A teacher anonymously calls out her students... So what?

A high school teacher in suburban Philadelphia was suspended for a profanity-laced blog where she called her students – among other things – “disengaged, lazy whiners.” She was placed on a paid suspension when she made some of the following comments (the teacher, Natalie Munroe, did not use her full name or identify her students or school in the blog).

“My students are out of control”

“They are rude, disengaged, lazy whiners. They curse, discuss drugs, talk back, argue for grades, complain about everything, fancy themselves entitled to whatever they desire, and are just generally annoying.”

“Kids! They are disobedient, disrespectful oafs. Noisy, crazy, sloppy, lazy LOAFERS.”

“They get angry when you ask them to be creative.”

“Parents are more trying to be their kids’ friends and less trying to be their parent.”

Some of the comments she said she wishes she could post on student evaluations:

“I hear the trash company is hiring.”

“I called out sick a couple days just to avoid your son.”

“Just as bad as his sibling. Don’t you know how to raise kids?”

A former student of Munroe’s said he thought “much of what Munroe said was true and that she had a right to voice her opinion . . .” he continued to say “[w]hatever influenced her to say what she did is evidence as to why she simply should not teach.”

Is there anything wrong with her comments if she did not use her full name or identify her students or school in the blog (I’m still wondering how people found out it was her if she did not use any identifying names/places)? I’m sure there are many of you have friends who are teachers who insist on posting quotes from their students on Facebook; is there anything wrong with those comments?

Bullying and why we need to blame the victim

North Dakota State Senator Oley Larsen (R-Minot/District 3) recently testified against SB-2167 which would designate the fourth Wednesday in January as “No Name Calling Day” and make bullying/harassing a criminal offense. The bill can be read in its entirety here: http://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/62-2011/documents/11-0210-01000.pdf. Mr. Larsen is the same Senator who recently introduced SB-2367 that would require ALL divorces in the state (not directly involving allegations of domestic abuse, those cases would not be subject to the bill) to be subject to a mandatory twelve-month waiting period where couples would be required – by law – to take part in ten (10) one-hour marital counseling sessions. That bill can be read in its entirety here: http://www.legis.nd.gov/assembly/62-2011/documents/11-0756-01000.pdf.

Here is what is most troubling about Mr. Larsen’s viewpoints: he is a teacher in the Minot Public School system. Although no one may limit what crazy views Mr. Larsen has, what can be done to protect the students from his outrageous viewpoints? In testifying against the anti-bullying legislation, he said, “[i]f we actually succeed in raising children who never experience any abuse or neglect, they would grow up to be emotional marshmallows . . . frustrated when they don’t get what they want; and unable to people mean or inconsiderate towards them.” He continued by saying, “[t]o develop emotional resilience, children need to be exposed to this type of aggression and learn to deal with it effectively.” Oh, it gets better...

“How do I help victims,” he asks? “By holding them responsible for their problem.” Well done, Senator. You are correct; we need to blame the victims for being bullied. Wow... Mr. Larsen then offers some explanation to why the victims should be blamed. When discussing the topic of school shootings, asks, “are the bullies shooting up schools?” “[A]re they going on violent rampages at their workplace? No. . . . The . . . acts of violence are all committed by people acting as victims. . . . A victim believes he’s totally innocent and blames the bullies for his misery and unfair . . . life. . . . Yet society is blaming the bullies and not the victims.” I cannot imagine why society would blame bullies for pushing victims to the breaking point. Just before he is cut off (due to time restraints pursuant to Rule 306 limiting debate to 10 minutes) Mr. Larsen begins to address the topic of rape victims. We can only imagine what type of hate Mr. Larsen would have continued to spew.

Here is Mr. Larsen’s contact information

(701) 852-9006

olarsen@nd.gov

And here is the audio of his testimony.

And the Hoooooome ooof thhhhhhhe SIOUX

If you’ve ever been to a UND Fighting Sioux hockey game (home or away), you’ve heard it. Rather than the traditional version of the National Anthem, Sioux fans – every game – replace the “brave” with “Sioux.” It is one of the many Sioux hockey  traditions that have been going on for as long as most can remember.

Recently, UND traveled to Colorado Springs, CO to play the Colorado College Tigers in a weekend WCHA series. As is always the case at away games, Sioux fans were well represented in the stands. Some say they out-numbered the home team’s crowd. True to their (our) form, the Sioux fans replaced the “brave” with “Sioux” and the game proceeded.

