Full Version: Teacher in trouble over photo of President Bush
QUOTE(yehoshua @ Oct 6 2004, 11:18 AM)
Difference number two. Dealing with middle school age children is far different then anything else. First off you don't engage the student in a debate. Secondly, if you ignore the first, you don't allow the hormonally challenge to feel justified in voting for Manson. This isn't a 'child' pursue a small minded open eyes bright to the world child. This is a hormonal deranged, pubescent, street punk that is challenging the establishment. I know I was one.
Once again I read your words and you are agreeing with me from what I can tell. You have admitted what she did was wrong, that was my point so I think we can move on.
But I do want to say that your generalization here about teenagers is wrong. Some of them are very responsible and they aren't hormone crazed rebels. It is views like that which really set teenagers off in the first place against adults, and I'm sure that several of our teenager members could back me up on that. I know because I was in the "responsible" category.
QUOTE(Yehoshua)
I've been through the statement a couple of times and do not see where the partisan paraphernalia was put up after the initial complaints by parents. Quote it please
Read this passage:
QUOTE
Ms. Pillai-Diaz is a new Language Arts teacher in the South Brunswick Schools. Recently, the school administration began receiving complaints from students and parents that Ms. Pillai-Diaz was using her position, classroom and teaching time to engage in partisan politics. Students reported that she had made statements which denigrated one party over the other. The conversations included Ms. Pillai-Diaz telling some students who offered opinions contrary to her statements, that she was “glad they were not old enough to vote.” Other comments to students, including such statements as, “you should be ashamed to be a Democrat” have been verified through student interviews.
A classroom bulletin board, normally intended for curriculum-related matters, was set up as what she herself described as a “personal bulletin board.” On the bulletin board she placed a picture of the President, the President’s dog, the Oval Office and several other Presidential artifacts. In addition, she placed a stuffed elephant on a classroom cabinet, which generated student reaction and discussion about partisan politics. Following receipt of complaints from parents, the Assistant Principal met with Ms. Pillai-Diaz and cautioned her not to engage in partisan political discussions in her Language Arts classes. He did not initially ask her to remove the picture of the President. As the issue grew in intensity, the teacher herself chose to remove the stuffed elephant because of student
comments.
A classroom bulletin board, normally intended for curriculum-related matters, was set up as what she herself described as a “personal bulletin board.” On the bulletin board she placed a picture of the President, the President’s dog, the Oval Office and several other Presidential artifacts. In addition, she placed a stuffed elephant on a classroom cabinet, which generated student reaction and discussion about partisan politics. Following receipt of complaints from parents, the Assistant Principal met with Ms. Pillai-Diaz and cautioned her not to engage in partisan political discussions in her Language Arts classes. He did not initially ask her to remove the picture of the President. As the issue grew in intensity, the teacher herself chose to remove the stuffed elephant because of student
comments.
It appears to me that the school is stating that the discussions became an issue before the bulletin board did. However, I can see your point that they aren't precisely clear as to when it happened. I would suggest that it happened as more of an escalation of the discussions than as a big bang (i.e. one day the students walk in and there is this bulletin board). The escalation explanation makes the most logical sense.
However, I don't see what the point in discussing it further serves in this debate.
That being said, regardless of whether you agree with my interpretation of the timeline you have admitted the following:
1. This isn't about a picture of president Bush
2. The teacher acted in an improper manner around her students
3. The parents were within their rights to complain (and indeed you would have done so yourself)
So with that in mind, I'm not sure there is anything else for me to spend my time debating here aside from nitpicking small irrelevant details. It has been established that the teacher was wrong, the parents were justified and what happens to her is really up to the discretion of the school and their policies.
The questions for debate as originally posed aren't even really valid anymore in the first place because they were based on flawed information. So, I think that is it for me on this subject.
QUOTE(Cube Jockey)
But I do want to say that your generalization here about teenagers is wrong. Some of them are very responsible and they aren't hormone crazed rebels. It is views like that which really set teenagers off in the first place against adults, and I'm sure that several of our teenager members could back me up on that. I know because I was in the "responsible" category.
