Friday, July 5, 2013

Zero Tolerance drug testing/profanity/verbal threats/violence in schools



Here is a reasonable comparison:

Frank Schleck, Luxembourg pro cyclist, will not have his contract renewed by RadioShack-Leopard following his one-year suspension from the sport for doping (his illegal use of a restricted diuretic). Simply put: The International Cycling Federation, along with the athletes themselves, MUST do this if they want the sport to survive. How can the accomplishments/legitimate title of any team or individual cyclist in any competition be upheld without the sure knowledge that cheating did not occur? It can't. And so, zero tolerance. Zero tolerance for cheating.
 
As a professional educator, I understand zero tolerance for profanity, verbal threats or any act of violence, and I accept it unconditionally. In public schools zero tolerance means an unwillingness on the part of students, parents, teachers, administrators, and boards to accept, condone, or tolerate bullying and/or intimidation on the part of a student(s) toward another student(s). Schools MUST do this if they want legitimate learning to take place, and to ensure that every child experiences maximum success socially and academically. How can a student be expected to perform at maximum efficiency if they feel unsafe or inferior? They can't. And so, zero tolerance for the actions mentioned above. Zero tolerance for anyone who, through their actions or words, prevents another from succeeding. Why must public schools do this? Because by law, public schools will accept ALL students, inclusively. None will be turned away for any reason. And, as professionals, we are charged with maximizing student academic performance. The American public, rightfully, wants and expects academic results.
 
Photo: Zero tolerance drug testing/profanity/verbal threats/violence in schools. 
Frank Schleck, Luxembourg pro cyclist, will not have his contract renewed by RadioShack-Leopard following his one-year suspension from the sport for doping (his illegal use of a restricted diuretic). Simply put: The International Cycling Federation, along with the athletes themselves, MUST do this if they want the sport to survive. How can the accomplishments/legitimate title of any team or individual cyclist in any competition be upheld without the sure knowledge that cheating did not occur? It can't. And so, zero tolerance. Zero tolerance for cheating.
As a professional educator, I understand zero tolerance for profanity, verbal threats or any act of violence, and I accept it unconditionally. In public schools zero tolerance means an unwillingness on the part of students, parents, teachers, administrators, and boards to accept, condone, or tolerate bullying and/or intimidation on the part of a student(s) toward another student(s). Schools MUST do this if they want legitimate learning to take place, and to ensure that every child experiences maximum success socially and academically. How can a student be expected to perform at maximum efficiency if they feel unsafe or inferior? They can't. And so, zero tolerance for the actions mentioned above. Zero tolerance for anyone who, through their actions or words, prevents another from succeeding. Why must public schools do this? Because by law, public schools will accept ALL students, inclusively. None will be turned away for any reason.
This comparison between the actions of/consequences for athletes who cheat and students who bully or intimidate serves us well, I feel. When the public is witness to such rules being implemented and enforced, though they may not be familiar with current public school, classroom social/academic practice, they nevertheless develop an understanding of why the rules are in place.

This comparison between the actions of/consequences for athletes who cheat and students who bully or intimidate serves us well, I feel. When the public is witness to such rules being implemented and enforced, though they may not be familiar with current public school, classroom social/academic practice, they nevertheless develop an understanding of why the rules are in place.
 







No comments: