|
Post by darbus alan on Nov 16, 2009 11:47:12 GMT -5
It also comes down to how the word meep is being used. If it's just a friendly greeting you say to someone as you pass them in the halls, then the ban is ridiculous as they're essentially stopping people from saying hello (in this odd little way). However, if students are yelling meep to each other across the lunchroom, meeping at each other during class when the teacher is trying to teach, or some other way that causes a disturbance, then the students should be punished for it. The problem in this case is that banning this particular nonsense word does not solve the root problem, which is students continually making loud disturbances despite being told not to. Then you punish the disrupting students for classroom disruption and give them detention for it. If you must suspend, you do it after a few days' detention. You don't arbitrarily ban a nonsense word and suspend students for daring to utter it. That's just draconian nonsense, a slippery slope, and ultimately achieves nothing. Now the kids can just find another nonsense word to abuse until THAT'S suspended and the cycle will continue.
|
|
|
Post by Back to being Cenanuff on Nov 16, 2009 12:04:28 GMT -5
It also comes down to how the word meep is being used. If it's just a friendly greeting you say to someone as you pass them in the halls, then the ban is ridiculous as they're essentially stopping people from saying hello (in this odd little way). However, if students are yelling meep to each other across the lunchroom, meeping at each other during class when the teacher is trying to teach, or some other way that causes a disturbance, then the students should be punished for it. The problem in this case is that banning this particular nonsense word does not solve the root problem, which is students continually making loud disturbances despite being told not to. Then you punish the disrupting students for classroom disruption and give them detention for it. If you must suspend, you do it after a few days' detention. You don't arbitrarily ban a nonsense word and suspend students for daring to utter it. That's just draconian nonsense, a slippery slope, and ultimately achieves nothing. Now the kids can just find another nonsense word to abuse until THAT'S suspended and the cycle will continue. Sure, it probably was a little excessive, but looking at the article, kids were targeting one teacher's class because that teacher probably expressed some annoyance at the word. Having been left to its own devices, it may have died out in a few weeks. On the other hand, I remember being in high school, and for my Fine Arts credit, I had to take Chorus, which was taught in the band room. In the room there was this giant drum that people would throw things at when the teacher stepped into the office for something, and we'd get a kick out of him running back out and yelling at us every time someone threw something at it, so as long as the teacher is annoyed, the students will do it. So, bottom line, the kids were being s***heads, which is par for the course for teenagers, and the teacher did pretty much the only thing they're allowed to do now to stop random jackassery, and that's make more rules. They're not freedom fighters, people. They're just jackasses.
|
|
|
Post by missellie on Nov 16, 2009 12:48:23 GMT -5
It's an annoying word but that's just pathetic.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2009 12:56:48 GMT -5
Kids are idiots. You know it wasn't just like, "Meep!" in this really fun, innocent way. Think back to your high school days. Were your classmates really like that? Mine weren't.
Okay - I'm sure some of the kids were using it like that, but I can imagine a lot of this going on:
"Hey Becky - I'd like to meep you real bad!" "I heard her meep is meeped from letting to many guys meep her!"
And that's a tame version of what was probably happening.
Meep is just a word, but so is the f-word and people get all riled about it. When those kids hit 18 they can do whatever they want, but until then they're SOL.
|
|
|
Post by forgottensinpwf on Nov 16, 2009 12:58:56 GMT -5
Meepanoia will destroya.
|
|
|
Post by Drillbit Taylor on Nov 16, 2009 13:10:01 GMT -5
Then you punish the disrupting students for classroom disruption and give them detention for it. If you must suspend, you do it after a few days' detention. You don't arbitrarily ban a nonsense word and suspend students for daring to utter it. That's just draconian nonsense, a slippery slope, and ultimately achieves nothing. Now the kids can just find another nonsense word to abuse until THAT'S suspended and the cycle will continue. Sure, it probably was a little excessive, but looking at the article, kids were targeting one teacher's class because that teacher probably expressed some annoyance at the word. Having been left to its own devices, it may have died out in a few weeks. On the other hand, I remember being in high school, and for my Fine Arts credit, I had to take Chorus, which was taught in the band room. In the room there was this giant drum that people would throw things at when the teacher stepped into the office for something, and we'd get a kick out of him running back out and yelling at us every time someone threw something at it, so as long as the teacher is annoyed, the students will do it. So, bottom line, the kids were being s***heads, which is par for the course for teenagers, and the teacher did pretty much the only thing they're allowed to do now to stop random jackassery, and that's make more rules. They're not freedom fighters, people. They're just jackasses. Just need to bring back corporal punishment again. Instead of suspending them, send them to the coach and have him paddle the kid a few times.
