resolved without having to take legal action.

<script language="JavaScript"> </script> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 05:36 AM

<table bgcolor="#000000" border="0" cellspacing="1" width="420"> <tbody><tr><td class="leftrail" align="left" valign="top" width="100%"><table class="leftrail" border="0" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="leftrail" align="left" valign="top">http://wsbradio.com/templates/station_logo_alt.gif

Do you think the suspension of Corey Rager is justified? </td> </tr> </tbody></table> </td> <td rowspan="2" align="center" bgcolor="#ffffff" valign="top" width="120">
</td> </tr> <tr height="100%"> <td align="center" bgcolor="#ffffff" valign="top"> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td align="left" valign="center" width="100%"> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td width="40%">Yes</td> <td width="25%"> <table border="0" height="100%" width="69%"> <tbody><tr> <td align="left" bgcolor="blue"> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> </td> <td>69%</td> </tr> <tr> <td width="40%">No</td> <td width="25%"> <table border="0" height="100%" width="31%"> <tbody><tr> <td align="left" bgcolor="blue"> </td> </tr> </tbody></table> </td> <td>31%</td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody></table></td></tr></tbody> </table>

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 05:42 AM

Thoughts...

1. It is a silly rule.

2. Despite #1, I think the suspension is "justified", as the poll asks. The article makes it clear that he *knew* of the silly rule and chose to disobey it.

3. Because of #2, any time whining about the punishment is silly as well. Don't whine about the in-school suspension. Focus on the rule itself. The in-school suspension is the "correct" punishment for willfully breaking the rules.

4. I seriously doubt that, as of a few mintues ago, the 69% of people who voted that the suspension is justified think so based on the logic of willfully breaking the rule. My guess is that the "Yes" votes are far more based on the fact that to the adults voting in the poll, the boy looks like a "troublemaker."

Joe

09-23-2004, 05:44 AM

take the piercings out, shut up, and go to school

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 05:46 AM

Legislating the appearence of students makes me nervous. Especially given the reasons most schools have these rules. I think the appearence of students in school is defined by society anyway. Who cares if they look the same in school as they would outside of school? Either their parents and society have gotten them ready to dress appropriately for society or they haven't. Piercings are ok to get into buisnesses and purchase services, should be good enough to recieve an education.

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 05:48 AM

FBPro

09-23-2004, 05:49 AM

take the piercings out, shut up, and go to school
Brilliant!!

Yossarian

09-23-2004, 06:00 AM

Skydog's on the ball here.

The punishment is appropriate because he broke a known rule.

The rule is whack because who's business is it deciding if he gets to pierce himself?

Reminds me of the thread a while back about the guy in jail who won the lottery - folk saying it should be taken from him but the law saying it was his.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 06:24 AM

When we grew up and went to school
There were certain teachers who would
Hurt the children in any way they could
By pouring their derision
Upon anything we did
And exposing every weakness
However carefully hidden by the kids
But in the town, it was well known
When they got home at night, their fat and
Psychopathic wives would thrash them
Within inches of their lives.

We don't need no education
We dont need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.

We don't need no education
We dont need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teachers leave them kids alone
Hey! Teachers! Leave them kids alone!
All in all it's just another brick in the wall.
All in all you're just another brick in the wall.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 06:51 AM

This is just a continuation of a fine tradition that requires multiple rules that have no real basis on education. It is about control.

If any of this had anything to do with education, you wouldn't be able to do it in college either where the classes/concepts are way more difficult and complex.

They should spend their limited resources (school systems constantly complain about that) dealing with education issues instead of implementing someone's social agenda.

condors

09-23-2004, 07:01 AM

we had a stupid rule when i was in high school

girls could wear mini skirts as short as they want with no problem

boy-no shorts allowed

we were having problems in the summer with the air conditioning not working except on the 1st floor (where all the prinicpal's offices were)

along with a bunch of other guys i wear a mini skirt (it didn't cover my boxers quite the fashion statement) to school. I was sent home and given a 30 day in school suspension for wearing what most girls wear everyday. It never crossed my mind to try to get an attorny because i was missing out on a quality education of books shared by 6 people that are a decade old with pages missing.

Anyways my thought is follow the rule or deal.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:05 AM

If his mother really cared as much as she pretends to, she would homeschool the kid where he can be an individual and even exceed a public high school's curriculum. That would prove that you are willing to stand up for your kid against the system.

When I was in high school, we had the same no-shorts rule. About half of the guys just simply started wearing shorts when we were freshmen (having driven in the same sort of change in our middle school with the same tactics). The school backed down because they couldn't discipline that many students by their preferred methods and the backlash would have been too strong. So, the policy changed and everyone could wear shorts. If half of the students at those schools started coming in with piercings, something would change.

Yossarian

09-23-2004, 07:13 AM

If his mother really cared as much as she pretends to, she would homeschool the kid

Theres a LOT more to that decision that 'caring enough'.

a LOOOOT more

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:23 AM

Theres a LOT more to that decision that 'caring enough'.

a LOOOOT more

A child that age could be homeschooled, with a curriculum that exceeds the public school system, without a parent needing to be home with them 100% of the time. I've seen it before with my own eyes. It just depends on how much work the parent is willing to put into it and how responsible the student is.

I'm not sure where you are located and what the rules/laws are there regarding homeschooling, but I've seen the above work successfully in Georgia and Michigan, with a highschool aged child and two working parents. In both cases I am aware of, the student ended up progressing through their academics at a faster rate than they would've even been allowed to at the public school.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 07:29 AM

In many ways, I agree with Mom. I have always despised the idea of school uniforms and restrictive policies. I believe that many times, they're unnecessarily strict because of a generational gap.

I can understand the need for control when dealing with students, but I don't see how piercings inhibits the school's ability to do that in any way. In all probability, some school bureaucrat/parent group got a bug in his (their) butt about piercings and just decided to ban 'em with little justification.

Is there a line somewhere around there? Yes. Do I think piercings cross it? No. But that's my opinion and opinions are like assholes - everyone has one.

wade moore

09-23-2004, 07:29 AM

A child that age could be homeschooled, with a curriculum that exceeds the public school system, without a parent needing to be home with them 100% of the time. I've seen it before with my own eyes. It just depends on how much work the parent is willing to put into it and how responsible the student is.

I'm not sure where you are located and what the rules/laws are there regarding homeschooling, but I've seen the above work successfully in Georgia and Michigan, with a highschool aged child and two working parents. In both cases I am aware of, the student ended up progressing through their academics at a faster rate than they would've even been allowed to at the public school.

I'm with Yossarian on this one... you are definately WAY WAY oversimplifying this...

Ksyrup

09-23-2004, 07:31 AM

This is just a continuation of a fine tradition that requires multiple rules that have no real basis on education. It is about control.
I think it has to do with "disruption" of the class. Now, don't ask me exactly how having piercings disrupts a class, but I think that's the justification for this kind of thing. It doesn't have anything to do with education, per se, other than allegedly making it easier to educate kids and control the classroom without distractions.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 07:32 AM

A child that age could be homeschooled, with a curriculum that exceeds the public school system, without a parent needing to be home with them 100% of the time. I've seen it before with my own eyes. It just depends on how much work the parent is willing to put into it and how responsible the student is.

I'm not sure where you are located and what the rules/laws are there regarding homeschooling, but I've seen the above work successfully in Georgia and Michigan, with a highschool aged child and two working parents. In both cases I am aware of, the student ended up progressing through their academics at a faster rate than they would've even been allowed to at the public school.

So? What if she feels that she's not qualified to homeschool? What if she wants him to associate with other kids in the area since he's new? If he were homeschooled, he'd be even more isolated. Just because she CAN homeschool doesn't mean she SHOULD.

Because she doesn't in no way reflects upon her "caring" for her child. That's just an absurdly ignorant statement.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:34 AM

I'm with Yossarian on this one... you are definately WAY WAY oversimplifying this...

The complexities of accomplishing it are different based on the community and how many obstacles have been placed in the way by the local government (often due to the lobbying of teacher associations). So, what you think may be overly complex and difficult in your area is not so in all places.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:38 AM

Besides, if the mother is even entertaining the idea of bringing in an attorney...she would be far better off investing her time, money, and general effort in taking the boy out of government schools.

Draft Dodger

09-23-2004, 07:44 AM

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:47 AM

Because she doesn't in no way reflects upon her "caring" for her child. That's just an absurdly ignorant statement.

Then she should tell him to follow the rules and get over it, I suppose. Either he plays by the rules, or takes his punishment for violating them. I'm just saying that if she really wants him to be an individual, she has to take it to its logical conclusion and remove him from the situation that strives to remove that.

Additionally, home schooled children are only as isolated as they/their parents want to be. I played hockey and soccer with kids who went to public school, private school, and even home schooled when I was growing up. Rarely were more than two kids on any team going to the same school anyway, so it is a moot point. That 'social' argument against homeschool is a bogus one.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:49 AM

mrules are rules - he might as well start getting used to that now. suspension is totally justified, IMO. oh, and 11 seems to be to early to have all those ridiculous piercings like that.

One would assume that his prior school system had no problem with it. I wonder which school system has the better SAT scores and overall academics. I don't know, but I'm leaning towards his previous one.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 07:49 AM

man, when I got my ear pierced at 16, it was still very much pushing the envelope. when I got a 2nd hole at 18, it was even rarer. now you have to go and pierce your eyebrow or chin to get attention.

rules are rules - he might as well start getting used to that now. suspension is totally justified, IMO. oh, and 11 seems to be to early to have all those ridiculous piercings like that.

Who is 11? He's a 10th grader - he should be 15 or 16.

