News-Record.com

Children need to be educated for this at home and know when to speak to their parents. Children need to be educated on the proper use of the internet. You can't monitor every teacher's e-mail, phone conversations. Think how that would go over.

Background checks should be nationwide but still others can slip through the cracks.

The first step in Guilford County was getting rid of Sedexho who hired their own subcontractors and did their own background checks. By the time many of these subcontractor background checks came back, these janitors had been in our elementary schools. All of a sudden they were gone. Reasons given on one that I know of was he had a "record with involving children." Teachers say he used to sit and watch the kids.

Let's hope GCS will be ever diligent in their background checks. It is worth the cost.

Jennifer,

Where are you going to find two adults for every room when we can't oftentimes find one adult to relieve us to use the bathroom. Remember TAs were cut not added.

There is a class called, "Protecting God's Children" that is a requirement in many private schools in order to have ANY contact with children. All parents that volunteer, ALL teachers, janitors, clerical personnel, etc. must take the course. It is a course concerning this very topic.

Of course in Guilford County schools, the priority is diversity, so such a program would never warrant any attention, not to mention that it has the word "God" in the title.

Now if it was called, "Protecting Minority children", or "Protecting Colored Children" or "Protecting Deena's Children", then I'm sure it would be mandatory for all.

While Diversity remains the school system's #1 priority, other areas will just keep getting lost...like education and safety...

It's too bad that's the real truth.

The Real Truth:

The real truth is there are perverts out there. Money would be better spent on "Protecting God's Children" than many of the other wasted programs. We could keep the SROs in school to taze the child predators.

This is unrelated to the thread topic, possibly the Chalkboard editors could start a new strand. Let me just prepare readers to have their barf bags standing by....

I just read that Dr. Terry Grier hired a new Chief Academic Officer. His name is Dr. "Mack" McCary.

At first glance he looks well equipped for the job with his Harvard/Yale degrees, but just one simple "Google" gets you the history of his recent FIRING from his last job as Superintendent of a teeny, weeny 7 school district.

Many reasons were cited for his firing, among them: "Lack of Leadership"..."Failure to follow board instructions"..."Lack of rapport with parents"...the list goes on...

Why oh why does Guilford county's children get the bottom of the barrel when it comes to those that lead this system? What have they done to deserve such faulty leadership? Why would Grier hire a man with such an abominable past? Is this a joke? We need MORE leadership in our school system! NOT a man that was just fired for lacking it! We need MORE rapport with our parents and students! NOT a man that was just FIRED for lacking it!

Taxpayers and parents, PLEASE let Terry know what you think of his latest innovative idea.

I'm getting outta here.

McCary, is just another from the long list of Guilford County school system employees that have been fired from other systems.
There is the man himself Terry Grier and
Beacoats too.

Ok it might not be a long list but these are very important leaders in our system.

What a mess!

Jennifer & Morgan,

Either of you attending today's School Board Retreat?

If so - how about some live postings a la Bruce Buchanan?

Thanks!

A birdy just told me that the school board is discussing new school bonds and year-round schools in the same breath. I wonder what they have in mind for the students of the county? If they can't get voters to approve new school bonds will they decide that the only alternative is to have two or three shifts per day all year? Will that sit well with parents? Or, for that matter, teachers?

Since when does it matter what the parents and teachers think?

Year round schools will never fly. GC doesn't have enough buses now. You won't find cafeteria workers, bus drivers, TAs who want to work all summer. It is a ploy to "vote for our bonds or else".

People on the chalkboard that are concerned with
tasers in our schools and sexual harrassment should
be furious about this legislation that is going through without any opposistion.
Posted: September 23, 2006
9:40 p.m. Eastern

By Joseph Farah
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON - Even though student molestations seem to be reaching epidemic proportions in schools across America, the House of Representatives has approved a tough new anti-drug and anti-weapon law that would require local districts to develop search policies - including strip searches - with immunity against prosecution for teachers and staff.

Schools would have to develop policies for searching students, or face the loss of some federal funding, under the bill - HR 5295, approved by a voice vote Tuesday. It moves to the Senate, which does not have similar legislation pending at this time.