But following the game, Colorado Springs Gazette writer David Ramsey took exception to what is turning into “National Athem-gate.” Ramsey wrote:

            “. . . they began the night by shouting “home of the SIOUX” instead of “home of the brave.” Guess the actual words of the anthem aren’t quite good enough for North Dakota fans. And, I guess, in the land of free North Dakota fans can sing the anthem any way they want, even if this behavior offends and saddens those who care about our great country and its great anthem.”

(here is the link to the story; the comments are great: http://daveramseysez.freedomblogging.com/2011/01/30/what-do-you-think-of-people-who-end-anthem-with-sioux-instead-of-free/4662/)

DOH-K Mr. Ramsey. “[T]he actual words of the anthem aren’t quite good enough” for us? I assure you that few – if any – of the North Dakota fans think the Anthem’s words “aren’t quite good enough.”

I appreciate Mr. Ramsey’s point of view – however much he is missing the point. Just as Sioux fans (or any fan at a sporting event) can add their team’s name at the end of the Anthem, Ramsey can write whatever he pleases. What are your thoughts on Sioux fans saying “home of the SIOUX” and do you think this is an issue/non-issue?

President Kelley, I want the truth

See what I did there? I threw in a little “A Few Good Men” reference. I am so witty. Ok I’m not, but you get the point. As I’m sure most of you are aware, but for those of you who are not, both the Herald and Forum recently printed articles saying that Summit League commissioner Tom Douple was approached by UND president Robert Kelley and athletic director Brian Faison and they told Douple to publicly say that the Summit League would not consider accepting UND until the nickname fiasco was resolved.

I have multiple issues/thoughts about Douple’s allegations. First, it is no secret that President Kelley has been more than compliant with the SBoHE decision to retire the Fighting Sioux nickname. He has put up little-to-no fight (relatively) to keep the nickname. This is likely due to the fact that he has no real ties to the nickname. Before taking the reigns at UND in 2008, he was previously dean of the College of Health Sciences and professor of medical education and public health at the University of Wyoming so his reason for fighting tooth and nail to keep it are few, if any.

The same can be said about Brian Faison. He took over in 2007, after he was the Special Assistant to the President and Major Gifts Officer at New Mexico State University. Faison and Kelley were seen as “outsiders” when they took their respective positions and that may very well be the case. But that leads me to the most obvious point stemming from Douple’s comments. What did Douple have to gain by saying Kelley and Faison pressured him?

Since the UND/Summit League courtship has ended, UND announced they were accepted into the Big Sky Conference on November 1, 2010. So why would Douple, over two months later, make these statements? I understand things happen behind closed doors that few people learn about. But these allegations have raised some very troubling questions about UND’s leadership. To me, it seems like some shady, back-room shenanigans are taking place that are contrary to what current students and alumni would like to see happen.

What was most troubling to me was Kelley’s response to the allegations. Instead of adamantly denying he said those things, he simply stated that he “[doesn’t] recall ever putting pressure on Tom (Douple) as he implied.” He doesn’t recall? Either he remembers or he doesn’t. We need a more definitive answer.

Cyberbullying/Cyber-harassment/Cyberstalking

Call it what you want to call it, we all know what it is. This has been a prevalent topic in the news throughout 2010. But why does it happen? The answer to this question in everyone's mind probably sounds like this: because people (kids mostly) are extremely mean. But the 'why does this happen' question I am trying to get at is why is cyber-negativewordofyourchoicehere happening at all? What can we be doing in order to prevent a.) people from being so mean to others online and b.) people from taking other's words so personal? Is there anything that can be done to prevent it? I am well aware that we will not be able to censor every mean word someone says. But something needs to change. 

Here you go Kevin

North Dakota House Bill 1212

This bill would prohibit alcohol at college sporting events with minors present. A person may not possess or sell alcohol in the presence of minors at public or nonpublic college sporting events of student athletes.

I posted this on the Book earlier so I apologize if you have already experienced my complaining... 

Here is the text of the bill:

A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 5-01 of the North Dakota CenturyCode, relating to the possession and sale of alcoholic beverages at college sporting events; and to provide a penalty.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF NORTH DAKOTA:

SECTION 1. A new section to chapter 5-01 of the North Dakota Century Code is created and enacted as follows: 

Prohibition of alcohol at college sporting events with minors present - Penalty. A person may not possess or sell an alcoholic beverage in the presence of a minor at a public or nonpublic institution of higher education sporting event of student athletes, whether on

the real property under contiguous ownership or control as the location of the sporting event or on the real property of the institution contiguous to that location. The contiguity of property is not broken due to a highway or other transportation corridor. A violation of this section is a class B misdemeanor.

I feel like I am on an episode of Punk'd right now. I can not fathom a scenario where something like this would pass. Or can I?