Rules are rules. But rules should be challenged or protested if they are unjust or unnecessary. Again, fine line here, but I think Mom is probably right.

I think the school system needs to show that piercings have caused, or are a likely cause of, a disruption to the school. If they can't, then the rule needs to go.

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 07:52 AM

One would assume that his prior school system had no problem with it. I wonder which school system has the better SAT scores and overall academics. I don't know, but I'm leaning towards his previous one.
Well, according to the article, she's claiming that Henry County's school system played a part in the move:

"My son wants an education in Henry County and we came here because Henry County has a good school system. We came 700 miles just to get here."

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 07:57 AM

Boortz is talking about this right now. As usual, he's not exactly sympathetic, but the man sure is entertaining!

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 07:59 AM

Well, according to the article, she's claiming that Henry County's school system played a part in the move:

I missed that part...the distance is probably about 700 miles...Well, if she wanted to move 700 miles to get her son a better education and hand-picked that school system, why is she upset about the rules of the school system? This is a non-story. I overlooked that important quote that changes everything. Perhaps she regrets not really checking into the details now.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 08:02 AM

Boortz is talking about this right now. As usual, he's not exactly sympathetic, but the man sure is entertaining!

The Boortz of the more than a few years ago might have said, "That's what you get in government schools", but today's Boortz that has taken a sharp turn to the right over the past couple of years and has a different take.

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 08:05 AM

The Boortz of the previous few years might have said, "That's what you get in government schools", but today's Boortz that has taken a sharp turn to the right over the past couple of years has a different take.Well, I'd expect an anti-government-schools rant before the morning is over. He doesn't spare many people his rants. So far, he's been all over "this fat little pin cushion freak." I expect government schoolls will get a good blasting in the coming half-hour.

wade moore

09-23-2004, 08:07 AM

The complexities of accomplishing it are different based on the community and how many obstacles have been placed in the way by the local government (often due to the lobbying of teacher associations). So, what you think may be overly complex and difficult in your area is not so in all places.

I'm not talking about legal obstacles... I'm talking to many issues like Blackadar mentioned among any others...

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 08:08 AM

I expect government schoolls will get a good blasting in the coming half-hour.

I wonder if I will be able to keep listening long enough. I've found him far less tolerable since shortly before the invasion of Iraq. I've listened enough to hear some of his opinions falling more in line with Hannity than they used to, which isn't very interesting.

Hahah. Here comes the government-schools rant...hah. You were right on that. 1 point for SkyDog.

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 08:10 AM

Hahah. Here comes the government-schools rant...hah. You were right on that. 1 point for SkyDog.:D

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 08:10 AM

I love school uniforms and think this rule is completely fair. Most jobs have dress codes, why can't schools?

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 08:12 AM

Tekneck, I didn't mean to blast you over your "caring" statement. It came off a bit harsh. I just don't like to see anyone's caring for their child questioned in a case like this.

If my local school system implemented a strict school uniform policy, I'd probably be fighting the same fight.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 08:13 AM

I love school uniforms and think this rule is completely fair. Most jobs have dress codes, why can't schools?

Because one is a public enterprise and one is private. Big difference.

Ben E Lou

09-23-2004, 08:28 AM

I've listened enough to hear some of his opinions falling more in line with Hannity than they used to, which isn't very interesting.FWIW, I can very rarely listen to Hannity for more than 15 minutes at a time, but I can keep Boortz on for the full 4 1/2 hours if it is a light morning.

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 08:48 AM

I love school uniforms and think this rule is completely fair. Most jobs have dress codes, why can't schools?

Because its a service not a job. A better comparison would be recieving other services. Lets say, getting ones driver's liscense. I would bet you would have a hard time getting a driver's liscense(or a service from a private company) naked. This is because there are certain codes of conduct in society, some enforced by laws and some not.

You can, however, get almost every public or private service you want with the type of piercings this young man has. A public education should not be any different.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:02 AM

Because its a service not a job. A better comparison would be recieving other services. Lets say, getting ones driver's liscense. I would bet you would have a hard time getting a driver's liscense(or a service from a private company) naked. This is because there are certain codes of conduct in society, some enforced by laws and some not.

You can, however, get almost every public or private service you want with the type of piercings this young man has. A public education should not be any different.Then either I or you are looking at public education in the wrong light. It should be more in line with a job (because that is what it is doing. Preparing these kids for the future).

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:07 AM

Because one is a public enterprise and one is private. Big difference.
Reaaly? So how can they enforce any rule? I mean, I can talk to my friends in line at the DMV, therefore I can talk in class, right? I can listen to music in a public place, therefore I can listen to music in class, right? Your setting up a situation where no displine can be held in the classroom.

Crapshoot

09-23-2004, 09:14 AM

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 09:19 AM

Then either I or you are looking at public education in the wrong light. It should be more in line with a job (because that is what it is doing. Preparing these kids for the future).

If they choose to be in a specific vocational program within their school I could see the merits of looking at their educational experience in that specific light. Until then I think the more we treat general learning as learning, and not job preperation, the better off our learning environments will be. Plenty of opporitunity to be acclimated to jobs outside of school. If you pigeonhole learning you kill the possibilities that play a major part in making education great.

Subby

09-23-2004, 09:25 AM

Faux individualism is the bane of the modern public education system...

Farrah Whitworth-Rahn

09-23-2004, 09:27 AM

It should be more in line with a job (because that is what it is doing. Preparing these kids for the future).
I agree with GrantDawg on this one. I'm even going to go a step further and say that as a kid, going to school is your job. And as with any job, if you knowingly and purposefully break the rules there are repercussions.

HornedFrog Purple

09-23-2004, 09:29 AM

FWIW, I can very rarely listen to Hannity for more than 15 minutes at a time, but I can keep Boortz on for the full 4 1/2 hours if it is a light morning.

I pity you foo' :D

You are getting brainwashed by an Aggie.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:30 AM

If they choose to be in a specific vocational program within their school I could see the merits of looking at their educational experience in that specific light. Until then I think the more we treat general learning as learning, and not job preperation, the better off our learning environments will be. Plenty of opporitunity to be acclimated to jobs outside of school. If you pigeonhole learning you kill the possibilities that play a major part in making education great.Are you saying you don't need education to get job's outside of vocational learning? Schools are just learning for learnings sake? And since that's the case, they aren't allowed to make rules on dress? How about speech? How can they possible have dention? I mean, you can't get dentention while using other services.

Pidgeonhole, smidgegeonhole, school (if a service) is different than other services. Education requires discipline, and removing the ability of schools to make rules and enforce them is a very bad idea.

Samdari

09-23-2004, 09:32 AM

A child that age could be homeschooled, with a curriculum that exceeds the public school system, without a parent needing to be home with them 100% of the time. I've seen it before with my own eyes. It just depends on how much work the parent is willing to put into it and how responsible the student is.

I'm not sure where you are located and what the rules/laws are there regarding homeschooling, but I've seen the above work successfully in Georgia and Michigan, with a highschool aged child and two working parents. In both cases I am aware of, the student ended up progressing through their academics at a faster rate than they would've even been allowed to at the public school.

Well, two cases, that certainly proves homeschooling is the way to go in every case.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:33 AM

bingo. a bunch of old fogies implementing archaic crap that has nothing to do with education is ridiculous.
Expect, every school I have ever heard of that implemented a uniform system has had test scores improve. Education is the purpose here, right?

JAG

09-23-2004, 09:36 AM

Schools are just learning for learnings sake?

Well, I can't say knowing what happened in The War of 1812 has helped me in any job I've held...:)

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:40 AM

Well, two cases, that certainly proves homeschooling is the way to go in every case.You know, the thing is most of these homeschooling kids would have excelled at public school, too. (Some might not because of being in really bad schools, or social problems of their own. I'm not trying to blanket anything). The reason? Their parents would have been involved.

Every study shows parential involvement is the key. Generally, if a parent would sacrifice the time to homeschool, they would also be the parent that would spend time with their kid after school.

We do not homeschool, but my daughter is already a head of her class in almost everything. It is not because she is a genius (though I think she is in some ways :)), but it is because we go over everything with her after-school. We take the time to help her with learning. A Parent who leaves it all up to the school is setting their kid up to fail.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:44 AM

Well, I can't say knowing what happened in The War of 1812 has helped me in any job I've held...:)
And I don't use algebra at all at my job, but I might in the future. Point? Are you saying that being well rounded education-wise doesn't help you in your job? Then why do so many employers want college educated workers even when their degree is not in the job-field? Are you seriuosly saying that education has nothing to do with preparation for employment?

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 09:45 AM

Are you saying you don't need education to get job's outside of vocational learning? Schools are just learning for learnings sake? And since that's the case, they aren't allowed to make rules on dress? How about speech? How can they possible have dention? I mean, you can't get dentention while using other services.

Pidgeonhole, smidgegeonhole, school (if a service) is different than other services. Education requires discipline, and removing the ability of schools to make rules and enforce them is a very bad idea.

The arguement on school's role comes from simply talking about it as job preperation or a temperary job for the children of America. I would argue that thats a very dangerous road, but it really is a seperate arguement.

As far as discipline, obviously its nessassary. I still contend public education is a service. Its something being given to another person. As such I would think it is something that should be responsible to the consumer, both individual and collectively. You can't listen to music in the classroom because it will disrupt your learning as well as the learning around you. Simple, you are wasting the resources used on yourself and others. Unacceptable.

Piercings? There is no proof being offered up that they disrupt the educational experience for the individual or collective. Furthermore, common sense would dictate that a few studs in someones face won't disrupt educational services. (seriously, what kids will stare at someones piercings all day because they aren't in ones ear?)

