Teacher faces firing for stomping on flag in lesson on symbols

[Kathryn]

It sounds like he's done this same lesson for years but only got in trouble for it this year.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/10/scott-compton-south-carol_n_2448399.html

[Remudamom]

Huh. That wouldn't bother me any. But then again, I figure if someone wants to do something like........spit on a cross maybe... that's their problem, not mine. As long as it wasn't my cross or my flag. That's not the flag I have at my house though, 8)

[*********]

My opinion? That's a ridiculous reason for a teacher to lose his job.

[Joker]

I don't think he should lose his job over it, but I'm surprised he would think it a smart thing to do since it's a large military community.

[Guest inoubliable]

Ridiculous. Looks like the lesson went right over the heads of the student who complained and the people calling for his termination, IMO.

[Rebecca VA]

If he were doing these things as a private citizen, on his own time, I would shrug it off because he has free speech. Since he was a teacher, though, teaching lessons to students, he should have been more cautious about what he was trying to say. He could have made his point (yes, a flag is a piece of cloth, but it has symbolism that is very important to people) without showing disrespect to anyone. He obviously wanted to express contempt for the flag and teach others to do so.

 

ESPECIALLY since the district's teachers had been told to leave their personal views out of the lessons, he should have been fired.

[Mrs Mungo]

A quote from the article:

“So many of our veterans have made sacrifices for that flag. We still have men and women deployed in service to our country and we do take this very seriously.â€

 

 

I disagree that our veterans make sacrifices for the flag. They make sacrifices for what the flag represents-our freedoms and liberty. That *must* include views with which we disagree or the sacrifices are meaningless.

 

[SKL]

After reading the article, it seems to me that this was a very insensitive act and clearly intended to push his political views. If he really needed to make that point, he could have done so verbally. I find his action and attitude disgusting and I wouldn't want my kids to be forced to sit in his class in order to earn their high school diploma. So although firing for one act seems harsh, the real question is whether this guy is a good choice for the job in the first place. I'm leaning toward "no."

[BrookValley.]

If he were doing these things as a private citizen, on his own time, I would shrug it off because he has free speech. Since he was a teacher, though, teaching lessons to students, he should have been more cautious about what he was trying to say. He could have made his point (yes, a flag is a piece of cloth, but it has symbolism that is very important to people) without showing disrespect to anyone. He obviously wanted to express contempt for the flag and teach others to do so.

 

ESPECIALLY since the district's teachers had been told to leave their personal views out of the lessons, he should have been fired.

 

 

I fail to see why the lesson, as described, the teacher "obviously wanted to express contempt for the flag and teach others to do so." It sounds like he was trying to make a point that it is the ideals behind the symbol that are to be respected, more so than the physical object. What is wrong with that? Should we just devote ourselves to the flag, or should we actually, you know, look past that to what makes it the symbol that it is?

[SKL]

A quote from the article:

[/left][/size][/font][/color]

 

 

I disagree that our veterans make sacrifices for the flag. They make sacrifices for what the flag represents-our freedoms and liberty. That *must* include views with which we disagree or the sacrifices are meaningless.

 

 

Yes, but this is more than just a guy expressing his views. Kids are required to attend English class, so anything a teacher says and does in English class is an imposition on the kids. Desecrating the flag is no small thing for most Americans. Would it be OK for a teacher to make slurs on Islam to a classroom full of Muslims? Or to promote gay slurs knowing there are gay kids in the school/class? How is this different, really? A teacher who thinks so little of the sentiments of his students doesn't belong in the classroom.

[Mrs Mungo]

Yes, but this is more than just a guy expressing his views. Kids are required to attend English class, so anything a teacher says and does in English class is an imposition on the kids. Desecrating the flag is no small thing for most Americans. Would it be OK for a teacher to make slurs on Islam to a classroom full of Muslims? Or to promote gay slurs knowing there are gay kids in the school/class? How is this different, really? A teacher who thinks so little of the sentiments of his students doesn't belong in the classroom.