|
|
Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
May contain ADHD
Posts: 13,505
|
Post by Malcolm on Nov 16, 2009 13:56:18 GMT -5
Sure, it probably was a little excessive, but looking at the article, kids were targeting one teacher's class because that teacher probably expressed some annoyance at the word. Having been left to its own devices, it may have died out in a few weeks. On the other hand, I remember being in high school, and for my Fine Arts credit, I had to take Chorus, which was taught in the band room. In the room there was this giant drum that people would throw things at when the teacher stepped into the office for something, and we'd get a kick out of him running back out and yelling at us every time someone threw something at it, so as long as the teacher is annoyed, the students will do it. So, bottom line, the kids were being s***heads, which is par for the course for teenagers, and the teacher did pretty much the only thing they're allowed to do now to stop random jackassery, and that's make more rules. They're not freedom fighters, people. They're just jackasses. Just need to bring back corporal punishment again. Instead of suspending them, send them to the coach and have him paddle the kid a few times. Oh noes! That is teh child abuse. Parents don't want other people parenting their kids better than they could. But yeah, I agree on bringing back corporal punishment. Too many kids these days think they can do whatever the hell they want.
|
|
|
Post by Alucard on Nov 16, 2009 14:11:34 GMT -5
Glad to see public schools are dealing with the tough issues and facing them HEAD ON! Stupid mother-meepers. Triple Kelly! Watch your meeping language, for meeps sake!
|
|
|
Post by Back to being Cenanuff on Nov 16, 2009 14:14:32 GMT -5
Just need to bring back corporal punishment again. Instead of suspending them, send them to the coach and have him paddle the kid a few times. Oh noes! That is teh child abuse. Parents don't want other people parenting their kids better than they could. But yeah, I agree on bringing back corporal punishment. Too many kids these days think they can do whatever the hell they want. I'd personally be in support of a Scotsman in coveralls randomly whacking people in the hall with a car's dipstick.
|
|
|
Post by angryfan on Nov 16, 2009 14:30:20 GMT -5
Glad to see public schools are dealing with the tough issues and facing them HEAD ON! Stupid mother-meepers. Triple Kelly! Watch your meeping language, for meeps sake! Hey now, she's just meeping expressing herself. I say why the meep not, it's not like she's talking about meeping some meeps while she meeps a meepsicle filled with meepballs while belting out "Meeping in the Rain" at the top of her meeping lungs, right?
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Nov 16, 2009 14:44:54 GMT -5
When I was in the 2nd grade, "dag" became really popular for some reason. Our teacher finally got tired of hearing it all the time, pulled out a dictionary and put it in front of the kid who said it the most. She told him to look up "dag" in the dictionary and tell her what it meant. After stressing that it was not a real word no one ever used the word again.
This article isn't telling us much other than "the word was banned." No one knows what the kids were doing and why it bothered the teacher so much so no one can really make a comment about whether or not this is "stupid." Rules are rules. When you're in K-12 you are supposed to go to school, learn what you're told, rehash that on exams, and follow the rules.
Original thought and discussion doesn't come into play until you get to college. It's not exactly right because then thousands of kids who go to college are completely overwhelmed by this and can't handle the change but that's the way things are.
|
|
AriadosMan
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Your friendly neighborhood superhero
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by AriadosMan on Nov 16, 2009 14:49:29 GMT -5
Without going too far into politics, paddling a kid for saying "meep" is practically begging for lawsuits.
