Summit on school violence

[nightwng2000]

I've read the CNN and MSNBC articles on the summit so far.

As expected, they are focusing on the tragedy-level events. Preventing the tradgedy-level events (suggesting students snitch on others who are planning the tragedy-level events, more securty, and so on).

But, so far, no word on preventing the tragedy-level events from being considered as an option.

It's true that there is no set pattern. The violence in recent months proved that.

Some of the shooters were adults and took their violence out on students in schools as easily as they could have walked into a business or someone's home or other location.

Others were students who, reportedly, were victims of abuse in or out of school and, for whatever reason, felt the need to strike back with violence.

Others used the violence or threat of violence as what appears to be crys for help.

But, so far, the only suggestions seem to be to track down those who might commit tragedy-level events and prevent the events from occuring at that point. Thus far, no suggestions on changing attitudes and actions to prevent any abuse upon those who may end up turning to violence as their solution to abuse they've suffered.

The situations with the adults in the Colorado and Pennsylvania shootings aren't as easy to pin down (especially since the attackers commited suicide so we can't get a clear picture of all the facts) as those situations with students taken violent acts against their abusers.

While in the adult cases, better security is probably the only option available to schools, when it comes to students/kids, there should be a lot more that should be done. Stopping abuse, no matter what form the abuse takes, in its early stages and at the youngest ages, both in and out of school, is one of the ways of cutting down on the tragedy-level violence options that are being chosen by some students/kids as a solution to their being abused.

By ending the romantic view or trivialization of abuse in school (which is partly caused by terming it "bullying"), and treating it the exact same as abuse outside of school will go a long way both to ending violence (whether violence towards others or towards one's self) as a solution to abuse and encourage individuals, once grown up, that abuse is wrong and shouldn't be taken no matter what form it takes.

Hopefully, by the time the summit ends, such a suggestion may be made.

[Jabrwock]

Of course the "zero tolerance" policies as currently written usually backfire, because it's almost always the bullied being punished for reacting to the bullying...

So the current policies usually encourage the bullied to just suck it up and live with it until they snap.

On a related note, the APA now says that all those structured activities parents plan for their kids in an attempt to give them a leg up at school may actually be putting a ton of stress (the bad kind) on kids.

[illspirit]

Hmm, so Dubya hasn't announced a plan to launch a pre-emptive war against the children then? :p

[KN]

Hmm, so Dubya hasn't announced a plan to launch a pre-emptive war against the children then? :p

He HAS made comments on the stench small children produced, and has dubbed them 'Asses of Evil'.

[Samson Effect]

Hmm, so Dubya hasn't announced a plan to launch a pre-emptive war against the children then? :p

You made me roffle.

But anywho, snitching on people who are PLANNING tragedy-level events is all well and good, but that only works if they HEAR about them. How about, you know, effecting changes to the environment and policy so students who would commit school shootings feel less of a need to? Also, things like metal detectors and such, I think would largely be useless. People like Klebold/Harris, Gill, et al don't seem to make much of a secret that they're carrying a gun when they go to mess stuff up.

[nightwng2000]

The CNN and MSNBC stories indicate that some speakers said that schools need to take bullying more seriously. No specific details as to what was said or who said it.

But this comment is a bit... odd.
""The communication link is very important," said George Sugai, a University of Connecticut education professor. "Parents are not going to engage the schools if they have to walk through a metal detector, if they have to go through steps to access the teachers.""

It's a little strange because while they are saying that access for parents to teachers should be easier, they are also implying that access to schools in general should be easier.

My son's school doesn't have a metal detector. But I do have to have my ID out and sign in when I arrive. What do I think about this? I pull out my ID before I walk in the door and sign in if I have to go past the front desk. In such a manner, I have both security for my child and access to school authorities. If I think I need quicker access in advance, I send a note to school with my son. I mean, what are they saying? They want to make it easier for parents to get in so they should make it easier for ANYONE to get in?

