News-Record.com

On the fight itself, I'm inclined toward leniency. From what I've read, there were no weapons and no innocent bystanders involved. Sure, fights need to be punished, and there should be a harsher penalty for those who were responsible for the teacher's glasses, etc.

But I'd hazard that the teachers at Grimsley could discriminate with some precision between those who are more-or-less bad apples--whose behavior in and out of the classroom is disruptive--and those who are more-or-less decent kids who got caught up in a neighborhood scrap.

The problem with blind justice in cases like this is that those discriminations get lost in the process. I hope they won't be.

I'm somewhat amazed that the ultra-PC News & Record (your number one source for supporting the Status Quo in Guilford County) stated that school attendance is a privilege and not a right. That's absolutely true. The majority of students go to school to learn. They put forth the effort to get good grades, excel at extra-curricular activities and further their academic careers. But a small minority of trouble-makers disrupt classrooms, start fights and generally behave in an anti-social manner. However, under Terry Grier's 8 year reign of terror, the teachers have been hamstrung in their efforts to discipline students in order to stack the deck in Grier's favor and make him look as though he is reducing the number of suspensions. This has caused havoc in the school system. Ask any teacher.

The campus of Grimsley High School is no place for thugs to settle their turf wars. They broke the rules. They assaulted a teacher. They deserve what they got. Grimsley and the Guilford County School System as a whole are better off without them.

I agree with Brian 4, I don't think you can use blanket suspensions without giving each kid an individual hearing. It seems these organizations always have some kind of leadership and these guys should be permanently gone, although most of them are probably out of school by now.

Your Mitch editorial this morning seemed to be missing a key point. It seemed to mention fairness etc. but nothing was mentioned about what would be best for the town. Clearly Mitch has lost his mandate. Fairness may not have much to do with it. Unless heretofore unknown facts are revealed that show David Wray was unequivocally a racist, nobody is going to change their opinion and the council will be divided. Mitch may hang on to his job but the city gov't will be paralyzed.

I think you have to look at politics in a more European model where things aren't taken so personally and egos and who is right or wrong is not that great an issue. Take the British Parliment for example. If the execs, prime ministers etc. lose their mandate a new govt is formed. Winston Churchill, probably the greatest and most heroic politician of the last hundred years, who guided his country through the darkest days of WWII, was canned as prime minister six mos. after the war ended- for whatever reason losing his mandate.

Mitch would increase his stock tremendously by taking the high road on this. He just has to say he did the best he could with the info he had but he sees for the good of the town he has to step down. Heck if the guy did this he could run for president next election.

There are many aspects of the fight and the effort reduce the suspensions. The one that has received no attention but is very important is what the students said at the BOE meeting last week. The kids goto school at SCALES. They said the material was not challenging and they alread knew all that was being taught. Why can't SCALES give challenging work to those that are ready for and want to do it. Some of the kids talked about their dreams were to be doctors, lawyers and etc. and if they cannot get back in regular school their dreams will be shattered. What is going on at SCALES?

I know one thing, If I had been the Chairman of the BOE, I would have looked at Dr. Becoats (Dr. Grier was absent) and told him to contact the Principal at SCALES and have their workload reviewed. In addition, I would have told hime to hate the Counsler keep close watch on their progress and advise teachers/principal if they were not getting challenging work. Life is not over if you goto SCALES, if the staff and the students work together to keep up with the work that they need to know.

If SCALES is not going to provide adequate education for the suspended kids, they they should be returned somewhere where education can take place. "A MIND IS A TERRIBLE THING TO WASTE".

I was on campus the day the fight broke out. I personally experienced the chaos. I was a witness to the look of fear that ran across the faces of those who were caught up in the mess. Those who were calling their parents asking to be allowed to come home. Wrong place, wrong time?? They were at SCHOOL. There ARE students who come to school to get an education. Then, there are others who come to school for one reason and one reason only. They're BORED and the law says they HAVE to be there. It's "social hour". They go to class if and when they want to. The bells mean absolutely nothing. They walk the halls using language that is truly offensive. When you try to correct them, you're either cursed out or given the "Was I talking to YOU?" look. When they do go to class, they're disruptive. They have no respect for authority. Where does this come from?
Growning up, my parents taught me respect. They also taught me that I had to be held accountable for my actions. If my dreams were not attained, it was because of the choices I made. Nothing would be handed to me on a silver platter. Yes, the mind IS a terrible thing to waste. What are we teaching these kids if we allow them back in school? That it is perfectly alright to break the rules or break the law as long as you're really, really sorry when it's all said and done? What kind of example are we setting? What message are we sending to those who do come to school for an actual education. Who's going to be there for those kids? Don't they ALSO have a right to an education? An education without disruption or the fear of ending up in the middle of some "turf war".
Are we doing those who do cause problems any favors by allowing them to do as they please? These kids are in high school. It wasn't a little scuffle on the playground. People got HURT. But now, they want to "get an education". Poor babies. Perhaps they should have thought of that before they charged off of those buses in search of a fight.
Who is going to come to their rescue when they're in the real world? Who will speak for them when they're being fired from a job because of their inability to take orders from a supervisor? Is this what we want for our children ad their future?

