"Judge stops school from expelling girl who refused to wear tracking device" [Archive]

philnotfil

11-24-2012, 09:20 AM

Good for her in fighting it all the way to the courts, and good for the judge in standing up for freedom.

rt.com (http://rt.com/usa/news/school-hernandez-rfid-student-449/)

A Texas high school student will be allowed to continue going to class for now despite her refusal to cooperate with a program that forces pupils to be mandatorily tracked with computer chips.

Andrea Hernandez was told she’d be expelled from John Jay High School’s Science and Engineering Academy in San Antonio starting next week if she insists any further on disobeying a new policy that requires students to wear ID badges equipped with tiny Radio Frequency Identification (“RFID”) chips. Now attorneys with the Rutherford Institute say Hernandez has been granted a temporary restraining order that will prohibit the Northside Independent School District from relocating the student to another facility.

According to San Antonio’s KENS5 News, a judge gave Hernandez a temporary restraining order from the school district and ruled on Wednesday that the principal's orders to make the surveillance mandatory were a violation of the student's speech and religion. On her part, she equates wearing a badge — RFID equipped or not — with the biblical “mark of the beast.”

A hearing on the preliminary injunction will take place next week, at which point the future of the tracking program will be brought into question.

Some interesting stuff about voter ID in there :)

GatorNorth

11-24-2012, 12:55 PM

Why would/should a school care where the kids are when they're not at school? Isn't that what parents are for? Seems very overreaching.

brainstorm

11-24-2012, 01:02 PM

This situation with the RFID requirement is VERY disturbing to me. The principal should be terminated.

Swampmaster

11-24-2012, 08:34 PM

maybe a better solution is under-skin implants of tracking devices--the government needs to know.

wygator

11-24-2012, 11:58 PM

Ironic that the school is named after John Jay, the first US Supreme Court Chief Justice. I feel pretty certain he wouldn't believe that the RFID tracking would pass constitutional muster.

In fact, he'd probably wonder what the heck the government was doing running a school in the first place...with taxpayer funds!

DSRrg

11-25-2012, 11:03 AM

I love how a few years ago if anyone brought this up you were immediately written off as a conspiracy nut. Well people, this is just the first step.

gatorlaw71

11-27-2012, 10:52 AM

... John Jay, the first US Supreme Court Chief Justice....
he'd probably wonder what the heck the government was doing running a school in the first place...with taxpayer funds!

Hardly.

From the mid-1600s, the Massachusetts Bay Colony required every town of 50 families to have a school.

When the Continental Congress passed the law providing for survey and settlement of Northwest Territories (the midwest today), it reserved a portion of land in each township for a township school.

kygator

11-27-2012, 12:20 PM

I love how a few years ago if anyone brought this up you were immediately written off as a conspiracy nut. Well people, this is just the first step.

I wouldn't say this is the first step. Wasn't there already a school that placed tracking devices in student's laptops and spied on them through the webcam?

philnotfil

01-09-2013, 11:02 AM

Well, the judge ruled, and the student has to wear the tag or go to another school. An interesting piece of information missing from the earlier story is that the school is willing to let her wear a tag without the RFID chip. I'm not sure what the hang up is if the RFID chip is not in the name tag.

mysanantonio.com (http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/education/article/Judge-rejects-lawsuit-against-Northside-s-student-4176148.php)

A federal judge Tuesday ruled that Northside Independent School District can transfer a student from her magnet school for refusing to wear her student ID badge to protest a new electronic tracking system.

The badges contain a chip used to track students' on-campus whereabouts but Northside ISD officials had offered to let her wear it without the chip.

Andrea refused, saying it violated her constitutional rights and religious beliefs, and after Northside officials reassigned her to Taft High School, her regular neighborhood school, the family filed suit in November.

“Today's court ruling affirms NISD's position that we did make reasonable accommodation” to Andrea's religious concerns, the district said in an emailed statement. “The family now has the choice to accept the accommodation and stay at the magnet program, or return to her home campus” later this month.

WESGATORS

01-09-2013, 11:29 AM

There's a big difference between requiring the students to wear the ID badges at all times and requiring them to wear the ID badges while on the school property during normal school hours. I don't have any problem with the latter of the two, but the article doesn't make it clear what the expectation was.

This article (http://rt.com/usa/news/texas-school-id-hernandez-033/) states "at all times," but if you read it, the implication is that the demand is only during normal school hours on school property. They're kids, they don't have the same rights as the rest of us, and I'm not sure why that should change. Why on Earth does a child need to have "privacy" while getting an education provided for by the taxpayers?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

texigator

01-09-2013, 11:30 AM

The principal should be terminated.

Don't you think that capital punishment for the principal's poor judgement is a little too strong of a penalty?

G8trGr8t

01-09-2013, 11:34 AM

the chip allows her to be tracked, the id allows her to be identified so apparently the they are saying that requiring id is ok (as long as she doesn't want to vote :) )but requiring her to be tracked is not okay. at least that is what I got out of it

wargunfan

01-09-2013, 10:34 PM

Just attach the tag to your cat and retrieve it in the morning.

ChartsandGrafs

01-09-2013, 10:59 PM

Are these children, or livestock?

