New Haven Independent

posted by: V on January 11, 2010  4:21pm

The schools should enforce their rules.  All the time.  They should have given sufficient warning that the enforcement would change.

“Robo calls”?  What happened to announcements in homeroom?

posted by: motherof2 on January 11, 2010  4:38pm

Awww…the little babies got punished! Its about time someone put their foot down and stuck to the rules.  These kids need to stop whining and take responsibility for their actions.  The rule is no cell phone or iPods in the building…bottom line!  Get a watch if you need to check the time.  Get a photo album if you need to share photos!

I may agree with the students on how they quickly went from low tolerance to no tolerance because they got caught with their pants down.  Cross’ administrators holds some responsibility too.  They knew the rules and decided not to enforce it.  But such is life!!!!!!

posted by: Pedro on January 11, 2010  4:45pm

Ugh, yet another zero-tolerance policy that is horribly misguided. Why can’t the schools bother to teach appropriate use of technology and proscribe it’s use than have a brain-dead policy which makes no sense. And a 3-day suspension? On what planet are these school administrators?

posted by: fedupwithliberals on January 11, 2010  4:46pm

Now if only they could do something about weapons….

posted by: asdf on January 11, 2010  4:56pm

Seems a little harsh to be suspending kids for 3 days after a first infraction.  Do kids get the same punishment for fighting or being caught cheating or bullying? 

Also, I’m a little unclear on the power structure at Cross.  Why does the principal need to speak with the administrators ‘downtown’ to change the policy?  Does this mean that the mandate for this policy came from ‘downtown’?  Does this mean Mayo is behind this?  Is the same policy in place at Hillhouse? at Career?  How about at the elementary schools?

posted by: Beansie's Mom on January 11, 2010  5:03pm

Tell me what an out of school suspension accomplishes.  Three days?  I’d rather have the students in school, even if not in their regular classrooms.  What happened to the concept of detention after school?

How many days of suspension do they give students for bullying?

posted by: Speak on January 11, 2010  5:09pm

I am a student at Wilbur Cross, and agree with the following. To enforce a rule so curly and in the middle of finals is unnecessary! We have always been told not to wear/do these things, but they are much minor than kids distributing drugs in school. If there should be any “crack-down” it should be on walking into school, not around. The adadministratorshould be happy kids even want to attend school.. so why take them out?

posted by: Pioneer on January 11, 2010  5:15pm

As the Vice President of student government in my New Haven Public School, I’m happy to see this rule being enforced. However, I don’t think out-of-school suspensions are the answer. Three days of in-school suspension sitting in complete silence doing schoolwork should do the trick.

posted by: Cross Teacher on January 11, 2010  6:02pm

asdf:  No electronics and no hats is a district-wide policy, at all grade levels.

posted by: Ned on January 11, 2010  6:04pm

“Get a watch if you need to check the time.  Get a photo album if you need to share photos!”  Why don’t you suggest banning laptops too?  So the students should be technologically retarded or punished?  Last time I checked cellphones, DPA’s, Ipods, etc. were necessary to modern society, culture and business, and very useful tools.  What is a student going to learn by missing three days of classes: that adults can be unreasonable and arbitrary in their exercise of power?

posted by: Blarney on January 11, 2010  6:37pm

Yes, rules are rules, but as my son says…“Wow, they suspended 150 students, now too bad there are kids still doing drugs every time I walk into the bathroom! Yeah, we are safe now from all those hat wearing students!!!” Jaded freshman, he is.

I suggested wearing different type of hats to see if they really enforced the rule. Say, a top hat or a huge straw gardening hat with flowers. Now can we enforce administrators to actually monitor teaching methods and student engagement?

posted by: Student on January 11, 2010  6:49pm

asdf and Cross Teacher:
No electronics and no hats is a district-wide policy, at all grade levels. That is correct.
However, mandatory three-day suspensions for all students seen with these items is not district policy.

posted by: unprotected on January 11, 2010  7:59pm

nice… the student/parent handbook they get at orientation spells out the do’s and don’ts.  typical attitude of students to blame faculty and staff for them not following rules.  wait till the kids start to realize they are a juvenile till 16 now.  gonna get fun at dismissal.

posted by: robn on January 11, 2010  8:17pm

I fail to see how listening to an i-pod, looking at photos, texting or making cell-phone calls in between classes is detrimental to discipline. If somebody pulls out a phone or pda in class, drop the hammer…but in between??? c’mon.
And before somebody drags out that old bone about school security.. if it gets to the point when children are coordinating criminal acts with phones at school, then the administration has missed indicators far more indicative than phone use.

posted by: City Hall Watch on January 11, 2010  8:27pm

This uproar is what happens when you don’t enforce the rules from the beginning. Cell phone use in school has been rampant for several years at Cross. That Rose Coggins is just now figuring it out says as much about her and her 7 assistant principals as it does about the law breaking students. Some students are answering their phones and texting during class.

If Coggins can knuckle down on cell phones and hats…how about closing the windows too so taxpayers aren’t paying to heat East Rock?

posted by: asdf on January 11, 2010  8:39pm

Student and Cross Teacher…

Thanks for the answer.  This leads to another question—if the mandatory suspension is not district wide, then why does the principal need to talk with district administrators to change a policy that only that school has in place?  Who made the decision in the first place if the principal doesn’t have the authority to do it herself?

posted by: Cross Teacher on January 11, 2010  9:12pm

I don’t think the students should be complaining. This is the administration’s school, and they can do whatever they damn well please. Suck it up.

posted by: MCB on January 11, 2010  9:44pm

I’m a Junior at a Private School. A strict private school. yet, when a hat is worn inside the only punishment is a demerit, not three days out of school. The administration needs to realize that a zero tolerance rule doesn’t work. The gov’t doesn’t even have a zero tolerance rule on murder, yet when a coat is worn inside a kid like Jessie, a 3 AP class student gets an OSS for three days? What’s the logic in that? please try to justify this. I would relish the opportunity to disprove you.

posted by: TheVolleyballGod on January 11, 2010  10:18pm

ANIMALS

posted by: Student on January 11, 2010  10:21pm

cross teacher…

The administration does not have the right to do as they please. As a teacher, you probably have to deal with them too, so they might as well do as they wish with the faculty. I have not been suspended ..yet.. but by the way things are going i might as well expect it. punishing a student because of the violation of a school rule is understandable but 3 day suspension is RIDICULOUS. As of now, if the method of punishment is still enforced, students at the school are planing to take action, the administration cant suspend everyone. If the method is not changed, they will hear from the student body, and it wont be pleasant.

posted by: asdf on January 11, 2010  10:32pm

Yes, the administration can do whatever they want, but that doesn’t mean they should. 

The administrators (and teachers) should suck it up and accept the criticism of their inflexible policies.

posted by: Been Called Worse on January 11, 2010  10:42pm

As an outside observer, I have no problems with the rules as enacted by the school/BoE.

As a Cross graduate, and working professional who manages others and sets policy, based on the story as reported, I find the administration’s actions to be lacking.

Would WCHS/BoE enact a policy for staff without setting a firm start date, publicized well in advance?  (Heck, the way I do it, policy is written, reviewed, approved, given an implementation date, then sent to the employees who are effected by it for them to sign a copy acknowledging receipt of the policy to be enacted.)  My experience from my time with the City of New Haven as an employee is that it is done the same way there.

In prepping these students for the real world, an implementation of rules with punitive measures could have been MUCH better managed by the administration as opposed to beginning to enforce the rule on an arbitrary date.

If this was done to teachers or staff at the school the measure would surely be overturn by union grievances based on the slipshod way the policy was implemented.

posted by: broken on January 11, 2010  11:13pm

the real issue at cross is so far from cellphone use in the hallways and indiscriminate suspensions.  however, these suspensions give us the evidence needed to reflect on the sustainability of dysfunctional shopping mall high schools like cross. 

“oh, but my daughter takes advanced placement courses there and sits next to the son of a yale professor.”  certainly the truth.  and certainly the very inequity that mandates this “equal opportunity” suspension policy.  by punishing the honors kids along with everybody else, for infractions like hats and ipods, the administrators at cross fail to address and respond to the real needs of the school. 

they also attempt to mask the devastating divide that exists within their school.  the seemingly fair application of a “rules are rules” policy is not fair.  after three days, the advanced placement student will return to the sort of structured environment that benefits adolescent learning.  meanwhile, back on the 1st and 2nd floor, the other teenagers wander the halls aimlessly, looking for meaning in a crusty curriculum created for someone else.

n.b.  im fully aware of the blatant rule-breaking that goes on at cross and other high schools.  im not trying to excuse or deny this behavior.  kids who ignore the caring adults in their lives just because they present as stern have a lot to learn. 

educational research tells us that kids need consistency.  from the sounds of things, that’s the one thing that was not administered this year at wilbur cross.

posted by: NHPS Parent on January 11, 2010  11:32pm

The cell phone rule needs to be changed to allow cell phones in school but only if they’re OFF and OUT OF SIGHT. I have no patience with the time sink of all the idiotic texting and narcissistic Facebook “bestie” snaps (‘eeew’) but I need my middle and high school children to carry a cell phone for before and after school communication and potential emergency use.
Sorry, one of the prices of admission should be “NO exceptions,” no “but I was just checking the time” BS. If you can’t handle finding the nearest Seth Thomas now and them, wear a watch…
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167_1-10137452-100.html

Seriously, I hope parents and NHPS’s can get together on reasonably changing the cell phone rule—we had a no hoodie rule enforced for quite a while in our middle school until enough parents complained. Now the PTA sells them with a school logo!

BTW, don’t forget, FBers, you only have 2MM http://www.2mminutes.com/

posted by: WC Student on January 11, 2010  11:33pm

Wow, I’m glad I’m graduating soon.

Yes, the rules were clear. Yes, there was prior warning.

But we are dealing with at-risk students who have been raised in a system in which breaking policy meant virtually nothing for years. If you want to see disgrace, don’t look at our cellphone usage. Look at our graduation rate. Look at our percentage of drop-outs. Then tell me continually suspending students for 3 days is a good idea.

The policy does not fit the crime, nor does it fit the situation. Period. These students deserve to be punished. But I refuse to accept a policy that will only bring more damage to our already poor academic reputation and strengthen our reputation as one of the worst public schools in Connecticut.

I can’t believe any teacher would support this. They above all know how detrimental missing 3 days could be.

posted by: Cross Teacher 1 on January 12, 2010  6:07am

For the record the two “Cross Teacher” postings are from two different “Cross Teachers.”

posted by: Jason on January 12, 2010  6:13am

Listen kid, you don’t make policy or rules so follow them ... Being an AP student I am sure you should be able to follow the rules even if others were not.

posted by: Old School on January 12, 2010  8:21am

It’s nice to see New Haven high school students are only being suspended for using electronic devices and wearing hats.  When I was a student at a New Haven high school, the suspensions were generated by assaults, robberies, drug possession/distribution, etc.

posted by: ROBN on January 12, 2010  9:09am

I can’t see the purpose of cell phone restriction in between classes. The point of a rule is not just enforcement of that rule, but a reasonable productive goal. Lacking that, we’re teaching our children about the capricious application of power. Do we really want to do that, having just experienced a decade of textbook fascism (the blurring of public interests with corporate interests)?

posted by: sols on January 12, 2010  9:23am

It’s sad that the articles in the NH Independent about Wilbur Cross tend to feature only the minority students: the elitist white parents and students who think the whole school exists just for them.. “well, I can’t miss class because I’m in AP and I’m smart.. but it’s OK for those other kids” or “why do we have to let all THOSE other New Haven kids into Cross, it makes the hallways too crowded” or “even though I live across town, my kid should be able to go to Cross so they can be in all Honors classes and not hang out with THOSE kids at Hillhouse”

posted by: Concerned on January 12, 2010  9:43am

What happened to the UNIFIED Code of Conduct that was rolled out by NHPS this year?  My recollection is that the Unified Code of Conduct was implemented to help reduce out of school suspensions and to insure that discipline was applied consistently across the district.  Sounds like Cross hasn’t gotten the message!

Does the NHPS student handbook ban cell phones, i-pods, etc.?  Certainly, but it also states very clearly that “students will only be suspended if they PERSIST in bringing them into the school.”  Possession/use of a cell phone clearly falls within a Level 1 Minor Offense under the Unified Code of Conduct which doesn’t call for suspension, either in school or out of school, but rather a time out of a class period of less or loss of privileges.

What are we teaching students if NHPS doesn’t follow its own rules when disciplining its students?

posted by: bigsecurity on January 12, 2010  10:25am

those kids at cross were out of control. someone that works there could tell you that these kids want to run the school.  thanks to this crackdown, the last couple of days the halls have been nearly empty.  kids are actually going to class and not sharing headsets.  also the everyday problem of stolen ipods, mp3s, and cell phones was ridiculous to the point that school officers and staff were spending hours trying to figure out who stole what. there are enough land lines in the bldg if students need to make a call.  there are enough clocks on the wall if they need the time.  good job cross

posted by: Mike on January 12, 2010  10:36am

The children need to learn to function without their toys, nice job W.C. High!

posted by: TAXPAYER and Parent on January 12, 2010  11:13am

Does NHPS’ really want to deny our children the capability to speed dial 911 in an emergency while walking to and from school? HELLO, a child was abducted on Canner St while walking home from Worthington Hooker, raped and bludgeoned to death etc. etc.—the additional safety provided by cell phones (think GPS locating) is a no-brainer especially for children who walk to and from school (walking vs. driving is a hot issue in the ER neighborhood, yes?)
Some of our wonderful teachers have adopted reasonable ‘Out of Sight-Out of Mind/Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell’ personal policies but I agree with NH PARENT, NHPS’ short sighted cell phone rule is untenable, a district wide policy change needs to be put in writing because we taxpayers/parents want our children to be able to carry cell phones for elemental safety (but they must be OFF in school!). Others may want to fight for between class use, but, ‘OFF in school’ is my proposed compromise.
FWIW, NHPS’s 2009 - 2010 Student/Parent Handbook states that “Students will be suspended from school if they persist in bringing them (cell phones) into the school building.” Current District/City wide regulations do not specify a three day Out Of School suspension, let alone for a first offense and a WCHS student got their recent suspension reversed because a parent works for the BoE! What’s the message/lesson there?

