- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
As a teacher, you're inevitably going to be drawn into conflict. That's not to say that you should actively seek it out, but you cannot afford to ignore it, avoid it, or pretend it doesn't exist. Nor can you allow a student to continue doing something that you consider to be dangerous, disruptive, or which the school has made it known that it wishes to see come to an end, just because you're afraid that the kid will claim his rights have been trampled on.
In the scenario I have outlined, the school has made it known that energy drinks and anything associated with them are not permitted in the school. This isn't just something that they've written down on a sheet of paper that is currently in a pile in the copy room, waiting to be distributed to everyone. The students have been told that energy drinks are banned in the school - they are not sold in the canteen (if they ever were to begin with), and students who are caught with them will be asked to throw them out.
These are the first three things that I learned about how to be a teacher before I got into a classroom:
1) Never, ever be alone with a student.
2) Never, ever let emotion dictate your course of action.
3) Never, ever push a political opinion onto a student.
The third is the most important. For the sake of argument, let's just pretend that voting is and always has been compulsory in America, the way it is here (hear me out - there's a reason why I'm asking you to do this; you'll see it in a moment). Now, you have an eighth-grade civics class, and you are trying to teach them the difference between Republicans and Democrats.
This is an example of what you can say:
This, on the other hand, is what you cannot say:
The reason for this is because by the time those eighth-graders turn eighteen, there might be another election where same-sex marriage is one of the key issues. In this version of America, where voting is compulsory, if you have taught them that one party is good because they support it and the other party is bad because they do not, then you're influencing the vote with your own politics. Even if you only influence one student.
Now, you can offer your political opinion, particularly if you want to discuss an issue like same-sex marriage, but generally speaking, you're better off saying nothing unless a student asks you a direct question. If you do choose to do it, then you have to make it clear that this is your opinion, and not a fact.
That's really why I'm questioning this version of events where the teacher started shouting at a student because he himself did not agree with gun ownership. Teachers are instrumental in the development of young minds - many students spend more time with their teachers than they do with their parents, particualrly in households where both parents work. We're keenly aware of this, as it's something that has been drummed into us since a time before we even got into a classroom for the first time.
If I felt that the student's shirt was questionable under the school dress code, then I probably would have approached him. But I would also have the sense to approach him before school starts if I could. A big part of the reactions in this case come down to the way the teacher approached him late in the day; he'd been fine until then, and then one teacher approached him at lunch, and that's where the trouble started.
In approaching him, I'd make it pretty clear that I felt the shirt was questionable under the dress code, and that the responsible thing to do would be to err on the side of caution. If I can think that, then other teacher might think it, too. I'd make it pretty clear up-front that this has nothing to do with my views on gun ownership, just that it's an issue to do with the dress code, and that there may be people out there who can misinterpret the message he wants to make.
If he resists, I'd appeal to his sense of knowing and respecting guns - he should know and respect the issues that come with them as well, and that maybe he should consider the idea that making a statement in support of gun ownership at school isn't the most appropriate way to make that statement.
Finally, it would be important to bear in mind that he is fourteen. He's concerned about an issue that he cares deeply about, but he hasn't necessarily thought the idea all the way though. So I'd try and get him to consider that there are people out there who feel just as strongly about the issue as he does, with the difference being that he holds an opposing position. They might see his actions as something that they can use to further their own cause. They could claim that "The NRA is getting kids to support gun ownership in schools!", and regardless of whether or not that is actually true, he shouldn't give them the opportunity to say it, which weakens their cause and strengthens his own.
If he still resists after all of that - particularly if he wants to make a political issue out of it by bringing up his rights - then I'd make it clear that if he wants to exercise his rights, then he needs to shoulder the responsibilities that come with them. If he cannot accept that responsibility, then he should not exercise that right to begin with, or choose another way to exercise it, one that has responsibilities that he can handle.
They've probably sought legal advice of their own, and have decided to remain silent. There is no need for them to be drawn into a conflict with the kid that will only make headlines and further enable him. No, this will go behind closed doors. I very much doubt anything will come of it - legal costs would build up at such a rate that the kid and his family would reach a point of diminishing returns, where any damages paid out just go to cover the costs, making the whole affair an expensive waste of time. That's probably why the family went to the media: a quick settlement is the only way they'd get anything out of it, if that. There's a case here where the school might want to remove the kid from school, out of concerns that any student who disagrees with a teacher will simply launch legal action.
