My kid might just do such a thing. But if he does, I would expect that he accept the punishment that was spelled out before he did it. And I hope that would make him think before he breaks another rule with a consequence he should have thought about. I would much prefer he spend a year in an alternative high school than think that the rules don’t apply to him and because he’s “so special” he should get away with it to continue the behavior.</p>
<p>I love how these threads bring out the parents who think their children are so special that the consequences shouldn’t apply to them.</p>
<p>I just don’t understand the logic here. So, because the kids and the parents were aware of the consequences, it’s OK to have unreasonable and extremely harsh consequences. How does that make any sense?</p>
<p>Let’s say the punishment is even worse, three years in a facility? Is that OK too? How about we tar and feather the kids too and make them walk down the main drag - just to make sure everyone sees what can happen when you do stupid things. Hey, it was in the contract…why not? Is there any line to be drawn here?</p>
<p>^^^
Am I right in assuming this is a public school? So you want me spend bucks I don’t have to put my child in a private school because I don’t agree with the rule? Or move? Or take on a fight with them in my spare time?<br>
I have seen kids harshly punished for bringing an advil tablet into a public school. Some rules are just plain stupid. Hopefully, an incident like this will spur on some further review of their rules. Guns Good… Pot Bad. Huh?</p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with consequences. I do have a problem with depriving a kid of an appropriate education as the consequence. Most alternative schools are really handling kids who could not make it in a regular schools and are not equipped to teach kids who are high-achieving. They could have been given community service hours, a mandatory drug prevention program, counseling, transferred to another public school with stipulations that they could not participate in certain activities and had a mark on their record. All of which would have sent a strong message to other students and the offending students. But it is not right to deprive a kid of an appropriate education. We had a controversy at our school a few years ago where the area superintendent had a tardy lockout policy that had kids missing their first-period classes if they were late to school, even by a minute. This is a school where kids come from all over a city well-known for its horrific traffic. Anyhow, it turned out that he wasn’t allowed to deprive the kids of classroom time as a punishment and the policy was adjusted. I think this is a similar situation. Punish the kids but not by depriving them of an education that is appropriate.</p>
<p>“I don’t have a problem with consequences. I do have a problem with depriving a kid of an appropriate education as the consequence.”</p>
<p>If a student has blown his chance at an “appropriate” education by blatantly breaking well known and understood rules, it becomes the parent’s responsibility to provide the appropriate education at that point. I think that many parents use the excuse of the adolescent brain to justify disobedient behavior. It is just that. An excuse. Many kids do follow rules, so teens are certainly capable of doing that, at least if they don’t have parents making excuses for them.</p>
<p>Sorry- alternative education is for the kids who cannot function in a mainstream classroom, often due to emotional or behavioral problems (diagnosed problems). To put bright young people in that environment is crazy and way to PC if you ask me. </p>
<p>There are plenty of appropriate consequences that have been mentioned on this discussion board: community service, drug and alcohol education, missing some school priveleges, out of school suspension. That’s quite a bit right there. </p>
<p>Way back in the 70’s, our high school student council (Pres, VP, etc) were caught smoking pot in a car in front of the school. It was a small, Catholic high school, and the kids had been accepted to some amazing schools. We collectively held our breath, wondering if this would derail their college careers before they begun. The school managed it well: they had to leave the student council and missed all senior activities (trips, proms, etc). No one told the colleges. They should not have to pay for one mistake for the rest of their lives. </p>
<p>Now a second mistake is another issue altogether.</p>
<p>The mom in the article whose kid has a 34 ACT and 4.2 GPA says he can’t get an appropriate education in alternative school…So, is the alternative school OK for kids with the same offense who have (let’s say) a 20 ACT and a 2.0 GPA?</p>
<p>^^Yep, maybe it is OK. Maybe those kids aren’t in AP classes or aren’t on a college prep track.<br>
I could even see the alternative school for the rest of this school year- with the classwork being sent from Ravenwood. But to impose this for the whole next year doesn’t make sense.</p>