I was on campus the day the fight broke out. I personally experienced the chaos. I was a witness to the look of fear that ran across the faces of those who were caught up in the mess. Those who were calling their parents asking to be allowed to come home. Wrong place, wrong time?? They were at SCHOOL. There ARE students who come to school to get an education. Then, there are others who come to school for one reason and one reason only. They're BORED and the law says they HAVE to be there. It's "social hour". They go to class if and when they want to. The bells mean absolutely nothing. They walk the halls using language that is truly offensive. When you try to correct them, you're either cursed out or given the "Was I talking to YOU?" look. When they do go to class, they're disruptive. They have no respect for authority. Where does this come from?
Growning up, my parents taught me respect. They also taught me that I had to be held accountable for my actions. If my dreams were not attained, it was because of the choices I made. Nothing would be handed to me on a silver platter. Yes, the mind IS a terrible thing to waste. What are we teaching these kids if we allow them back in school? That it is perfectly alright to break the rules or break the law as long as you're really, really sorry when it's all said and done? What kind of example are we setting? What message are we sending to those who do come to school for an actual education. Who's going to be there for those kids? Don't they ALSO have a right to an education? An education without disruption or the fear of ending up in the middle of some "turf war".
Are we doing those who do cause problems any favors by allowing them to do as they please? These kids are in high school. It wasn't a little scuffle on the playground. People got HURT. But now, they want to "get an education". Poor babies. Perhaps they should have thought of that before they charged off of those buses in search of a fight.
Who is going to come to their rescue when they're in the real world? Who will speak for them when they're being fired from a job because of their inability to take orders from a supervisor? Is this what we want for our children ad their future?

I agree, Allen, that these students don't belong back on the Grimsley campus. While it is noble to want to help and rehabilitate the trouble-makers, schools first and foremost must be safe places. If that means removing some problem students so that the rest of the kids - the well-behaved students - can get an education, then so be it.

And John above is exactly right. The Guilford County Schools administration has sent a quiet mandate to principals and teachers to reduce suspensions at all costs, just to make the numbers look good.

As a result, the discipline problems in many of our schools have gotten much worse. It's a case of "the inmates running the asylum" - the trouble-makers know the authority figures are essentially powerless, so they know they can do whatever they please.

I understand that many discipline problems are home-based and go far beyond the scope of school. But how the schools respond is something under their control - and GCS has done a tremendous disservice to the well-behaved kids in recent years.

We have to do what it takes to save our children. This may mean extensive education of the parents. Children that cannot behave in orgainized society should obtain their education in a special isolated facility independent of those children that can behave. Judge Mathis was a gang member with all that entails but he turned around got a good education and is a productive citizen. I may have to give up on a child but I am not going to give up on him/her when he/she is 13, 14 or 15 years old. Except in very unusual cases, we should stick with the kids untill at least their 18th birthday. Giving up on a child contributes to crime, loss of hope and the prison population. If I am wrong, pls tell me when we should give up?

I agree, Joe. We can't throw away these kids at this point in their lives.
We'll only have to deal with them later, in the social service and/or criminal justice systems.

Alan,
Channel 2 is going to be airing a special next week about the cover-up of violence in Guilford county schools. Apparently, principals are starting to speak up about violence that is not being reported. Now that Grier is leaving they are getting the courage to speak up!

Allen and Joe, it's great to say we "can't give up" on students who cause trouble in school. But what about the other students - the ones who come to school to get an education. Why should they have to give up their right to a safe, orderly school?

Guilford County Schools has adopted a cart-before-the-horse approach for the past several years. The needs of "at-risk" students (i.e. those who come to school to make trouble) are put before the needs of the well-behaved kids.

As a result, discipline in many classrooms has completely broken down. Teachers get shouted down in their own classrooms. At some schools, students know there are certain parts of campus they simply can't go, for fear of physical harm.

Is this environment conducive to education? I think not. We should do whatever we can for the trouble-makers, but the schools system's priority should always be serving the vast majority of students who want to do the right thing.

Just Saying:
I have not heard of some of the problems you mention, such as students knowing not to go to certain parts of campus out of fear for their safety.
But I do agree that the schools will need to balance the needs of the majority with the needs of the troubled students.
And I would hope that these priorities are not viewed as mutually exclusive.

Not mutually exclusive, but when push comes to shove, the priority should be the students who come to school to learn. Unfortunately, the GCS administration and school board have decided to coddle the trouble-makers and let the good kids fend for themselves.

And if you haven't heard stories about certain parts of our high school campuses being dangerous, you need to talk with more teachers, parents and students. There are certain spots on many high school campuses where kids know that if they go there, their safety cannot be guaranteed.

Just saying, Alan lives in the NW area. He is isolated (segregated) from the real issues that most of us live with.

As a student at Grimsley it upsets me that so many people are showing so much haterd towards dose students that were in the fight. Yes, I do agree that the issue between the two nieghborhoods should end soon before it gets even more out of control but I don't think telling those students involed shouldn't be allowed back in the school. I can see that you have far that it might cause the conflict to start up again but the problem started outside of school and it's gonna conutine outside of school. Is that all you care about i making the school a better place, what about everywhere else don't they matter to?