So what are we talking about? Rules with no purpose? Thats awefully inefficient and who knows what kind of muck it creates in the system that we don't see.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 09:46 AM

Reaaly? So how can they enforce any rule? I mean, I can talk to my friends in line at the DMV, therefore I can talk in class, right? I can listen to music in a public place, therefore I can listen to music in class, right? Your setting up a situation where no displine can be held in the classroom.

Give me a break.

The public enterprise can enforce almost any rule as long as they show that rule is needed so they can fulfill their primary function. That's why they can legally do quite a bit, including locker searches, etc. That's why talking out of turn in class, listening to music in class, etc. can be restricted. Those actions interfere with the primary mission of the school. They also interfere with the rights of other students to learn as well.

In this case, I'm not sure they can show that it interferes with the school's ability to teach or that it causes a disruption with the ability of the other students to learn. In addition, this is a 1st Amendment (freedom of expression) and there is a LOT of grey area here. The courts have never been clear on how much the 1st Amendment applies to students in a classroom.

A private enterprise can enforce almost any rule, so long as that rule isn't illegal in purpose or unfairly discriminatory. Again, there's a major difference between a private and public enterprise.

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 09:46 AM

Well, two cases, that certainly proves homeschooling is the way to go in every case.

I was relating a personal experience that homeschooling a kid beyond what is offered by the public school system is possible without a stay-at-home parent. I never said it was more than that.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:48 AM

Piercings? There is no proof being offered up that they disrupt the educational experience for the individual or collective. Furthermore, common sense would dictate that a few studs in someones face won't disrupt educational services. (seriously, what kids will stare at someones piercings all day because they aren't in ones ear?)

So what are we talking about? Rules with no purpose? Thats awefully inefficient and who knows what kind of muck it creates in the system that we don't see.
Sure, no proof except every study that has been done has shown marked improvement in schools after implementing a dress code. Seems the rule has been affective and does have a purpose.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 09:50 AM

Give me a break.

The public enterprise can enforce almost any rule as long as they show that rule is needed so they can fulfill their primary function. That's why they can legally do quite a bit, including locker searches, etc. That's why talking out of turn in class, listening to music in class, etc. can be restricted. Those actions interfere with the primary mission of the school. They also interfere with the rights of other students to learn as well.

In this case, I'm not sure they can show that it interferes with the school's ability to teach or that it causes a disruption with the ability of the other students to learn. In addition, this is a 1st Amendment (freedom of expression) and there is a LOT of grey area here. The courts have never been clear on how much the 1st Amendment applies to students in a classroom.

A private enterprise can enforce almost any rule, so long as that rule isn't illegal in purpose or unfairly discriminatory. Again, there's a major difference between a private and public enterprise.

Again, every study I've ever seen or heard about shows marked improvement in schools that enforce a school uniform policy. How is that then a rule that is not affective toward their primary goal?

Draft Dodger

09-23-2004, 09:52 AM

Who is 11? He's a 10th grader - he should be 15 or 16.

oops. where'd I come up with that from? I thought he looked a little big for an 11 year old

Tekneek

09-23-2004, 09:54 AM

A Parent who leaves it all up to the school is setting their kid up to fail.

A parent who takes full control of this raises the bar as well. Rather than just staying ahead of the rest of the class, but having to stay with a curriculum beneath them, you can move forward without those boundaries. Even in high school when I was taking advanced placement courses, self-study courses, and moving on into more science and math as electives... I probably could have gone much further and faster if I had not been bound to the confines of what the public school was willing to teach me.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 09:58 AM

I've also seen where uniforms have been shot down, legally, because there was no reason for them. The schools often mentioned in studies were vastly underperforming schools that needed drastic action to improve. In those cases, the courts felt that the need of the enterprise AND the need of students to get an education outweighed the individual rights of free speech/expression.

There's currently no evidence (either way) that THIS school needs to enforce this policy or that it helps the learning environment in any way. Just because it worked elsewhere doesn't give a school a "get out of Jail free" card to enforce any policy regarding dress codes it wants. It has to be taken on a case-by-case basis because it is a public enterprise.

RendeR

09-23-2004, 10:00 AM

take the piercings out, shut up, and go to school

Its ignorant shit like this that makes me distrust, nay completely discredit most right wing/republican/bible thumping types.

Grow up man, its not the 50's anymore, people, even children, have a right to look, think, and believe as they choose.

JAG

09-23-2004, 10:00 AM

And I don't use algebra at all at my job, but I might in the future. Point? Are you saying that being well rounded education-wise doesn't help you in your job? Then why do so many employers want college educated workers even when their degree is not in the job-field? Are you seriuosly saying that education has nothing to do with preparation for employment?

Actually, I was just trying to be light-hearted in regards to your statement. What I was trying to point out that since much of what people learn in school is not directly applicable to their profession, there is a certain degree of 'learning for learning's sake' that's important to take from the experience. Knowing what happened during the War of 1812 doesn't help me in life or work, but understanding why it happened can bring me some enlightenment to alternate points of view I might not have thought of. I can also learn where to find information on it, a type of research that could help me learn how to find things about a topic for work on which I might need information. So I tend to think it's the behind the scenes things you learn at school that are more helpful than the actual topics being taught.

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 10:01 AM

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:01 AM

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 10:02 AM

You know, I agree that it should be case by case. It seemed to me though that you threw the whole idea out as bad. I'm saying this school has every right to have said policy.

Beat ya! See my post above yours. :)

Troll

09-23-2004, 10:03 AM

Again, every study I've ever seen or heard about shows marked improvement in schools that enforce a school uniform policy. How is that then a rule that is not affective toward their primary goal?

You are throwing this around quite a bit, but I would like to see drop out rates before and after dress code. I know at my local high school they made the dress code more stricht(still not even a uniform) around my sophomore(4 or 5ish years ago) year and the drop out rates since then have been record highs. My class alone had a drop out rate of 15%. I think this is far worse than wearing baggy clothes and shirts and still getting that education. The main reason for these dropouts were that they spent more time in the office than anywhere else. The sole reason for spending time in the office? Dress code violations.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:03 AM

Its ignorant shit like this that makes me distrust, nay completely discredit most right wing/republican/bible thumping types.

Grow up man, its not the 50's anymore, people, even children, have a right to look, think, and believe as they choose.Sure, and outside of school have at it. That doesn't mean he gets a free pass on purposely breaking a rule.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:06 AM

BTW, GrantDawg, I'm not saying the policy is unnecessary.

I am saying that the school system needs to show some pretty good justification for the policy for it to stick. That burden *must* fall on the public enterprise to justify those restrictions and exclusions. They are not allowed to operate in a vacuum. After all, the public enterprises are in place to serve the public.
Blacky, the thing is this policy has been chanllenged over and over again (in this same school system if memory serves) and it still stands. Of corse, continuing to fight this thing is a great way to waste money that could be in the classroom.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:11 AM

You are throwing this around quite a bit, but I would like to see drop out rates before and after dress code. I know at my local high school they made the dress code more stricht(still not even a uniform) around my sophomore(4 or 5ish years ago) year and the drop out rates since then have been record highs. My class alone had a drop out rate of 15%. I think this is far worse than wearing baggy clothes and shirts and still getting that education. The main reason for these dropouts were that they spent more time in the office than anywhere else. The sole reason for spending time in the office? Dress code violations.
I have an exact opposite experience. The school I went to was a nightmare the years before I started. I was one in one of the first classes that were affected by a stricter dress-code policy (along with other "non-education" reforms that dealt with discipline). My school went from one of the worst schools in the state to a National School of Excellence (with my class having over a million dollars given in scholarship money for the first time in school history) in the matter of three years. It is totally antidotal, and far from the sole basis for my opinion, so take it for what it is worth.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:14 AM

BTW, a few years after I left, so did the principle and the rules set he had enforced. The school dropped down to the dregs again, and has just recently begun improving.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:16 AM

I've just looked at some of the studies on school uniforms (spec. ones against since I had never read any). Just about everyone I read says something along the lines of "test scores did improve, but other factors than uniforms could have caused it."

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 10:17 AM

GrantDawg, I can break out some studies for you, but needless to say the only close to scientific studies I've seen done on school uniforms show they have no real impact on achievement test scores.

Some studies can, and often do show otherwise. This is because schools often use uniforms as part of an overall effort to improve the school at multiple levels. Improvements that could take place without worrying about the student's appearence.

Needless to say some school administrators and parents like to talk up flawed studies for uniforms, because uniforms make their lives eaiser.

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 10:19 AM

And a quick abstract from a study I had handy:

The Effects of Student Uniforms on Attendance, Behavior Problems,
Substance Use, and Academic Achievement

David L. Brunsma and Kerry A. Rockquemore
Department of Sociology
University of Notre Dame
Notre Dame, IN 46556

Manuscript accepted for publication in The Journal of Educational Research
February 13, 1998 (manuscript #03-97-83)

Direct all correspondence to David L. Brunsma at
[email protected]

ABSTRACT

Recent discourse on public school reform has focused on mandatory uniform policies. Proponents of such reform measures emphasize the benefits of student uniforms on specific behavioral and academic outcomes. This research empirically tests the claims made by uniform advocates using 10th grade data from The National Educational Longitudinal Study of 1988. Our findings indicate that student uniforms have no direct effect on substance use, behavioral problems or attendance. A negative effect of uniforms on student academic achievement was found. These findings are contrary to current discourse on student uniforms. We conclude that uniform policies may indirectly affect school environment and student outcomes by providing a visible and public symbol of commitment to school improvement and reform.

Buddy Grant

09-23-2004, 10:21 AM

Non conformist freaks have to realize that they aren't going to get anywhere unless they play ball and get with the program, just look at China. This isn't an issue of free speech, it's an issue of free garbage - take it away, I have no pity for them. If only a few tattooed and pierced students are allowed to participate in classroom functions it will be too many, after all where do you draw the line?