<p>Our school has a zero tolerance for alcohol and drugs, and a similar number of students did not walk at graduation (seniors) and had to attend an alternative ed school (juniors) after bringing alcohol into a limo and onto the grounds of the prom 2-3 years ago. Not even drugs involved. Smart kids who did a stupid thing. They knew what the consequences were–it is drilled over and over before prom, and written on the back of the tickets. Lots of hue and cry. Some of the juniors were homeschooled, doing AP classes online via Florida Virtual School. (They were out for the rest of the spring semester and for the entire next fall semester.) The zero tolerance has been around awhile, and they knew they were crossing the line. </p>
<p>Its the girl who is suspended for taking Advil for cramps that I have a problem with.</p>
<p>Around here alternative schools are for kids who simply who are failing out of high school and have problems a mainstream school cannot handle, even then, there isn’t room for all the kids who are not making it in a mainstream high school. A 2.0 GPA is far from failing. We’re talking about kids who will not graduate in a mainstream school.</p>
<p>A S attended one of those “elite” boarding schools that had a zero tolerance for drugs and alcohol. A large percentage of the third year students were expelled after a school trip. They had all been required to sign an agreement about refraining from using illegal substances. That said, if ever an administrator had been present on moving out of the dorms day they would have been shocked by the number of bottles that got hurled from the upstairs floors into a large garbage can strategically placed on the ground floor. Or maybe they wouldn’t have been shocked.</p>
<p>These are the Texas pot laws. The age of majority is 18. In 2006, my S turned 18 the second week of his senior year in HS. At his private HS he was not nearly the oldest in his class.</p>
<p>The “punishment fit the crime” argument is not very comforting since the punishment for the crime can be very severe.</p>
<p>In 1968 when I graduated from Texas HS, Lee Otis Johnston was sentenced to 50 years in prison for giving one joint to an undercover narcotics officer in Houston. That was the old law, but I tried my best to make sure my S knew what the penalties were.</p>
<p>^^ The amount of drugs available at a certain Texas prep school is beyond belief. I know for a fact that in one class the boys formed a co-op and every month a different boy made “the buy” for the group. These are the best of the best… Some of what was purchased was re-sold to the kids at the public high school. It’s everywhere.</p>
<p>Without a doubt, but if caught by the school --bye, bye–. And, as happened in Jan of 2006 (as I recall), a police bust of a student during Christmas break meant --bye, bye-- from the school.</p>
<p>FYI–I assume potential participation when deciding how to address possible “youthful indiscretions.” I also tried to point out that when “the system” (legal or a school) gets a person in its sights it can go bad, VERY BAD, even for the gifted and well-to-do.</p>
<p>"The amount of drugs available at a certain Texas prep school is beyond belief. I know for a fact that in one class the boys formed a co-op and every month a different boy made “the buy” for the group. These are the best of the best… " </p>
<p>No, they are not. The “best of the best” do not purchase and peddle illegal drugs. Money does not equate with “best.”</p>
<p>Is the alternative school a residential placement? If so, I think that’s a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money and not likely to bring about a good outcome for anyone.</p>
<p>But I would have no problem if the school expelled the students for this, and they had to find another school. I happen to think that pot should be legal, but it isn’t. Smoking pot at the hotel while on a school trip is an act of consummate stupidity that ought to have serious consequences. It shows contempt for everyone involved. If they were seniors, I would want the school to tell their colleges and let the colleges decide whether to take additional steps.</p>
<p>MomOfWildChild, I know the research you’re citing re brain development. If these kids didn’t understand before that actions have consequences, I bet you that they do now. This is the first time they’ve faced consequences that matter. That brain development doesn’t happen spontaneously; they have to learn it through hard experience.</p>
<p>At my old high school, which is not private or elite at all, the policy was comparable. If you got caught doing illegal drugs, or possessed a knife on school property (we’ve never had a case of a gun), you were kicked out of the school for the rest of the year, and it was up to you to arrange outside tutoring, self-study the rest of your classes, and you were only allowed on school grounds to take AP tests and Regents. </p>
<p>I never had a problem with this policy. Severe or not, students knew the rules before they engaged in these behaviors, and the punishments were doled out equally no matter who you were. Even the rich star athlete who drove a convertible to school was not spared of his fate by the protests of mommy and daddy.</p>
<p>What I think is unjust is not the policy, but the sudden outcry that’s inspired when the kids involved are supposedly bright. If alternative school is not adequate for these little darlings, it’s not good enough for anyone. I doubt people would be reacting this way if the students were poor, troubled, underachievers.</p>