2nd Graders Having Sex In Class?

[prospectmom]

the first incident involved several students who undressed, at least partially, while acting disruptively in the classroom," the letter read, according to KRON. "The second incident concerned two students who engaged in sexually explicit behavior, also in the classroom."

Ok these are the facts reported to parents and caregivers, not alot of clear facts , alot could be read into it if you have a mind to . I really could see the first incident happening and really it has nothing to do with sex . Kids are silly at times and that age it is easy to follow with out thinking what is happening.

The second incident dosen't say anything about cloths being off so that is supposed. I feel it could have an equally logical answer and we shouldn't run off and believe the worst.

[Backroads]

As a person who has taught 1st grade, I'm frowning more at the teacher. What was happening that allowed the situation to get as far as it did?

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

As a person who has taught 1st grade, I'm frowning more at the teacher. What was happening that allowed the situation to get as far as it did?

Exactly. Where could the teacher be in the classroom where two children engaging in sex acts would escape his attention. One anomoly I can understand, two is a pattern. Children stripped naked and then in a separate incident children performed sex acts on each other. C'mon, people, use your heads!

[prospectmom]

Quote:

the [b]first incident[/B] involved several students who undressed, at least partially, while acting disruptively in the classroom," the letter read, according to KRON. "The second incident concerned two students who engaged in sexually explicit behavior, also in the classroom."

The report says nothing about sex acts... why would you even go there and assume that I think it says something. I respectfully see this so differently than you. Jumping to conclusions like this has caused alot of misery to innocent people. Remember the over zealous cop who accused a whole church congregation of sexually abusing children ...... In the in it was totally false and these good people were put through the ringer because someone jumped to conclusions. I think to pass judgement on this is premature givin the lack of clear facts.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I think that wanting to be fair and not jumping to conclusions, even conclusions that are inevitable, would fly right out the window if it were your child in that class. I know I would pull mine immediately based on just the facts at hand.

[Suzie]

I would like to interview the teacher.

If one child is acting this way we can think of many factors but the way the article is written indicates that several kids were behaving this way. There is much more to this story than we are being told.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I would like to interview the teacher.

If one child is acting this way we can think of many factors but the way the article is written indicates that several kids were behaving this way. There is much more to this story than we are being told.

Oh, I'm sure he's being interviewed and made to explain his actions. I can't believe so many are willing to believe that 2nd graders spontaneously get naked and perform these acts without adult direction. When I was in 2nd grade paste was good to eat, girls had cooties and were not to be touched, and getting naked was something I did at home before taking a bath.

I don't think kids have really changed all that much since then.

[Soulsearcher]

Oh, I'm sure he's being interviewed and made to explain his actions. I can't believe so many are willing to believe that 2nd graders spontaneously get naked and perform these acts without adult direction. When I was in 2nd grade paste was good to eat, girls had cooties and were not to be touched, and getting naked was something I did at home before taking a bath.

I don't think kids have really changed all that much since then.

Think you might be surprised.......

[Backroads]

I've dealt with first graders who knew pretty much everything.

[Guest]

I have a 2nd grader and a 4th grader. I can't imagine any of them or their friends doing something like this. I'm with SaintMichael on this one. I believe that the difference is in the parenting - not the "era".

[Wingnut]

I can't believe so many are willing to believe that 2nd graders spontaneously get naked and perform these acts without adult direction.

I'm not sure anyone thinks it was spontaneous. You seem to be putting all the blame and focus on the teacher, though, when many here are suggesting this is not a problem with the educator, but rather with the parents.

I have a 2nd grader and a 4th grader. I can't imagine any of them or their friends doing something like this. I'm with SaintMichael on this one. I believe that the difference is in the parenting - not the "era".

[Dravin]

I'm not sure anyone thinks it was spontaneous. You seem to be putting all the blame and focus on the teacher, though, when many here are suggesting this is not a problem with the educator, but rather with the parents.

Heck it's not even that, it's suggesting we don't know which one it is, the parents or the teacher, and to what extent and to what nature each is responsible (if at all as others besides the teacher and parents have access and influence on children).

Edited January 26, 2011 by Dravin

[Backroads]

Speaking from [former] teacher perspective...

The teacher has a responsiblity to be in charge of his/her classroom at all times. Chaos happens, but getting to his level is shocking and suggests SOMETHING was not happening on the teacher's part.

However, teachers are trained in classroom/education psychology, instructional methods, subject knowledge... and very little in how to do the parent's job of raising kids. Yes, we all get to take a few classes on social skill instruction, but teachers are incapable of teaching the children the ethics and behaviors they need from early on in life. IT IS NOT THE TEACHER'S JOB TO RAISE THE KIDS!

The teacher should be reprimanded for letting it get as far as it did, but something iffy is going on at home.