 

There was no slur. He didn't say anything bad about the United States or the military. I don't like people who desecrate the flag, even when they do stuff because they are supposedly "patriotic" like decorate with the flag. But, the flag is a symbol for something much bigger and more important-our freedom. Our freedom includes freedom of speech.

 

I find it *insane* that the some of the same people (not saying you, SKL, are one of them) who insist that the second amendment means they should be able to have any gun or ammunition they please want to stomp all over the first amendment, which only involves speech. Is speech really that much more dangerous?

[SKL]

There was no slur. He didn't say anything bad about the United States or the military. I don't like people who desecrate the flag, even when they do stuff because they are supposedly "patriotic" like decorate with the flag. But, the flag is a symbol for something much bigger and more important-our freedom. Our freedom includes freedom of speech.

 

I find it *insane* that the some of the same people (not saying you, SKL are one of them) who insist that the second amendment means they should be able to have any gun or ammunition they please want to stomp all over the first amendment, which only involves speech. Is speech really that much more dangerous?

 

Well, personally I think that stomping on the US flag in front of American kids equates to a "slur" at best.

 

I guess by your view, if a student then proceeded to flip his teacher the bird, that would be OK as well, since it's just a finger.

 

Again, it's not the right to speech we're complaining about. It's imposing it on kids who have no choice but to listen / watch. And even more than that, it's the mindset that it's OK for a teacher to trample on the kids' known sensitivities.

[SKL]

I don't think flipping someone the bird is the same at all. How is this the same?

 

If the school didn't like the "lesson" I'd be fine with them telling him not to do it anymore, but firing him for that? Seems ridiculous.

 

Many if not most Americans consider stomping on the US flag to be a massive insult. It most definitely equates to "F U" if you were raised in that belief system.

 

Part of qualifying to be a teacher is understanding the population you teach and being sensitive to its sensitivities.

 

Again, the point could have easily been made without the dramatic, emotion-eliciting act of desecrating the flag.

[Mrs Mungo]

Well, personally I think that stomping on the US flag in front of American kids equates to a "slur" at best.

 

How? To me, your view the view that leads to putting a price on the head of cartoonists who depict Mohammed.

 

I guess by your view, if a student then proceeded to flip his teacher the bird, that would be OK as well, since it's just a finger.

 

I'm sure there is something in the school rulebook about that.

 

Again, it's not the right to speech we're complaining about. It's imposing it on kids who have no choice but to listen / watch. And even more than that, it's the mindset that it's OK for a teacher to trample on the kids' known sensitivities.

 

So, don't send your kids to school. I don't. Otherwise, yes, you have to listen to the teacher's lesson. What is the lesson? That our freedoms are more important than a symbol of freedom. This is a point that the complaining parents obviously missed. I think it is a very important point, and I agree with it, even though my kids and I show respect to the flag *every day* in our military community.

[SKL]

How? To me, your view the view that leads to putting a price on the head of cartoonists who depict Mohammed. I'm not suggesting a death sentence, but discipline is appropriate because of his position, not his views.

 

 

 

I'm sure there is something in the school rulebook about that. And according to someone's quote, it's also against the rule to push political views.

 

 

 

So, don't send your kids to school. I don't. Otherwise, yes, you have to listen to the teacher's lesson. What is the lesson? That our freedoms are more important than a symbol of freedom. This is a point that the complaining parents obviously missed. I think it is a very important point, and I agree with it, even though my kids and I show respect to the flag *every day* in our military community. I am not sure that was what he was teaching. It seems to me he was just saying that symbols are unduly charged with emotion. However, I agree that what the flag represents is more important than the physical flag. That does not mean it's appropriate to offend the sensitivities of the community just to make a point that could have been made without such an act. Obviously the teacher failed to realize that pissing off the class is distracting and actually impedes learning. That's a competence issue if not a blatant act of insubordination. He also seems to be forgetting who is paying his salary. Maybe it's time he stopped taking his salary for granted.