Welcome to the ham farm.

ursidman

01-09-2013, 11:19 PM

RFID transponders are passive and have to be close to a reader for the chip to register. So I am assuming the child could only be tracked in the school where presumably the readers are. The child could not be tracked off campus (assuming no readers elsewhere). Many credit cards are also chipped. This is how they keep track of runners in a marathon - they put the chips on their shoelaces and have readers along the course to make sure no one cheats.

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 01:09 AM

I see no real good reason for them. Around your neck today and in your head tomorrow.

Juggernautz

01-10-2013, 01:35 AM

Big Brother just won't give up!

ChartsandGrafs

01-10-2013, 03:26 AM

Big Brother just won't give up!

http://patdollard.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/napolitano-e1348109655600.jpg

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 09:48 AM

I see no real good reason for them. Around your neck today and in your head tomorrow.

The schools are responsible for the safety of the children. Knowing that they're in the classrooms tells them that they're not skipping class and leaving campus. It also serves as a deterrent to misbehavior.

These children don't have freedom (and that's ok), they're told what they can and can't wear to school. They're told where to go, how long to be there for, when to leave, when to talk, when to listen, and what to do when they're not on school property (homework). The idea that this is somehow an overreach of "big brother" is a complete mystery to me, but I very clearly seem to be in the minority on this one.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 09:56 AM

The schools are responsible for the safety of the children. Knowing that they're in the classrooms tells them that they're not skipping class and leaving campus. It also serves as a deterrent to misbehavior.

These children don't have freedom (and that's ok), they're told what they can and can't wear to school. They're told where to go, how long to be there for, when to leave, when to talk, when to listen, and what to do when they're not on school property (homework). The idea that this is somehow an overreach of "big brother" is a complete mystery to me, but I very clearly seem to be in the minority on this one.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

They were responsible for us 40+ years ago when I was going to school. Sometimes kids skipped classes or school period but we got by perfectly okay without being monitored all the time. I feel certain they still can.

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 10:02 AM

They were responsible for us 40+ years ago when I was going to school. Sometimes kids skipped classes or school period but we got by perfectly okay without being monitored all the time. I feel certain they still can.

Ok, so you don't buy the benefit, some do...what's the harm?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 10:27 AM

Ok, so you don't buy the benefit, some do...what's the harm?

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

My biggest complaint is it is I see it as one more encroachment on our freedoms. There has to be a point where the costs outweigh the benefits.

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 10:42 AM

MichaelJoeWilliamson

01-10-2013, 10:48 AM

Just another reason for the growing number of children that are home schooled.

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 10:49 AM

Just another reason for the growing number of children that are home schooled.

My brother home schools. Those kids have even less freedom.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 10:52 AM

I don't think children have a reasonable expectation of freedom while on school property (see my list of restrictions I mentioned in post #19). I do think cost is a valid concern, but that's an issue for those providing revenue to the district.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

I disagree. Just because you go to school does not mean you forfeit all freedoms. Perhaps you have to submit to certain restrictions but in this case I see it as going too far.

MichaelJoeWilliamson

01-10-2013, 10:54 AM

My brother home schools. Those kids have even less freedom.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

Perhaps. But if that is true, then it is the parents making the decisions, not bureaucrats.

MichaelJoeWilliamson

01-10-2013, 10:56 AM

I don't think children have a reasonable expectation of freedom while on school property (see my list of restrictions I mentioned in post #19). I do think cost is a valid concern, but that's an issue for those providing revenue to the district.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

School property? SCHOOL PROPERTY?

From where did the funds come from to buy that property? To build it? To maintain it?

The parents of the students supplied the money.

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 12:15 PM

I disagree. Just because you go to school does not mean you forfeit all freedoms. Perhaps you have to submit to certain restrictions but in this case I see it as going too far.

Where did the notion come from that children are supposed to have freedom outside of the freedom designated by their parents? If a parent sends a child to school that imposes such restrictions, then they are necessarily condoning the restrictions that are in place. Theoretically, parents are the ones driving how the school board operates. Or are we to believe that the world is full of apathetic individuals who do not reach out to their government representatives and only wish or vent on message boards that things might be different...ok, I can buy that. ;)

Perhaps. But if that is true, then it is the parents making the decisions, not bureaucrats.

Parents should be driving the decisions made by the "bureaucrats." This is much easier to accomplish at the county level than at the Federal level. Whenever the politicians are being blamed (especially at the lower levels) you have to look at the people who provide the influence (or lack thereof).

School property? SCHOOL PROPERTY?

From where did the funds come from to buy that property? To build it? To maintain it?

The parents of the students supplied the money.

Well, presumably it's in a district that neither you or I are contributors toward, but we are free to opine on what they are doing right or wrong. The funds come from the same people who permit the rules to be in place, if they don't like the rules, then they should press for the rules to be changed. But if they do like the rules, then shouldn't they be entitled to allow them to remain?

--------------------------

I still haven't seen anybody express tangible damages. To me, this is victimless paranoia. So the school knows where you are, why does that matter? If anything it offers protection against false accusations.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

The_Ultimate_Gator

01-10-2013, 12:29 PM

Hardly.

From the mid-1600s, the Massachusetts Bay Colony required every town of 50 families to have a school.

So? John Jay was from New York.

When the Continental Congress passed the law providing for survey and settlement of Northwest Territories (the midwest today), it reserved a portion of land in each township for a township school.

