Teacher Rant!!!

[Mrs.K]

As for the vid of the kid on the bus, that was enough. Sorry, I really don't care about what was behind slamming the kid into the bus windows and wall, she picked him up and threw him into the wall. No way. There is just nothing you can say to justify that crap. And bus monitors do not have 10 years of education, unless you are counting grade school and high school.

If you look closely you can see that the kid was on top of her. It looks to me like that woman was actually attacked by the boy and I have to agree with Liesje. It speaks for itself that the woman wasn't charged because we all know how fast you can get charged with abuse.

[selzer]

And I wouldn't want my kid on that bus witnessing an adult who is supposed to be in charge, throwing a child into a wall like that.

[selzer]

Originally Posted by Mrs.K

If you look closely you can see that the kid was on top of her. It looks to me like that woman was actually attacked by the boy and I have to agree with Liesje. It speaks for itself that the woman wasn't charged because we all know how fast you can get charged with abuse.

She was fired and the police were investigating the incident. I would expect she will be charged.

[Mrs.K]

Originally Posted by selzer

She was fired and the police were investigating the incident. I would expect she will be charged.

Doesn't look like it.

Prosecutor: No Charges Planned In Bus Video Case CBS Detroit

[onyx'girl]

I've told my kids to question authority...not sure that is right, but I don't want them to blindly follow anyone. Do it with respect but don't just think because someone is in authority they are the be all end all. Unless we truly know someone and that they have no agenda....it is best to go in with eyes wide open.
FWIW, that bus monitor had several "citations" in her career, she was fired from another district and it wasn't discovered until this incident. It was bad from the get go that she was the one trying to control the kid.
The kid may have been calmed down with someone else's influence. Just like canines have calming signals, humans should as well.
As far as that incident, the whole group of children were affected on that bus, and I'm sure more than a few are now in therapy because of it...such as the society we live in. Oh, and one of the kids were the one filming that video with a cell phone. That is how it got out...the kid shared it.

[harmony]

Originally Posted by onyx'girl

I've told my kids to question authority...not sure that is right, but I don't want them to blindly follow anyone. Do it with respect but don't just think because someone is in authority they are the be all end all. Unless we truly know someone and that they have no agenda....it is best to go in with eyes wide open.
FWIW, that bus monitor had several "citations" in her career, she was fired from another district and it wasn't discovered until this incident. It was bad from the get go that she was the one trying to control the kid.
The kid may have been calmed down with someone else's influence. Just like canines have calming signals, humans should as well.
As far as that incident, the whole group of children were affected on that bus, and I'm sure more than a few are now in therapy because of it...such as the society we live in. Oh, and one of the kids were the one filming that video with a cell phone. That is how it got out...the kid shared it.

thumbs up! and could imagine how much our children would/could tell us, and mine do not even ride a bus! I seen a bus driver, drive down these roads and it scared me!! And my mom was one 40yrs ago...

[Liesje]

Originally Posted by selzer

10 years of education? Really? I mean, out here it takes a BS degree and you can get one in 3 if you cram, 4 if you are average, and maybe 5 if you go for a Master's too. There are not a lot of doctors in education save at the university level.

Here, if you are in a special ed program it's a five year undergrad degree because the special ed majors have to do double the amount of teacher aiding and student teaching as the gen ed majors (special ed does gen ed *and* special ed). The masters program takes another three years (you don't really take class full time as a masters student, because you need to be teaching in order to be in the program, you need to have an actual classroom where you can apply and test what you are working on in your classes or you can't proceed). I don't know how it is in other states; this is how it is here (I work for a college in Michigan). You also have to have a teaching certificate with certain endorsements, which you don't just get from having an undergrad degree. You have to take a 542 literacy class within 7 years of your undergrad degree and have to earn credits and CEUs in order to keep your license. Most of the people in the program have additional degrees and/or have taken time between them to teach and gain applied experience in the classroom. So, being a masters level (which is what you really need to be to work with at-risk kids, do IEPs, run special ed programs, etc) can very easy take 10 years plus the continuing CEUs. People who take it seriously aren't "cramming" it in just to get it done. There are teachers out there who actually care about this stuff and aren't there just to boss kids around and shove candy down their throats.

