Last night I was surprised to discover that Channel 8 wanted to cover our parent meeting and I was faced with the prospect of deciding whether or not to allow that. Whenever the news media is involved, you have very little control over how the story is reported. A great example of that is last night Channel 8 promo'd the story on the meeting by talking about our zero tolerance policy and saying some parents were so upset that we we being sued. The meeting wasn't about the zero tolerance policy and to date, we have not been sued by anyone. They also used an image of Faith Academy in their promo, the 2nd time in as many weeks they have confused the two schools.
While I was greeting parents before the meeting the reporter chose to go outside and caught a couple of our students for their comments. I wish the students would have said something other than what they did, but I'm all for freedom of speech. However, normally when the press is on campus an adult is always present when they are interviewed.
The bottom line is that the story may not have accurately portrayed what the meeting was about: should Faith impose tougher drug testing standards on our students. I think it is a fair characterization to say that almost everyone present was supportive of the summer hair testing program. There may have been some in the audience apposed, but if so, they were very quiet.
One parent did raise an interesting point: is Faith prepared to lose a bunch of students because of the policy change? Honestly, it didn't occur to me that large numbers of families would withdraw students because of this. As a parent, I would want to know if my son or daughter had some drug involvement because the earlier intervention occurred, the more likely it would have some impact. I hope and pray that is true for all of our families. But if it isn't, I hope we still proceed. If it is a good idea, fear should not defeat it. If it is a bad idea, I hope more people would speak up and defend their point of view.
There are legitimate arguments to make against this proposed change, just as there are legitimate arguments against our zero tolerance policy. School administrators weigh those arguments carefully as policy is crafted. We try to do what is best for all of the students even though individual circumstances may create some perceptions of unfairness. Our aim is to do no harm, but it also to aggressively pursue those measures that can warn and protect students from involvement with drugs and alcohol.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Great observations about the zero tolerance meeting.
It appears that some angst might be related that the new policy might force us parents to be more actively involved in larger areas of our kid's lives. We may be forced (the thought of it) to know where our kids are going, what they are doing and whom are they doing it with rather than just wishing them well and negotiating the curfew.
The only area of real concern is need to be consistent. There have been some instances related to the behavioral policy that have not been enforced consistently.
I think that the increased diligence on the part of Faith to ensure that our kids are learning in an environment that is as drug-free as possible is excellent. As a parent of a Freshman I am happy that Faith takes the stand it does as it offers a deterrant to kids and an excuse they can easily use to abstain from drug use.
Thank you!
We appreciate the proactive stance and the summer hair testing. If you lose some, you will gain others.
You have no idea what you are doing, if you do the drug testing hundreds of kids will leave the school. The amount of money lost from kids leaving will destroy the school. Its a very bad idea. I know at least 100 kids by name that do drugs and will leave the school upon the drug testing. This is not including the hundreds of kids that I am unaware of. Don't do it if you guys want to keep your jobs!
Post a Comment