And most school systems don't have the money to fight that, especially now.
|
|
Jay Peas 42
El Dandy
Totally flips out ALL the time.
Is looking forward to a Nation of Domination Kwannza Special.
Posts: 8,329
|
Post by Jay Peas 42 on Nov 16, 2009 15:20:03 GMT -5
Teachers have authority over their pupils, just like their parents do, and the pupils are obliged to follow any legal command. Why don't people understand how hierarchy works?
|
|
H-Fist
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,485
|
Post by H-Fist on Nov 16, 2009 15:36:45 GMT -5
A point of order to another previous poster: high school is not purely voluntary. Different jurisdictions have different requirements. I believe that Illinois makes the dropout age 16, for instance. Parents/guardians ultimately make most educational decisions for their children, as well. Furthermore, there would need to be a method of determining a cutoff for acceptable and unacceptable administrative uses of authority; a racist teacher unwilling to give As to black students, for example, could not qualify as "love it or leave it." Without going too far into politics, paddling a kid for saying "meep" is practically begging for lawsuits. And most school systems don't have the money to fight that, especially now. Personally, I don't care what the reason is. Any use of physical violence by a powerful person against a weaker person as a method of social control is wrong. It teaches absolutely nothing other than fear: fear of punishment and fear of getting caught. It teaches absolutely nothing in terms of right and wrong. The take-away lesson is to avoid getting caught and, if caught, pass the blame onto someone weaker than yourself. Similarly, a suspension for the use of a nonsense word teaches nothing other than people in power choose to exercise power as they see fit rather than in a reasonable manner. Seeing as this specific use of power is unreasonable, there is no reason for the students to respect as legitimate any decision made by the school's administration. Once a person reaches the age of reason, "because I said so" is no longer a valid reason for purely arbitrary uses of power. To be clear, "because I said so" IS valid in basic matters such as making a kid take a bath or wash hands or go to bed. This is because that specific answer is equivalent to saying, "as a parent, it is my responsibility to ensure your health and well-being; these decisions are made based on my knowledge and experience." "Because I said so" in a high school scenario, likewise, does work for demanding order during fire drills or certain classroom rules. Having voiced my opinion, I will here offer a legitimate alternative. This was a punishment used by my junior high teacher for students who wouldn't shut up. He kept a box with slips of paper/index cards on his desk, each with 10 obscure words or terms written on them. The student had to provide definitions for each as well as formulate a coherent sentence demonstrating understanding of the word. This previously could be done at home (8th grade class of 98), but today would require after-school or Saturday detention and the school library. To force the student to finish it, the administration could simply put in place a reasonable policy: no student who fails to perform disciplinary requirements by such-and-such a date in May shall be promoted to the next grade or allowed to graduate. Or, you know, the teacher could just tell the kids, "Take out a sheet of paper, put away your books and notebooks, and write your name on the top line. This pop quiz will count for 2% of your cumulative grade for the semester. And for every 'meep' I hear from a student from now until then, its weight will increase by one percentage point." The meep problem would then be diminished only to the super-serious kids who ace it and the jerkoffs who would fail anyway. And then, the teacher can proceed to other disciplinary methods. Make behavior a more significant aspect of a grade, rather than something students do "just because." The point of a social recognition of adolescence is to ease the transition of children into adults. There are many times when fully engaging an adolescent or an adolescent group as full adults doesn't work. But to regress to the level of treating the same young adults as three-year-olds, rather than taking a new approach, is to admit defeat and guarantee failure.
|
|
hollywood
King Koopa
the bullet dodger
The Green Arrow has approved this post.
Posts: 11,122
|
Post by hollywood on Nov 16, 2009 15:48:44 GMT -5
The kids thought it was cool to say "MEEP?"
Seriously, the principal should've just made an announcement via intercom: "...you're all idiots."
|
|
|
Post by El Cokehead del Knife Fight on Nov 16, 2009 16:02:16 GMT -5
I have to agree with holllywood. The Principal should have just gone out and said that everyone were idiots.
