We’re baffled. There’s no other way to say it.
When a gun threat was allegedly made by a student at Lowther South last month, why wasn’t every parent of every student at that school immediately notified?
Instead, the administration first chose to quietly conduct a several-weeks-long “investigation” into the incident. And not until Tenisha Baylor informed the board of education last week of the bullying and repeated threats against her daughter, begging for a solution, and the incidents became public knowledge, did Principal Jessica Griffin send a letter home to parents informing them of the alleged gun threat.
What was she thinking?
Do our school administrators, teachers, counselors, staff and personnel need to be reminded that they are responsible for every student under their jurisdiction as if they were their own? It’s called in loco parentis, a legal doctrine that holds every school staff person responsible to be “in the place of a parent” concerning the health, safety and well-being of students as long as the students are under their guardianship.
There isn’t one parent who wouldn’t want — no, demand — to know immediately of a potential threat to his or her child’s safety at school. During a time when school safety and deadly bullying cases are on the forefront of every parent’s mind, schools have an obligation to keep the lines of communication open and flowing back and forth with parents. They want to know their children’s schools are being proactive, not reactive, when it comes to students’ safety.
At the board of education meeting, in which the board was also coincidentally approving minor changes of semantics to the district-wide bullying policy, board president Mike Crouch told Baylor that he was not attempting to push the allegation “under the rug.” But isn’t that what happened when parents were not informed of the threat nearly a month ago?
According to Griffin’s May 13 letter to parents, “there is no evidence that actual threats were made or that a weapon was brought to school.” We hope that’s true.
But in the meantime, gambling the safety of students on such an outcome seems to be not only an awfully presumptuous risk to take, but an act of negligence on the part of the administration.
Furthermore, what kind of a precedent did this set for our students? That a threat has to be proved viable before it’s taken seriously by the administration? That there’s some wiggle room in how school officials will respond?
If parents are angry, they have a right to be. Someone must be held accountable.
And we hope that next time we can count on the Emporia school district staff to put themselves in the shoes of parents and find a better way to handle a situation such as this one.
Ashley Knecht Walker
Editor
butterfly (anonymous) says...
"There isn’t one parent who wouldn’t want — no, demand — to know immediately of a potential threat to his or her child’s safety at school."
I think the problem here is that the school was trying to be certain there really was a threat prior to taking action. You do all realize the reports are coming from 5th graders - right? Have you tried to get accurate information from a 10 or 11 year old? I think people need to realize if it was their child being accused of making a threat, which does come with serious consequences, they would want to be sure they had the WHOLE story.
When the whole story was revealed - THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THAT A THREAT WAS MADE OR THAT A WEAPON WAS BROUGHT TO SCHOOL.
That letter was likely a courtesy letter to stop the rumors and false information.
As a parent with a child in 5th grade, I can assure you that the principal DOES take bullying seriously and deals with it as promptly as possible. I think if anyone disagrees with how school discipline is handled - they are welcome to get their adminstrative degree and give it a shot - it is not a cake walk, and it is often unpopular. This public bashing based on falsehoods is sad.
May 20, 2010 at 2:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
"When a gun threat was allegedly made by a student at Lowther South last month, why wasn’t every parent of every student at that school immediately notified?" Well Ashley, you answered your own question by including the word "allegedly." Remove that word, and by all means. Parents should be informed without hesitation. But sadly, allegedly is the accurate word in this circumstance. A complete investigation of this incident was not only conducted by the school district, but also by the Emporia Police Department. Both of them came to the same conclusion. There is no evidence that this happened. And in finding such, blurs the backbone on which you wrote your very one sided editorial. You used "in loco parentis" as a reasoning for your argument. Let me use it for mine as well, because you see, in your haste to judge you forgot to include the second part to the law. In loco parentis "allows institutions such as colleges and schools to act in the best interests of the students as they see fit...." Make sense. However, unfortunately for you Mrs. Walker, it continues, "....although not allowing what would be considered violations of the students' civil liberties." Civil liberties such as making false claims when in fact proof was found otherwise, maybe? No matter how bad the school may have wanted to throw the perverbial "book" at this bully, he still has rights. And these rights must be protected. Due process must be followed. And it was. Not only by the school district, but by an independent entity. A fact of life is that 11 year old children sometimes embelish the facts. It just happens. And it is on an 11 year old's statement, that you Mrs. Walker, found it well within your professional responsibility to personally attack Mrs. Griffen. I realize this is your family's paper, and this is your editorial. But to patronize all of the hard working employees of the district by stating they should "put themselves in the shoes of parents (wonder how many actually are parents....1 or 2 maybe?) and find a better way to handle the situation" when you offer nothing but judgements based on an 11 year old girl, proven to be false, is very irresponsible. Or to use your profound statement.....baffling.
