hoops23;1146164 wrote:No it doesn't. It shows common sense.

It's not like you asking your manager at McDonald's for 3 days off because your gerbil died and he denied it, but granted it to a co-worker who needed 3 days off because his grandmother died.

That doesn't show favoritism, it shows common sense and good judgement.

What about 3 days off for a friend that died? No? What about a close friend?

There is always going to be some gray area, and a lawsuit that will ensure if the party feels slighted or there is even a peep of any favoritism. Are you really that clueless about the benefits of a "zero tolerance" policy?

I Wear Pants;1146384 wrote:Rationality always wins. In the long run it always wins.

It never wins. However, #sleeperwins

I Wear Pants;1146162 wrote:Have the rule and then have a system for looking at appeals then. Not that damn difficult to do the right thing.

Ok, this is what I was talking about. Opinions are being thrown all over the place, but I bet no one has thought this through about how it would be run and governed.

First off, who is in charge of the "system in place" for appeals? Is it the principal? The BOE? A separate appeals committee who could overrule the school ADs. At what cost financially and time wise? Would this committee and the school then be able to be sued more easily? Will the taxpayers pass a higher operating levy if necessary? This is specifically what I meant by opening a whole new can of worms and those few question are just off the top of my head. Many, many more would likely need addressed.

Secondly, would it open up a slew of possible "appeals" from families who feel their situation is like another case where an exception was granted? Because there would now be a precedence set. This is what I meant when I said it's a school system, not a court system. Because I'm also pretty certain the schools don't want to be in he "judicial" business.

DeyDurkie5;1146290 wrote:LOL SVF is such a bitch

STFU black. Add something worthwhile other than trying to call out someone's fail, especially when you're wrong about it.

Steel Valley Football;1146603 wrote:Ok, this is what I was talking about. Opinions are being thrown all over the place, but I bet no one has thought this through about how it would be run and governed.

First off, who is in charge of the "system in place" for appeals? Is it the principal? The BOE? A separate appeals committee who could overrule the school ADs. At what cost financially and time wise? Would this committee and the school then be able to be sued more easily? Will the taxpayers pass a higher operating levy if necessary? This is specifically what I meant by opening a whole new can of worms and those few question are just off the top of my head. Many, many more would likely need addressed.

Secondly, would it open up a slew of possible "appeals" from families who feel their situation is like another case where an exception was granted? Because there would now be a precedence set. This is what I meant when I said it's a school system, not a court system. Because I'm also pretty certain the schools don't want to be in he "judicial" business.

Dude, it's a fucking high school not a massive business with thousands of employees or a government program with millions of people in it.

Carrollton has like 175 kids per class (going from OHSAA enrollment data), not exactly going to be a ton of people in that situation.

We've thought it through, we just don't think actually considering the circumstances before not allowing kids to attend graduation with the rest of their class is the massive "OMG ITS GOING TO BANKRUPT THE SCHOOL" bureaucratic nightmare that you think it is.

I Wear Pants;1146614 wrote:Dude, it's a ****ing high school not a massive business with thousands of employees or a government program with millions of people in it.

Carrollton has like 175 kids per class (going from OHSAA enrollment data), not exactly going to be a ton of people in that situation.

We've thought it through, we just don't think actually considering the circumstances before not allowing kids to attend graduation with the rest of their class is the massive "OMG ITS GOING TO BANKRUPT THE SCHOOL" bureaucratic nightmare that you think it is.

But our schools are state-run institutions. If one school did it, others would be allowed. Add the numbers up.

Right now, you're just stating an opinion and that's fine. You didn't address one of my questions, though. Questions that have been already been considered by the state, schools, ADS, lawyers, etc. before arriving at the current disciplinary system.

Steel Valley Football;1146651 wrote:But our schools are state-run institutions. If one school did it, others would be allowed. Add the numbers up.

Right now, you're just stating an opinion and that's fine. You didn't address one of my questions, though. Questions that have been already been considered by the state, schools, ADS, lawyers, etc. before arriving at the current disciplinary system.

lol, what? It would still be a school by school basis. What Carrollton does would have no bearing on what Toledo Whitmer or Glenville, or another school does.

Your argument is lazy. Your argument is also invalid, because the school did reverse their decision. So it's pointless.

Steel Valley Football;1146651 wrote:But our schools are state-run institutions. If one school did it, others would be allowed. Add the numbers up.

Right now, you're just stating an opinion and that's fine. You didn't address one of my questions, though. Questions that have been already been considered by the state, schools, ADS, lawyers, etc. before arriving at the current disciplinary system.

I'm just saying that this attitude of homogenization and trying to make everything a bureaucratic nightmare is certainly one of the problems our education system has.

Not every student is the same and not every disciplinary situation or whatever can be handled the same unless you're willing to give up doing the right thing for consistency which you clearly are.