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Nov 16, 2009 16:05:04 GMT -5
I'd rather say 'meep' then swear every 5 seconds like some people I know do.
|
|
|
Post by Back to being Cenanuff on Nov 16, 2009 16:42:07 GMT -5
A point of order to another previous poster: high school is not purely voluntary. Different jurisdictions have different requirements. I believe that Illinois makes the dropout age 16, for instance. Parents/guardians ultimately make most educational decisions for their children, as well. Furthermore, there would need to be a method of determining a cutoff for acceptable and unacceptable administrative uses of authority; a racist teacher unwilling to give As to black students, for example, could not qualify as "love it or leave it." Without going too far into politics, paddling a kid for saying "meep" is practically begging for lawsuits. And most school systems don't have the money to fight that, especially now. Personally, I don't care what the reason is. Any use of physical violence by a powerful person against a weaker person as a method of social control is wrong. It teaches absolutely nothing other than fear: fear of punishment and fear of getting caught. It teaches absolutely nothing in terms of right and wrong. The take-away lesson is to avoid getting caught and, if caught, pass the blame onto someone weaker than yourself. Similarly, a suspension for the use of a nonsense word teaches nothing other than people in power choose to exercise power as they see fit rather than in a reasonable manner. Seeing as this specific use of power is unreasonable, there is no reason for the students to respect as legitimate any decision made by the school's administration. Once a person reaches the age of reason, "because I said so" is no longer a valid reason for purely arbitrary uses of power. To be clear, "because I said so" IS valid in basic matters such as making a kid take a bath or wash hands or go to bed. This is because that specific answer is equivalent to saying, "as a parent, it is my responsibility to ensure your health and well-being; these decisions are made based on my knowledge and experience." "Because I said so" in a high school scenario, likewise, does work for demanding order during fire drills or certain classroom rules. Having voiced my opinion, I will here offer a legitimate alternative. This was a punishment used by my junior high teacher for students who wouldn't shut up. He kept a box with slips of paper/index cards on his desk, each with 10 obscure words or terms written on them. The student had to provide definitions for each as well as formulate a coherent sentence demonstrating understanding of the word. This previously could be done at home (8th grade class of 98), but today would require after-school or Saturday detention and the school library. To force the student to finish it, the administration could simply put in place a reasonable policy: no student who fails to perform disciplinary requirements by such-and-such a date in May shall be promoted to the next grade or allowed to graduate. Or, you know, the teacher could just tell the kids, "Take out a sheet of paper, put away your books and notebooks, and write your name on the top line. This pop quiz will count for 2% of your cumulative grade for the semester. And for every 'meep' I hear from a student from now until then, its weight will increase by one percentage point." The meep problem would then be diminished only to the super-serious kids who ace it and the jerkoffs who would fail anyway. And then, the teacher can proceed to other disciplinary methods. Make behavior a more significant aspect of a grade, rather than something students do "just because." The point of a social recognition of adolescence is to ease the transition of children into adults. There are many times when fully engaging an adolescent or an adolescent group as full adults doesn't work. But to regress to the level of treating the same young adults as three-year-olds, rather than taking a new approach, is to admit defeat and guarantee failure. Adolescents are not young adults. They're teenagers that act like kids, so they should be treated like kids. Young adults are adults who are young. Schools never, ever have the authority to teach right and wrong. It's always the parents' responsibility, and if the parents fail, that's their fault. Their interest is keeping order while trying to educate an ever-increasingly coddled and immature group of children. Keeping order requires one of two things: respect for the rules, which these kids didn't have, or fear of consequences. Respect only comes with understanding, and how many teenagers do you know that give a crap about anything that isn't completely self-serving? Teenagers are not mature enough to follow rules without there being fear of consequence, and parents today are too unwilling to discipline their children effectively.
|
|
|
Post by Kroot bringing Justice on Nov 16, 2009 16:45:59 GMT -5
I told my old lit, math, and history teachers about this while playing MW2, lots of Meeps were heard.
|
|
|
Post by Bullhead on Nov 16, 2009 16:51:28 GMT -5
It's things like this that make me glad I'm not in high school anymore.
MEEP!
*headslap*
Sorry, boss.
|
|