May 20, 2010 at 2:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
I wonder how many times the people at Columbine School just shrugged off the threats students made as just an " empty, alleged " threat . Well that so called alleged threat amounted to the eventual making good on the alleged threat and several people died .
Oh, I know people will say this is not Columbine and it will never happen here. I sincerely hope you are right, however , there is an old adage that goes, " better safe than sorry " ! I for one do not ever want to be sorry, because something was not taken seriously . Especially when it comes to the safe guarding our children, in some of the places they should feel the safest.
May 20, 2010 at 3:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
Yes, methusla, good point. As we now remember, the threats of those two boys, both in school and the arsenal they were amassing at home, were shrugged off many times before that horrible day.
Good article, Ashley.
May 20, 2010 at 3:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sloan (anonymous) says...
Well said Lurker and Butterfly. Ms. Walker, please get the facts before you write. I hope your next column will be an apology to the LSIS principal.
May 20, 2010 at 3:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
butterfly (anonymous) says...
The allegation of a threat was taken seriously. The police were involved and an investigation completed. Just because a parent doesn't like the outcome (and by the way parents are not informed about the discipline of students unless it is their child) doesn't mean the allegation of a threat was not taken seriously - and by the way....the investaigation revealed there wasn't a threat.......
May 20, 2010 at 3:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
booker5m (anonymous) says...
I am with Ash! Why take a chance.Always take the highroad its easier to say sorry than bury a kid
May 20, 2010 at 3:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
methusla and create....do you know for a fact that it is being shrugged off? Just because it's not public how the boy is being handled, you think it's just back to normal? There is a reason you don't know, because it's none of your business. Or mine. But don't assume nothing is being done, simply because it isn't public.
May 20, 2010 at 3:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
Lurker, have you forgotten that it was not just one 11 year old girl, but other students that also recieved threats or bullying from this same problem student.
And apparently this student that likes to bully or make threats has had a history of such behavior ?
May 20, 2010 at 3:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
formerhornet (anonymous) says...
At what point do we trust that Principal Griffin is a professional and did the best thing for the students? Mrs. Griffin was posed with a situation, and she dealt with it in a manner that resolved the situation. No one got hurt.
Parents are not subject to ALL of the information here, clearly. Let's not second-guess the authority figure that was hired by the school board that YOU elected.
Mrs. Gtriffin is a compassionate woman who cares deeply about kids. Kudos to her.
May 20, 2010 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
meth, that didn't answer my question, but I'll answer yours. No, it wasn't just one, it was two. And they are best friends. What people are failing to understand, this isn't a private school or a church school. It is a public school and they have legal obligations they must follow. No where in any of my posts have I stood up for the character of this bully. Bottom line. The school did it's legal obligation and included the authorities. The authorities concluded there wasn't any grounds for action. So what can the school do? Expel him on grounds of what an 11 year old girl and her best friend say? Did he say it? I have no idea. But there is only so much the principal can do. But to personally attack her and the rest of the staff at lowther south, not to mention the rest of the district, isn't going to solve anything.
May 20, 2010 at 4:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
All I know about this story is what I have seen on this website and it is really hard for me to form an opinion in either direction because of my cousin's story. There were several bullies (popular kids) in his high school (in one of our neighboring small towns) who teased him incessantly on the bus. When he got a car, they vandalized it so he went back to riding the bus. He had a job here in Emporia and when they would come to town, they would come to his workplace and scratch up his paint. One day, on the bus, when he had about as much as he could take that day, he told them that kids like them, doing what they do were the reason that kids like him end up snapping and bringing guns to school. Guess who got in trouble? Zero tolerance got him suspended and then placed in the principle's office during school hours after returning. His reaction? "It's okay. I don't have to be around those kids during school now."
Sometimes, the one that's being told on really is the bully, and sometimes they are actually the one being bullied. I guess you have to be there and know both kids to see past their individual perceptions to know the truth. I hope that the teachers and principle there at the 5th grade building have done this accurately.
May 20, 2010 at 4:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
giggles (anonymous) says...