“CONNECTED KID’S FIRST”(!?!)
“STUDENT CONDUCT

Beepers/Cellphones/Electronic Devices/Computers/Internet

Students will not be allowed to bring beepers, cell phones, or any other electronic devices, such as ipods, mp3 players, PSPs, etc. into the school building for any reason whatsoever. If they are brought to school they will be confiscated and returned to parents. Students will be suspended from school if they persist in bringing them into the school building.”
[Page “Sec2:15” (pdf page 21)]:
http://www.nhps.net/sites/default/files/2009_SPH_ENGLISH.pdf

Page 11 of WHS’s 2009 - 2010 Student/Parent Handbook states that:
The following items are not permitted in school:
-Electronic toys or games
-Pagers or cell phones
-Laser pointers
-Weapons of any kind
-Collectable cards
-CD or cassette players (note 8 track loophole)
-Expensive jewelry
-Large sums of money
Page 12 of Worthington Hooker’s 2009 - 2010 Student/Parent Handbook states that “Students are not to carry active cell phones on school buses or anywhere on school property. Cell phones will be confiscated by a staff member or school administrator and a parent must come to school to pick it up. Please refer to NHPS Handbook for the school district’s policy and procedures regarding cell phones.” (see above)
NHPS’, please change the cell phone rules to ‘OFF in school’ ASAP.

posted by: NHI reader on January 12, 2010  11:22am

“Doss-Gollin said another student was suspended while giving a class presentation. An administrator walked by, noticed she was wearing a hat, and suspended her.”

So while a student was giving a presentation to her class, an administrator interrupts the student and the class to suspend her? Public speaking, the ability to communicate your thoughts and ideas to others is a life lesson that all students should be learning in school. Perhaps this student was nervous or insecure and the hat helped with her confidence to stand in front of her classmates for her presentation? Is that really so bad? What’s the long term goal of education? Isn’t the teacher the best person to ascertain the best learning environment in his/her classroom? The administrators should have more respect for the teachers and their classrooms. After all, it is up to the teachers to provide these suspended students with the lessons/materials they miss out on while serving their suspension, not the administrators.

posted by: cross student on January 12, 2010  11:25am

i feel its right for cross to ensure this rule but its horrible. like i dont understand there are more things to worry about then ipods and cellphones.. we have midterms in two weeks and noone seems to care. we need to spend our tI’me studying and in school learning instead of out of school doing nothing useful. the administrators just dont understand and for cross teacher we dont need to suck it up. im sure everyone listens to music while doing there work even teachers. i just dont understand. and i didn’t get the warning BTW!

posted by: sjbj on January 12, 2010  11:37am

Perhaps Cross Administrators should read the RESEARCH on zero tolerance policies:
Fifteen years after the rise of zero tolerance ... there is still no credible evidence that zero tolerance suspensions and
expulsions are an effective method for changing student behavior.
See: http://ceep.indiana.edu/ChildrenLeftBehind/pdf/ZeroTolerance.pdf

posted by: nfjanette on January 12, 2010  11:50am

The cell phone rule needs to be changed to allow cell phones in school but only if they’re OFF and OUT OF SIGHT. I have no patience with the time sink of all the idiotic texting and narcissistic Facebook “bestie” snaps (‘eeew’) but I need my middle and high school children to carry a cell phone for before and after school communication and potential emergency use.

Agreed - the policy as written is simplistic and a failure.  The times they have a changed, and schools need to teach proper use of available technology.

Sorry, one of the prices of admission should be “NO exceptions,” no “but I was just checking the time”

Because it’s too hard to instead only punish based upon direct observation of bad behavior (calling/texting)?

posted by: Bigger Issue on January 12, 2010  12:05pm

As parents we want our kids to be safe in all environments, one would think that our kids should be safe in school. I understand the issue of electronics and even cell phones. The issue is that the school is not going to go rummaging through backpacks, pocketbooks and lockers looking for these items. If students really need/want to carry them for use during non school time then put them away.  I would like to be able to reach my children in case of an emergency and vice versa, but walking up and down the halls breaking the rules is unacceptable.  Perpetuating a society of chances sets you up for failure. If you know what you can get away with then why create the rule/law. As adults we do not get very many chances to break the rules/laws. The sooner young people understand the less disappointed they will be. Do away with strikes. Kids learn from very young what they can get away with, the famous, stop right now stated several times before the parent acts. The first time is when the parent should act.

posted by: Been Called Worse on January 12, 2010  12:31pm

sols -

Nowhere in the article did I find any of the “quotes” mentioned in your comment.

I’m sure none of the parents/students you were disparaging by “quoting” would appreciate you putting words in their mouth.

posted by: TWONI (A SENIOR AT WC) on January 12, 2010  2:21pm

WHAT MAKES YOU GUYS BETTER THAN ANY OTHER STUDENTS? YEA YOUR IN AP CLASSES BLAH BLAH BLAH…BUT ITS SO SIMPLE TO JUST PUT YOUR PHONE AWAY. ITS FUNNY HOW ONLY THE “KNOW IT ALL” KIDS ARE THE ONES WHO ARE COMPLAINING, THATS B/C YOU GUYS DONT THINK THE RULES APPLY TO YOU.

B/C YOUR IN AP CLASSES YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO THINK LOGICALLY & KNOW THAT THE RULES ARE ACCEPTABLE. WE ALL KNOW THAT NO ONE LISTENS TO THE ADMINISTRATION SO NOW IS THIER TIME TO DISCIPLINE & EVERYONE NEEDS TO JUST ACCEPT THAT. YOU DISOBEY THE RULES YOU FACE THE CONSEQUENCES THIS IS THE REAL WORLD & BREAKING THE RULES GETS YOU NO WHERE.

IF YOU DONT LLKE THE RULES TRANSFER I THINK THEY’RE DOING A GREAT JOB, KIDS ARE AFRAID TO BE SUSPENDED & I HAVEN’T TAKEN MY PHONE OUT SINCE! TAKING A PIC, CHEKING THE TIME, USING THE CALCULATOR ON YOUR PHONE IS ALL BULL CRAP. THE RULES ARE SIMPLE.