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 10:22 AM

Dola, why would I have such a thing handy? Well my dirty little secret is, I am a graduate student in Educational Policy. Might explain my sudden attendence in the educational threads.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:25 AM

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 10:29 AM

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:29 AM

Needless to say some school administrators and parents like to talk up flawed studies for uniforms, because uniforms make their lives eaiser.
And there is no benefit to that either?

Blackadar

09-23-2004, 10:30 AM

And there is no benefit to that either?

Not when it infringes on the rights of those who don't agree.

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 10:31 AM

And I've read how those studies are done. If you compare before and after of the school (which almost always show score improvements) then they say it was because of "other factors." How can we ever know that? It again seems to be one of those issues with where the view of the study maker affects the results. But, every public school that I've ever seen that begins a school uniform program has test scores go up.

Thats why empiracal evidence is so important (to some). There are plenty of schools that don't see improvements. Mostly suburban white schools that already had high parent/community participation. IMO, that is really the key thing to be tapped. Usually uniform initiatives come with all kinds of overall changes that tap into community and parental involvement that wasn't present.

And lets face it, community and parental involvement is THE major factor that comes up time and time again as impacting a child's success in school.

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:33 AM

And lets face it, community and parental involvement is THE major factor that comes up time and time again as impacting a child's success in school.
We completely agree there. (Now to take this thread totally off track) What do you suggest to do to help that happen the communites were it is not?

clintl

09-23-2004, 10:34 AM

I've spent a fair amount of time in public school classrooms over the last year as a substitute teacher (which pretty much means I get to see the students at their worst behavior). I'm going to make some generalizations here that won't apply to every kid or every school, and may not even apply in different regions across the country. But they're based on my observations and experience so far in the schools.

For the most part, the kids I see with piercings are not very engaged in their school work, but they are not the ones most likely to be disruptive in the class, either. They tend to quiet and withdrawn. I think there's reason to have some concerns about them as individuals, because I suspect quite a few of them have underlying social and emotional problems that are not being adequately addressed by the adults in their lives. However, nothing that I have seen suggests to me that banning piercings, in and of itself, will do much to improve the learning environment. These are not the kids who are disrupting other people. Would such a ban help them as individuals become more engaged? I don't know. I suspect piercings, tattoos, and similar decorative expressions are manifestations of symptoms rather the root cause of problems.

As for the discussion about rules, I agree with the view that the rule and consequences were clear, and that this kid shouldn't be surprised. Enforcing consequences is very important in maintaining school discipline. I'm not sure that the school was very wise in its choice of consequences, however. I'm not sure what the "in-school" suspension really accomplishes in this case.

Rules should be made with a purpose, and the consequences should fit the infraction. I think that raises another issue in this situation - if a rule and the consequences are perceived as arbitrary and unfair, I think they become counterproductive and inspire contempt for other rules. This is especially true when kids are reaching the high school level, and are becoming more independent (and independence is the ultimate goal of child rearing and education, something I think adults sometimes forget when dealing with kids this age).

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 10:35 AM

Not when it infringes on the rights of those who don't agree.
You see, there is were we have a divergent idea. Children by in large have less rights than adults, and they should. You may disagree.

Tigercat

09-23-2004, 10:40 AM

We completely agree there. (Now to take this thread totally off track) What do you suggest to do to help that happen the communites were it is not?

Million dollar question. Although one big problem, again IMO, is schools with the lowest parental/community involvement seem to be the most afraid to ask for that inolvement. Unless you try the outreach you are not going to get it.

henry296

09-23-2004, 10:44 AM

And I've read how those studies are done. If you compare before and after of the school (which almost always show score improvements) then they say it was because of "other factors." How can we ever know that? It again seems to be one of those issues with where the view of the study maker affects the results. But, every public school that I've ever seen that begins a school uniform program has test scores go up.

To me, it is a flawed control group. The basis behind proving cause and effect, "Is all things being equal". It is like saying the team's running game improved when we drafted player X because with him the team ran for more yards. However, they also brought in a new offensive line coach. What is the cause and effect of the improved running game.

Todd

Troll

09-23-2004, 10:46 AM

You see, there is were we have a divergent idea. Children by in large have less rights than adults, and they should. You may disagree.

Again I call this statement out, my high school had people in it ranging from ages 14-23, yes there was a 23 year old. Most Seniors were 18+ and many juniors(40% I'd venture a guess) were 18+ by the end of their junior year. Are these people considered Children?

GrantDawg

09-23-2004, 07:43 PM

Again I call this statement out, my high school had people in it ranging from ages 14-23, yes there was a 23 year old. Most Seniors were 18+ and many juniors(40% I'd venture a guess) were 18+ by the end of their junior year. Are these people considered Children?
The vast majority of highschool students are under 18. I would also suggest that if you have 23 year old students, then they probably need the rules the most. :)

RendeR

09-23-2004, 10:39 PM

Sure, and outside of school have at it. That doesn't mean he gets a free pass on purposely breaking a rule.

I hate to tell you, but when tax dollars are in use to support a program, be that welfare, or public education, then the program itself cannot discriminate. As was noted in posts above, public schools have to prove there is a NEED for such a rule before blanket conformity can be enforced. if they don't they should be getting sued.

bad for the schools all around.

This kid has done nothing beyond make a statement about who he is and who he wishes to be, what right does anyone have to refuse him this ability? He was not disturbing other students.

Dress codes do one thing, and one thing only, they strip individualism from the students and create and oppressive environment. no teacher, school official, or board of education has the right to tell me as a parent or my child how they can appear so long as it is not disruptive to other students. if a teacher can't handle viewing such things, then perhaps the teacher needs to grow up and get over their petty self indulgence. The schools isn't there to cater to teachers, it is there to educate our children. Every school needs discipline, turning kids into carbon copies of one another is not discipline, its brainwashing.

This kid is being punished because he took a stand against an ignorant and stupid rule put in place by people who would rather see classrooms full of uniformed robots than true students.

I will fight each and every school my children attend on ANY regulation they try to impose that goes beyond NECESSITY. This rule is completely unnecessary and this kid should be returned to his normal classes. period.

RendeR

09-23-2004, 10:49 PM

You see, there is were we have a divergent idea. Children by in large have less rights than adults, and they should. You may disagree.

I have to take a moment on this one, I don't think this is about the rights of kids and adults being equal, this is about the school system taking MY rights as a parent out of my hands.

The child is MINE, if I wish him or her to dress a certain way, then I have that right. I will submit to rules which will obviously affect other students, lowcut tops, skin tight short skirts, things that will severely attract attention away from studies.

Piercings? Unless its on his pecker and its out in the open, this is NOT an issue the school has any right to remove from MY control as a parent. People are all different, public schools are melting pots, but quite frankly, the right wing control freaks who take the interest to work in them would rather the kids be locked in their chairs in matching grey trousers. And sadly, its because they're simply unwilling to accept differences in children.

Mary kate wore her hair loose today...she should be told to put it in a bun like proper ladies do. So she won't look slutty.

you think that line preposterous, but it came from the lips of a 60 yr old english teacher in MY high school. Thank god the principle told her in no uncertain terms that it is NOT the public school systems job to teach kids how to dress, that is a parents responsibility.

Mr. Davis may have been a real hardass on troublemakers, but he was fair to everyone.

Society can have standards that it likes, but it does NOT have the right to force those standards on anyone who chooses not to agree with them.

randal7

09-23-2004, 11:20 PM

Its ignorant shit like this that makes me distrust, nay completely discredit most right wing/republican/bible thumping types.

Grow up man, its not the 50's anymore, people, even children, have a right to look, think, and believe as they choose.

Dude, you do realize that it's not really George W. Bush that posted that, right? And that most of what he posts is intended to be humorous/ironic because it is posted under that name?

...And as an aside, do people have the right to choose to think and believe that school is about learning, not about expressing your individuality?

Coffee Warlord

09-23-2004, 11:50 PM

(snip snip)

I will fight each and every school my children attend on ANY regulation they try to impose that goes beyond NECESSITY. This rule is completely unnecessary and this kid should be returned to his normal classes. period.

I was about to write a big long winded reply on this thread, but not only did you beat me to it, you beat me to it as well, if not better, than I could do. Well put.

stevew

09-23-2004, 11:55 PM

I wonder what this kids dad thinks about all of his piercings.

Abe Sargent

09-24-2004, 12:25 AM

Let's clear up some of this absolute dogma, shall we?

As an ordained minister (which could make me a "bible-thumper"), a card carrying member of the Republican party, A former aide to several of the top republican state congressional delegates as well as a former aide to a republican Representative, I should qualify for everything that some people critize.

I am republican (on many, not all, issue. I am Christian (Baptist), and I consider myself an "old" conservative (of the Goldwater pseudo-libertarian type)

Apparently, people care about that sort of stuff, so let's get it out of the way, so that nobody thinks I am hiding anything.

First of all, I hate when people automatically assume that the reason somebody does something you disagree with is because they are of the other political persuasion. There are school systems around America in control by conservatives, and there are school systems controlled by liberals.

Note that there are liberals that ban books and conservatives that ban books. There are liberal school systems that require or try for school uniforms, and conservative school systems that do that same. It has proven by numerous surveys and studies that political beliefs do not have a correlation with beliefs about the specifics of the educational system (outside of a few political grenades, liek school prayer and vouchers and what not)

In other words, whther you lean republican or democrat does not influence whether you believe in weighted classes or whether students should be required to wear unifroms or be allowed to bring bookbags into school and whatnot. Let's not become victim to the very same demagogery of the unwashed mass.