Oh, some of you want to use semantics to insinuate that "alleged threats" means that there was never an incident. What it actually means is that by the time the investigation was underway, they couldn't determine what took place. Was this investigation done the same day of the incident? No one will say. The kid could have gotten rid of any evidence before they came looking. There is a lot of missing information. Perhaps the bigger point is that the parents didn't know anything for a long time, too long if you ask me. She should have issued a statement saying that there were allegations of a threat of physical violence with a weapon, but that they were investigating. Let the parents know about any incidents without giving out too much information. If this child has a history of bullying or violence, then I as a parent want to know that the best policy at that point is to remove that child until the investigation is complete.
I am also curious as to why we cannot be allowed to know what the punishment is for students who have brought disiplinary actions against them.
May 20, 2010 at 5:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
keepinitreal (anonymous) says...
Lurker75- No you dont have your facts correct at all EITHER....there was more than just the 2 girls who heard the threat. It was only their parents who came forward and wanted something done. It does not matter if they are best friends or not...It was said to them, and they did what we tell our children to do....when you hear or see something serious like this, go and tell so no one gets hurt.
May 20, 2010 at 5:10 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
And the school did what it is told to do. Contact the authorities and investigate. Listen, I have no problem with parents doing what is best for their children. I'm just saying the school's hands are tied when it comes to he-said, she-said. Right or wrong. Ask any lawyer how well an 11 year old's testimony stands up in court, especially against another 11 year old. What I'm saying is, don't drag the school or the principal through the mud for doing going through the steps that are outlined for them. Imagine, reading in the paper someone questioning you for following guidelines that were already in place before you got your job. You were simply doing what you were told to do.
May 20, 2010 at 5:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GPride (anonymous) says...
What the school failed to do was notify the majority of the staff about the threat. Most found out at an emergency staff meeting on the day the "courtesy letter" went home to the parents. How many days/weeks do you think the staff worked while unaware that a gun threat had been made? Not notifying the public, perhaps. Not notifying the staff, unexcusable. How many extra eyes/ears could have been on the lookout for signs of trouble?
May 20, 2010 at 5:26 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
Giggles and GPride, I actually agree with both of you. A letter going home saying something happened and it was being looked into, without any names, could have extinguished many fires. I also think the staff probably should have been in the know from the outset. What I cannot agree on is the attack by Mrs. Walker on the principal and the staff. Apparently, an unknowing staff. Something positive needs to come out of this, and when the local newspaper resorts to finger pointing and accusations, emotions get worked up and sides get set. She very easily could have stated something to the fact of we can all work together to solve these intolerable actions for the better of our community, or we can point fingers and question people's judgement and without stating it, question their integrity, professionalism, and competency. I guess mud slinging sells papers. No wonder i keep hearing people say they refuse to take the gazette.
May 20, 2010 at 6:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lots_to_learn (anonymous) says...
Good piece, Ashley. Wouldn't consider it mud slinging, just demanding immediate notification in the future. If you have a public job, you get to hear the public displeasure at unpopular decisions. Goes with the territory. Is someone feeling a little overly sensitive?
May 20, 2010 at 7:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
lurker75 (anonymous) says...
You are absolutely correct. If you hold a public job, you do get to hear the public displeasure at unpopular decision that are made over circumstances that are of a PRIVATE matter. In other words, we the public get to judge their decisions over private matters in which we know nothing about. We get to voice our opinions without reprocussion, under the safety umbrella that "Hey, it's a public job. You have to listen to me. Regardless of whether I know the facts or not. Deal with it." While the other side, by law, cannot comment. Pretty fair fight, right? It's all good. The police deal with it all the time. Nothing new, and not going to change.
May 20, 2010 at 7:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
nmse_s (Shannon Standard) says...
: A parent of 6th and 3rd grade students here in Emporia. A couple years ago, a similar incident happened at one of their school's (I won't name which one). The parents were sent home a letter from the principal the same day of the incident. The letter was worded very well so we, the parents would not be overally alarmed. The situation was resolved with the student being punished accordingly. I believe the principal did well in handling the situation. I for one was glad to be notified, and would want to continually be notified of situations that concern my child(ren)'s safety. But I believe each situation is different and needs to be handled accordingly. I just hope teachers/administraters don't ignore signs of school violence/bullying, no matter how little or severe they may be.
May 20, 2010 at 8:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
I heard a little bit ago that Mrs. Griffin was on maternity leave at the time of the alleged incident. Does anyone know if that's true? If it is, she's taking heat for something she had no way of knowing about either.