TAKE YOUR 3 DAYS & GET OVER IT, YOU SHOULDNT HAVE HAD YOUR PHONE OUT, THE RULES ARE IN THE WC HAND BOOK. “READ IT”

posted by: Cross Teacher 2 on January 12, 2010  3:13pm

I’m sorry if I offended anyone, that’s just how I feel. If you’re under 18, then you are legally our property. That’s just how it is. If this is too much reality for you, I suggest maybe rethinking your approach to life. The fact of the matter is that the administration has every right to suspend any student it wants, for any reason it wants, and there is little much the students can do.

posted by: kevin martinez on January 12, 2010  4:02pm

come on now its only cellphones and hats that school should be worry about our education not hats and cellphones let us carry a cellphone its our cellphone let us wear our hats…...as-long as its not getting in our way of learning

posted by: reality check on January 12, 2010  4:15pm

Cross Teacher 2:
The fact of the matter is that the administration has rules to follow too. Just like President Obama can’t singlehandedly make rules. The Student Code of Conduct, among many other policies, lays out what the rules are. The administration’s job is to enforce the rules AND to do the most it can to help kids learn and grow.
And when you say “legally our property,” what exactly is that supposed to mean? I have a hard time believing you are actually a teacher at Wilbur Cross.

posted by: PendingSuspension on January 12, 2010  4:54pm

Haha, 150 suspended, while i still walk into a bathroom and greet 4 young men smoking Pot. Sure the saying is start small or whatever, but, really think cross could think of some other reason to suspend people. A+ student for 3 years, and i am a constant texter, IN CLASS, i mean, cant use me as an example for such a large student body. But, this is kinda appalling.

-Pending

posted by: NHPS Parent on January 12, 2010  4:59pm

nfjanette wrote,
“Because it’s too hard to instead only punish based upon direct observation of bad behavior (calling/texting)?”

nfjanette,

No, ideally anyway, but just trying think realistically in terms of making it easier on school staff, meeting the school system half way and picking battles—if you don’t specify “NO exceptions” kids will push it by calling/texting and, when caught, cant use the “I was just checking the time” excuse.

As ‘TAXPAYER and Parent’ said, “Others may want to fight for between class use, but, ‘OFF in school’ is my proposed compromise.”

‘TAXPAYER and Parent’ also wrote:

“Does NHPS’ really want to deny our children the capability to speed dial 911 in an emergency while walking to and from school? HELLO, a child was abducted on Canner St while walking home from Worthington Hooker, raped and bludgeoned to death etc. etc.—the additional safety provided by cell phones (think GPS locating) is a no-brainer especially for children who walk to and from school (walking vs. driving is a hot issue in the ER neighborhood, yes?)”

EXACTLY!

posted by: Cross Teacher 2 on January 12, 2010  5:43pm

reality check:

I’m sorry if my brazenness is too overwhelming for you, but I am indeed a teacher at Wilbur Cross High School. Now getting back to the matter at hand. All the students currently enrolled at the high school signed a code of conduct that legally binds them to follow the rules or else face consequences. The administration has been giving prior warning to students concerning the hats, cell phones, and other electronics, for years now. Recently, more serious warnings had been issued, in anticipation of this recent crackdown. Now let me give YOU a reality check. All you little concerned activist students need to sit down, shut up, and accept the fact that you have little to no effect on school policy, despite your “student councils”. Give me a break. You are nobodies in this education business, and once you realize and accept that, the better for us all.

posted by: Streever on January 12, 2010  6:04pm

NHPS LOVES out of school suspensions.

When I was a high school student—not all that long ago—they gave us detentions, followed by in-school suspension, followed by out of school.

Out of school suspensions don’t help engage students or make them learn. They are a last resort for when children are simply too disruptive for the school. To use them for honors students who clearly seem to enjoy/work hard at school it’s a punishment, but for students who don’t want to be their it’s a reward, rewarding them for bad behavior.

posted by: TAXPAYER and Parent on January 12, 2010  7:23pm

Dear Cross Teacher 2,

What do you think about NHPS’ changing the language of the district wide policy to allow students to bring cell phones into the schools as long as the phones are “OFF in school” and Out Of Sight?

(I’m asking because many taxpayers/parents want our children to be able to carry cell phones for communication/elemental safety to and from school)

PS all:
By the way, we just got a robocall at home from WCHS Principal Coggins saying that, re cell phones, kids can’t enter school with electronic devices and that repeated offenders will have to stay after school for a PT conference “when you return to school.” (does she mean return after an OOS suspension?)

posted by: NHPS teacher on January 12, 2010  7:50pm

Should students be suspended for three days over electronics, hats, and phones?  No.  That is rather drastic; however, there are schools in New Haven that are under staffed therefore they don’t have in school suspension or after school detention.  Our school has teacher mandated after school detentions, but detentions are not given by all teachers.  Plus, it is the teacher’s responsibility to make sure the student stays for the detention.  What happens if they don’t stay?  We can’t put them in in-school suspension because it doesn’t exist in our building.  There needs to be a consequence for breaking the rules.  Perhaps one day suspension would be enough.  Students need to be in school so they can learn, but they also need to follow the rules. 

As a teacher, it is extremely disruptive when lots of students are absent.  It is also extremely disruptive to have to tell kids over and over to put their electronics away.  When students are listening to their iPods, they are missing valuable information.  When a student is texting during class, they are distracted and not learning.  Texting is a huge problem because there is no way to know what they are saying.  Kids have admitted to texting about potential fights and other things that shouldn’t be discussed in school.  Often times when a student is told to put an electronic away, that electronic doesn’t stay put away for the rest of the class.  Then the teacher has to take the electronic until the end of class or the end of the day.  This can become a fight because the student doesn’t want to give up their electronic, and that disrupts the learning of the entire class.  Students are addicted to their electronics and it is a major problem.  Most students are not using their technology appropriately in school; for example, they are not using cell phones as an appointment book or to keep track of homework assignments.  If students were using electronics in that manner, it wouldn’t be a problem.  Also, as a teacher I shouldn’t be told to F-off when I ask a student to get off the phone or put an electronic away in the hallway.  It is clearly stated in the policy books that electronics are not allowed.  I understand that students have electronics and parents want their children to have access to their phones before and after school.  I think that is very reasonable.  The problem is that the electronics are not staying off or away.  The problem is that parents are texting or calling their children during the day instead of calling the school’s office if there is an immediate need to talk to their child.  It would be wonderful if students could have their phones/electronics turned off during the day and if those phones/electronics could remain in pockets or backpacks.  Since this is not what is happening, something needs to change in the district.

posted by: sols on January 12, 2010  8:19pm

Look back at the article on Cross overcrowding from June 29th.. and the ethnicity of the parents/officers of the PTO and the students/ student council (all white). Look at the kids and parents quoted in this article. Look at the comments in the June article about the “two Cross” s. (honors program being the reason that crowding has to stop). Now look at the difference between the last principal and this current one.
The fact is that certain parents and students think that they are a different school, above the rules because they are “honors”, but read between the lines people… 13% of the kids (white) think they should decide on how to run the school, certainly not THAT principal, how dare she…
welcome to the 21st century.

posted by: MT on January 12, 2010  8:38pm

Cross teacher wrote “Now let me give YOU a reality check. All you little concerned activist students need to sit down, shut up, and accept the fact that you have little to no effect on school policy, despite your “student councils”. Give me a break. You are nobodies in…”

You’re right, we should be mindless drones. Another valuable Cross lesson. Don’t fight for what you believe in; you’re a nobody. Basically all I’ve learned here so far, actually. 