Having said that, this whole situation is stupid, because you have a school system trying to force a student to do abide by a rule that should never have been made in the first place. Even if you believe that this rule is fairly benign, as far as rules go, we can all remember when we were at an educational institution that had rules that made no sense, were outdated, or which did not reflect the reason behind these institutions - namely education.

Ergo, challeneging this rule, although a minor rule, is definitely a noteworthy thing. I daresay that this student will learn more about how the world works through this protest that by attending classes.

Lastly, I want to chime in on the whole education vs job training thing. If our school system is JUST about jobs, then we have a reeally dumb school system. We should go to a simple four year program where we teach students how to read, write, and do simple math. After that, students can enroll in a vocational course of various length to be trained for a specific job. We could shink our entire educational system down into a simple, cheap, manageable four year chunks with vocational schools around for adults who want to shift careers.

The benefit of an education is more than simple job training - it has to be. Education, learning, knowledge is a good in itself, not merely a means to an end. People don't watch Discovery, Animal Planet, or the History Channel simply because that knowledge will help them sell more widgets. It is an end in itself. If you don't get that, then I pity you.

However, if education is just about job training, then where do I go to get my money back? The entire justification for why I have to fund the public education system with my tax money despite the fact that I have no children and never will, is that an educated citizenry is good for society as a whole. I benefit from having an educated society in areas of crime, civil involvement, and so forth. On the other hand, if our system is just job training, then do what a lot of job training programs do - pay for it by garnishing future wages until their share is paid off.

And I should get my taxes back.

-Anxiety

Abe Sargent

09-24-2004, 12:32 AM

The vast majority of highschool students are under 18. I would also suggest that if you have 23 year old students, then they probably need the rules the most. :)

I know you attached a smiley, so I am not going to be too harsh here, but I have known overaged students who were held back, not because they were idiots and morons who paid more attention to drugs, women, and farting then education, but because they were mentally challenged, and moved through the school system slowly. Sure, most people fall into the previous rule, but still, there are enough in the second to make you stop and think.

There was a guy who was 16 and in the 6th grade. He drove to elementary school. He was in a coma for several years and thus missed several years of education. When you are driving to your elementary school, that can be amazingly embarassing (remember, he had the mind of a sixth grader, so insults and whatnot still hurt, and so forth).

-Anxiety

Glengoyne

09-24-2004, 02:04 AM

I find it sort of interesting that the positions taken in this thread line up pretty well with political leanings.

Most of those that favor the rule lean right, and those who oppose it lean left. I had no clue.

I sort of thought that it was common sense, that children don't necessarily have the same rights as adults. I also believe that enstilling civic responsibility in a child is more important than protecting his civil rights.(not that civic responsibilty comes to play here, that is just something I bring up when I hear people complain that a student's rights have been violated) Some say this rule isn't a necessity, I say it isn't necessary for him to wear the piercings at school. I don't think his piercings "disrupt" the education of other students, but I do think the school/school district can mandate a certain amount of social conformity. If he was an employee of mine, I wouldn't let him wear them at work,and yes I know that is a private vs public setting. There do seem to be some fairly clear similarities though.

Schools have dress codes, some are more strict than others. In my High School experience the strict enforcement of a dress code lead to a more disciplined environment. I don't think that is a bad thing, even if kids' freedom of expression are violated. They can express themselves elsewhere, they don't have to do it at school.

Antmeister

09-24-2004, 02:50 AM

Ben E Lou

09-24-2004, 03:12 AM

AJC Article for this morning....has more information:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width=760 border=0><TBODY><TR vAlign=top><TD align=left width=760><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width=120 align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle height=5></TD></TR><TR><TD height=5>http://www.ajc.com/shared-local/images/1pix_trans.gif</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><CENTER><SCRIPT language=JavaScript1.1 src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/ajc.cni/metro;ap=news;pg=metro;sub=clayton;fromsite=ajc;swrd=;ura=35;urg=m;urz=30084;urm=i75;urn=sub7;sz=336x1;tile=4;ord=967906991?"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://ds.serving-sys.com/BurstingScript/ebServing_51682.js"></SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT>http://bs.serving-sys.com/BurstingPipe/BannerSource.asp?FlightID=51682&Page=&PluID=0&Pos=6442 (http://bs.serving-sys.com/BurstingPipe/BannerRedirect.asp?FlightID=51682&Page=&PluID=0&Pos=6442)</NOSCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://ds.serving-sys.com/BurstingCachedScripts/BrowserCheck_56_4.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT src="http://ds.serving-sys.com/BurstingCachedScripts/ebMain_56_9.js"></SCRIPT>
<SCRIPT src="http://bs.serving-sys.com/BurstingPipe/AdServerPipe.asp?param=%3CType%3ACommand%3BCode%3A7%3BobjRef%3AgEbEyes%5B0%5D%3BFlightID%3A51682%3BForceDisplay%3A0%3BTimeOfDay%3A4.1369444444444445%3BPluID%3A0%3BPage%3Awww.ajc.com%3BWebPageSource%3A0%3B%3E%3CType%3APlugin%3BAudioVersion%3A1%3BFlashVersion%3A7%3BPlatform%3A8%3BBrowser%3A4%3BResolution%3A4%3B%3E&ord=0.8234068504810068&CSVersion=5.6&BWVal=897&BWDTime=2153505539"></SCRIPT><OBJECT id=ebReportingFlash style="BORDER-RIGHT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; WIDTH: 0px; BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; POSITION: absolute; HEIGHT: 0px" codeBase=http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=4,0,0,0 classid=clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000 name=ebReportingFlash>

</OBJECT><SCRIPT id=ebExpBanner src="http://ds.serving-sys.com/BurstingCachedScripts/Templates_56_4/ExpBanner.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT id=ebAd_78259 src="http://ds.serving-sys.com/BurstingRes/Site-315/Type-11/78259_A72B2FCA-8672-4BFE-A45C-6745972D1189.js"></SCRIPT><SCRIPT id="" event=FSCommand(command,args) for=ebBannerFlash_0_45778774037278286>ebScriptWin0_45778774037278286.gEbEyes[0].displayUnit.handleFSCommand(command,args);</SCRIPT></CENTER></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/) > Metro (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/index.html) > Clayton/Henry (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/clayton/index.html)

Student fights to sport metal
A 15-year-old boy who moved to Stockbridge from Maryland is challenging the Henry County school district's policy barring visible body piercing after being suspended for showing too much metal.

Daniel "Corey" Rager, with the backing of his mother, will try to return to class today with piercings on his brow, under his lip and in his nose.

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width=175 align=left border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/09/35/06/image_906359.jpg (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/clayton/0904/41477366_corey.html)
Johnny Crawford/AJC
(ENLARGE) (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/clayton/0904/41477366_corey.html)
</TD></TR><TR><TD class=caption>'I think they are beautiful,' said Kati Monahan, who has hired a lawyer to fight to allow Corey to wear piercings at school.
</TD></TR><TR><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width=170 bgColor=#ffffff border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle width=170 bgColor=#cccccc><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=10 width=168 bgColor=#ffffff border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width=148>http://img.coxnewsweb.com/C/08/26/62/image_262268.gifEMAIL THIS (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/clayton/0904/24pierce.html#)
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/C/03/27/62/image_262273.gifPRINT THIS (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/clayton/0904/24pierce.html#)
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/C/04/27/62/image_262274.gifMOST POPULAR (http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/clayton/0904/24pierce.html#)
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD><TD width=5>http://www.ajc.com/shared-local/images/1pix_trans.gif</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>The 10th-grader is coming off a three-day, in-school suspension — imposed four days after he enrolled at Dutchtown High School in Hampton.

"I'm going to be in [in-school suspension] as long as they make me be in there and that might be a while," said Corey, who noted he acquired the piercings two years ago as a way of asserting his individuality. "I'm going to keep them because I have a right to."

Policies guiding body piercing differ among local school systems.

Corey's piercings were not a problem at his former school, Meade High in Fort Meade, Md., about 20 miles from Baltimore. The school is part of the 75,000-student Anne Arundel County Public School District, which doesn't have a policy that specifically addresses the piercing issue.

In metro Atlanta, some school districts, such as Fulton and Gwinnett, have dress code policies that do not directly address piercings, instead focusing on clothing that would be deemed disruptive and inappropriate.

DeKalb County schools basically look at the issue "piercing by piercing," with the main concern being whether the student creates distractions that interrupt instruction, officials say.

In Fayette County, piercings are allowed for high school students unless they are "disruptive" or "dangerous."

Henry County schools are known for strict enforcement of student behavior rules and have a three-year-old, districtwide policy against piercings.

Corey said he was surprised by the school district's seriousness in enforcing the rule. On Monday, his first day at his new school, he agreed to remove his piercings at the urging of a counselor, but on Tuesday he returned to school with the piercings in place. With his mother's help, he is now represented by a lawyer.

Continued refusal to obey the policy could earn the student in-school suspension indefinitely, said Cindy Foster, a school district spokeswoman. "I would assume he could go the whole year in in-school suspension," Foster said.

Officials say the rule is part of the 32,000-student district's effort to prevent disruption of learning and ward off health and safety hazards. School principals have some discretion in determining what constitutes a violation. But the policy spelled out in student handbooks allows only earrings and bans piercing jewelry on other visible areas of the body, including the tongue.

Corey's lawyer, Scott Key, argues that constitutional rights are at stake. Key sent a letter Wednesday to Dutchtown Principal Dwala Nobles demanding Corey be allowed to return to regular classes with no further punishment. "If it's not done, we will seek some kind of remedy from the court system," the lawyer said.

