Oh boy, this is a humdinger. A dumb policy combines with a dumb implementer. I assume the policy comes for the Board; the implementation was by the principal.
A sixth-grader reported something to his principal as he should, but he waited to do so. One report says until after a test, another said because of bullying concerns. Either way, he reported the infraction and was then punished for the delay.
I assume that this was not retaliation on the part of the principal but a "zero tolerance" policy meaning treat all transgressions the same way, whether a 1 degree deviation or the full 180. So because the student delayed reporting the wrongdoing, he was treated as if he were the wrongdoer.
This is wrong.The underlying offense was and is serious. The original evil-doer deserved counseling and, if ill-intent was indeed evident, punishment. However, the reporter did the right thing, albeit tardily. He should have been reminded of the need for speed, possibly even given a last-chance warning type of advise, but not punished and certainly not given the same sanction as the primary miscreant.
The principal here was wrong, the policy was wrong and the administration's hiding behind the policy is cowardly. I feel sorry for the young man and for how he feels. It is a terrible message to send. Why should you see something, say something if you are to be punished for doing so? Why indeed?
**Please leave comments and queries below.**
Further Reading
No comments :
Post a Comment