So? Jay was not a member of the Continental Congress when it passed that law (I assume you're talking about the Land Ordinance of 1785).

I have no idea what Jay thought of government schools.

MichaelJoeWilliamson

01-10-2013, 12:46 PM

Parents should be driving the decisions made by the "bureaucrats." This is much easier to accomplish at the county level than at the Federal level. Whenever the politicians are being blamed (especially at the lower levels) you have to look at the people who provide the influence (or lack thereof).

Bit of a straw man here. "Hey just be glad schools are not federally controlled!"

This does not justify requiring children to wear tracking devices.

But if they do like the rules, then shouldn't they be entitled to allow them to remain?

In case you aren't keeping up with current events, this is exactly what is happening

I still haven't seen anybody express tangible damages.

You mean, other than violating the student 14th amendment rights and probably the 9th?

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 02:01 PM

Where did the notion come from that children are supposed to have freedom outside of the freedom designated by their parents? If a parent sends a child to school that imposes such restrictions, then they are necessarily condoning the restrictions that are in place. Theoretically, parents are the ones driving how the school board operates. Or are we to believe that the world is full of apathetic individuals who do not reach out to their government representatives and only wish or vent on message boards that things might be different...ok, I can buy that. ;)

I don't know but maybe I have quaint notions that children have certain rights independent of whether their parents designate them or not. The right to their life comes to mind right off. The right not to be deprived of liberty would be another. How about civil rights? Does these need the parents acquiescence to be viable?

In this case it seems the parents are behind the student and the attempt to impose it was done after the kid was already in school.

ChartsandGrafs

01-10-2013, 03:21 PM

These children don't have freedom (and that's ok), they're told what they can and can't wear to school. They're told where to go, how long to be there for, when to leave, when to talk, when to listen, and what to do when they're not on school property (homework). The idea that this is somehow an overreach of "big brother" is a complete mystery to me, but I very clearly seem to be in the minority on this one.

Is it really a mystery to you? I'm surprised. Allow me to assist.

Take the time to read this. It should help to clear things up:

http://www.worldtrans.org/whole/schoolteacher.txt

wgbgator

01-10-2013, 03:36 PM

Perhaps. But if that is true, then it is the parents making the decisions, not bureaucrats.

Tyranny begins at home.

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 03:57 PM

Bit of a straw man here. "Hey just be glad schools are not federally controlled!"

You're reading too much into the significance of that one line. I was just making a side note that a lack of participation is less excusable at the local levels.

This does not justify requiring children to wear tracking devices.

The justification has already been established. What has not been established is the damage.

You mean, other than violating the student 14th amendment rights and probably the 9th?

In loco parentis. Do you really think students should maintain Constitutionally protected rights while getting an education? Including the 1st and 2nd amendments, too, right? That's impractical and has already been upheld (not to say that sometimes a school may have been said to go too far - i.e. interpretation of establishment clause). But what we are talking about here is a more efficient attendance system.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 04:03 PM

I don't know but maybe I have quaint notions that children have certain rights independent of whether their parents designate them or not. The right to their life comes to mind right off. The right not to be deprived of liberty would be another. How about civil rights? Does these need the parents acquiescence to be viable?

Liberty? Really? Do you think the children should be able to come and go as they please and be free to ignore the teacher in his/her classroom? I have to say I disagree that there's any place for "liberty" in the classroom other than the freedom to be there or not be there as a package deal. If you choose to be there (or your parents have chosen for you to be there), you have a reasonable expectation to play by their rules. If the rules suck, children need to take it up with their parents.

In this case it seems the parents are behind the student and the attempt to impose it was done after the kid was already in school.

Parents are trying to extend rights to the students that they don't truly have. Should children be allowed to purchase firearms too? Minors don't have the same rights as everybody else, and this has been upheld in the courts (in fairness, in some cases, the extension of the right has been upheld). But the idea that minors have less rights is not a new idea.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

WESGATORS

01-10-2013, 04:09 PM

Is it really a mystery to you? I'm surprised. Allow me to assist.

Take the time to read this. It should help to clear things up:

http://www.worldtrans.org/whole/schoolteacher.txt

I will read all of that, but the first thing that comes to mind when the teacher talks about confusion is that this was a very poor teacher. This individual apparently did not grasp the idea that teaching is more than placing a robot in a classroom to follow exclusively and explicitly a specific curriculum. The best in any profession know what tweaks to make and where to deviate from past instances to cater to the interest of your customers. This teacher clearly didn't get it. We've all had teachers that we remember for being fantastic (well, hopefully), and we've all likely had teachers that we could have done without. It seems like this was a good teacher who lost his ability to reach his audience and decided to blame it on "the system" rather than to continue to make adaptations that fit the clientele. Either that or his praise was a sham and he felt guilty about his incompetence. But I will read the rest of that when I get a chance.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

ChartsandGrafs

01-10-2013, 04:16 PM

I will read all of that, but the first thing that comes to mind when the teacher talks about confusion is that this was a very poor teacher. This individual apparently did not grasp the idea that teaching is more than placing a robot in a classroom to follow exclusively and explicitly a specific curriculum. The best in any profession know what tweaks to make and where to deviate from past instances to cater to the interest of your customers. This teacher clearly didn't get it. We've all had teachers that we remember for being fantastic (well, hopefully), and we've all likely had teachers that we could have done without. It seems like this was a good teacher who lost his ability to reach his audience and decided to blame it on "the system" rather than to continue to make adaptations that fit the clientele. Either that or his praise was a sham and he felt guilty about his incompetence. But I will read the rest of that when I get a chance.