May 20, 2010 at 8:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
yev_kassem (anonymous) says...
I really find it interesting that parents are calling out a Principal and staff for not notifying them of something that was "allegedly" said.
Can you imagine how many rumors float around a 5th grade building?
It sounds like things were handled properly.
You also have to remember there are 2 sides to this story. What consequences come about if the school makes a big alert that "Billy" allegedly said he was bringing a gun to school? Can you imagine the panic? And what happens to "Billy"? He is labeled a problem whether or not he did or said anything.
May 20, 2010 at 9:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
neighbor (anonymous) says...
Notifying parents everytime there's a problem between 5th graders would add 50lbs to the kid's backpacks that already 50.
Sounds to me like they handled this situation by notifying administration who notified the police who also investigated.
I hope many of you are never allowed to serve on a jury pool, including the author of this article. This is America where you must be proven guilty before punishment is handed down.
May 21, 2010 at 10:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
How dare parents be concerned for the life and safety of their children.
May 21, 2010 at 11:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
lurker, it damn well IS my business if my taxes are supporting the school and bullying problems aren't being handled properly. Problems in schools are a PUBLIC problem. If this problem was handled well, that woman would not have felt she needed to go to a school board meeting in search of help.
May 21, 2010 at 2:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
12345678 (anonymous) says...
I am glad to see that people are actually taking a step back and understanding the process that the school had to go through before announcing everything. The threats were confirmed alleged so therefore there was no reason to inform the entire school of students and parents to create a mass panic for something that was deemed false. And to say that the staff didn't know for weeks until an emergency meeting.... do you work there??? chances are most everybody commenting does not, so maybe you all should stop speculating on what did and didn't happen and understand that the correct LEGAL process was taken, carried out and found the accusations were in deed false. This is an 11 year old KID we are talking about and besides the fact in America we are innocent until proven guilty. No thanks to the lovely gazette and the psycho mom that went nuts, let's try and leave this alleged 11 year old to the last bit of their innocense and stop creating all this public drama.
May 21, 2010 at 2:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
keepinitreal (anonymous) says...
Well I think we can tell by the comments who works at the school, no wonder it was handled like it was...look at them calling people names ... (psycho mom), and being nasty with their comments on here.
May 21, 2010 at 2:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXKKtF...
May 21, 2010 at 2:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GPride (anonymous) says...
Actually, I do work there. And the majority of the staff was unaware of the incident in question until it was revealed at the emergency meeting. And by majority, I mean 90%, not 51%. That meeting was in response to the original story about to be printed in the Gazette. If the news had not been published, no letter would have gone home.
Furthermore, an investigation that determines that there was not enough evidence to prove the allegations does not mean the allegations were false. It simply means that there was not enough evidence to "convict" the child involved. Saying that it didn't happen is to accuse the alleged victims of lying. If someone stole your car, but you didn't have enough evidence to single out the thief...does that mean your car wasn't stolen?
I somewhat understand the need for evidence beyond the word of an individual or small group of students. However, I worry about the message that this sends to the students as a whole. We tell them to come to an adult when situations like these arise. What they're learning is that, without a tape recording of the threats, the end result is that nothing changes. Was the alleged bully removed from the student population while the investigation was conducted? No.
I also remain concerned that the staff was not notified of the threat. While I'm not going to suit up in body armor before I head to work, I do feel that I deserve to be informed if/when my safety, or that of the students in my care, is in jeopardy.
May 22, 2010 at 12:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
GPride,
I would like to thank you for coming forward with your comments and assesment of the situation. I am proud to say that with people like you in our schools to look after and care for our children, at least someone cares about " action " as well as being concerned about " inaction " .
And I agree that the message sent to the children who feel threatened, is " be afraid " and you can' t tell anyone, as you will be the one branded as a " liar " .
Likewise the message sent to the " bullying " student is " You can do anything you wish, we will not punish you " .
Above all, what kind of message does this send to the public, who expect their/our children to be safe while attending our public schools.
Again, thank you GPride for having the courage to come forward and add some incite into this incident.
May 22, 2010 at 6:58 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
I would also like to say to those who belittle those who do not use their real names on these threads.
What do you think would happen to GPride, being an employee of the school/school district, if they would have signed their real name to their comment ?
I would venture to say that the " Sh_t would have really hit the proverbial Fan " and most likely, not in GPrides' favor.