There will always be hassles in life. Passwords and PINs exist because bad people do bad things. ID cards exist and are upgrade technologically because bad people do bad things and find newer ways of doing bad things. Security guards, metal detectors, and even guard dogs exist because bad people do bad things. Not everyone is bad. But I'd rather have the inconvience of proving who I am rather than a bad person not having to completely identify themselves and be allowed to do something bad. Yeah, when I'm in a hurry, I feel the hassle. But I know that I'd rather have than not have that security.

[Jabrwock]

Cause you know, stopping in at the school office before running to bitch out the teacher for giving your child a low mark on a test is such a hassle! :p

[Grahamr]

I've read the CNN and MSNBC articles on the summit so far.

As expected, they are focusing on the tragedy-level events. Preventing the tradgedy-level events (suggesting students snitch on others who are planning the tragedy-level events, more securty, and so on).

But, so far, no word on preventing the tragedy-level events from being considered as an option.

It's true that there is no set pattern. The violence in recent months proved that.

Some of the shooters were adults and took their violence out on students in schools as easily as they could have walked into a business or someone's home or other location.

Others were students who, reportedly, were victims of abuse in or out of school and, for whatever reason, felt the need to strike back with violence.

Others used the violence or threat of violence as what appears to be crys for help.

But, so far, the only suggestions seem to be to track down those who might commit tragedy-level events and prevent the events from occuring at that point. Thus far, no suggestions on changing attitudes and actions to prevent any abuse upon those who may end up turning to violence as their solution to abuse they've suffered.

The situations with the adults in the Colorado and Pennsylvania shootings aren't as easy to pin down (especially since the attackers commited suicide so we can't get a clear picture of all the facts) as those situations with students taken violent acts against their abusers.

While in the adult cases, better security is probably the only option available to schools, when it comes to students/kids, there should be a lot more that should be done. Stopping abuse, no matter what form the abuse takes, in its early stages and at the youngest ages, both in and out of school, is one of the ways of cutting down on the tragedy-level violence options that are being chosen by some students/kids as a solution to their being abused.

By ending the romantic view or trivialization of abuse in school (which is partly caused by terming it "bullying"), and treating it the exact same as abuse outside of school will go a long way both to ending violence (whether violence towards others or towards one's self) as a solution to abuse and encourage individuals, once grown up, that abuse is wrong and shouldn't be taken no matter what form it takes.

Hopefully, by the time the summit ends, such a suggestion may be made.

very,very,true. in a way,these policys are creating more violence.

you seem to be an expert on these things.

[Tollwutig]

The CNN and MSNBC stories indicate that some speakers said that schools need to take bullying more seriously. No specific details as to what was said or who said it.

But this comment is a bit... odd.
""The communication link is very important," said George Sugai, a University of Connecticut education professor. "Parents are not going to engage the schools if they have to walk through a metal detector, if they have to go through steps to access the teachers.""

It's a little strange because while they are saying that access for parents to teachers should be easier, they are also implying that access to schools in general should be easier.

My son's school doesn't have a metal detector. But I do have to have my ID out and sign in when I arrive. What do I think about this? I pull out my ID before I walk in the door and sign in if I have to go past the front desk. In such a manner, I have both security for my child and access to school authorities. If I think I need quicker access in advance, I send a note to school with my son. I mean, what are they saying? They want to make it easier for parents to get in so they should make it easier for ANYONE to get in?

There will always be hassles in life. Passwords and PINs exist because bad people do bad things. ID cards exist and are upgrade technologically because bad people do bad things and find newer ways of doing bad things. Security guards, metal detectors, and even guard dogs exist because bad people do bad things. Not everyone is bad. But I'd rather have the inconvience of proving who I am rather than a bad person not having to completely identify themselves and be allowed to do something bad. Yeah, when I'm in a hurry, I feel the hassle. But I know that I'd rather have than not have that security.

Nghtwng2000 how dare you blame half thought out policies by people who only think theorhetically about a problem.


Also it wouldn't hurt as most people said if those who are doing these violent acts thought there was another way, but then preventing kids from making thier own social pecking order is impossible. It could be minimized though.

[Thefremen]

very,very,true. in a way,these policys are creating more violence.

you seem to be an expert on these things.

He's a parent, he has to be!