I think you might be misunderstanding what Gatto was saying in that piece. Finish it, and then consider why the "education" system was set up this way and what it was intended to accomplish.

To focus on individual teachers within a deliberately corrupt system is to miss the larger point.

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 04:45 PM

Liberty? Really? Do you think the children should be able to come and go as they please and be free to ignore the teacher in his/her classroom? I have to say I disagree that there's any place for "liberty" in the classroom other than the freedom to be there or not be there as a package deal. If you choose to be there (or your parents have chosen for you to be there), you have a reasonable expectation to play by their rules. If the rules suck, children need to take it up with their parents.

Parents are trying to extend rights to the students that they don't truly have. Should children be allowed to purchase firearms too? Minors don't have the same rights as everybody else, and this has been upheld in the courts (in fairness, in some cases, the extension of the right has been upheld). But the idea that minors have less rights is not a new idea.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

In this case there is a certain amount of liberty involved. The school, nor the parents, have the right to imprison the students so these kids do not relinquish all of these rights when they walk in the door. I think you are using rights which have been determined it is necessary to be of a certain age with those where age should not be a determining factor. The right to life is basic and unless a crime committed I don't see where this has been limited nor upheld by courts not to be so. The same goes back to the liberty issue and it seems so far there are those in the judicial branch who believe likewise.

philnotfil

01-10-2013, 04:51 PM

I will read all of that, but the first thing that comes to mind when the teacher talks about confusion is that this was a very poor teacher. This individual apparently did not grasp the idea that teaching is more than placing a robot in a classroom to follow exclusively and explicitly a specific curriculum. The best in any profession know what tweaks to make and where to deviate from past instances to cater to the interest of your customers. This teacher clearly didn't get it. We've all had teachers that we remember for being fantastic (well, hopefully), and we've all likely had teachers that we could have done without. It seems like this was a good teacher who lost his ability to reach his audience and decided to blame it on "the system" rather than to continue to make adaptations that fit the clientele. Either that or his praise was a sham and he felt guilty about his incompetence. But I will read the rest of that when I get a chance.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

30 years in the class room, three times teacher of the year in the city of New York, one time teacher of the year in the state of New York (all four of those awards towards the end of his career). I'm going to go with you misread what he wrote rather than that he wasn't a good teacher or lost his ability to reach his audience.

MichaelJoeWilliamson

01-10-2013, 04:55 PM

You're reading too much into the significance of that one line. I was just making a side note that a lack of participation is less excusable at the local levels.

So????

The justification has already been established. What has not been established is the damage.

you mean, other than violating rights?

Do you really think students should maintain Constitutionally protected rights while getting an education?

Of course I do.

bluelang

01-10-2013, 05:07 PM

ChartsandGrafs

01-10-2013, 05:21 PM

30 years in the class room, three times teacher of the year in the city of New York, one time teacher of the year in the state of New York (all four of those awards towards the end of his career). I'm going to go with you misread what he wrote rather than that he wasn't a good teacher or lost his ability to reach his audience.

Do you think they would have given him those awards if they had any idea he would end up writing the books he's written and giving the interviews he's given?

philnotfil

01-10-2013, 05:30 PM

Do you think they would have given him those awards if they had any idea he would end up writing the books he's written and giving the interviews he's given?

Some of them would. Teachers don't like that the institutional nature of schools makes us do those things.

ChartsandGrafs

01-10-2013, 05:40 PM

Some of them would. Teachers don't like that the institutional nature of schools makes us do those things.

Are such awards typically left up to the discretion of fellow teachers and not administrators? It's hard to believe that they'd allow the inmates to run the asylum, so to speak.

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 05:46 PM

Wes is absolutely correct. If the parents don't like it, they're free to run for the school board. The kids do not have the legal right to freedom of movement on school grounds - neither do you or I. Random Joe Adult can't show up on school grounds and start eating a picnic lunch.

And someone already pointed it out, but RFID is not the same as GPS. RFID wouldn't do anything once off school grounds.

"Freedom" doesn't mean what most people seem to think it means.

The school is not giving up their governing power. They can still dictate where the classes are and where the students can go and not go. However, having a tracking device is stepping across the line imo. I"m a not a person who sees a conspiracy at every turn but once conditioned to wearing one on school grounds for 12+ years of their lives how easy would it be to implement measures outside of the school environ and pass them off as natural extensions.

bluelang

01-10-2013, 05:54 PM

The school is not giving up their governing power. They can still dictate where the classes are and where the students can go and not go. However, having a tracking device is stepping across the line imo. I"m a not a person who sees a conspiracy at every turn but once conditioned to wearing one on school grounds for 12+ years of their lives how easy would it be to implement measures outside of the school environ and pass them off as natural extensions.

They have tracking devices now. They're called "teachers" and "hall monitors." And whether you like it or not isn't the question, the question is whether or not it is legal.