[Dravin]

The teacher has a responsiblity to be in charge of his/her classroom at all times. Chaos happens, but getting to his level is shocking and suggests SOMETHING was not happening on the teacher's part.

Baring some extraordinary/Rube Goldberg scenarios chances are the teacher dropped the ball somehow. That said it isn't a given that the way he dropped the ball was in directing the events.

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Baring some extraordinary/Rube Goldberg scenarios chances are the teacher dropped the ball somehow. That said it isn't a given that the way he dropped the ball was in directing the events.

I'm sorry. I don't see how this was not at his direction. I think in terms of what fits more logically and what is more of a stretch. I have a cop's intuition for finding the truth because truth has a way of making itself known because the lies told to conceal it only serve to throw it into sharp relief for those who have an eye for it. Truth is not coherced. It fits naturally and doesn't need to be forced into place. Like a rubber band, it retains its correct shape when it isn't stretched.

Every one of my posts has been designed to shed light on the more plausible explanation, that the teacher was well aware of what was going on and encouraged it. It disturbs me that so many are willing to cling to an explanation that defies logic and doesn't fit naturally; that the teacher may have read a magazine or just stepped out of the room for a moment and (whoops!) the kids took that as an opportunity to fling off their clothes and perform sex acts on each other.

Why is it that so many are unwilling to see the obvious? It might be because most teachers are wonderful, committed, and caring human beings who can be trusted with our children and we don't want to believe one of them would do something like this. It might be a number of reasons. It's a foible of human nature to shape our vision of the truth according to host of pre-existing biases, experiences, beliefs, blindnesses, and over all world views. It takes discipline to commit oneself to the truth, wherever that may lead them, and discard the most cherished of beliefs when they fail to measure up to the iron standard. That's what I'm trying to get people here to do. It means gravitating to what is probable, rather than what we'd like to believe.

[selek]

To be perfectly blunt (something I'm good at)- whether this behavior was learned at home or not, the teacher is responsible for allowing it to take place in his class room.

While those kids are in his class room, he's responsible for their safety, their conduct, and their well-being- just as a military commander is responsible for the conduct of his men.

The bottom line is that the teacher is either complicit or incompetent- there's no third choice.

In either case, he should be removed from his position rather than place the safety and welfare of a child at risk again.

Just for the sake of argument, how many of you would be defending the teacher's obliviousness had there been an adult involved in the in-class incident?

Edited January 27, 2011 by selek
Clarity

[Dravin]

So why do you insist on gravitating on what you'd like to believe?

We have two positions:

1. I was not there. The article contains scant information. I do not know exactly what happened.

2. I was not there. The article contains scant information. It is possible that this happened so I am going to insists it is what happened.

Which position is insisting on gravitating on what you'd like to believe?

You do realize my position is not that he did not orchestrate what took place but that I do not know if he did or he didn't? And are you seriously going to insist that I do know what happened? You don't seem to get this distinction (a rather large and important one) which demonstrates a rather embarrassing lack of reading comprehension on your part.

The bottom line is that the teacher is either complicit or incompetent- there's no third choice.

Actually if you ask St. Michael incompetent is not a choice. He must be complicit because that's what his hunch tells him.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Dravin

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

Selek, another question that I've been asking is, if a child of yours was in that classroom, would you wait for confirmation that something is amiss before pulling him out? Nobody seems to want to answer that question because the answer is a sure indicator of the truth. Nobody wants to subject their own children to a pet theory that a foul situation might have an innocent explanation.

[selek]

Selek, another question that I've been asking is, if a child of yours was in that classroom, would you wait for confirmation that something is amiss before pulling him out? Nobody seems to want to answer that question because the answer is a sure indicator of the truth. Nobody wants to subject their own children to a pet theory that a foul situation might have an innocent explanation.

I'm the father of four daughters.....

.....if it were my little girl, the question would be when (if) the teacher got out of traction, rather than the classroom.

Edited January 27, 2011 by selek

[Dravin]

Selek, another question that I've been asking is, if a child of yours was in that classroom, would you wait for confirmation that something is amiss before pulling him out? Nobody seems to want to answer that question because the answer is a sure indicator of the truth.

No it isn't. If my Mom had discovered one of my teachers was a homosexual she probably would have pulled me out of my class. It would have been an emotional reaction lacking a logical basis, because "he's a homosexual that means he's a paedophile" is not a logical argument.

People don't want to answer the question because you'll illogically use it as proof for your hunch. If somebody said they would remove their child because they feel there are high odds the teacher is either incompetent or complicit you'd haul it out as proof that see! He's complicit or you'd leave him in the class! It's like avoiding the question from an Anti about if Satan and Christ are brothers because you know he's just waiting to twist what you say to fit his own agenda regardless of what actually comes out of your mouth.