People have the right to remain anonymous, for their own protection, even when giving testimoney in a court of law and credibility lies in the truth and facts, not in a name.
May 22, 2010 at 7:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
"If the news had not been published, no letter would have gone home."
Thanks for the clarity, GPride. I'm sorry to hear that you all weren't notified right away as you should have been. I find it troubling that the administration waited to notify parents and only after news of this problem was published. This "look the other way" attitude is unsafe.
May 22, 2010 at 7:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
supernanny (anonymous) says...
GPride- Thank you so much for coming forward......I am getting so frustrated with people saying that "It didnt happen". I clearly happened. There is also alot more to the story to that is not out there. There was more than one threat made.
May 22, 2010 at 8:10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
educ8253 (anonymous) says...
As an educator in the USD 253 district, I can tell you that threats on some level are an almost daily occurrence at our schools, including the 5th-6th grade level. They range from, "I'm gonna kick your ass on the playground" to "I'm gonna kill you." All threats are taken seriously. All threats are investigated. The amount of time and effort spent on each investigation varies, depending on the nature of the threat, but, none are taken lightly. Most of the time, the threats are muttered in the course of some dispute that blows over quickly. Once in awhile, a threat is truly serious enough that more drastic measures must be taken. The police have been summoned to schools several times this semester to deal with students deemed out of control. Mental health professionals have been summoned in consultation about students whose behavior has been seen as highly unusual. Authorities such as SRS have been notified when a student comes to school with a credible report of abuse at home. In other words, every threat made at a school is seriously investigated. As an educator and a parent of students attending USD 253 schools, I have confidence that the administrators, teachers and staff know what needs to be done in each case of inappropriate behavior.
If every threat required notifying every parent every time it was made, we'd be bogged down in so much paperwork that we'd never be able to educate our students. Also, the federal law known as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act prevents employees of the district from discussing such issues with parents AND even among colleagues except on a need to know basis. Create and GPride, as district employees, are aware of FERPA as well.
http://www.usd253.org/home/inside-usd...
May 22, 2010 at 2:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GPride (anonymous) says...
An allegation that a child has threatened to bring a gun to school most certainly constitutes a "need to know" scenario.
If a bomb threat were called in anonymously, the building would be evacuated until it was thoroughly searched and the situation was deemed to be safe? Are you suggesting that if the bomber were known, they'd send us into the building in order to protect the rights of the student? They wouldn't inform us of a potential threat to our safety?
Why wasn't the content of the eventual note home given to the staff on the day the incident was reported? It contains no reference to a particular student..thereby complying with FERPA. Furthermore, if she assigned some teachers to watch the student, what's the harm in asking the staff as a whole to keep an eye out?
Practically speaking, those in the building know exactly why they weren't informed. It holds true to the pattern of downplaying anything that might reflect poorly on the school. Ironically, Griffin's #1 priority, since her arrival, has been to eliminate any negative press/conversation related to Lowther South. She's actually gone so far as to tell staff members that they are not "allowed" to make comments that might be perceived as negative while out in public. The warning actually includes the line that "you won't be here next year" if you're found to be questioning the practices of the school.
Bizarre indeed.
May 22, 2010 at 3:53 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
barefooting (anonymous) says...
After reading comments to this story and the related stories, all I can say is--dang glad I dont have kids in the school district. The schools are dealing with a newer form of bullying than the schools had when I was growing up and I m glad we dont have to deal with it.
May 22, 2010 at 4:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
educ8253 (anonymous) says...
GPride, I beginning to have doubts that you work for the district. If you did, you'd know the answers.
May 22, 2010 at 7:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
12345678 (anonymous) says...
keepinitreal- no, sorry, i don't work for the school.
May 24, 2010 at 8:43 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
butterfly (anonymous) says...
hahahahaha gpride - i wonder where you get your information about what Mrs. Griffin does or does not say to her staff? As far as negative comments about the school being made by members of staff - what people say in their personal lives is their own business, at the same time - if you worked for a company and while in public went around bashing your company - do you think you might be in jeapordy of keeping your job? Probably. Further, bashing the place where you choose to work, also makes you look like an idiot for working there....so maybe if Mrs. Griffin did say that, she was making her decision to fire someone based on their proven stupidity :-)
May 24, 2010 at 11:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
"Further, bashing the place where you choose to work, also makes you look like an idiot for working there"
No, not in the least. People have to take the jobs they can get to survive, especially in this economy. They may be ungrateful but certainly not idiotic. I am actually thankful for people that go to jobs even though they hate them. At least they are not sponging off society.
