Ah, I see. I took your eye-rolling to mean something else :):p

SLOW DOWN!

The story that is posted in the OP and the story in the link are saying 2 different things. The school is saying that the boy was never suspended and the picture is not the one he drew.

Also, for the record: Teachers cannot suspend students, only administrators. But, as the district says, the student was never suspended.

...interesting...they updated the story...



I just wonder... does Taunton only smell bad on the outside?

Is this the original story?

http://www.tauntongazette.com/news/x...awing-of-Jesus

The one where the school principal refers the reporter to speak to the superintendent's office, because that is required by the staff at the school? Where the district says that they can't speak about what happened to reporters because, oh I don't know, there are strict privacy laws that don't allow districts to speak about students to the public?

But, of course, the parent couldn't be stirring up issues and making a mountain out of a molehill. Only teachers and school officials do that. :rolleyes:

Not from the link but that is one variation I read.

DaemonSeid-

Just to clear the air, I was not intentionally attacking you or suggesting that you were purposefully not reporting the facts correctly. If it appears that way in my post, I apologize. I just felt that the teacher was being unfairly attacked for something that was taken out of her hands.

It was taken out of her hands because she handed it to someone else. We know that teachers don't singlehandedly place such disciplinary action on students and request psych evals before students can return to school.

It started with her and, therefore, it is first her fault for getting the ball rolling, and then the dumb administration's fault for seeing it through. If she had just spoken with the parents (like teachers used to do--and some still do--before school violence started getting attention outside of the "inner city") the parents and teacher could have addressed this.

I knew it! The son "had created a violent drawing," and I am thoroughly amused as I predicted I'd be.

YES YOU WERE!!


Nah...we're cool...I went back and looked and saw that the original source had indeed changed.

But...let us proceed:

This just gets better and better, thanks LaneSig:

link

TAUNTON, Mass. (AP) — A Massachusetts school district on Tuesday night denied a father's claims that his son was suspended for drawing a stick figure of Jesus on a cross.

The Taunton School District said in a written statement that the second-grade student was never suspended over the sketch and that a drawing circulated to reporters by the boy's father, Chester Johnson, is not the same one that was discovered by the teacher.

The district also denied that the boy and his classmates had been assigned to draw something that reminded them of Christmas or any other religious holiday.

Johnson, who had said his son was ordered to undergo a psychological evaluation after the drawing was discovered, did not return multiple phone messages from The Associated Press on Tuesday night about the school district's statements.

"This incident occurred nearly two weeks ago, it was handled appropriately, and the school staff and family had been working together in a cooperative and positive manner," the district said in a statement posted on its Web site.

School officials did not specify any action they took, but said they followed "well-established protocol," including reviewing the child's records and consulting with school psychologists.

"It is unfortunate that the actions of our district staff have been classified as "religious" in nature when, in fact, they were based solely on the wellbeing of the student," the district's statement said.



Somebody's story is starting to look shaky

Oh well...if the school's lying then WOMP. If the parents are lying then WOMP.

Actually, it's kind of the opposite of "ironic" - it's pragmatic.

Exactly.

If the school is denying the entire event, then what happened? How is this even a story? If the teacher wasn't upset about THIS drawing, where's the one that DID concern her?

The character of the boy's father has nothing to do with this situation. He can yell, "Racism!" and "Religious persecution!" as much as he wants, but that doesn't change what actually happened. And as far as I can tell, the school has not denied that the boy was sent home from school, and was forced to undergo a psychological evaluation... an evaluation which reportedly (but possibly not yet confirmed) states that the boy was "cleared to return to school."

If that's the case, then yes, the boy was suspended until a psychological evaluation established that there was nothing to be alarmed about.

I don't know. When the father is already talking about the money that the school system owes him, I think it does have a bearing on his credility and motivation.

The school system isn't denying the entire event; it's denying some of what the local paper reported about the event. Specifically, it has denied that the boy was suspended, that he was given an assignment to draw something holiday themed and that the drawing that has appeared in the press is the one the teacher saw. (And as Lane has pointed out, legal/privacy restrictions prevent the school from releasing any of the kid's work without parental permission.)

And "being cleared to return to school" isn't, I don't think, the same as suspension. As far as I know, a suspension is a disciplinary action for a set length of time. If the psych exam is not for disciplinary reasons and there's no disciplinary action being taken, then there is no suspension. The school's response is that the drawing seemed to be a possible "cry for help." If that's the case, it seems more akin to "don't come back to school until you've been fever-free for 24 hours" than to suspension.

I think this may well be a misunderstanding grown out of control. I'm not saying that the school system is (or isn't) blameless here. But my experience is that these things are seldom as cut and dry as the may appear in the press, especially when one side can say whatever it wants while the other side is pretty limited in what it can see.

If I had the authority to send you to the corner, I would have over this one. :p
I was thinking about that Monday. People want religion shoved away into a box but let everybody find out they have to work on Christmas...:cool:

So if this isn't "the drawing in question" then what is it? Because IDK if anyone else noticed, but the name at the top of the crucifix isn't Jesus, it's Jalen. And it isn't at the top of the page like it's just a name on the assignment, it's a nameplate on the cross.

According to one of the articles posted here, the kid was asked to leave school on the 2nd, and he wasn't able to return to school until the 7th. Sounds like a suspension to me.

Also, a suspension can be any length of time, from 1/2 a day to weeks. So a "don't come back for 24 hours" can be a suspension if it involves disciplinary action.

The kid was kicked out of school for pissing off his teacher. Now the district is trying to cover ass.