The rule violates the teen's First Amendment rights to free expression, Key claims. "There is no real evidence his appearance has disrupted class," he said. "If anything, the disruption is coming from the school and its efforts to enforce this unconstitutional rule."

Henry County officials said they have no plans to back down. When Corey's mother, Kati Monahan, complained at a school board meeting Monday, board members stood by the policy, saying only that they are open to considering possible changes for the 2005-06 school year.

Monahan said her son feels naked without his body jewelry. She said she had her nose pierced a couple of months ago and once wore a piercing in her right eyebrow. "I think they are beautiful," she said.

A single mother whose other two children are college students, Monahan said she moved to metro Atlanta because of its lower cost of living and better quality of life. Corey's dad, Scott Rager, lives in Jessup, Md

The battle over body piercing is the third time in recent years the Henry County school district has attracted media attention over its policies governing student behavior.

In 2003, a Union Grove student was expelled for bringing over-the-counter medication to school and giving it to another student.

Another Union Grove student received a two-day, in-school suspension the previous year for kissing his girlfriend on the forehead in a school hallway.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

stevew

09-24-2004, 03:18 AM

Man, i gotta say it was really hard to tell that this kid didnt have 2 parents at home. Take the shit out of your face, and go to school. Its in the rules, abide by them.

Tekneek

09-24-2004, 06:10 AM

If he was an employee of mine, I wouldn't let him wear them at work,and yes I know that is a private vs public setting. There do seem to be some fairly clear similarities though.

The biggest difference on this point, to me, is...that unless his mother makes other arrangements for him, he is compelled by law to go to that school. He would not likely be compelled by law to be your employee. If he is forced, by law, to attend this school then they should be forced to respect him as an individual in every way that they cannot demonstrate damages their ability to educate.

Blackadar

09-24-2004, 06:19 AM

I sort of thought that it was common sense, that children don't necessarily have the same rights as adults. I also believe that enstilling civic responsibility in a child is more important than protecting his civil rights.(not that civic responsibilty comes to play here, that is just something I bring up when I hear people complain that a student's rights have been violated) Some say this rule isn't a necessity, I say it isn't necessary for him to wear the piercings at school. I don't think his piercings "disrupt" the education of other students, but I do think the school/school district can mandate a certain amount of social conformity. If he was an employee of mine, I wouldn't let him wear them at work,and yes I know that is a private vs public setting. There do seem to be some fairly clear similarities though.

I understand what you're saying, but I disagree. Protecting our right to free speech, expression and religion is fundamentally more important than fitting in. We're not talking civic responsibility here - "do the right thing". In fact, if we were talking about civic responsibility, then I think Mom is the only one who is acting responsible and defending the prinicipals we all should hold dear.

We're talking (as you mentioned) social conformity. There's a large difference.

sterlingice

09-24-2004, 01:31 PM

You know, I wanted to make a ton of posts in response to these but I just don't think I'd be saying much that hasn't been said. Oh, and really good post, clintl.

SI

GrantDawg

09-24-2004, 03:12 PM

I'm going to leave all this alone because I just have nothing left nice to say. I will say this. I'm sorry if I said that education is "only" to prepare students for work. It was a simple oversimplification on my part. I do fully believe it is one of the most important things school does, and to ignore that is to allow schools to fail students in providing what they need.

I also want to say (and I'm going to try to be nice here) that some of the attitudes here is exactly why we have so many problem in public education today. You and I are not going to agree with every rule, and what you consider a "stupid and arbitrary" rule is probably different than what I think is stupid and arbitrary (like I think zero-tolerance policies are an idiotic assault on common sense). Since we cannot all agree, we need to find a way to deal with these disagreements that are least likely to disrupt what the primary responsibilty of the education system is which is to educate students.

While I disagree with zero-tolerance rules, I would never send my kid to school with a butter knife in her lunch box. Though that butter knife would not harm anyone, she would never use it to harm or threaten anyone, and I think the rule against it is stupid, my daughter is not going to school to make a political statement against stupidity. She is going to learn. Furthermore, to tell her to would suggest the best way to handle any rule that you do not agree with is to break it. I don't agree with that either.

I could go on (the suggestion that students could have complete free speech while in school is laughable, but I'm not going to continue arguing this), but I'll just leave it at this.

GrantDawg

09-24-2004, 03:18 PM

I know you attached a smiley, so I am not going to be too harsh here, but I have known overaged students who were held back, not because they were idiots and morons who paid more attention to drugs, women, and farting then education, but because they were mentally challenged, and moved through the school system slowly. Sure, most people fall into the previous rule, but still, there are enough in the second to make you stop and think.

There was a guy who was 16 and in the 6th grade. He drove to elementary school. He was in a coma for several years and thus missed several years of education. When you are driving to your elementary school, that can be amazingly embarassing (remember, he had the mind of a sixth grader, so insults and whatnot still hurt, and so forth).

-Anxiety

I was joking and you turn this into an attack on the handicapped. :rolleyes:

sterlingice

09-24-2004, 03:21 PM

I was joking and you turn this into an attack on the handicapped. :rolleyes:
Yeah, but how can you beat the token sob story that gets attached to every post like this?

SI

Abe Sargent

09-24-2004, 03:46 PM

I was joking and you turn this into an attack on the handicapped. :rolleyes:

Like I said, I know it was in good fun, and I apopreciate that, but the way that I took it, initially, weas to relate it to my own experiecnes (like we all do), and it floored me for a second.

(Warning, the following may not be suitable for sensitive people)

For example, I honestly cannot understand all of the hoopla over 9/11. Anybody who didn't know about the potential for terrorist attacks prior and didn't expect was either young or naive. Anybody who didn't take security seriously until then was likewise. Everybody talks about all of these changes but honestly, not one thing in my life has changed, except for everybody talking about it. However, I understand that other people think it's a big deal, so I treat the topic with care.

(End Warning Section)

So, my only point was that someone might take it in a different vein than you meant it - that's no. No harm, no hard feelings, I still love you.

-Anxiety

GrantDawg

09-24-2004, 03:54 PM

(End Warning Section)

So, my only point was that someone might take it in a different vein than you meant it - that's no. No harm, no hard feelings, I still love you.

-Anxiety
I love you, too, you insenstive prick. :)

JonInMiddleGA

09-24-2004, 04:18 PM

nybody who didn't know about the potential for terrorist attacks prior and didn't expect was either young or naive. Anybody who didn't take security seriously until then was likewise.

Agreed.

... not one thing in my life has changed

I gather you don't fly very much?

Easy Mac

09-24-2004, 04:41 PM

Here's the one thing I've seen no one bring up yet.

Why is there a rule that bans all piercings except earrings? What kind of purpose do earrings serve that nose/eyebrow/tongue rings do not? Are they all not different forms of expression? DO earrings somehow aid in the learning process? I think the difference is that one (earrings) are generally seen as a way to fit in, while the others are seen as a way to individualize oneself (even if they are doing so in a non-conformist, conformist kind of way).

Now obviously most of the discussion has steered away from the inanity of the rule and more to the principle of adhering to it, but why is it necessary to adhere to a rule that makes no sense in the first place? Granted, as has been mentioned in numerous threads throughout the FOFC, you can't necesarilly go rule to rule and pick and choose the ones to follow. However, aren't there lines that have to be crossed when rules inherently contradict themselves?

Anyway, yeah, the kid knew the consequences, but so does everyone else who disobeys idiotic rules. At least he's taking his punishment while he does it. Serve the time and work in the spare time to get it changed, thats the only effective way to produce change.

Easy Mac

09-24-2004, 04:43 PM

Oh, and GrantDawg (I think it was you), only 16% of your class dropped out... wow. We started my class with 600 kids in it, and we graduated with 178... Its amazing I even got into college.

GrantDawg

09-24-2004, 04:46 PM

Oh, and GrantDawg (I think it was you), only 16% of your class dropped out... wow. We started my class with 600 kids in it, and we graduated with 178... Its amazing I even got into college.That wasn't me. My class started with (roughly) 1,100 and 450 graduated (the year they were supposed to). Of course the official grad rate would be different than a straight percentage of that because some graduated early, some much later. :)

RendeR

09-24-2004, 09:56 PM

Since we cannot all agree, we need to find a way to deal with these disagreements that are least likely to disrupt what the primary responsibilty of the education system is which is to educate students.

I agree with you that not everyone will agree, thats a basic situation in this world. however, the idea that everyone must conform to what a group *yes even if that group is a majority* believes to be acceptable is wrong.

There are points where you have to draw a line, crimes, and disruptive behaviour are obvious points that I won't disagree need to have general rules to maintain discipline.

HOWEVER:
One of the points of discipline is having the common sense to sit in your classes and pay attention to your teacher. Wether or not someone looks different than you in the 3rd row. This is not a point that is disruptive to the class, this is the kids having been taught how to act by their parents.

If you say that general appearence IS disruptive, then you open the door to segregating colors, ethnicity, hell why not keep the blondes in one school and the brunettes in another? we'll make the red heads dye their hair one way or the other so we don't dicrupt anyone's education.

Yes I realize I'm going to a rediculous extreme, but this is what rules like this CAN lead to, I hope to heck it never does, but it CAN and that is what we have to guard against when the rights of an individual are involved. We can't make stupid rules that lead the way to even MORE stupid rules.

I agree that provocitive clothing CAN cause a disturbance, we're talking about about hormonae laiden teenagers here. So dress codes limiting how much leg and belly you can show off are rational and acceptable needs. This does NOT mean there should be a uniform, I draw the line at anyone trying to force my children into the same costume.

