^I think most colleges feel that way.
@wis75 - he also ruined a perfectly cromulent moustache styleee
If the discipline wasn’t considered serious meaning it didn’t include academic probation/suspension, the school would not have to report it. I’m getting the sense that the teacher reported information the school was not going to report. She was doing what she felt was right morally, but the school really had no obligation to report the incident.
According to this, http://www.necn.com/news/new-england/Teacher-Suspended-For-Rescinding-College-Letter-After-Swastika-Incident-412614413.html the teacher called the college to rescind her rec. She then told the student, who told his mom.
His mother complained to the principal.The teacher was reprimanded for bullying and “conduct unbecoming a teacher.” She’s appealing.
If Nazi vandalism “isn’t considered serious” at that school then it has far deeper and more serious problems than this kid and this rec letter.
This quote from the Huffington Post article made me laugh:
Wonder if anyone bothered to ask him if was creating a hostile environment for the Jewish community attending or teaching at the school?
Then this says much more about the administration of the school…and not of the good kind.
Teachers/LOR writers do and IMO SHOULD reserve the right to rescind LORs if they find subsequent student behavior is sufficiently negative that they could no longer write a positive LOR in good conscience.
This is a right that was clearly reserved when I was going through HS and was a right clearly used by an older college classmate’s MA program Profs to rescind their LORs from PhD applications just a few years ago when they subsequently found out about negative classroom behavior from another colleague in their academic department.
I think it’s outrageous the parent here and the school board feel entitled to second guess and focus on punishing the LOR writer for legitimately exercising the right to rescind one’s LOR. Talk about high-handed totalitarian behavior AND “special snowflaking” a student who clearly committed a serious offense in violation of school policies as the school admins found in their decision.
Worse, if most adcoms and employers I’ve known from family/past working relationships found a given educational institution has such micromanaging school/college admins and excessive helicopterish parents, they’d be inclined to view that institution* and the issued LORs with deep dubiousness and act accordingly.
- Worse, many would view the school admins as acting in an exceedingly totalitarian high-handed manner in trying to micromanage an area which is solely the prerogative of the LOR writer...no one else.
Pot…kettle…black. It’s the mother of that adjudicated and guilty student who is acting the part of the bully…and the school board is wrongfully taking her side and throwing a teacher under the bus for doing her job.
I would agree w/ post 3.
It could be just a dumb thing high schoolers do, it could be thought of as a generic act of rebellion.
It would be premature to believe just based on that, that he favors the National Socialist Party.
And to post 25- Yes I can see the act of creating that swastika could be considered offensive by any Jewish person that took it seriously. But in the one particular, limited example you quoted, you have misunderstood the student’s complaint. His complaint is the hostile environment being created AFTER he was originally punished for the initial act. His complaint isn’t with the punishment. Posting one offensive symbol, one time, is sure offensive, but probably falls well short of “creating a hostile environment”. If we define a hostile environment so broadly that it includes just one thing we find insulting, then almost everyone lives in a hostile environment every day!
Seems like if that is a hostile environment, the student chatter about the incident created it before the teachers said anything.
No, ucbalumnus, that isn’t the student’s complaint. His complaint is that faculty members(school officials) are creating it by continuing on about it AFTER he has been punished. In the quote posted, there is no indication the student doesn’t understand it was an insult. There is no indication he disagrees with the punishment by the administration. ok to agree or disagree with his opinion, but careful readers want to be sure to understand it before we decide which side of the fence we’re on. And readers need to know there is a difference between one insult and a hostile environment.
What do you think that the teachers and administration should have done once they heard other students chattering about the incident?
If you mean before the punishment, I think the teachers should say it is under investigation.
If you mean after the hearing and the punishment then I think they should say- the administration has dealt with this.
This teacher has her appeal to get thru still. it might all work out in the end.
Regardless of the outcome of the appeal, it will affect future writers of LOR. Do they have the right to rescind letters? My guess would be, yes. Do they have the right to divulge disciplinary issues in a letter or directly? Maybe no.
And to all readers here, let me make clear that I think I understand the student’s objection, but I am being very careful not to say I agree or disagree with him.
There are times when I don’t think people understand that actions have consequences, and sometimes those consequences go beyond punitive action. A person can’t just say and do whatever they want and expect the world to shrug it off. It’s a hard lesson to learn. But what good is a LOR if the writer (or the college) believes the words could be misleading at best to downright untruthful.
If it were say, an African American student who put up some sort of incendiary statement of some kind against another group of people, I think I’d be inclined, as either an educator or administrator, to take the student aside for a serious discission about his/her future, and how an action of that sort could impact it going forward. With accompanying disciplary action. What I would NOT do is inform potential colleges (unless I perceived the student to be an actual threat of some sort), because that’s only going to get a student blackballed.
High school students do dumb things without a lot of forethought. Unless a clear pattern has been established I think there’s more benefit to trying to give the student some insight rather than trying to ruin the student’s college chances.
Whether it be a swastika, gang symbol, or other sort of slur.
The teacher should have had every right to retract the LOR. The kid is not the kid the teacher thought he was. I would retract it in a heartbeat, but I guess the issue is what exactly did the teacher get suspended for. I read the article, and unless I missed it, it isn’t clear.
Okay. More info leaking out. I can’t say whether it’s accurate, but I suspect it is.
The name of the teacher is out there. The name of the college she attended is out there. It’s UMass-Boston.
According to a local talk show, the student was applying to UMass-Boston and asked this teacher to write a LOR for him because she’s an alum and he hoped a letter from an alum would be given more weight. She agreed to do it.
The incident with the swastika took place in a class about the Holocaust. A Jewish student objected to the swastika. Student took it down but said something along the lines of " Hitler should have burned you with the rest of them" or words quite similar to that.
The teacher who wrote the LOR is Jewish. She called UMass-Boston and said she wanted to withdraw her rec and why she did.
Seriously? She gets disciplined for this!!!
She told the kid she withdrew the LOR. He told his mom. Mom hired a lawyer who is complaining that he is being harassed by teachers . Teacher was suspended without pay for 20 days to be served two days per week for 10 weeks for bullying a student and conduct unbecoming a teacher.
If what @jonri says is true, then that teacher has been wronged. I am sick of parents who don’t hold their kids accountable. Shame on the kid and the parents.