It’s sad, because we “nobodies” were actually interested in cooperation, not a battle.

posted by: MT on January 12, 2010  8:44pm

The wording of the clause is an issue in itself, sadly. Not allowing cell phones AT ALL in school is a safety issue. I know this personally, as I was victim to a medical emergency last year after school. No one had a cell phone, and I was not inside of the school, so there were no class phones. I’m glad I got to the hospital, though. EVENTUALLY.

posted by: Mike on January 12, 2010  8:54pm

I go to Cheshire High, and if we ever had a crackdown, probably 95% of the school would be closed, and teachers just wouldn’t even bother showing up. Our rule is if you get caught (rare occasion) you get it taken away and you pick it up when the school day is over(they’re supposed to be “in our lockers” at all times). Hats is a little stricter, but not really an issue here. An OSS is insane, absolutely insane. If anything, they should suspend students after maybe a 2nd or 3rd offense, not from the the getgo. Then you get the good kids,like AP students and sports captains, off school grounds, which ultimately impacts Cross in a negative way. Cross has the extreme advantage compared to other city schools that they still have a driven portion of the student body that’s willing to learn and achieve, and yet they’re just tossing their assets out the window. Craziness.

posted by: Bold123 on January 12, 2010  9:49pm

In reality does it matter if you are an AP student or a students taking collage course?  The answer is no!  Rules have to be followed at all time no matter how harmless the rules might be.  I have not noticed anyone stating that at times certain color hats, bandannas or other items of clothing are used to identify what part of town they are from or what group they are “down” with to say the least.  Nothing has been mentioned about the amount of students who are no longer walking around in the hallways and disturbing quality class time. As a parent I understand why you would like your child to have a phone.  As an adult, I also know that rules are rules.  I am sure if they keep the phones off, not on vibrate, no one will notice they exist.  There is no need for them to be walking around the hallway and using them to communicate to each other while they are at school, taking an exam or at times planning to do something more devious. 
Walk a mile in the shoes if those individuals responsible for our children’s safety and education and then you could question their motives

posted by: William Kurtz on January 12, 2010  9:54pm

I sincerely doubt that ‘Cross Teacher 2’ is an educator in any way, shape, or form, at Wilbur Cross or anywhere else.  A meaningless assertion, I know, since there’s no way to prove otherwise.  (This is one of those occasions when anonymity means a person’s bizarre and irrational views can be safely dismissed without consideration.) He or she is either woefully ignorant of the meaning of the word ‘legally’ (as in “legally our property”) and the role that students play in education, or is trolling in an attempt to get a rise out of people with provocative remarks.

posted by: Hmmmmm on January 12, 2010  11:41pm

These are some interesting sources…..

Some statements previously made by Dr. Mayo
http://www.newhavenregister.com/articles/2009/05/18/news/new_haven/a3_mon_necode.txt

American Academy of Pediatrics study:
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/pediatrics;112/5/1206.pdf

CT Voices for Children study:
http://www.ctkidslink.org/publications/edu08missingout.pdf

State guidelines governing discipline:
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/pressroom/In_School_Suspension_Guidance.pdf

Cheshire school system code of conduct (for reference)
http://www.cheshire.k12.ct.us/chs2/files/4B976B7F23614C529F6645D470BE9F8E.pdf

posted by: Concerned Parent on January 13, 2010  4:24am

Dear Cross Teacher 2,

What a horrible state of affairs when you feel so angry as to tell these young minds whom you have the fantastic opportunity to mold that they are “nobodies in this education business.” If that is truly how you feel, you’ve clearly missed the point of being a teacher.

You have the opportunity to help mold these young minds and have clearly lost sight of what an amazing responsibility that is. Your job is to empower these kids to go out and change the world yet it seems your goal is actually to somehow break them. In your own words “All you little concerned activist students need to sit down, shut up, and accept the fact that you have little to no effect on school policy, despite your “student councils.”

I truly hope you find a source of inspiration or walk away from what must be a lose-lose situation in the classroom.

posted by: asdf on January 13, 2010  7:26am

Hmmmm—I read the article about the unified code of conduct for New Haven Schools and this policy clearly violates the spirit and probably letter of the new code on many counts.  In particular, that the goal was to reduce out of school suspensions, not increase them.  I also enjoyed reading the following paragraph:
“The document brings the district into compliance with a state law requiring suspensions be served in school, unless students pose such a danger or disruption that they must be excluded.”

So, I should take this to mean that the suspensions are against state law.  Nicely done.  Also, I’d like to return to this—why does the principal need to go to the administration to lessen the punishment, when the policy is so clearly in violation of NHPS guidelines.  It suggests to me that the administration is not following its own policies (in violation of state law) or that the principal is being deceptive.  Which is it?

For the record, I’m not a student, not a teacher and not a parent of a child in the school system—just an interested bystander (and tax payer in New Haven).

posted by: Louise on January 13, 2010  9:46am

The problem with out of school suspensions for 3 days for such things as cell phones and hats is that the crime does not fit the punishment and the punishment is, in fact, anti-educational!  Not only are these kids missing very important class instruction, they must also report any out of school suspensions when they apply to college, thereby, decreasing their chances of getting into the college of their choice.  Out of school suspensions for this type of activity can, therefore, have a negative impact on the future of these kids.

I think we can all agree that high school is a time when kids will make mistakes.  Their mistakes should be corrected and they should learn from them but the punishment should not be so egregious that their FUTURE is put in peril.  Confiscation of the offending equipment would go a long way to putting a stop to this behavior and if the behavior continues, administrators should be able to come up with a creative, AFTER class, punishment. 

Administrators at Cross should be reprimanded for their actions.  The state has mandated that suspensions be served in school unless a student poses a danger or disruption.  It is too bad that this law does not take effect until this July but all public school systems should have in place punishment systems that will abide by this law.  The administration at Cross has taken the easy, lazy and anti-educational path and in so doing have shown they do not care about kids.

posted by: Mom of 2 year old on January 13, 2010  10:16am

IF the students would keep the phones, et al in their pocket or backpack, this wouldn’t be an issue.  Students get 5 minutes or less between classes, I don’t think it’s a hardship to expect them to keep the phones away.  IF the students ONLY used the devices before school, during lunch and after school, again we wouldn’t have this discussion. 