I disagree that his kids piercings are disruptive, if the students are doing what they SHOULD be doing, paying attention to the teacher, they aren't looking at his peircings now are they? their education is not being affected. (I honestly could say the same for see through blouses on girls, if they aren't looking at them its not affecting anything, but I'm male, I know that it will)

So instead of implementing rules like this that are not 100% accepted by the populace, why not as a parent take the responsibility to NOT send your child to school with them? You and your neighbors may not like them, thats fine, don't let YOUR children get them, but you, nor the school district has the right to tell ME how allow my children to appear in public. Only I as their parent can do that.

RendeR

09-24-2004, 09:58 PM

haji1

09-25-2004, 12:02 AM

Being a teacher (excuse my typing and spelling as I am trying to do this with a 9 month old on my lap) I have a few thoughts on the piercings.

Understand that many, not all, but many, students get piercings to draw attention to themselves. In school they will try to use those piercings to get people to notice them.

Girls love to show off there belly button studsto one another and it obviously catches the boys eyes while they are doing so. Or they will just fiddle with them in class by lifting up their shirts partway, which, again is enough for a boy to lose his thought process. Many students are constantly taking them in and out, playing with them, etc. Not a big deal, but when a student is pulling the stud out of their nose it tends to draw attention. One boy in my Comp III class is constantly getting his caught on things. He also clicks his piercied tounge against his mouth. This drives me nuts, but I see it as no different as clicking a pen.

Here is why one of my former schools decided to crack down on piercings. We had students begin to rip them off other students. We had two guys get in a fight. In the middle of the fight one kid punched the other one in the jaw and the piercing got driven in. When the kid saw what he had done, he thought it was funny and ripped out the guys eyebrow piercing.

Well, this group of boys he hung started to rip out other kids piercings in school. Knock them down, hold them, and rip them out. To get back, some of the students started wearing sharp objects in their piercings, to use as weapons I guess. They would take them and tape them onto pens/pencils and use them to jab other students.

The school board decided to disallow the body piercings during school. This took about one week of the above type of activity going on. They called a special session to decide what to do. We were punishing kids, but this was just escalating out of control. They justified it using two reasons. One, to stop studnets from being maimed. Two because they considered piercings potential weapons. The kids were angry at first, but eventually it became no big deal to them. Many of them still wore their piercings out side of school. A few went to other schools in the area. I am no longer at the school, so I don't know if they have changed their policy back since then.

Easy Mac

09-25-2004, 09:25 AM

We had a fight where a girl ripped off another's weave... that was fun.

Tekneek

09-25-2004, 09:38 AM

Well, this group of boys he hung started to rip out other kids piercings in school. Knock them down, hold them, and rip them out.

One, to stop studnets from being maimed.

Interesting that 50% of the reason they could not wear their piercings was because the school could not (or would not) prevent predators from attacking them and ripping them out. So if this group of boys starting pulling up dresses, would they ban dresses?

sterlingice

09-25-2004, 02:00 PM

Interesting that 50% of the reason they could not wear their piercings was because the school could not (or would not) prevent predators from attacking them and ripping them out. So if this group of boys starting pulling up dresses, would they ban dresses?
If knives were allowed at school and the school could not prevent kids from stabbing each other, would you blame the school for that, too? How about guns and shootings?

SI

sterlingice

09-25-2004, 02:13 PM

I disagree that his kids piercings are disruptive, if the students are doing what they SHOULD be doing, paying attention to the teacher, they aren't looking at his peircings now are they? their education is not being affected. (I honestly could say the same for see through blouses on girls, if they aren't looking at them its not affecting anything, but I'm male, I know that it will)

So instead of implementing rules like this that are not 100% accepted by the populace, why not as a parent take the responsibility to NOT send your child to school with them? You and your neighbors may not like them, thats fine, don't let YOUR children get them, but you, nor the school district has the right to tell ME how allow my children to appear in public. Only I as their parent can do that.
Ren, your whole concepts here are extremely self-centered. You don't like the school's rules so your suggestion is that the school should bend to your will and everyone else should leave. Yet, you don't allow for others to dictate that right to you and your children. Rawls would not be very happy with you.

For your example, you say the school doesn't have a right to tell you how your kids should dress but they do tell you your kid has to go to school like they say every other kid does. So, at your school, can girls wear whatever they want as long as it's within the law? Let's say I'm a really permissive parent and my girl wears a bra and thong. By your logic, it's your boy's fault if he can't concentrate. It might be indecent, but it's not illegal, so, in your own words "You and your neighbors may not like them, thats fine, don't let YOUR children get them, but you, nor the school district has the right to tell ME how allow my children to appear in public. Only I as their parent can do that."

How is that any different than what we are describing with piercings?

SI

Easy Mac

09-25-2004, 02:15 PM

If knives were allowed at school and the school could not prevent kids from stabbing each other, would you blame the school for that, too? How about guns and shootings?

SI

Is this where I'm supposed to mention a strawman, or is it a slippery slope.

sterlingice

09-25-2004, 02:18 PM

Is this where I'm supposed to mention a strawman, or is it a slippery slope.
I belive it would be slippery slope. But using the logic laid out there, mine fits his logic just as well as his. So the argument doesn't wash. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, but his reasoning isn't it.

EDIT: Wouldn't it be a strawman if I had said only taken a part of his argument rather than using every parameter?

SI

Tekneek

09-26-2004, 06:28 AM

If knives were allowed at school and the school could not prevent kids from stabbing each other, would you blame the school for that, too? How about guns and shootings?

SI

Wearing piercings is not the same as carrying knives around. The story, as provided, indicated the use of piercings as a weapon was a response to a situation that the school was not taking control of. Instead of coming down hard on those who would rip piercings out, they ban piercings. So, therefore, their response is to punish those who are being attacked by forcing them to stop wearing the items that are motivating the thugs to attack them. It has nothing to do with knives and your point is somewhere in the ether...because it certainly wasn't typed into your post. The school's inability to provide a safe environment for its students does not, in itself, excuse their ban on an item that was otherwise being worn in a safe manner that resulted in injury to no one.

ISiddiqui

09-26-2004, 06:31 AM

Because one is a public enterprise and one is private. Big difference.

Actually that isn't an issue. I can't show up to my government job (a PUBLIC enterprise) in shorts and a 'wife-beater' t-shirt. My boss will tell me to go home and don't come back until I dress according to how I'm supposed to.

The issue is that students are required to go to school, which does indeed make a difference.

Here is why one of my former schools decided to crack down on piercings. We had students begin to rip them off other students.

Yep, that's the first reason I thought of as well when I read the story. If that was the case for this school district, then the kid has no recourse in the courts, IMO. People ripping out piercings to that degree, it's definetly going to cause massive disturbances.

So if this group of boys starting pulling up dresses, would they ban dresses?

I wasn't aware that pulling up dresses led to maimings.

I agree that provocitive clothing CAN cause a disturbance, we're talking about about hormonae laiden teenagers here. So dress codes limiting how much leg and belly you can show off are rational and acceptable needs. This does NOT mean there should be a uniform, I draw the line at anyone trying to force my children into the same costume.

I disagree that his kids piercings are disruptive, if the students are doing what they SHOULD be doing, paying attention to the teacher, they aren't looking at his peircings now are they? their education is not being affected. (I honestly could say the same for see through blouses on girls, if they aren't looking at them its not affecting anything, but I'm male, I know that it will)

Wait, wait, wait... so piercings MUST be protected as 1st Amendment speech, but you don't want provacative clothing because you feel it causes a disturbance? And then you say if the students pay attention to the teacher they shouldn't be disturbed by the piercings?

At the very LEAST, you can be consistent.

Tekneek

09-26-2004, 06:41 AM

akw4572

09-26-2004, 07:20 AM

Alright. So, it is ok for a school to ban piercings because they can't stop students wearing them from being attacked? While a group of boys going around the school lifting dresses would not "cause maimings", to pretend that it would not cause problems and disturbances is illogical. Everyone who pulled out a piercing was committing an assault and should have been arrested. It's not unreasonable to expect the school to keep your kid from being assaulted, and banning an accessory the victim was wearing just doesn't sound like the right response.

This is exactly what's wrong with American schools today. No one wants any structure or discipline. Everyone wants to say what they want to say, when they want to say it, do homework when they want to, listen to the teacher when they want to, where what they want to, break rules when they want to. show up when they want to, etc. And then they blame the teachers for not educating their kids.

Tekneek

09-26-2004, 07:42 AM

This is exactly what's wrong with American schools today. No one wants any structure or discipline. Everyone wants to say what they want to say, when they want to say it, do homework when they want to, listen to the teacher when they want to, where what they want to, break rules when they want to. show up when they want to, etc. And then they blame the teachers for not educating their kids.

It certainly sounds like there is no structure or discipline when the solution to piercings being ripped out is to ban them. Essentially, "We can't handle the burden to keep our students safe. A pack of thugs has decided to make it their mission to rip piercings out. We'd better ban those piercings because that is an easier solution than getting out there and protecting them."

As far as doing homework, I have always been of the opinion that only tests and reports/presentations should count toward your grades. That is what really demonstrates your ability and knowledge.

Blackadar

09-26-2004, 07:46 AM

Wait, wait, wait... so piercings MUST be protected as 1st Amendment speech, but you don't want provacative clothing because you feel it causes a disturbance? And then you say if the students pay attention to the teacher they shouldn't be disturbed by the piercings?

At the very LEAST, you can be consistent.

No, you can't be. We're dealing with a very large grey area of the law. There's not an absolute right to free speech or expression in schools. In fact, there's a very restricted free speech policy, according to the courts.