And yeah dude, what one school enacts doesn't have a bearing on another school. My high school a few years ago implemented a no extracurricular activities like sports practices and such on Sunday policy (which is fucking stupid) and it has no effect on whether other schools have that policy. Also, I assume you think the school is going to get sued now that they're letting him walk. Better get ready for the resulting levy and breakdown of our entire school system because now all other schools have to follow suit in every case!

SVF must feel that each crime should be punishable the same way. Murder somebody? You get the same treatment as a guy who stole a bag of peanuts.

We need consistency! The sheer # of criminals is far too large to give individual cases.

hoops23;1146656 wrote:SVF must feel that each crime should be punishable the same way. Murder somebody? You get the same treatment as a guy who stole a bag of peanuts.

We need consistency! The sheer # of criminals is far too large to give individual cases.

I mean, what if someone gets a different punishment for the same crime because of situational things? Obviously society would break down.

Steel Valley Football;1146605 wrote:STFU black. Add something worthwhile other than trying to call out someone's fail, especially when you're wrong about it.

What does this mean???

Pile on!! It's the circle jerk!!

/cj'd


Btw, I said allowed to do it not forced. RIF.

Steel Valley Football;1146665 wrote:Pile on!! It's the circle jerk!!

/cj'd


Btw, I said allowed to do it not forced. RIF.

Um, we're arguing that schools should (and are) allowed to make judgement calls based on the context of the situation instead of hiding behind zero tolerance like cowards. There are situations when the rule is the rule and then there are situations where sticking to the rule book is the wrong thing to do.

Sure sometimes a school may make a judgement call (or not make one) that upsets some people. But if you're trying to make everyone happy all the time you're going to end up pissing everyone off. The only thing a school should be concerned with is doing the right thing.

I Wear Pants;1146382 wrote:Yeah, **** this kid for having other things to worry about at the time like taking care of his cancerous mother and not properly getting excuses. Should just expel him.

???

Huh ? Why expel him? He had enough time to do his school work. He was passing his classed and going to graduate. Come on it's not like he wasn't engaged with the school at all throughout the entire process. The kid was attending classes and doing school work. If he was going to miss some days to care for hims mother there's no reason he couldn't make them aware keeping the days as excused absences. This is on him and his mother.

Steel Valley Football;1146603 wrote:Ok, this is what I was talking about. Opinions are being thrown all over the place, but I bet no one has thought this through about how it would be run and governed.

First off, who is in charge of the "system in place" for appeals? Is it the principal? The BOE? A separate appeals committee who could overrule the school ADs. At what cost financially and time wise? Would this committee and the school then be able to be sued more easily? Will the taxpayers pass a higher operating levy if necessary? This is specifically what I meant by opening a whole new can of worms and those few question are just off the top of my head. Many, many more would likely need addressed.

Secondly, would it open up a slew of possible "appeals" from families who feel their situation is like another case where an exception was granted? Because there would now be a precedence set. This is what I meant when I said it's a school system, not a court system. Because I'm also pretty certain the schools don't want to be in he "judicial" business.

You're making it more difficult than it has to be. When I was in school, there was no "zero tolerance" policy. If you got in trouble for something, you went to the principals office, and he determined a punishment on a case by case basis. It didn't take alot of time, and by no means did it cost any more money.

Con_Alma;1146690 wrote:???

Huh ? Why expel him? He had enough time to do his school work. He was passing his classed and going to graduate. Come on it's not like he wasn't engaged with the school at all throughout the entire process. The kid was attending classes and doing school work. If he was going to miss some days to care for hims mother there's no reason he couldn't make them aware keeping the days as excused absences. This is on him and his mother.

Dude, I was being sarcastic and pretending to be SVF.

Steel Valley Football;1146651 wrote:But our schools are state-run institutions. If one school did it, others would be allowed. Add the numbers up.

Right now, you're just stating an opinion and that's fine. You didn't address one of my questions, though. Questions that have been already been considered by the state, schools, ADS, lawyers, etc. before arriving at the current disciplinary system.

One school did do it. Other schools are allowed to do it.

Steel Valley Football;1146605 wrote:STFU black. Add something worthwhile other than trying to call out someone's fail, especially when you're wrong about it.

Also, please stop with the "racial" insults. Good lord, you're a grown ass man.

So if the kid is allowed to walk, is he also allowed to go to prom and on the senior trip to Cedar Point? The Canton Rep has an article today saying his classmates want him to be able to do prom and the trip.

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x2009659112/Silent-support-for-Fish-at-Carrollton-BOE-meeting

justincredible;1146814 wrote:Also, please stop with the "racial" insults. Good lord, you're a grown ass man.

Oh pipe down white

I Wear Pants;1146802 wrote:Dude, I was being sarcastic and pretending to be SVF.

Ok. Thanks.

justincredible;1145737 wrote:My wife work for a high school. I think that's enough to make me an expert in this, btw.

English major I see......

justincredible;1146814 wrote:Also, please stop with the "racial" insults. Good lord, you're a grown ass man.

/irony

How is that ironic in any way? He didn't use a racial insult. Goodness you're dumb.

Mr. 300;1146835 wrote:English major I see......

Oh no, I forgot an s.