HOWEVER, the reality of Cross (and elsewhere) is the students are constantly plugged in.  They are late to class, text/listen to music during class, etc.  Do all students do this?  No.  Does every high school in CT and beyond have this problem?  Yes.  Three days is harsh, but how many times can you say ‘put it away’?  Or take it away, have the parent come into get it, only to see the same student with the same devices in use the next day? 

Should the school have been more consisent in following policy previously?  Sure but how this can be a surprise to the students is beyond me.  To say this has been a looooooonnnnggggg time coming after a blizzard of warnings is putting it mildly.

And frankly, I would expect an Honors/AP student to be more observant of the rules than others.  Sorry but that’s how I feel.  A phone call comes to your house warning you and you still whip it out??  Foolish and punishable.

posted by: streever on January 13, 2010  10:55am

Mom of 2 years, Cross Teacher 2, etc:

Look, it’s not about “is what they did right or wrong” as it applies to the students.

The reality is NHPS gives out out of school suspensions like they are candy.

Kids who don’t like school & are already misbehaving definitely will see that as a reward—“Oh I get to go home & not be in school”.

We need to find more creative ways to discipline. I received a detention in 6th grade & studiously avoided doing anything which could put me in that position again. That’s a good punishment.

NHPS blanket suspending people (rumor has it that the person who did it was feeling their authority had been challenged by another administrator that day) is ridiculous. It doesn’t help the students learn & it doesn’t improve our city.

It’s a weak punishment designed to avoid having to work. When I was a student (again, not that long ago) we were given detentions, in-school suspension, had privileges revoked, and FINALLY out of school suspension for people who were simply too out of control, with follow-up.

NHPS is letting down it’s students and it’s community if it thinks this is OK.

posted by: Student on January 13, 2010  11:24am

I must add that the suspensions will not be reported on the transcripts..so if i wanted to take a three day vacation i might as well pull out my phone.

posted by: SW on January 13, 2010  12:08pm

I agree with Louise.

These suspensions are a Hiroshima response.  Maybe there is another way of dealing with this problem without putting children’s future in jeopardy?

posted by: Miss Martinez on January 13, 2010  1:53pm

this is literally disgusting.. so.. you rather suspend the students rather than confiscate the cell phone.. and call a parent.. I personally agree with students having cell phones.. can anyone remember COLUMBINE High school.. My son will continue to carry a cell phone.. the only difference is he’s 13 years old..and hides it very well….

posted by: streever on January 13, 2010  3:40pm

EXACTLY Student: you hit the nail on the head. These suspensions are vacations from school.

I’ve heard educators say the issue is parents aren’t engaged: Well, a 3 day suspension out of school is endangering to the student in that case, and not useful, if that is really the problem.

Lack of discipline is a real problem at New Haven schools. I’ve witnessed it first hand—kids who threatened teachers are sent to social workers who are not paid fairly & who are expected to discipline the students who end up just aimlessly wandering the halls, refusing to go to the social worker’s office. What happens to the student then? Nothing. Nothing at all.

Go into some of the schools in New Haven & you’ll see students just wandering the halls during classes. It’s bizarre. I’ve been allowed into a “secure” student by a 3rd grader who had taken over the security officer’s desk. On three separate occasions. The security officer was doing something elsewhere, and a building with signs up saying “access only with ID/sign-in” was left completely unsecured. The students were rummaging in the securities desk & writing on it.

At the school, the administrators issue no punishments: they literally just sent every misbehaving kid to the social worker, and didn’t penalize them for not bothering to go. If the student went home instead, nothing happened. If they did it enough times, they’d get an out of school suspension.

It’s a real problem & one that has to be solved. I know that the School Change Campaign is focused on the bigger picture, but I think they need to re-evaluate some of their administrators. The teachers I’ve observed were doing as good a job as one could do with ZERO involvement by the administration/zero disciplinary actions being taken. Why focus on ways to remove teachers when you have a deeper problem?

New Haven schools have to answer for this event—150 students sent for a 3 day vacation for having hats, coats, or cell phones? bizarre.

posted by: Student Cross on January 13, 2010  3:49pm

Honestly, I think that all of this is bull because eventually everything will go back to normal seeing as these threats NEVER go on for more than a couple of weeks. The suspensions are absolutely outrages because it is NOT district policy so therefore i think another method for punishment should be found.

posted by: Brian Tang on January 13, 2010  4:32pm

Holly cow. If this happened to me, it would probably reduce me to tears. I was a straight-A student all through high school, but I couldn’t live without my iPod. A three-day suspension would have totally traumatized me and would have made it impossible to do my work. When I was in high school (two years ago), if you were caught texting, the teacher would confiscate your phone and you could pick it up at the end of the day. It seemed to be a pretty effective policy. A three-day suspension is completely outrageous and will surely do more harm than good.

posted by: Smart cross student on January 13, 2010  6:11pm

To mom of 2 year old, we can’t even we them in the cafe or gym so honestly, u worry about it sons life and leave us alone. And to anyone else saying anything about how this policy is good, you try not been allowed to use your phone work, or during a break and have a very important job. Put yourself in our shoes

posted by: Mom of 2 year old on January 13, 2010  7:23pm

Smart Cross student -

At my job, I was not allowed to use my cell phone.  That was the job, I dealt with it.  I recommend the same for you.  And don’t be late for Language Arts tomorrow.

posted by: Student11 on January 13, 2010  9:47pm

Even as a student at Cross, I agree with enforcing the electronic rules.  Kids do spend too much time during class listening to iPods, texting, and sometimes, even making calls.  It is understandable that many teachers have issues controlling some students and getting them to cooperate by putting these electronics away successfully.  However, a 3 day suspension is clearly ineffective in the sense that it reverses the ultimate goal of the high school.  Cross has been deemed a ‘failing’ school at times, due to the low attendance and graduation rates.  OSS only aid to this by taking students away from school, motivating them to not do any work, and missing valuable class time.  And no, do not say that it is only the AP and honors students who are upset about this abuse of power.  Plenty of nonhonors students are upset about being suspended by such minor offenses.  As a student, I have seen others get suspended for checking the time on their cell phone in the hallway (mainly because about 60% of the clocks in the school are broken, especially in the cafeteria), and even just holding a hat in their hand.  Also, there are much greater problems than ‘abuse’ of electronics.  What about drugs (today I walked into the bathroom and it reeked of pot), or bullying? These are offenses that need to be addressed more closely and are not because such attention is being put to electronics and hats.

posted by: Brian Tang on January 13, 2010  11:16pm

Having recently been a high school student, I can say that this would have totally traumatized me had it happened at my school. I was a straight-A all through high school, but especially nowadays, I couldn’t live without my iPod. If I were handed one of these suspensions I am sure I would be reduced to tears. It would be nearly impossible for me to recover from that academically. One slip and my life would have been completely altered.

I was a high school student just two years ago. I know what it feels like to be embarrassed at that/my age. I depended on the positive support provided by everyone around me. To feel like I was a bad kid would have totally altered my outlook and my willingness to perform academically.