In 1969, in the case of Tinker vs. Des Moines, the Court ruled that students do not "shed their constitutional rights when they enter the schoolhouse door." But it is also the case that school administrators have a far greater ability to restrict the speech of their students than the government has to restrict the speech of the general public. Student speech cases require a balancing of the legitimate educational objectives and need for school discipline of administrators against the First Amendment values served by extending speech rights of students.

Cases on both sides have been won in Court. Most recently, the US Federal Court of Appeals came down on the side of allowing uniforms (wrongly, in my view) but the Supreme Court has not ruled on any direct case. So Tinker still stands as the law of the land, but not by much.

akw4572

09-26-2004, 08:52 AM

It certainly sounds like there is no structure or discipline when the solution to piercings being ripped out is to ban them. Essentially, "We can't handle the burden to keep our students safe. A pack of thugs has decided to make it their mission to rip piercings out. We'd better ban those piercings because that is an easier solution than getting out there and protecting them."
.

No, it's solving a problem before it happens. Schools are looking to minimze disturbances, that's all.

Yossarian

09-26-2004, 09:33 AM

Excellent point. if his piercings have to go, ALL piercings should have to go

That reminds me of the old REM music video for stand.

Originally it featured some women and Messer Stipe dancing about with no tops on.

MTV Censored the video and wouldnt allow it to be shown without black boxes masking the nipples. Stipe said that a nipple was a nipple so he censored his (and the other one or two guys') nipples too.

Cringer

09-26-2004, 10:08 AM

Nice thread here. Stupid ass rules and dress codes. My daughter will be home-schooled. This was decided around the time she was born. My main two reasons, public schools are not the best at educating a kid (i know from experience) in my opinion. My other reason, dress coeds down here are over the top and to tell the truth they get me extremely pissed off.

Following are things that you could say rub me the wrong way about local dress codes (copied and pasted)......

"The District’s Dress Code is established to teach grooming and hygiene, instill discipline, prevent disruption, avoid safety hazards, and teach respect for authority."

2. All shirts designed to be tucked in must be tucked in correctly. Discretion by the principal or his/her designee will
prevail.

d. Secondary school students are not permitted to wear shorts.

I have major problems with this whole section that follows (except maybe 11.)..............

8. Earrings or studs for boys are prohibited on any part of the body.
9. All students are prohibited from wearing earrings or studs on any part of their bodies other than their ear lobes.
10. Bandanas, hats, hairnets and caps are prohibited. Headbands must be worn appropriately to restrain hair, and
not across the forehead.
11. Sunglasses are prohibited for classroom use unless prescribed.
12. Appropriate footwear shall be worn at school. Sneakers/Tennis shoes should be worn for PE participation. Flipflops/thongs and steel toe boots are not appropriate footwear. All footwear must have a closed heel or have a
strap around the rear of the ankle. Socks must be worn, when appropriate.
13. Hair must be clean and neatly combed. Boys’ hair shall not extend beyond the top of the shirt collar; no ducktails or ponytails will be allowed. Hair that is styled in a manner that draws attention to the student or is distracting is prohibited.
14. Sideburns shall not extend beyond the bottom of the earlobe. Mustaches shall be neatly trimmed. Beards are not permitted.
15. Bleaching of hair in an exaggerated color or combination of colors is prohibited.

Here is one recent conflict with a dress code down here, has to do with hair. Regulating length of a guys hair is bullshit, and when a kid means to do good with it like this.......http://www.valleystar.com/localnews_more.php?id=54533_0_19_0_M

How about if you wear too much black? (http://www.themonitor.com/SiteProcessor.cfm?Template=/GlobalTemplates/Details.cfm&StoryID=3386&Section=Valley)

Wonder how many people would be pissed if they were told they couldn't wear crosses around their necks, or that WWJD? shirt? Minor religions are still religions.....Different religion related problems, not really local.... (http://www.religioustolerance.org/sch_clot5.htm)

also, i know there are local school districts here, most actually, that say you can not wear sweat pants, which I find stupid. And many also have the rule that goes along with the "no long hair" for guys rules, is that you can not have your hair shorter then 1/4 of an inch.

Anyways, I'm rambling as always, but I hate dress codes. Of course I do look the way I look so I'm sure my hatred of them is a given........

akw4572

09-26-2004, 10:10 AM

That dress code is very strict. The one at my school is not anywhere near as strict as that. Ours pretty much limits piercings, the length of skirts, indecent writings on T shirts, and pants that hang down inapproiately and show your ass.

Joe

09-26-2004, 10:13 AM

yeah that dress code is gay as AIDS

Tekneek

09-26-2004, 11:11 AM

"The District’s Dress Code is established to teach grooming and hygiene, instill discipline, prevent disruption, avoid safety hazards, and teach respect for authority."

Only the bold items appear legitimate to me. Unless the caliber of people involved with that school system is truly above most, they aren't the kind of people I would trust to be teaching discipline and respect to my son.

I'm glad we did not have any of those kinds of policies when I went to public school. Mostly they were sensible and didn't even resort to any of the supposed 'rules' unless there was a problem. In other words, they didn't walk around with the school rulebook looking for trouble where trouble was not already present. It was used to resolve problems, not create them.

GrantDawg

09-26-2004, 02:58 PM

...Unless the caliber of people involved with that school system is truly above most, they aren't the kind of people I would trust to be teaching discipline and respect to my son.

Then your child needs to be home-schooled. Period.

Glengoyne

09-26-2004, 05:53 PM

I honestly think Instilling discipline is a very valid reason for a dress code. I actually have no issues with any of the dress code posted above. Well maybe the no hats and etc option. I'd actually like it if my kid's school dress codes were that strict. Then again I'm leaning toward sending them to a private school, so I guess that is why I wouldn't mind it.

I'm not 100% for all of the dress codes in our area schools. Local schools prohibit any clothing with a sports team logo or name college or pro teams are prohibited. Any piece of clothing with a camoflage print is banned. I think the reason I'm not happy with those, is that they are enforced with more of a zero-tolerance policy mindset, than a dress code.

RendeR

09-26-2004, 08:07 PM

Any and or all of these things (with perhaps the exception of #11) are valid reason, in my opinion, to threaten the school board with a lawsuit. They need to prove that ANY of this actually affects the ability of the children to attend and understand and learn in their classes.

While schools may indeed have a better ability to limit the students rights, they are not exempt from lawsuits for discrimination. The entire entry about boys hair is in fact discrimination by sex. I'd love to meet the ignorant fool who drafted this and somehow snuck it past any intelligent person on that schoolboard. IF they ever did so. I'm betting it never got reviewed at all.

2. All shirts designed to be tucked in must be tucked in correctly. Discretion by the principal or his/her designee will
prevail.

d. Secondary school students are not permitted to wear shorts.

8. Earrings or studs for boys are prohibited on any part of the body.
9. All students are prohibited from wearing earrings or studs on any part of their bodies other than their ear lobes.
10. Bandanas, hats, hairnets and caps are prohibited. Headbands must be worn appropriately to restrain hair, and
not across the forehead.
11. Sunglasses are prohibited for classroom use unless prescribed.
12. Appropriate footwear shall be worn at school. Sneakers/Tennis shoes should be worn for PE participation. Flipflops/thongs and steel toe boots are not appropriate footwear. All footwear must have a closed heel or have a
strap around the rear of the ankle. Socks must be worn, when appropriate.
13. Hair must be clean and neatly combed. Boys’ hair shall not extend beyond the top of the shirt collar; no ducktails or ponytails will be allowed. Hair that is styled in a manner that draws attention to the student or is distracting is prohibited.
14. Sideburns shall not extend beyond the bottom of the earlobe. Mustaches shall be neatly trimmed. Beards are not permitted.
15. Bleaching of hair in an exaggerated color or combination of colors is prohibited.

Ben E Lou

09-26-2004, 08:20 PM

What school system's dress code is that anyway?

Abe Sargent

09-26-2004, 09:22 PM

To be fair, I'm confortable with Number 12 as well as 11. Requiring appropriate shoes for PE and hygiene seems fair. They may go a little too far with how they phrase it, but the general idea seems good.

-Anxiety

Any and or all of these things (with perhaps the exception of #11) are valid reason, in my opinion, to threaten the school board with a lawsuit. They need to prove that ANY of this actually affects the ability of the children to attend and understand and learn in their classes.

While schools may indeed have a better ability to limit the students rights, they are not exempt from lawsuits for discrimination. The entire entry about boys hair is in fact discrimination by sex. I'd love to meet the ignorant fool who drafted this and somehow snuck it past any intelligent person on that schoolboard. IF they ever did so. I'm betting it never got reviewed at all.

2. All shirts designed to be tucked in must be tucked in correctly. Discretion by the principal or his/her designee will
prevail.

d. Secondary school students are not permitted to wear shorts.

8. Earrings or studs for boys are prohibited on any part of the body.
9. All students are prohibited from wearing earrings or studs on any part of their bodies other than their ear lobes.
10. Bandanas, hats, hairnets and caps are prohibited. Headbands must be worn appropriately to restrain hair, and
not across the forehead.
11. Sunglasses are prohibited for classroom use unless prescribed.
12. Appropriate footwear shall be worn at school. Sneakers/Tennis shoes should be worn for PE participation. Flipflops/thongs and steel toe boots are not appropriate footwear. All footwear must have a closed heel or have a
strap around the rear of the ankle. Socks must be worn, when appropriate.
13. Hair must be clean and neatly combed. Boys’ hair shall not extend beyond the top of the shirt collar; no ducktails or ponytails will be allowed. Hair that is styled in a manner that draws attention to the student or is distracting is prohibited.
14. Sideburns shall not extend beyond the bottom of the earlobe. Mustaches shall be neatly trimmed. Beards are not permitted.
15. Bleaching of hair in an exaggerated color or combination of colors is prohibited.