There are some parents out there upon reading this who will be upset. I’m guessing this parody is about you.The parents that can laugh at this knows better. They know they packed a truly healthy lunch for their child and not lunchables.. That their child did their homework because they bothered to talk to their child about their day and made sure it was done. That in those 3.7 hours after school and before putting them to bed at an appropriate time they spent time after homework, talking, playing and, connecting to them. They know the value in helping to educate and nurture their own children in and out of school. They’re laughing because they know unfortunately the parent that would be upset about this parody is out there and neglects to do these things for their own child. Yes they also know that type of parent does suck.
Thank you, “A Reader”, for a thoughtful and considerate comment.Your observation raises two important questions.First, given that such parents (those who “suck”) are private citizens who have every right to raise their children as they see fit, as long as it is within the law, must we accept the consequences that their actions have on the performance of their children and, consequently, the school system?Second, is there anything that the school system, with limited resources, can do to compensate for their “neglect” without ultimately diverting resources from, and thus penalizing, the families and students who are actively involved in their children’s education?It is not enough to invoke school choice as the option. In many cases there are economic factors at play that are beyond the ability of families to control even though they provide responsible parenting.Ultimately it comes down to the extent to which the school is expected to operate “in loco parentis” , beyond the traditionally accepted role of providing education rather than some expectation of a full service source of surrogate parenting.The recent incident with the Guidance Counselors at SMHS is a case in point. Over the last 40 years the expectation for those in this role has been morphed from being a resource officer to be consulted by students and parents as a source of student assessment and advice. It has become expected to serve as some kind of post-secondary education placement service assuming responsibility for the initiative and judgment once expected of the student and parents. As a result they become a whipping boy for consequences ultimately beyond their control.
Hey, Father Obanion, write in English. Is that [Spanish] or old fashioned Catholic under "Catherine the not so Great"? What does it mean? Knowing her my guess is that it means " my way or the highway" or " kiss my @$$ [---]".Is it true that Ms. Nikolla wants to get a Charter amendment to require all the members of the School Committee to vote in favor of removal in order to fire a Superintendent?(COMMENT EDITED FOR CONTENT}
It's Latin for "It's my way or the highway". I don't know anything about a planned Charter amendment.
"I'm for a state takeover" Brent spent the EHS subcommittee meeting tonight cozying up to current SC members. Looks like he really wants to run for SC. (Note: Big Mac wasn't there.) Meanwhile Queen Cathy told Buzz that, while he should have given her a heads up on the unemployment costs, he was her favorite superintendent.
Do reptiles mate in the spring?
Slick, when did Kathy say that Buzz was her favorite? Was this in the past, or has he returned despite claims by others that his medical leave was permanent?[comment edited for content]
To Clara Mean:I am investigating the incident that you allege. I feel that any further discussion of it as this point would be inappropriate.
Buzz was at the EHS meeting last night.
Thank you for looking into the possible issue at [-], but maybe the SPD and the Schhool District leadership should be looking into it more. Maybe the District leaders were too concerned about Blog parodies at the time?[Comment edited for content]
I am curious why you are so intent on making an issue of this now. The school administration, the SPD and others are looking into this matter. There are ramifications that would damage an individual’s reputation severely and, from what I can determine, unjustifiably. There are also political implications that some would like to think that they would benefit from.At present my research indicates that the real issue is how this matter has been handled by the Administration. The facts that I have uncovered are especially interesting insofar as how they parallel a previous situation.If you have facts of which you feel I may be unaware and that you can verify, please contact me at email@example.com . Your confidentiality will be respected.
Why wasn't Big Mac there? They sent the guy with probable Alzheimer's.
All comments subject to moderation. All commenters must use their own name or a screen name. No comments labelled as "Anonymous" will be published. To use your name or a screen name select "Name/URL" from the drop down menu. Insert you name in the "Name" space and leave the "URL" space blank.