At my school, if you were caught texting, the teacher would take away your phone and you could pick it up at the end of the day. It was effective and appropriate. This OSS business is appalling. They are surely doing more harm than good.

posted by: mr. prez of new haven on January 13, 2010  11:39pm

i think the suspension is another form of our school officials not wanting to do there job! i believe they feel it’s easier to suspend a kid than to teach them! when our students are behind in all areas of education! so lets suspend them administrators and teachers for not doing their jobs!

posted by: JoinTheRealWorld on January 14, 2010  12:52am

These kids are lucky - when I graduated from high school, electronics other than calculators were confiscated until the end of the school year if they were seen at school.  This was clearly laid out in the student handbook.

And yes, parents, I was in high school after Columbine…yet my parents managed to not *have* to contact me during school hours.  When you arrive at school property, you turn off your phone and either lock it in your dash or secure it to the bottom of your backpack.  It remains turned off, in the bottom of the backpack, for the duration of the school day.  When school is dismissed, you turn the phone back on.  It’s very very simple. 

As for complaints that now is a bad time to enforce the policy…I imagine exams give all the more reason to eliminate distractions from the environment that are, frankly, excellent tools for cheating.  The complaint that this is going to mess up the SAT for juniors?  I hate to break it to these kids, but if they are relying on their high school to prep them in the months before the SAT, they may find themselves sorely disappointed in their SAT scores.  SAT administrators will NOT be forgiving of the apparently overwhelming desire to check time on a cell phone during the exam.  Zero tolerance, you’re out of the cash, and they don’t care whether or not you find it “fair”.

The entitlement of these students just astounds me - the suggestion that they should be able to do whatever they want because they aren’t the kids who do drugs, that they should be allowed to dodge consequences that they were warned about because they get good grades, and that a rule is unfair because it was actually applied to them when they were *knowingly breaking it* - showing a friend photos on the phone! - such an attitude is at best short-sighted and immature but is really downright bratty. 

That students “need” their phones and that it’s somehow cruel to be deprived of them for a mere six or seven hours a day is hilarious.  I saw a student get fired for a summer internship for talking on his cell phone during a break - it was a clear violation of company policy that was explicitly reviewed during the orientation and training, but he felt like he “deserved” to be able to take that call.  It seems that some of these commenters live under the illusion that adults can do anything they want on the job, and it’s simply not true. 

I know people who work in student affairs at various colleges and universities who bemoan the incompetent “special snowflake” freshmen that have arrived in increasing numbers over the past several years.  If you want your students and your children to be successful, competent adults when they turn 18 and you send them off to college, vocational school, the military, or jobs, do them a favor and disabuse them of this flawed sense of entitlement.  Let them know that there are rules, and that they need to follow the rules.  If they disagree with the rules, they may take responsible action to change them, but ignoring rules is not the way to effectively and responsibly lead to change.

posted by: Wilbur "THIS IS A TEST... THIS IS A TEST... " Cros on January 14, 2010  6:12am

As many folks have pointed out, this is a kneejerk reaction to a challenge faced by all schools in 2010.  Three-day suspension is not, nor should not, be policy for electronics and hat violations.  There are many other more creative, effective ways to address electronics abuse. 

(I believe Wilbur Cross should be encouraged to explore applications to expand smartphone use as an educational, internet access tool.)

My concern, as a dedicated teacher at Wilbur Cross High School, is the process by which the discipline reflex kicked in.

This approach was, pure and simple, “straight down the line”: from Reggie Mayo to the 8 principal administrators at Wilbur Cross High School.

I raise this point because solutions are to be found when we recognize and address the dysfunctions of each level.  In this case, Reggie Mayo does not like seeing phones and hats at Wilbur Cross High School.  He has made this clear in the past, and this time he and the school administration picked a way to deal with the problem.  The School Planning Management Team was not given an opportunity to develop a strategy, nor were there any focused planning meetings with school staff, teachers, parents, or the extended school community.

We still have not been told who came up with the heavy-handed idea of a 3-day suspension.  Once suspension was “the plan”, the administrators in the building had to do what they were told by their bosses.

We have a handful of schools in the district which are able to function in spite of our stifling central bureaucracy.  These are schools where students, parents, support staff, school community members, and teachers work together under reasoned, informed, and empowered school-based leadership to best inspire and guide young lives.  Is this something the community thinks we should bring to Wilbur Cross High School?

(To William Kurtz:  Unfortunately, I would not be surprised to find out that “Cross Teacher 2” is in fact a “teacher” at Cross.  These mean-spirited, worn-down folks are a big part of the reason we are among the 2,000 U.S. “dropout factory” high schools.  Step up New Haven Community.  We need great teachers, willing to put in long hours, weekends, and summers to help our neediest kids find their paths!)

posted by: Louise on January 14, 2010  11:59am

To Wilbur “This is a test”.  It reassures me as a New Haven taxpayer that we have thoughtful, caring teachers such as yourself at Cross.  I hope the administration listens to you and I hope they have read some of the other responses here to know that their, “knee jerk” reaction does not serve the community or the kids.

Also, I was impressed by many of the impassioned, thoughtful, responses of the students at Cross especially student 11.  I did notice that some of the student responses could benefit from a little refining.  Is there a writing skills center or similar type tutorial at Cross where I or other interested New Haven residents could donate some volunteer time?

posted by: Confused on January 14, 2010  1:47pm

The bottom line? Cross suspending 150 kids is absurd—if the number is that high, it’s an ineffective strategy. Work it out, guys—it’s that simple.

posted by: John Tulin on January 14, 2010  3:33pm

Streever, NHPS doesn’t love to give out suspensions like candy.  If they did, the Cross administration would have been suspending kids for these same violations earlier in year.  The reason that they are suspending now is because they were directed to “take back the school” and given the green light for suspensions.  “You get rid of some kids, or we’ll get rid of you”, one admin. said they were told by ‘downtown’.  I am not endorsing the policy, just clarifying. 

One point on on the suspensions, they are a lot of things - ineffective is the worst part.  Most of the kids who were suspended, most, are habitually not engaged ever anyway and constant hall roamers - they laugh about the 3 day vacation (like they all did about the “Christmas special” the admin. was threatening to issue before the break for similar stuff).  The students know that it will go back to normal soon enough, normal meaning the admin will do nothing about this stuff again soon.

There are so many other issues to address about the policy and this thread, but as a Cross teacher….I just can’t talk about it anymore!  How about those Jets!!

posted by: DENIAL OF SAFETY on January 14, 2010  5:08pm

Dear NHPS BOE, Administration and Staff,
Please do not rely on unofficial inferences of some sort of ‘understanding’ that students who keep cell phones ‘off and put away’ at school will not be suspended or punished. The net effect of the present policy language, and now, fear of suspensions is that you are denying middle school children and teens the before and after school safety that cell phones provide because you are forbidding them to bring the phones to school.
The Wilbur Cross High School Student Council, future and present attorneys and interested parties, can weigh in on whether NHPS could be legally liable for upholding such a written cellphone policy. The fact that us TAXPAYERS would have to foot the bill is all the more reason for us to insist that the written policy be changed to include the equivalent of “all student cell phones shall be turned off and put away at school.”...and preferably in their lockers. 