 

Comments above in red.

[Kathryn]

I don't think he should lose his job over it, but I'm surprised he would think it a smart thing to do since it's a large military community.

 

 

Oh yeah, I meant to address that assertion in the article. I thought that was kind of weird. Chapin has gone from small town to far-outlying suburb. Fort Jackson is on the completely opposite side of the city. It takes over an hour to get between the two of them in good traffic. I don't think the base has much to do with Chapin residents. Chapin is mostly known as being home to money as it's on a lake and was pretty rural until the last few decades when land got subdivided for lake homes and McMansion subdivisions.

[arghmatey]

When you choose to work in an institution that pledges allegiance to a symbol every single day, you should be prepared to kiss the job goodbye when you stomp on that symbol.

 

I don't have a problem with the lesson, but that's what he gets for thinking outside the box while earning income from inside the box.

[jhschool]

I think it's very disrespectful to stomp on an American flag in front of American kids.

 

What if there are Mexican-American kids in the class and he takes a Mexican flag and

stomps on it? Disrespectful and unacceptable.

 

What if there are Muslim kids in the class and he takes a picture of a holy place in Mecca

and stomps on it? Disrespectful and unacceptable.

 

And if there are Catholic kids and he takes a picture of the pope and stomps on it? Equally

disrespectful and unacceptable.

 

Or he takes a picture of a kid's mom and stomps on it? You get my point.

 

Some deeds are disrespectful and unacceptable regardless of freedom of speech. He should

be fired. Teachers should not be allowed to be disrespectful to kids and to do unacceptable things

in the classroom regardless of the lesson.

[*********]

When you choose to work in an institution that pledges allegiance to a symbol every single day, you should be prepared to kiss the job goodbye when you stomp on that symbol.

 

I don't have a problem with the lesson, but that's what he gets for thinking outside the box while earning income from inside the box.

 

True, true.

[SKL]

This raises the issue in my mind as to whether it's appropriate for a high school teacher to take it upon himself to change kids' cultural views on things their well-intentioned parents have taught them. Personally I don't think it is. It's fine to let kids know that other views exist, and even give the ratios, but to literally stomp on a belief held dear by families - when such belief does not impede academic learning - is not the place of a public school teacher IMO.

 

It sounds like this teacher wants to change the culture of the kids he is teaching. He is being paid to teach English, not stomp on symbols. I managed to learn English quite well without ever seeing a teacher stomp on a flag.

[Saddlemomma]

This bothers me tremendously because we have had too many of our young men and women die in foreign countries defending our flag, the symbol of all we stand for as Americans.

 

The actions of this teacher demonstrate the lack of respect for the values, morals, and principles that are the foundation of our country. How can we expect our young people to honor our country and each other with examples such as this? Just another demonstration of how far we have fallen and the insidious apathy that has invaded our culture. No one cares about anything anymore. It truly is the ME, ME, ME generation - Moral relativism. Just SAD and pathetic!

[Guest inoubliable]

This bothers me tremendously because we have had too many of our young men and women die in foreign countries defending our flag, the symbol of all we stand for as Americans.

 

 

That's exactly what this teacher was addressing. The flag as a *symbol* of what Americans stand for. And not every American is going to stand for the same thing. (Remember the whole gun rights kerfuffle?) I don't know a single serviceman or servicewoman going to bat for the flag itself. The flag means different things to different people.

[Mrs Mungo]

I think it's very disrespectful to stomp on an American flag in front of American kids. What if there are Mexican-American kids in the class and he takes a Mexican flag and stomps on it? Disrespectful and unacceptable. What if there are Muslim kids in the class and he takes a picture of a holy place in Mecca and stomps on it? Disrespectful and unacceptable. And if there are Catholic kids and he takes a picture of the pope and stomps on it? Equally disrespectful and unacceptable. Or he takes a picture of a kid's mom and stomps on it? You get my point. Some deeds are disrespectful and unacceptable regardless of freedom of speech. He should be fired. Teachers should not be allowed to be disrespectful to kids and to do unacceptable things in the classroom regardless of the lesson.

