Pic Of Sleeping Sub Nets Student Suspension

View Comments (22)

• The questions of some of the people there are appropriate. He was using the camera not the “telecommunication” part of the phone.....
  *******************
  Depends on the stated classroom policy. If it said, "Telecommunication by cell phone is not permitted during class hours, but it's okay to take pictures of people during class, with or without their consent," then you'd have a point.
  Unfortunately, the article doesn't give us enough information to decide whether the punishment was appropriate in this situation. And, while it might feel good to whip out snap judgments based on assumptions and wishful thinking, it's not terribly productive or honest.

  • The article says "using cell phones" is not permitted in class. So I suppose using the camera on a cell phone still counts. That doesn't answer the question of whether the photo would be acceptable if taken with a camera instead. My guess is no, they would still have come down on the kid because he posted it "on a social website" read facebook, and it embarrassed the district. The article also says it isn't clear if the phot was taken during class time. Well the no cell phonme provision only applies in class. So if he took the picture outside of class, why was he suspended? Lots of loose ends on this story, and discippline for breaking the rules is ok, but I still think suspension was excessive.

    • The article says: "A student may possess a telecommunication device while on school premises, but the use of a telecommunication device is not permitted during the school day."
      That leaves a lot of questions unanswered. The telecommunication part of the cellphone was not in used as a cellphone this days can be/is more than just the "telecommunication" part of it. Cellphones cannot really be called cellphones anymore, they are microcomputers with cellphone capabilities. He didn't use the cell as a telecommunication device, he used it as a camera. A good lawyer can destroy the school rules as vague at the very least.

      Like you stated, had it just been a camera only and not part of a device that has telecommunication capabilities, the school would have still punished him for using an electronic device during school hours. Like you stated, no where did it say that they were in class when the photo was taken, however if the teacher was asleep during the class time, then that tells me that the child was in the right to document that THEY WEREN'T officially in class as the teacher was not doing his job (which is to educate during the designated class hours). If during the designated class hours, the teacher was not teaching but sleeping they cannot in good conscience tell me that they were "in class". Again a good lawyer can truly destroy the school.

      With all of that said, again like you stated, there are a lot of good questions posted there that I suppose shall remain unanswered and until they are I like you believe this was indeed excessive and a lawyer should get involved.

• The questions of some of the people there are appropriate. He was using the camera not the "telecommunication" part of the phone. If it had been a digital or a poloroid or whatever camera would he had still been suspended? Were people advised that teachers were not doing their jobs before this? Was he or someone else ignored or punished and therefore the kid felt it proper to provide evidence? If the phone calculator was used but no one was calling him or viceversa he wouuld still be suspended? These people are extremely pathetic.

• Mustang Public Schools officials said a ninth-grader snapped a photo of a snoozing substitute with a cellphone last Friday at Mustang Mid-High School.
  The student was later suspended
  However, officials said, "A student may possess a telecommunication device while on school premises, but the use of a telecommunication device is not permitted during the school day."

  I actually got the story from the school district officials, not the parents.

  • So the schools argument is that if the student had taken the picture with a regular digital camera, it would have been okay?

    Sounds like a C.Y.A. to me.

• I know it is common in the school districts where I live for cell phone use to be verboten. I just don’t think the child should have been suspended for that particular offense. And I suspect that a big part of the suspension was based on the fact that the picture was posted and the school district was embarassed. As for the substitute, I don’t know the procedure in Oklahoma schools, but in our area, they would simply never call him back to offer him a job. Here, all the subs are on a big list, and when the school finds out that they are going to be short a teacher, they start calling from the list. They call teachers they are familiar with, or have used before successfully first. He’s likely just out of a job.
  *****************
  Exactly. So there's really no reason, except wishful thinking, for you to think the school went especially hard on the kid just because they were "embarrassed." It's the teacher, not the school, that should be embarrassed (assuming it was an ordinary "snooze," and not a medical situation).

  YOu might not agree that suspending the kid was appropriate---but again, we didn't get the whole story. We got the parents' account of what their kid told them ABOUT the incident. And kids have a way of downplaying their own actions when they get into hot water.