Of course there has to be appropriate consequences for offenders, but with the present policy language still in place it doesn’t inspire confidence when anonymous school reps comment here that it’s OK for our children to carry a turned off phone in their pocket or backpack when there are many scenarios where that situation could end up with a child being suspended through no fault of their own.
Who cares about ‘needing’ ipods and hats in school but, during cold weather, we don’t want to hear about any children suspended for walking two steps into the school with a winter hat on either.

posted by: Use it wisely on January 14, 2010  5:58pm

Why don’t teachers adapt to this student use of electronics? If you can harness a portion of the time students spend on their cell phones to dedicate to education the students will learn. In education course in graduate school we learn that you have to make education relevant students or there is just no getting through. This is the case when teaching anything to anyone. . . you have to make it relevant you fail as an educator.

Here lyes the BIGGEST problem, students are very technologically advance while the schools are still teaching through outdated methods. Teachers need to adapt to the new culture that comes through their classrooms.

Look the school doesn’t need to buy new computers the students already have them in their pockets. Use them!

By the way the responsibility not only fall on the teachers its the whole education culture and system. Use what you’ve got don’t suppress it.

posted by: HEARTBROKE INTERMISSION on January 14, 2010  9:43pm

HALFBAKED HOHELL
Well, my Fakebook page is empty,
They took away my cell.
It’s down at the end of Meadow Street
at HALFBAKED HOHELL
You make us so lonely Reggie,
We get so lonely,
We get so lonely we could die.

And although it’s always crowded,
take a toke in the bath room.
Where no hatted gov’nas
do text away their gloom.
You make us so lonely Reggie,
We get so lonely,
We get so lonely we could die.

Well, us student’s tears keep flowin’,
got suspended now I’m off track.
BoE’s been so long on Meadow Street
They must be smokin’ crack.
You make us so lonely Reggie,
We get so lonely,
We get so lonely we could die.

Hey now, if your celly leaves you,
and you got no text to tell.
Just take a walk down Meadow Street to HALFBAKED HOHELL.

Elvis Zep Reggae comic relief: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16LI4TUucW4

‘56: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1Qo1eaWF8c

We are THIS sad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDe-HcHJsX0

posted by: Walt on January 15, 2010  7:20am

Unless I missed it,  there is no indication of draconian searches for contraband.

Kids were blatantly   breaking the rules,  after often being   warned.

Even after the first 10 were suspended,  apparently another 140 could, or would , not realize that they could not continue to flout the rules.

Time to learn that in the real world,  those who ignore the rules eventually get punished.

Were any suspensions issued as a result of illegal body searches?  If not,  tough stuff kids.  Just take your punishment   and reform.

That said,  redoing the policy to clarify that any non-emergency use,  not merely possession of verboten equipment.  is   a violation , makes sense to me.

posted by: just wondering on January 15, 2010  10:14am

What exactly is the problem with cellphones?  If someone is causing a disturbance during class, in the library, or even walking by other classrooms while in the hallway, fine, then you deal with that student as you would anyone else being inappropriately loud.  I would think other use is not causing any harm.  What’s the problem?

posted by: SheilaMc7 on January 15, 2010  10:32am

Ah, here is the key graf:

The crackdown began when visitors to the school�including city school officials�saw students wearing headphones in the hallways, Wade said.

What officials were visiting the school, seemingly to roam the hallways and interfere with teaching and learning like this? Outrageous! That is NOT the role of outsiders, but only the responsibility of the school’s own administrators. How about if we treat them with respect and let them enforce their own rules? Don’t we pay them enough that we can expect them to do this? It seems clear that outside pressure lead to badly misguided over-reaction here. Very disturbing!

posted by: SheilaMc7 on January 15, 2010  11:07am

Ah, here is the key graf:

“The crackdown began when visitors to the school�including city school officials�saw students wearing headphones in the hallways, Wade said.”

What officials were visiting the school, seemingly to roam the hallways and interfere with teaching and learning like this? Outrageous! That is NOT the role of outsiders, but only the responsibility of the school’s own administrators. How about if we treat them with respect and let them enforce their own rules? Don’t we pay them enough that we can expect them to do this? It seems clear that outside pressure lead to badly misguided over-reaction here. Very disturbing!

posted by: CA Morgan on January 15, 2010  3:35pm

As an educator I applaud the fact the administration is cracking down on cell phone use ipod use in the school. The use of such devices during class is both rude and distracting. it is rude to the teacher who prepared the lecture and to students who are there to learn; it is distracting because the students who are using the devices are disengaged from the discussion and activities of the class and unable to be meaningfully involved.

posted by: Wilbur Cross "THIS IS A TEST..." on January 16, 2010  9:21am

To CA Morgan, fellow educator:

The central issue at Wilbur Cross is not just about the disrespectful use, or distractions caused by phones and ipods.  You and I agree - their use needs to be related to the education at hand, or curtailed.

As an educator, don’t you want sensible policy for the school that you can also support in your classroom?  Would you have a child suspended OUT OF SCHOOL for three days (our new policy) for any transgression of the zero tolerance policy?  Shouldn’t there be levels of infraction?  (Is using your phone to text a friend between classes the same as texting during class time?)

I repeat, this issue highlights the many levels of dysfunction within the New Haven Public School system.  The powers that be decided on, and implemented a policy, with NO INPUT from school staff.

“THIS IS A TEST… THIS IS A TEST…” is the message our expensive LED sign on Mitchell Drive has been broadcasting for the past few months.  The irony is delicious.  Our CAPT scores are horrible (THE TEST) and part of the reason is a broken school system.  Someone has the job responsibility (and $$$) to fix the LED sign in order to actually share information with the community about school events & celebrations.  Instead, we get “THIS IS A TEST…”

posted by: Walt on January 16, 2010  11:38am

Time to grow up,  Brian Tang,  and stop crying so much about so little.

If you get a job,  learn the rules,  stick your IPOD where it belongs,  and do your work.

Otherwise you will soon be out on your keister and maybe have something to really whimper about.

posted by: CA Morgan on January 16, 2010  2:24pm

I guess I am just not sympathetic to the argument that high school kids need phones and toys while in school. these are clearly things they “want” but there is no evidence that they actually “need” them during school hours.  I could be wrong, but somehow I doubt the school policy was developed because students were ONLY using the phones or ipods outside of the classroom setting. as far as the 3 days suspension issue, well I can only say if that is what it takes to get kids and parents to understand what is meant by a “zero-tolerance” policy, then 3 days it is. there may be alternatives but it sounds like this method has been successful at getting the attention of both students and parents.