 

I think ALL of those things could be used to illustrate the same point. I don't find any of them unacceptable.

 

This bothers me tremendously because we have had too many of our young men and women die in foreign countries defending our flag, the symbol of all we stand for as Americans. The actions of this teacher demonstrate the lack of respect for the values, morals, and principles that are the foundation of our country. How can we expect our young people to honor our country and each other with examples such as this? Just another demonstration of how far we have fallen and the insidious apathy that has invaded our culture. No one cares about anything anymore. It truly is the ME, ME, ME generation - Moral relativism. Just SAD and pathetic!

 

I still disagree. If we believe in freedom, then we should agree with his right to stomp on the flag or a picture of the pope or a cross or whatever. We don't have to *like* it; I certainly don't. I complain when athletes wear the flag like a cape.

[BrookValley.]

This bothers me tremendously because we have had too many of our young men and women die in foreign countries defending our flag, the symbol of all we stand for as Americans.

 

The actions of this teacher demonstrate the lack of respect for the values, morals, and principles that are the foundation of our country. How can we expect our young people to honor our country and each other with examples such as this? Just another demonstration of how far we have fallen and the insidious apathy that has invaded our culture. No one cares about anything anymore. It truly is the ME, ME, ME generation - Moral relativism. Just SAD and pathetic!

 

This is the whole point. This teacher obviously feels that his students should actually think about what our men and women die for. They do not die for the flag. They die for what it represents. I dearly hope our men and women did not die for a symbol of what our country stands for--and I hope that young Americans actually think about those things that it does represent. Many of us probably disagree with the approach, but do you really disagree with actually trying to get students to think about the actual "values, morals, and principles" behind the symbol of the flag? Because that's what the whole point of this guy's lesson was. From your post I would say you probably agree with the teacher a lot more than you think.

[Mergath]

This bothers me tremendously because we have had too many of our young men and women die in foreign countries defending our flag, the symbol of all we stand for as Americans.

 

The actions of this teacher demonstrate the lack of respect for the values, morals, and principles that are the foundation of our country. How can we expect our young people to honor our country and each other with examples such as this? Just another demonstration of how far we have fallen and the insidious apathy that has invaded our culture. No one cares about anything anymore. It truly is the ME, ME, ME generation - Moral relativism. Just SAD and pathetic!

 

 

I was in the Army. I did my basic training at the military base mentioned in the article, Fort Jackson. And this man's action doesn't bother me at all. People join the military to defend someone's right to do this exact sort of thing. It's the people who try to censor the actions and beliefs of others who are really spitting in the face of those who serve.

[Alte Veste Academy]

I don't think anyone is arguing that the flag isn't just a symbol. I am not even going to argue that he didn't have the right to present that lesson. But I do think it was in poor taste. It lacked empathy. I am not a fan of disdain for people who are affected by the destruction of the flag because it is "just a symbol." Until he personally knows the lives and hearts of his students, he can't possibly understand their feelings on the subject.

[Reya]

I don't think he should be fired, but YES, reprimanded strongly.

[Jenny in Florida]

Ridiculous. Looks like the lesson went right over the heads of the student who complained and the people calling for his termination, IMO.

 

 

Agreed. It's yet another case of people mistaking an object for the concept it represents. The flag actually stands for our right to stomp on or burn it. It's called free speech, folks, a pretty simple idea.

[SKL]

This is the first I've heard that consitutional free speech means a teacher is free to express anything in any way to his students.

 

Teachers have a responsibility to be careful what they say and do in front of kids during school hours. Teachers have been disciplined plenty of times for exercising their "free speech" at the wrong time and place and in the wrong way.

 

Another point. That wasn't even his own flag. If you're going to stomp on a flag, the least you can do is go buy your own flag to stomp on. Or ask the permission of the flag owner first. (Good luck with that.)

[Mrs Mungo]

This is the first I've heard that consitutional free speech means a teacher is free to express anything in any way to his students.

 

Who said that? Nobody that I can see.

[Guest inoubliable]

This is the first I've heard that consitutional free speech means a teacher is free to express anything in any way to his students.

 

Teachers have a responsibility to be careful what they say and do in front of kids during school hours. Teachers have been disciplined plenty of times for exercising their "free speech" at the wrong time and place and in the wrong way.

 

Another point. That wasn't even his own flag. If you're going to stomp on a flag, the least you can do is go buy your own flag to stomp on. Or ask the permission of the flag owner first. (Good luck with that.)

 

 

You realize he wasn't expressing a personal opinion, right? This wasn't a lesson on his politics or religion or choice of beer. This was a lesson on symbolism.

 

Whose flag was it?

[Mrs Mungo]

You realize he wasn't expressing a personal opinion, right? This wasn't a lesson on his politics or religion or choice of beer. This was a lesson on symbolism.

 

 

Exactly.

[SKL]

 

Whose flag was it?

 

 

My understanding of what I've read/heard is that it was the flag hanging on the classroom wall, which was presumably owned by the school / community.

 

And yes, he was experessing a personal opinion. His opinion that people shouldn't have feelings about seeing a flag stomped upon.

 

After hearing the students' reaction, it is clear that he did this knowing it would shock and offend.

 

I still can't figure out how he thought this was going to enhance his students' knowledge of the English language. I think poor judgment is manifest here, and poor judgment is a valid reason to discipline a teacher.

[Guest inoubliable]

 

My understanding of what I've read/heard is that it was the flag hanging on the classroom wall, which was presumably owned by the school / community. So then you don't know. So we can completely dismiss where you said "Another point. That wasn't even his own flag. "

 

And yes, he was experessing a personal opinion. His opinion that people shouldn't have feelings about seeing a flag stomped upon. No. He wasn't. He was explaining symbolism. That's a concept. That's not a personal opinion.

 

After hearing the students' reaction, it is clear that he did this knowing it would shock and offend. How did you come to this judgment?

 

I still can't figure out how he thought this was going to enhance his students' knowledge of the English language. I think poor judgment is manifest here, and poor judgment is a valid reason to discipline a teacher.

 

[FaithManor]

I'm not going to weigh in on the constitutional aspects that are being debated. I'm libertarian as a general rule so that pretty much says it all.

 

However, I wonder about this. My husband could be in trouble at his place of work if he were to make a spectacle of defaming his company's logo. If my dad found out an employee was going around defacing his "advertisement", etc. he would likely let that employee go. So, I have to wonder if there isn't another aspect to be considered. The teacher works for the government of the United States of America. This is the symbol of his employer. Can a case be made for the action to be considered "defamation of his employer" or slanderous in nature? I don't know. I'm not a lawyer. I'm totally for free speech and civil liberty. But, just like many discussions we've had on the board about what your employer can and cannot do to you when you choose to be employed by that person or company, it raises the question of whether or not the employer, the US government, has to put up with such behavior. Is it similar to "insubordination"? Does the employer have to consider the intent of the employee or just the action itself? Where do the employer's rights end and where do the employee's begin.

 

Interesting questions.

 

As for the captive audience idea, I think that would be another legal debate. There are those that would say that the parent doesn't have to send their child to that school so the student isn't being forced to listen to this or that. Others would say that the mandatory attendance laws make that a moot point and especially if you live in a state in which public education funding does not follow the student into the private sector...ie. money for homeschooling or private tuition. Each argument has a valid point.

 

Faith

[SKL]

From KK (in red) and my answers (in blue):

 

My understanding of what I've read/heard is that it was the flag hanging on the classroom wall, which was presumably owned by the school / community. So then you don't know. So we can completely dismiss where you said "Another point. That wasn't even his own flag. " Well no, I wasn't there (none of us were), but that's what the articles indicate.

 

And yes, he was experessing a personal opinion. His opinion that people shouldn't have feelings about seeing a flag stomped upon. No. He wasn't. He was explaining symbolism. That's a concept. That's not a personal opinion. So if I say "I don't believe spanking ruins kids" and smack a student (or, to make it legal, my own child) to prove it, I'm merely teaching a concept.

 

After hearing the students' reaction, it is clear that he did this knowing it would shock and offend. How did you come to this judgment? A student interviewed said that the students in her class expressed shock, after which the teacher said "at least you reacted better than my earlier classes. One girl screamed in an earlier class." They say he's done this little trick in prior years, so he knows how kids are going to react to it, but he still thinks it's OK. I have a problem with that.

 

I still can't figure out how he thought this was going to enhance his students' knowledge of the English language. I think poor judgment is manifest here, and poor judgment is a valid reason to discipline a teacher.

[Kathryn]

The teacher's statement through his lawyer on local news: http://www.wistv.com/story/20552687/teachers-attorney-my-client-was-trying-to-create-a-forum-for-discussion-using-a-powerful-symbol

[SKL]

As for the military thing, I don't come from a military family, but I would have been very angry to see a teacher do that in front of the class.

[Guest inoubliable]

From KK (in red) and my answers (in blue):

 

My understanding of what I've read/heard is that it was the flag hanging on the classroom wall, which was presumably owned by the school / community. So then you don't know. So we can completely dismiss where you said "Another point. That wasn't even his own flag. " Well no, I wasn't there (none of us were), but that's what the articles indicate. Right, then. So you don't know. Moving on.

 

And yes, he was experessing a personal opinion. His opinion that people shouldn't have feelings about seeing a flag stomped upon. No. He wasn't. He was explaining symbolism. That's a concept. That's not a personal opinion. So if I say "I don't believe spanking ruins kids" and smack a student (or, to make it legal, my own child) to prove it, I'm merely teaching a concept. Really? So then you do understand that it was a concept and not a personal opinion. I'm hoping that you also understand that smacking a student would most likely be illegal and that his flag stompin' time wasn't.

 

After hearing the students' reaction, it is clear that he did this knowing it would shock and offend. How did you come to this judgment? A student interviewed said that the students in her class expressed shock, after which the teacher said "at least you reacted better than my earlier classes. One girl screamed in an earlier class." They say he's done this little trick in prior years, so he knows how kids are going to react to it, but he still thinks it's OK. I have a problem with that. Those are reactions. They neither prove nor disprove his intent.

 

I still can't figure out how he thought this was going to enhance his students' knowledge of the English language. I think poor judgment is manifest here, and poor judgment is a valid reason to discipline a teacher.

[SKL]

From KK: "Those are reactions. They neither prove nor disprove his intent."

 

Obviously nobody can ever prove his intent, but the facts indicate to me that he intended to shock and offend.

 

Either way, intent is one thing, good judgment is another. A teacher needs to have good judgment. His action reflected very poor judgment in the opinion of his boss and many others.

[Guest inoubliable]

 

Obviously nobody can ever prove his intent, but the facts indicate to me that he intended to shock and offend.

 

Either way, intent is one thing, good judgment is another. A teacher needs to have good judgment. His action reflected very poor judgment in the opinion of his boss and many others.

 

 

I disagree. I think (and this is my opinion, of course) that he meant to use an easy symbol to illustrate his point. I think he meant to open up discussion, get his students thinking. I don't have a problem with that. I'd prefer that the public schools start churning out more critical thinkers.