It doesn't make anything that happens outside of the school any different. It's not legal for the government to require you to wear a tracking device in your everyday life and it won't suddenly become so because of this.

The real issue here for me is the grounds of the challenge - religious freedom. If ever there were a blatant corroborative misuse of the freedom of religion, this is it.

ChartsandGrafs

01-10-2013, 06:07 PM

And whether you like it or not isn't the question, the question is whether or not it is legal.

Slavery was once legal.

Does that somehow mean it was justified or moral?

HALLGATOR

01-10-2013, 06:33 PM

They have tracking devices now. They're called "teachers" and "hall monitors." And whether you like it or not isn't the question, the question is whether or not it is legal.

It doesn't make anything that happens outside of the school any different. It's not legal for the government to require you to wear a tracking device in your everyday life and it won't suddenly become so because of this.

The real issue here for me is the grounds of the challenge - religious freedom. If ever there were a blatant corroborative misuse of the freedom of religion, this is it.

If they already have a tracking device then what is the need for one the students wear? As far as my like or dislike the last time I checked this was a discussion board and thus that is my stated opinion. Whether or not it passes the legal test remains to be seen .

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 09:38 AM

In this case there is a certain amount of liberty involved. The school, nor the parents, have the right to imprison the students so these kids do not relinquish all of these rights when they walk in the door. I think you are using rights which have been determined it is necessary to be of a certain age with those where age should not be a determining factor. The right to life is basic and unless a crime committed I don't see where this has been limited nor upheld by courts not to be so. The same goes back to the liberty issue and it seems so far there are those in the judicial branch who believe likewise.

When my child goes to school, he relinquishes most of his basic rights in the name of order to the extent that I believe in the process put in place to educate my child. My child is not free to walk out of the classroom (an age-independent right) at his own whim; if he did, I would expect there to be consequences. This is not an issue of liberty, if it was, the parents could just as easily choose to home school their kids, but when you put your kids in a public school, you are doing so because you believe in the process. That process includes a reduction in rights, necessarily.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 09:44 AM

So????

So if it's not important to you, and if I mention it's only a sidenote, why highlight it? Especially when it seems like you agree with it. :confused:

you mean, other than violating rights?

You can't properly educate children without violating their alleged Constitutional rights. Most kids would rather be somewhere else than in school all day. It is the ability to take their rights away and institute consequences for expressing their freedom that enables them to be properly educated.

Of course I do.

That's not possible for reasons I've already detailed. To be properly educated, you must relinquish your rights in the name of order. I don't want my kid being educated in a classroom where other children are free to do what they please including come and go as they please. School is not a place for freedom, it's a place for instruction.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 10:01 AM

philnotfil

01-11-2013, 10:28 AM

Charts/Phil, I've read that, and I don't know how anybody can read that and not see that as very clear and obvious satire. You wouldn't expect me to watch History of the World Part I and assess how I don't think things happen that way. I can break it down by lesson if you like.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

As a former classroom teacher I can guarantee you that it is not satire. I felt as you do now when I first read it in college. After a couple of years of teaching I had reason to read it again and realized that I was teaching most of those lessons, and that my life would be easier if I would teach all of them. I think that Gatto has a tendency to go too far in his search for root causes. Most teachers apply these lessons out of self defense, not as part of any overarching plot to prepare a population of subordinates. As one of my principals was fond of saying in faculty meetings, you are outnumbered in every class, but you can't let them [the students] know that.

The purpose of institutional education is to educate as many people as possible as efficiently as possible. This takes an uncomfortable (for most children) level of discipline. These lessons make the whole process much easier. I don't think that they are good for the students or the teachers, but sometimes you don't have the time an space to do it any other way.

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 10:49 AM

He speaks (or spoke) as an individual without answers. I have answers for him, but it's clearly too late. If his comments are to be taken seriously, then he wasn't a good teacher. I am fortunate to have had many good teachers in my life. I know because I remember them for very specific reasons, not the least of which being that they stood out from other teachers which weren't as good at what they did (maybe like those described in his essay). The teachers I am referring to led me to have answers to where this individual allegedly struggled.

Just to take one point on this, as I'm still trying to figure out why Charts brought this up on this topic. I'm guessing its in regard to the "class position" lesson or perhaps the "emotional dependency" lesson. Learning requires structure, and the opposite of structure is freedom. That's not to say that you can't find ways to leak in a little bit of freedom into a structured environment or to add structure to a free environment, but they are competing concepts. The more structure that you have, the less freedom you have. There are no two ways around that. The author spoke as a person that didn't know how to handle leveraging the concepts of freedom and structure, that's not an institutional problem, that's an individual problem (and not one that cannot be resolved).

Some people work in a field where they need to be told exactly what to do, and that's how things get done. But teaching is not one of those fields. The author writes as if he's one of those people. (again, I don't believe he intended that to be free of satire, but I'm commenting as if he did)

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

philnotfil

01-11-2013, 10:53 AM

He speaks (or spoke) as an individual without answers. I have answers for him, but it's clearly too late. If his comments are to be taken seriously, then he wasn't a good teacher. I am fortunate to have had many good teachers in my life. I know because I remember them for very specific reasons, not the least of which being that they stood out from other teachers which weren't as good at what they did (maybe like those described in his essay). The teachers I am referring to led me to have answers to where this individual allegedly struggled.