For the record (prepare to twist!) I might pull my child out but I'd have to do additional research because a short on-line article is insufficient as evidence to calculate the risks (note that's risk not certainties) involved.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Dravin

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

For the record (prepare to twist!) I might pull my child out but I'd have to do additional research because a short on-line article is insufficient as evidence to calculate the risks (note that's risk not certainties) involved.

It may be that parents got more truth from a newspaper article than they did from the letter they received from the school district expressing regret but white washing the entire incident of scandel. They chalked it up to inattentativeness and child curiosity. Give me a break!

[Dravin]

It may be that parents got more truth from a newspaper article than they did from the letter they received from the school district expressing regret but white washing the entire incident of scandel. They chalked it up to inattentativeness and child curiosity. Give me a break!

And it may be that they didn't. Or it may be that you are secretly a Scientologist posing as a Catholic. There are a lot of maybes. The only one insisting that his personal favorite maybe must be the truth absent any evidence here is you. And I'll give you a break when you get this whole logic and evidences thing figured out. Oh and figure out the difference between something being possible, being probable, and being what actually happened.

As far as which is more accurate (letter or the article), there is no evidence (that we have) either way. And you do realize that the article reports that the teacher is not currently being accused of orchestrating or participating in the behavior? Though they do report the opinions of those who feel the teacher is responsible via a failure to properly control the class. The paper is not your friend in this.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Dravin

[Wingnut]

if a child of yours was in that classroom, would you wait for confirmation that something is amiss before pulling him out?

I would wait to find out what actually happened. I would wait to see what the investigation turned up.

(1) Practically speaking, if all parents of children in that class reacted so knee-jerkily as you have, there would no longer be a class, and other teachers would be overburdened. Large class sizes certainly don't help with learning.

(2) Why should I pull my child out? Shouldn't the offending children be the ones pulled out? Expelled, even? My child has done nothing wrong, and doesn't deserve to have her routine and pattern completely disrupted.

(3) I'm wary of making false accusations, especially of this magnitude. I don't know that the teacher was at fault. I'm not going to act as if he is, until I know.

Edited January 27, 2011 by Wingnut

[Saintmichaeldefendthem1]

I would wait to find out what actually happened. I would wait to see what the investigation turned up.

(1) Practically speaking, if all parents of children in that class reacted so knee-jerkily as you have, there would no longer be a class, and other teachers would be overburdened. Large class sizes certainly don't help with learning.

(2) Why should I pull my child out? Shouldn't the offending children be the ones pulled out? Expelled, even? My child has done nothing wrong, and doesn't deserve to have her routine and pattern completely disrupted.

(3) I'm wary of making false accusations, especially of this magnitude. I don't know that the teacher was at fault. I'm not going to act as if he is, until I know.

Well then. There's the opinion of one parent. I might pull my child out immediately, but I might also relent. If I truly felt this was led by the teacher, then the teacher's removal from that class solves that problem forthright. Either way, my child gets counseling so he knows the behavior he witnessed is entirely inappropriate.

[MarginOfError]

I'm sorry. I don't see how this was not at his direction. I think in terms of what fits more logically and what is more of a stretch. I have a cop's intuition for finding the truth because truth has a way of making itself known because the lies told to conceal it only serve to throw it into sharp relief for those who have an eye for it. Truth is not coherced. It fits naturally and doesn't need to be forced into place. Like a rubber band, it retains its correct shape when it isn't stretched.

Every one of my posts has been designed to shed light on the more plausible explanation, that the teacher was well aware of what was going on and encouraged it. It disturbs me that so many are willing to cling to an explanation that defies logic and doesn't fit naturally;

This is where you're off base. No one is clinging to any explanation but you. Again, you are the only person clinging to any explanation. The rest of us are saying, "let's wait to see what the investigation turns up."

For crying out loud, I'm glad we don't take your approach in the courtroom. We'd have executed 75% of the prison system's inmates without a trial!

To be perfectly blunt (something I'm good at)- whether this behavior was learned at home or not, the teacher is responsible for allowing it to take place in his class room.

While those kids are in his class room, he's responsible for their safety, their conduct, and their well-being- just as a military commander is responsible for the conduct of his men.

The bottom line is that the teacher is either complicit or incompetent- there's no third choice.

In either case, he should be removed from his position rather than place the safety and welfare of a child at risk again.

And he was removed. He was suspended pending further investigation. In other words, they said, "we'll remove him from the situation in case he is contributing to the problem, that way the students aren't exposed to risk. But we also acknowledge that an investigation may show than his actions aren't putting the students at risk, so we're still open to reinstating him if the results of the investigation show that it is safe to do so."