[Mrs Mungo]

Darryl D. Smalls says 12-year teacher Scott Compton was attempting to show his classes that America is an "inspirational idea," greater than the "material objects that represent it," during a lesson on symbolism.

 

I agree with him, even if I don't agree with his methods. I don't like Rush Limbaugh or Bill Maher or Westboro Baptist, but protesting, talking smack, even lying (to some degree) isn't illegal. Desecrating the flag is recognized as protected free speech by the SCOTUS. Smacking a kid? Not something that is recognized as being protected free speech by the SCOTUS. These are some terrible analogies you've come up with in this thread.

[Mergath]

As for the military thing, I don't come from a military family, but I would have been very angry to see a teacher do that in front of the class.

 

Which means you have absolutely no military perspective whatsoever and brought it up... why?

[Kathryn]

And actually, the American flag is probably the handiest tool for that kind of lesson, because everyone in the room would come ready-equipped with a pre-existing symbolic relationship to it.

 

Yes, that's what his lawyer said: "My client has had an exemplary twelve year teaching career and was only trying to create a forum for discussion using a powerful symbol with which all his students would be familiar."

[Jan in SC]

This guy got in trouble this year because another teacher in the district had really poor judgement with posting a political belief in a classroom.

 

I haven't asked around to see if I know anyone in the class, so I haven't heard a true account of what happened. My guess is that every teacher in the district was warned to tow the line for the remainder of the year, so it wouldn't surprise me if he is fired. I think that they aren't meeting until next week, though.

 

[SKL]

Which means you have absolutely no military perspective whatsoever and brought it up... why?

 

 

I didn't bring it up and of course I have perspective. Every American has some connection with the US military. My brother and various uncles and ancestors were in the military, some of them war heroes. But I wouldn't consider us to be in the military community, like those who have spouses serving. That doesn't mean I'm too dense to understand that the military community as a group takes patriotism a little more seriously than the general public.

 

My point was that you don't have to be in the military to be offended by this teacher's action.

[SKL]

I think that as a general rule, even giving this guy the full benefit of the doubt on intent, using the "shock and offend" factor on kids in a public school English class is foolish. He couldn't think of any other way to start a dialogue? How about just asking the kids how they would feel *if* he stomped on the flag, and why? It seems to me that would have elicited more thoughtful discussion than what he did. He obviously does not understand how adolescents' minds work. Maybe he needs to go seek a job in a liberal grad school.

[SKL]

And just because he's been a teacher for 12 years, that doesn't prove he's competent. I can think of quite a few teachers who taught for more than 12 years despite very questionable qualifications.

 

And of course his lawyer is now going to come up with some articulate reason for why he did this. That's what lawyers and defendants do.

[beaners]

I think that as a general rule, even giving this guy the full benefit of the doubt on intent, using the "shock and offend" factor on kids in a public school English class is foolish. He couldn't think of any other way to start a dialogue? How about just asking the kids how they would feel *if* he stomped on the flag, and why? It seems to me that would have elicited more thoughtful discussion than what he did. He obviously does not understand how adolescents' minds work. Maybe he needs to go seek a job in a liberal grad school.

 

 

Based on the high school I attended, that would provoke almost zero conversation. Think crickets chirping. This theatricality might have actually drawn more than one or two students into a discussion with the teacher, instead of waiting through those long, painful silences my own English class was full of. Adolescent minds in the school I attended would have flat out refused to engage in any debate that started out with a wimpy "how would this make you feel" line of questioning.

 

You would have croaked if you'd sat in either my World History or APUSH class, but those two teachers were the very best I've ever encountered, and those were the liveliest classes I had.

[Lisbeth]

Those who don't send their kids to school still have to help pay this joker's salary. I am tired of people who bite the hand of the system who feeds them. It's like suspended adolescence. Tiring behavior- ooh, look what an agitating agent and free thinker I am! Yawn. Our kids seem to lack the basics compared to other countries - perhaps teachers should focus there.