Just to take one point on this, as I'm still trying to figure out why Charts brought this up on this topic. I'm guessing its in regard to the "class position" lesson or perhaps the "emotional dependency" lesson. Learning requires structure, and the opposite of structure is freedom. That's not to say that you can't find ways to leak in a little bit of freedom into a structured environment or to add structure to a free environment, but they are competing concepts. The more structure that you have, the less freedom you have. There're no two ways around that. The author spoke as a person that didn't know how to handle leveraging the concepts of freedom and structure, that's not an institutional problem, that's an individual problem (and not one that cannot be resolved).

Some people work in a field where they need to be told exactly what to do, and that's how things get done. But teaching is not one of those fields. The author writes as if he's one of those people. (again, I don't believe he intended that to be free of satire, but I'm commenting as if he did)

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

I find it odd that you are disagreeing with Gatto on this particular subject. You clearly recognize the main pillar of his lessons, that institutional education requires structure which necessitates an infringement of freedoms. His lessons are merely the practical manifestation of that thought. The entire essay is nothing but answers to the question, how do we instill into students the discipline required to educate them in an institutional setting?

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 11:03 AM

I find it odd that you are disagreeing with Gatto on this particular subject.

If he's to be taken seriously, he expresses chaos. But the system is only chaotic when mismanaged (individual flaw, not a flaw in the system). He speaks like someone who is confused about his role and how to properly accomplish his goals.

You clearly recognize the main pillar of his lessons, that institutional education requires structure which necessitates an infringement of freedoms.

This has been my point all along, but I disagree that there is a necessary detraction that comes from this principle. That is where I suggest he is seeking answers, because what he expresses implies that he doesn't know of a better way of doing things than by teaching these "lessons."

His lessons are merely the practical manifestation of that thought. The entire essay is nothing but answers to the question, how do we instill into students the discipline required to educate them in an institutional setting?

And this is why I see his essay as satire. His answers are the wrong answers. There are better choices he could be making (as a teacher).

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

philnotfil

01-11-2013, 11:21 AM

If he's to be taken seriously, he expresses chaos. But the system is only chaotic when mismanaged (individual flaw, not a flaw in the system).

In what ways do you feel he expresses chaos? As I read him, he is putting for several ways for teachers to effectively avoid chaos in institutional education settings.

He speaks like someone who is confused about his role and how to properly accomplish his goals.

As I said before, thirty years in the classroom, three times teacher of the year for the city of New York, and one time teacher of the year for the state of New York. I would submit that he understand his role very well and did a good job of filling it.

This has been my point all along, but I disagree that there is a necessary detraction that comes from this principle. That is where I suggest he is seeking answers, because what he expresses implies that he doesn't know of a better way of doing things than by teaching these "lessons."

And this is why I see his essay as satire. His answers are the wrong answers. There are better choices he could be making (as a teacher).

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

What better ways would you suggest for teachers to be using?

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 11:51 AM

In what ways do you feel he expresses chaos? As I read him, he is putting for several ways for teachers to effectively avoid chaos in institutional education settings.

For instance, in lesson one, he talks about an inability to present the material in an organized fashion. The lesson is itself titled "confusion." Because he doesn't know how to present it in a less confusing way doesn't make the problem an institutional one. Maybe the topic is not suited for him and/or he's in over his head. Can you give me an example of one of the ways he's offering for teachers to avoid chaos?

As I said before, thirty years in the classroom, three times teacher of the year for the city of New York, and one time teacher of the year for the state of New York. I would submit that he understand his role very well and did a good job of filling it.

Again, which is why I very clearly see this as satire. All the things he picks on are necessary to a healthy learning environment, his expression (if to be taken seriously) imply an ineptitude with each:

- structure in presenting the material
- structure in the classroom
- knowing when and how to deviate from structure
- behavior management
- assessing and developing self-start skills
- assessing and analyzing the students progress, and consulting with them to help them understand where they are at
- adhering to a schedule

More obvious comments on the satirical nature of the piece:

It is time that we faced the fact squarely that institutional schoolteaching is destructive to children.

School is like starting life with a 12-year jail sentence in which bad habits are the only curriculum truly learned.

The whole thing is riddled with sarcasm.

What better ways would you suggest for teachers to be using?

Pick a lesson and we can break it down. Short of that, let's assess the class position lesson. First thing that needs to be acknowledged is that the first thing you need to have in order to teach a child is a child present and paying attention. You can't have that if you don't have any structure. No matter whether you are in a public school, private school, or home schooling, this concept holds true. It holds true for anything that you are learning. So we can accept that it is necessary. There are no rational alternatives (feel free to suggest some if you disagree).

These comments, again, very clearly sarcastic to me:

I teach that you must stay in class where you belong. I don't know who decides that
my kids belong there but that's not my business.

He's not really "teaching" this, but let's suppose he was. His focus is all wrong. He should be "teaching" the material and finding ways to capture his audience. That they're required to be there doesn't need to be a focus of the presentation throughout the course of the year. He does know who decides that his kids belong in that classroom, and it is his business. I can't even take that comment seriously...unless, he's expressing that he's been a sham for 30 years, and his positive recognition is completely fraudulent.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

philnotfil

01-11-2013, 12:37 PM

For instance, in lesson one, he talks about an inability to present the material in an organized fashion. The lesson is itself titled "confusion." Because he doesn't know how to present it in a less confusing way doesn't make the problem an institutional one. Maybe the topic is not suited for him and/or he's in over his head. Can you give me an example of one of the ways he's offering for teachers to avoid chaos?