The American Civil Liberties Union, the American Federation of Teachers, the Drug Policy Alliance, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, the National Parent Teacher Association, the American Association of School Administrators and the National School Boards Association all opposed the bill saying it could invite unconstitutional searches. The National Education Association supports the legislation, according to the sponsor.

The bill was the brainchild of Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Kentucky, who said the idea was to "put a process in place so that the teachers don't have any fear of liability, but at the same time it protects the rights of the students from an unreasonable search."

The bill says only that search methods cannot be "excessively intrusive."

It drew opposition from the American Federation of Teachers, a smaller teachers union, and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The "Student Teacher Safety Act of 2006" passed on a voice vote, bypassing the committee process and with no way to hold individual members of the House accountable for their votes.

Particularly controversial is the requirement that each local school district have search policies in place, with the process defined like this:

"A search referred to in subsection (a) is a search by a full-time teacher or school official, acting on any reasonable suspicion based on professional experience and judgment, of any minor student on the grounds of any public school, if the search is conducted to ensure that classrooms, school buildings, school property and students remain free from the threat of all weapons, dangerous materials, or illegal narcotics. The measures used to conduct any search must be reasonably related to the search's objectives, without being excessively intrusive in light of the student's age, sex, and the nature of the offense."

The bill does not address whether body cavity searches are included, whether training will be provided to staffers performing them, whether background checks on staffers would be necessary, whether students who have been sexually abused in the past would be subject or whether parental notification would be required. Without those specifics, the judgment of local school administrators will be the litmus test.

Some fear the mandate for random, warrantless searches of every student, at any time, on any pretext - with immunity from prosecution - could create problems worse than drugs and weapons on campus.

Rep. George Miller, George.Miller@mail.house.gov , of California, the senior Democrat on the House committee that oversees education issues, called the legislation an intrusion into local affairs.

"Schools and school districts already have policies in place regarding student searches," Miller said. "Those policies are the product of consultation with local administrators, teachers and parents. They take in the concerns of the community."

The Education Department has not taken a position on the legislation.

WND has documented the incidents of teacher-student sex throughout the country - particularly the new trend of female teachers molesting male students. WND news editor Joe Kovacs, who has spearheaded the research on this trend, is scheduled to appear Wednesday on "The O'Reilly Factor" on the Fox News Channel to discuss the issue.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Minnesota law allows them in schools also..

http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/fh/mch/pe.pdf#search='school%20pelvic%20exam'

There is mention of Goals 2000 authorizing such exams.

Bryan

____________________________________________________________________________

ELEVEN YEAR OLD 6TH GRADERS VIOLATED BY GOALS 2000--LITERALLY!
© 1996 Mark E. Howerter

Originally Published by "The Other Side of the News"

http://home.comcast.net/~commonsensenow/goalviol.html

Parents no longer have to worry "only" about sex crazed men in trench coats when it comes to the sexual abuse of their daughters. Now, as one parent put it, "Rapists and molestors (sic) sometimes wear white, too, and don't always operate in the shadows." Such was the case this last March 19th at the J. T. Lambert Elementary School in East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.

Fifty nine sixth grade girls were instructed to strip to their underwear and wait for a genital examination that was part of a state mandated physical. Sixteen of the girls started to cry and some asked to call their parents. The school nurse called them "babies" and refused to let them call home.

One 11 year old, Susie Tucker, wouldn't take no for an answer. "I want to call my mother. My mother wouldn't want you to do this to me" she said. Her pleas fell on deaf ears. One nurse was reported to have blocked the door so that none of the girls could escape.

The East Stroudsburg Area School District officially admits that parents complained immediately about the examinations. The complaints were about the extent of the exams, that the 6th grade students

Real Truth?

Nice name...NOT!

Okay, Real Truth, my daughter attends a local private school and the teachers did not have to attend a class with that title. There is no history of any teacher making inappropriate advances towards children at her school, either.

What astounds me, is your willingness to boldly toot your supposed "faith" and your racist views in the same breath!

Perhaps, you need to attend a course entitled "We are ALL God's Children," and quit hiding your racist views behind religion!

Shame, Shame, God knows your name and your game!