  • >> kids have a way of downplaying their own actions when they get into hot water. <<
    And it seems, so do school districts.

    • >> kids have a way of downplaying their own actions when they get into hot water. <<
      And it seems, so do school districts.
      ***************
      How could it "seem" that way, when the school district has made no comment, other than that it's looking into the situation?

• Boy, a lot of blind assumptions are flying around this morning.

  First, what makes you so sure that the substitute was a union employee? That's surely not the case where I live.

  Second, as usual, you're all jumping to conclusions based on what the kid's parents (who weren't there, and didn't witness the incident) had to say about it. That's not news----it's secondhand gossip.

  Third, how do you know the substitute teacher was "protected," by the teachers' union or otherwise? We weren't given any information about the follow-up here.

  Fourth, is there a written policy that kids may not take pictures (especially of those who haven't given permission) during class time? Unless you know that there isn't, you can't honestly condemn them for punishing his behavior here.

  I've seen the same pattern here numerous times, in response to these formulaic "ain't it awful the way these mean teachers treat kids nowdays?" blurbs. In almost all cases, the article is built around the angry reaction of the parents, based on what their little darling told them about the incident. And, in ALL cases, you didn't wait around to hear the school's side of it before jumping in to bitch about public education and teachers' unions.

  As they say in France; "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose......"

  • School officials say cell phones are allowed on school grounds, but can't be used during class.

    The names of the student and the substitute teacher under investigation weren't released.

    Read more: http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/article/Okla-student-suspended-for-sleeping-teacher-photo-2716193.php#ixzz1kweuXa8g

    So here we see that taking a picture is not what merited the suspension, USING a telecommunications device is what merited the suspension. The stated reason anyway.

    The fact this sub is apparently still at his desk and getting paid good money to sleep is an indication that he's a unionist.

    I have no idea what the child's parents said, other than they support the policy but decry the punishment as too harsh. Therefore, what is in print is the information I'm going on, that and a healthy dose of intelligent understanding of the real world.
    If the school was trying to be fair, the sub would be suspended as well as the student. But since the school apparently doesn't have a policy regarding teachers and/or subs sleeping at their desks then this lazy jerk-wad will probably not be disciplined in any way, shape, or form.

    • I know it is common in the school districts where I live for cell phone use to be verboten. I just don't think the child should have been suspended for that particular offense. And I suspect that a big part of the suspension was based on the fact that the picture was posted and the school district was embarassed. As for the substitute, I don't know the procedure in Oklahoma schools, but in our area, they would simply never call him back to offer him a job. Here, all the subs are on a big list, and when the school finds out that they are going to be short a teacher, they start calling from the list. They call teachers they are familiar with, or have used before successfully first. He's likely just out of a job.

• The teacher was just a little sleepy after smoking a joint and having sex with an under aged student during lunch....And the teacher will get to keep the job since his defense lawyer will be provided by the N.E.A.

  • See above response.

  • I guess that oxycotin contenental breakfast he had that morning in the teacher's lounge finally kicked in. It's a UNION perk they give all the teachers so they can deal with the stress. Give that student his diploma now since he'll never further his education there.

    • The Oxycontinental! A classic that has been waiting for someone to say it!

• No doubt this pathetic excuse of an educator is the recipient of this country's sorry-ass public educational system---and the protection of teachers' unions. Too bad parents don't raise their voices and insist their children get school vouchers. Change will only come when it's demanded.

  • Oklahoma. Right to work state for several years now.

• Maybe it would have been better if the student had super-glued the teacher's head to his desk.

  • it probably would've been allowed by school policy.

    and just who made up the policy?

    These are the people "educating" our youth.
    friggin' morons.
    I say give all the youngsters cell cams and stage a protest. I'd like to see the admin, try and suspend the entire student body.

• School officials said they "will take appropriate follow-up action as this type of behavior by staff is not tolerated."

  They'll hide under their desks until this blows over.

  • "Why Janey Can't Read" by Teri Newman
    Sponsored for book burning by union teachers nationwide.