He doesn't teach confusion because it is better for the students. He teaches confusion because it is better for the school. If all of the connections between the pieces of information a student has are missing, then teachers don't have to spend classroom time on the intricacies of some of those connections that one student noticed while the rest of the class still hasn't had their brains packed full of the unrelated facts that they need to pass their standardized tests. If nothing in one classroom relates to anything in any other classroom, then the teacher doesn't lose any time helping students understand why this class uses it differently from that class, or how the perspective of that class helps inform what we do in this class. And the teacher gains more time for the core things that the state has decreed that they cover in the 180 days they have to work with. If students are confused about the relationship between a given subject and another subject, or life, they ask fewer questions. There is a reason that young children are awesomely curious and that the longer they are in an institutional educational setting the less curious they become.

Does Mr. Gatto think that this is a good thing? Absolutely not. You should read his retirement letter (http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/prologue2.htm), published in the Wall Street Journal, it closes with "If you hear of a job where I don’t have to hurt kids to make a living, let me know." Teachers don't do these things because they are good for the kids, teachers do these things because they don't have the time or space to do what is best for the kids, and they are not incentivized to do what is best for the kids, they are incentivized to do what is best for the test scores of the kids.

Again, which is why I very clearly see this as satire. All the things he picks on are necessary to a healthy learning environment, his expression (if to be taken seriously) imply an ineptitude with each:

- structure in presenting the material
- structure in the classroom
- knowing when and how to deviate from structure
- behavior management
- assessing and developing self-start skills
- assessing and analyzing the students progress, and consulting with them to help them understand where they are at
- adhering to a schedule

On the contrary, the lessons show a mastery of these things and how to deal with them within the confines of an institutional school setting.

Pick a lesson and we can break it down. Short of that, let's assess the class position lesson. First thing that needs to be acknowledged is that the first thing you need to have in order to teach a child is a child present and paying attention. You can't have that if you don't have any structure. No matter whether you are in a public school, private school, or home schooling, this concept holds true. It holds true for anything that you are learning. So we can accept that it is necessary. There are no rational alternatives (feel free to suggest some if you disagree).

Which is exactly what he is saying. This is why I have a hard time understanding why you are in such vehement disagreement with him. He is showing how teachers can put into practice the very things you are saying should be happening. Class position is one of the most effective ways of implementing structure in institutional education.

These comments, again, very clearly sarcastic to me:"I teach that you must stay in class where you belong. I don't know who decides that
my kids belong there but that's not my business."

If you had ever lost a fight with an administrator over getting a kid into the class they should be in, instead of the class the administrator has assigned them to, you wouldn't see this as sarcastic, you would see this as sadly true.

He's not really "teaching" this, but let's suppose he was. His focus is all wrong. He should be "teaching" the material and finding ways to capture his audience. That they're required to be there doesn't need to be a focus of the presentation throughout the course of the year. He does know who decides that his kids belong in that classroom, and it is his business. I can't even take that comment seriously...unless, he's expressing that he's been a sham for 30 years, and his positive recognition is completely fraudulent.

Or that he is fed up with a system that doesn't let him actually educate his students, and instead mandates that he merely teaches them. It isn't that his focus is wrong, it is that the structure of schooling makes doing these things the most efficient ways of fulfilling the job requirements.

What is your experience in institutional education, outside of being a student?

MichaelJoeWilliamson

01-11-2013, 01:59 PM

You can't properly educate children without violating their alleged Constitutional rights. Most kids would rather be somewhere else than in school all day. It is the ability to take their rights away and institute consequences for expressing their freedom that enables them to be properly educated.

That's not possible for reasons I've already detailed. To be properly educated, you must relinquish your rights in the name of order. I don't want my kid being educated in a classroom where other children are free to do what they please including come and go as they please. School is not a place for freedom, it's a place for instruction.

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

In this case, it is quite clear that the parents did not want this tracking device. While I agree we restrict the rights of children before they become of age, by-in-large it is the parents get the final word on the matter. Not the state. And certainly not a school bureaucrat

.

WESGATORS

01-11-2013, 02:58 PM

In this case, it is quite clear that the parents did not want this tracking device. While I agree we restrict the rights of children before they become of age, by-in-large it is the parents get the final word on the matter. Not the state. And certainly not a school bureaucrat

.

I'll give you this much, I don't think it would be fair to implement the policy immediately if the parents had a problem with it (maybe permit them to sign a release not holding the school accountable or something like that). And grandfather the current residents in, and make it take effect for new residents or for children born after a certain date.

Phil, I'll have to read/digest all that later!

Go GATORS!
,WESGATORS

ChartsandGrafs

01-11-2013, 04:21 PM

When my child goes to school, he relinquishes most of his basic rights in the name of order to the extent that I believe in the process put in place to educate my child.