Let is devour what a generalization is:
- The act or an instance of generalizing.
- A principle, statement, or idea having general application.
In general, this statement, principle, idea applies to MIDDLE SCHOOL (not all teenagers, just pre teen to 13). Don't make pull stats on the imbalance of a child during pre teen/early teen years. The it accept that a general rule does apply, there or some who will always break the rule, but there was AT LEAST one in one of the classes that challenged the teacher to the comment, she did not say it off the top of her head to deem all children in her classes inappropriate to vote.
As we have agreed to before, wrong place, wrong time.
QUOTE(Cube Jockey)
The escalation explanation makes the most logical sense.
Agree. It probably started as the picture of the president and was add to over time. Maybe some by other students? Who knows.QUOTE(Cube Jockey)
That being said, regardless of whether you agree with my interpretation of the timeline you have admitted the following:
1. This isn't about a picture of president Bush
2. The teacher acted in an improper manner around her students
3. The parents were within their rights to complain (and indeed you would have done so yourself)
1. This isn't about a picture of president Bush
2. The teacher acted in an improper manner around her students
3. The parents were within their rights to complain (and indeed you would have done so yourself)
I don't have to admit anything. But I have admitted to all of the above in previous responses.
Cube Jockey's post really gives a much needed "other side" argument to this issue. Amazing how the school's viewpoint about an overly political teacher who completely acted unprofessionally didn't grab the headlines like the initial report of her firing. 
Perhaps that is due to the fact that her making the headlines is more newsworthy than actually hearing the other side of the debate. To me, it sounds as if the administration tried to get her to cool it a bit and she just didn't "get it" Administrators are nine times out of ten, former teachers themselves, and completely understand how things can be misconstrued or made-up on the part of students. Putting the president's picture up on the wall next to the other presidents is one thing-building a shrine to the current incumbent is quite another. Her statements were unprofessional and she should've been at a minimum-reprimanded. 
Perhaps that is due to the fact that her making the headlines is more newsworthy than actually hearing the other side of the debate. To me, it sounds as if the administration tried to get her to cool it a bit and she just didn't "get it" Administrators are nine times out of ten, former teachers themselves, and completely understand how things can be misconstrued or made-up on the part of students. Putting the president's picture up on the wall next to the other presidents is one thing-building a shrine to the current incumbent is quite another. Her statements were unprofessional and she should've been at a minimum-reprimanded.
QUOTE(nebraska29 @ Oct 9 2004, 01:39 AM)
[ Her statements were unprofessional and she should've been at a minimum-reprimanded.
Here’s a story about the incident from USA Today.
I have not seen an update on this story. I don’t know if Ms Pillai-Diaz was fired or not. Regardless of your thinking on this issue, she refused a direct order from a superior. That’s insubordination—something someone can be fired for. Discipline for her could range from termination, to suspension, to being returned to a probationary contract, to verbal reprimand to written reprimand. The insubordination clause is most likely in her written contract.
I am looking a this as a former member of the grievance committee for a local teacher's union. Her union will probably counsel her to back off and try to minimize disciplinary action.
QUOTE
He said, 'If you care about your job, you'll take the picture down,' " she [Pillai-Diaz] said.
Pillai-Diaz told the assistant principal to take the picture down himself. Then she sought Principal Jim Warfel, who gave her an upbraiding.
Pillai-Diaz told the assistant principal to take the picture down himself. Then she sought Principal Jim Warfel, who gave her an upbraiding.
http://www.thnt.com/thnt/story/0,21282,1068611,00.html
QUOTE
I am looking a this as a former member of the grievance committee for a local teacher's union. Her union will probably counsel her to back off and try to minimize disciplinary action.
As far as I undertand it, she's a veteran teacher in terms of experience, but a probtionary one since she may have switched districts. If that's the case, the school district can fire her for any reason and is not obligated to give her a hearing or anything like that. If she isn't tenured, stick a fork in her-she's done!.
As a side topic, a few people don't like the concept of tenure, but all it really does is make the school think long and hard about whether or not they want to get rid of you for light and transient reasons. Let this incident be a lesson to anti-tenure people on the right.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.