Let's face it, there are a LOT of doctors out there that aren't the cream of the crop, with a whole lot more education than teachers. There are teachers that are should not be teachers. There are bus monitors that shouldn't be bus monitors. There are breeders who should not be breeders. There are veterinarians that should not be veterinarians. There are police officers that should not be police officers.

I can understand giving the benefit of the doubt, and trying to look at the whole of information before tarring and feathering someone. But sometimes, there is just no scenarios that can justify some things. And throwing a 7 year old into a wall is one of them.

No one is saying otherwise, that all doctors and teachers are qualified for their jobs, but I'm not giving anyone "the benefit of the doubt" I'm saying that I don't think it's appropriate to make accusations about child abuse based on a clip on the Internet when I know for a fact (because I have relatives in law enforcement) that the case is a lot more involved than people can see or are willing to believe. You are welcome to your opinion based on the video clip but I would keep such accusations off public forums. The bus lady lost her job and probably should have a long time ago, no one is going to argue with you about that. As far as everything else being so black and white, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[selzer]

I thought about this last night. I wondered if the kid bit her. Bites are painful. When my dad was young, he delivered for a bakery and his boss told him if a dog bites you, wash it out, if a kid bites you, go to the hospital. But I still don't think it justifies throwing a kid into the windows of the bus.

Be that as it may, I think it is perfectly appropriate to discuss a video that was on the news and what we think about it. I think it is not appropriate to give information not public because people in law enforcement are talking about this behind the scenes. So if you know that the person will be charged, will not be charged, or anything else that is not public information, than voicing your opinion about the episode, if it varies from what could be reasonably ascertained from the video itself -- that would be inappropriate.

So, on the Appropriate Bridge, I feel like I am on solid ground, and maybe someone else is walking on tight rope.

[Liesje]

So if you are on a jury you would rule based on what is on the local news and not what is presented in court? Sorry I don't really get it. The woman has not been charged so even if you don't know the details of the case that should be enough to tell you that we don't go charging people based on what is posting online unless that itself is evidentiary. I don't think it's inappropriate to suggest that we can discuss all we want but it doesn't change the actual case and where it's going or not going. Besides the woman was not a teacher so I don't even get the relevance. Are there bad teachers? Oh yeah who hasn't had one.

And I agree with your dad on the biting! Human bites are just asking for a nasty, possibly life threatening infection.

[selzer]

Huh?

Who is on the jury?

I am discussing my opinion on a video that someone brought up. Looking at that video, yes I can make conclusions. They do not amount to a hill of beans because I am not on a jury. If I was selected for jury duty and they asked if I saw the video, I would answer yes. If they asked if it would be a problem for me to disregard what I saw in that video, I would have to say yes. So I wouldn't be selected.

People talk about crimes. They talk about them all the time. People selected for juries are not suppose to read news accounts or discuss the case outside the courtroom, and that would include internet forums.

But we are not on the jury. So I don't get your point.

You are telling me it is inappropriate to discuss this, or have an opinion about this.

I am saying if anything is inappropriate, it is to suggest that you have more information about the case due to your ties with law enforcement, that it is not like the video shows, and that other people should not discuss it. Sorry. You maybe should not disguss information you have that is not in the public domain. I am only disgussing that which was shown on a newscast.

What I saw was enough in my opinion. I think she should be charged with child abuse. Then let the court prove her guilty of child abuse, otherwise she would be innocent of child abuse. But the prosecutor may choose not to file charges for a whole bunch of reasons, and she STILL may have committed a crime, but was not charged.

I wonder if it is in a community's best interest NOT to charge someone with child abuse because if there is litigation down the line about the mistreatment of someone's child, having her convicted of child abuse would place the school system/community in a worse position in their legal stance. Just a quick thought, but I suppose it is possible. I mean if the lady was convicted of child abuse, and then the parent sued the woman and the school system for putting her in charge of the children without a solid background check, or whatever way they may have been negligent in using this individual, then the prosecutor might be pressured not to press charges. If our legal system actually did work like that, that would be criminal.