There's the problem. Like most well-meaning Americans, you live under the delusion that the public "education" system was set up and now currently exists in its present form to educate your child. Nothing could be further from the truth. While your child will receive some educational value while in government schools, this is only incidental. Government schools ARE NOT interested in maximizing your child's intellectual potential. They exist to foster conformity of thought, to prevent independent, critical thinking, and to further the aims of our corrupt, crypto-fascist State.

Government schools are basically sheep mills. They turn out sheep. That's all they do. The evidence of this all around you. Most Americans are incapable of thinking for themselves. This isn't a natural state of affairs, it's the work of the "education" system. The Gatto essay was supposed to tip you off to this, but you clearly missed the point.

philnotfil

01-11-2013, 04:29 PM

There's the problem. Like most well-meaning Americans, you live under the delusion that the public "education" system was set up and now currently exists in its present form to educate your child. Nothing could be further from the truth. While your child will receive some educational value while in government schools, this is only incidental. Government schools ARE NOT interested in maximizing your child's intellectual potential. They exist to foster conformity of thought, to prevent independent, critical thinking, and to further the aims of our corrupt, crypto-fascist State.

Government schools are basically sheep mills. They turn out sheep. That's all they do. The evidence of this all around you. Most Americans are incapable of thinking for themselves. This isn't a natural state of affairs, it's the work of the "education" system. The Gatto essay was supposed to tip you off to this, but you clearly missed the point.

WES, this is an example of taking things too far :)

While our government schools do many of these things, you will be hard pressed to find anyone involved in them, all the way up to the Secretary of Education, who wants to do these things, or is happy that the institutional nature of education causes them to happen. Government schools do not exist to foster conformity of thought, to prevent independent, critical thinking, or to further the aims of our corrupt, crypto-fascist State. Unfortunately some of the things that providing education in classes of mixed interest and ability cause us to do, also lead to those things, but for different reasons. Gatto has a very clear insight into what is happening, but takes an extra, unsupported step, in his speculation as to why those things are happening. There is a large population who is primed to believe the things that he is saying, and they carry it even farther than he has.

wgbgator

01-11-2013, 04:33 PM

I thought schools were set up in the industrial era to create industrial workers, because that's what most people did. Plus, any educational institution is going to be a disciplining agent, even if its home school. That's kind of what we do to kids.

bluelang

01-11-2013, 04:59 PM

If they already have a tracking device then what is the need for one the students wear? As far as my like or dislike the last time I checked this was a discussion board and thus that is my stated opinion. Whether or not it passes the legal test remains to be seen .

We started out with stop signs, then we had stop lights, and now we have traffic cameras. Technology improves.

I'm not allowed to go anywhere on my work campus without my badge (which has RFID), and anyone who comes on campus is required to also check in with ID and then wear RFID, too.

ChartsandGrafs

01-11-2013, 05:09 PM

WES, this is an example of taking things too far :)

While our government schools do many of these things, you will be hard pressed to find anyone involved in them, all the way up to the Secretary of Education, who wants to do these things, or is happy that the institutional nature of education causes them to happen.

You mean, hard to find anyone who would openly admit it.

Of course not. What a scandal that would be.

Government schools do not exist to foster conformity of thought, to prevent independent, critical thinking, or to further the aims of our corrupt, crypto-fascist State.

Wishful thinking on your part. I suspect cognitive dissonance is the culprit.

Unfortunately some of the things that providing education in classes of mixed interest and ability cause us to do, also lead to those things, but for different reasons. Gatto has a very clear insight into what is happening, but takes an extra, unsupported step, in his speculation as to why those things are happening. There is a large population who is primed to believe the things that he is saying, and they carry it even farther than he has.

LOL, "unsupported". The evidence is all around you, screaming in your face.

Do you honestly believe the rulings elites in this country want a nation of independent thinkers? Do you honestly believe the ruling elites in this country want a nation of people who can intelligently question the reasons they are given for all the wars, occupations, debt, fascist legislation, government expansion, and police state tactics? Why do you think this stuff is happening without hardly any opposition?

Come on, open your eyes.

busigator96

01-11-2013, 05:17 PM

maybe a better solution is under-skin implants of tracking devices--the government needs to know.

Sadly I think that will be the next step for "security" purposes. Then the medical/financial information on them will be next. Guess what happens after that....think OnStar for your life and identity. :whoa:

philnotfil

01-11-2013, 05:27 PM

You mean, hard to find anyone who would openly admit it.

Of course not. What a scandal that would be.

Yes,if no one is doing it, finding someone who will admit to doing it is quite difficult.

Wishful thinking on your part. I suspect cognitive dissonance is the culprit.

Actually I was mistaken. I forgot that the Texas Republicans were pushing to remove critical thinking from schools this past year. I don't believe that they have been successful yet, but they did state that as a goal.

LOL, "unsupported". The evidence is all around you, screaming in your face.

Do you honestly believe the rulings elites in this country want a nation of independent thinkers? Do you honestly believe the ruling elites in this country want a nation of people who can intelligently question the reasons they are given for all the wars, occupations, debt, fascist legislation, government expansion, and police state tactics? Why do you think this stuff is happening without hardly any opposition?

Come on, open your eyes.

Yes, unsupported. Lots of speculation, but a distinct lack of facts. Here is your opportunity to set the record straight. Share with us your evidence that government run schools exist to foster conformity of thought, to prevent independent, critical thinking, and to further the aims of our corrupt, crypto-fascist State.