"if you worked for a company and while in public went around bashing your company - do you think you might be in jeopardy of keeping your job?"
I don't think it's legal to fire someone that says they aren't satisfied with their employer. The school being a government entity could have different rules I guess.
May 24, 2010 at 12:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
"Further, bashing the place where you choose to work, also makes you look like an idiot for working there"
Oh please. Those who go to work everyday and keep silent about problems that are occurring, or about various abuses that take place every single day in workplaces across this country are foolish to keep their mouths shut because they are preventing solutions from taking place for lthemselves and for their co-workers. These people are called SHEEP. They have no courage. They are not critical thinkers.
Don't whine, of course not. But protest, YES!
seriously is right. People can't be fired because they complained about some abuse in the workplace or said something negative about their employment. If it were true, we wouldn't need labor unions would we?
May 24, 2010 at 1:46 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
educ8253, no one was asking for the bully to be identified, just dealt with and long before the press got wind of it or the victim's mother had to appear before the school board to get action. In this case the school was playing the old CYA game.
This was a GUN threat, not a "I'm gonna whip your ass" threat that takes place everyday. That makes it major on the criteria list.
May 24, 2010 at 1:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
butterfly (anonymous) says...
create - you made a nice clarification - protesting - absolutely acceptable. There is a difference between protesting/advocating for fair treatment of employees/services for students and just out and out whining in public about your job.
I do not know if you can be fired for that or not, and whining in your circle of friends and family - that is one thing, go ahead. However, in public areas, while it is a right to do so - doesn't mean it isn't really dumb to bash the place where you work. Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
And if you had to take a job you hated so you aren't "sponging off society" kudos to you - but don't bash the place that saved you from poverty.
Again to clarify - that is different than advocating/protesting.
May 24, 2010 at 2:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
pizza (anonymous) says...
I think Ashley is out of line and very, very unprofessional. If she has a complaint she needs to take it to the school and discuss it in private. Making a public ordeal of her problem is out of line. Just because she has access to the rag of a newspaper doesn't give her the right to air her dirty laundry against the school district. Maybe she thinks she could do better. No, I have no connection to the schools. I just see her actions as really tacky and with no class at all. At the very least she needs to provide a free response space for the district in tomorrow's paper, and not on the back page.
May 24, 2010 at 10:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...
They have been on here defending themselves quite a bit.
May 24, 2010 at 10:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
tbluma (anonymous) says...
There have been a lot of times I disagreed with Ashley or Chris, but not this time.
Until we make the parents of the alleged trouble makers responsible nothing will change.
We can't beat em because it's child abuse, we can't kick em out becuase the poor child hasn't got any place else to go. We can give them drugs, birth control, counciling etc. all at the tax payers expense, but we can't give them or their parents RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions.
If the damn kid causes trouble more than once or twice why don't we call the parents at work and tell them to come and get them? If the parent is inconvenienced enough they might be tempted to do something about it.
But alas I forget school is just a place for a lot of parents to get free babysitting so they don't have to take care of little Johnny or Suzy, never mind that the kids that want to learn or the parents that really care don't count for a hill of beans any more.
May 24, 2010 at 10:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...
"Making a public ordeal of her problem is out of line."
This wasn't Ashley's problem...she was doing an editorial on an existing problem that was made public at a board meeting..... that was explained in the editorial. There was also an earlier article reporting the events of the meeting that brought it further into the public eye. Who is really airing their "dirty laundry" with that uninformed accusation.
May 24, 2010 at 11:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
methusla (anonymous) says...
I have a question about this whole " alleged " incident. And this is just conjecture. I have been wondering, ever since I learned of this incident,
could it be possible that this seemingly cronic bully be the child of illegal immigrants ? And if so why hasen' t the proper INS authorities been notified or have our schools, school board/district become some sort of safe haven ?
Or could this cronic bully be the child or relative of some prominent citizen of Emporia, that is being protected, because of their parents powerful social status ? If so why should this child and his parents recieve preferential treatment/privilage ?
Like I say this is just conjecture on my part and there are things about this incident that just don' t make sense or really stink of a possible " cover up " . Again this is just conjecture on my part .
And as a parent Ashely has every right to voice her concerns, openly and I believe did the public a service , by bringing this seemingly serious incident to the publics' attention .
May 25, 2010 at 8:39 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )