The headline above and the photo to the right are from a Newton-based blog called ‘Touch My Culture’. Most of the threads are not Newton-specific but Newton North alum Michael Bennington’s post certainly is and well worth reading.
Crazy Divers: Men be like...
drivers man be like
Great post by Michael Bennington. Just a few more ways the school system abuses high school student’s rights. Unfortunately the School Committee doesn’t give a crap about any of this.
I read it. I don’t know if he has completely nailed the idea of culture… but I do think he brings up valid points, especially with regard to students rights.
Everything struck me as typical Newton except for “No Limos.” Really? That is THE prom thing to do… That’s half the reason limo companies exist.
Mike
Sounds a bit extreme, maybe Jen Price should move on to an all girls school where this type of control would be more accepted.
Parts of this seem exaggerated — “students get breathalyzed at the doors of basketball games”. Does he mean all students? How would the door people know who is a student and who is a visitor? That makes no sense.
But I stopped reading after this: “nobody is going on a fan bus sober…”. If public drunkeness is such an issue for your school, and you admit it, then question not why they treat you like inmates.
The one that gets me is “6) If somebody engages in a fight with you, you can not fight back or you will be suspended” unless there’s an exception for self-protection. What the heck is a kid supposed to do when pinned to the wall and being attacked?
I foresee big legal expenses for Newton when the inevitable happens and either a kid ends up with a concussion or broken bone because they were scared of being suspended, or a kid ends up with a suspension on their permanent record because they were flailing to try to escape attackers.
Hey HOSS, I think it’s a joke. But I’m really not sure!!
Good evening,
Thanks for sharing the article first of all. Second of all, my friends and I use the word culture with a different meaning than the literal one, it’s an inside joke. Newton North is trying to play the role of parents, and instituting too many rules that regulate these students social lives. I am more than grateful for the opportunities Newton North created for me, I just thought the institution of these rules is absurd. It takes away freedoms, along with these students’ creativity. High school drinking goes back generations and will continue to be a part of students’ social lives . Why not educate the students on drinking, rather the create a bunch of rules that will just ruin students’ future opportunities ? I just found these rules to be a little much.
Salutè,
Michael Bennington
TouchMyCulture
Thanks for commenting Michael: Can you explain how you use the term “culture”? Because, of course, repression can be culture too.
There really is no gray area around the legal drinking age. It is 21. So any high schooler consuming or purchasing alcoholic beverages is breaking the law.
In addition to that, there is “social liability law” which means that the host of a party can be held responsible for injury to guests that is caused by an intoxicated person. The school has some responsibility to try to control such behavior on their property or at their functions. So you might not like having to submit to a breathalyzer test, but that is a standard thing for authorities to use to determine drunkenness. If there is a big problem with drinking, then the school is right to try to deal with it and that is one tool in the arsenal.
Finally, in this recent atmosphere of school suicides, I would expect that the fact that alcohol is linked with suicide should mean something to people. This is a well-known at risk behavior among youths that is measured by the CDC. The students may think they have a right to drink illegally whenever and wherever they determine it helps them have “fun”, but this is not a demographic known for making wise choices. That’s where adults can help.
Michael Bennington — The irony is that your sister’s teachers and their administrators likely have at least as many rules on their behavior as your sister does. If you sister posted a selfie wearing a revealing bikini on Facebook, no problem. But a teacher?? Sure the teacher can do his/her own rule breaking too — but the key is not to be out in public doing it as you’re suggesting with some of the drinking stuff. Everyone gets restricted on their social behavior. (Unless you’re Rob Ford)
Not only are some of these rules ridiculous but on top of that the entire school inside and out has surveillance cameras. Someone mentioned inmates, now that is a word that applies to students at North. If the students are complaining, the adults better pay attention. If not we may see some dire responses to these “Big Brother” culture.
Has anyone checked the validity of these “truths”? Newton North certainly wasn’t like this a mere two years ago when my kid graduated….
Hmm. Almost all of these “culture” points seem to be rules instituted to discourage drinking by underage students- and yes, protecting the school from liability (not to mention students from potentially dangerous behavior). As a NNHS parent, I don’t have a problem with those things- including how the 6th Man leaders are decided. You want rules (and consequences) in those contexts? Try playing sports and see what happens if you are caught drinking. It’s zero tolerance, and I don’t have a problem with that. Kids are going to drink, that doesn’t meant the school needs to accept it.
I would think some of the new rules could be challenged in court.
Culture is something good; something that has a past; tradition. It can be something that makes you think; something that makes you smile; rather that be a legendary movie or a 3 course meal. Culture is hard to explain, simply because it can be so many things and can have different meanings for everyone. Generally, we use it for something good in our lives, that we think somehow, indirectly, represents what is good in humanity.
As I’ve written many times, I’m opposed to random use of breathalyzers on students. The Fourth Amendment does not include a provision which allows school administrators to ignore it. And I personally can’t think of anything more important to teach our public school students, than the wisdom behind the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Random breathalyzer tests run contrary to the Fourth Amendment, and send the exact wrong message to students. But as long as the School Committee thinks they’re smarter than our Founding Fathers, I have little doubt this practice will continue.
So here’s a more practical criticism for those who think use of these breathalyzers is a good thing. When breathalyzers are used by school administrators to deny students rides on a bus, in many cases those kids end up getting behind the wheel of a car and driving to school events. That’s obviously something none of us would condone. But should we really have a policy that denies safe rides and encourages drunken driving? That’s even stupider than a policy that tortures high school students through sleep deprivation.
Oh, I agree on breathalyzers (I go to a lot of games and have not seen them used, btw); I’m not certain what the interpretation of the law is on that from the courts, or if tit needs to be addressed and spelled out- but the general idea that the school wants/needs to discourage drinking and other illegal behavior is something I won’t argue with.
@Doug– I agree that the schools need to discourage drinking. I believe the best way to do that is through education, not intimidation. And while I have no issue with punishment for a student who is clearly intoxicated at school or a school event, some of the rules currently in place are just plain stupid. For example, a student athlete can be suspended from their high school team for simply attending a private party where alcohol is present, whether or not they drink themselves or even know others are drinking. Rules like this create a culture of secrecy, at an age when we should be encouraging these kids to speak openly about alcohol use among themselves and their peers.
There are exceptions to the fourth amendment that have been recognized by the US Supreme Court under the “special needs” exception. And there have been cases where the court has held that American public school students do not have the same rights afforded to the general public under the fourth amendment. School officials are recognized as having an obligation to maintain safety and underage drinking is illegal, so if they are running an event – even off site – and there appears to be drinking going on, I don’t see why there would be any legitimate objection to doing a minimally intrusive test to ensure that the rules are being followed.
I can imagine a poorly designed policy that might infringe on student rights, but if there is a known drinking problem, and the school clearly communicates these policies (e.g. handbook, postings, etc), and if care is taken to limit privacy violations (like not sharing the test results unnecessarily), then the mandatory testing is probably going to be upheld.
@Steven– You’re talking about the same Supreme Court that once ruled slavery was constitutional, right? And didn’t the Supremes give their okay to lock-up Japanese-Americans in prison camps? Sometimes their rulings are influenced by political expediency. But even if I concede your point that student searches may be constitutional, that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. School Administrators are educators who work for us. They are there to teach our children. They are not employed to abuse student’s rights for the sake of expediency. And how’s all that working out by the way… Have all the breathalyzer tests and zero tolerance policies eliminated or even reduced teen drinking? Isn’t it time we took a more effective approach to this subject?
The basketball breathalyzer thing must be a threat and not reality. Once the school day ends, attendees to the game should have the same rights of admission whether they are an 8 year old from Needham, and 18 year old current NNHS student, or an 80 year old from wherever. Spotting a known NNHS student and asking them to blow into a straw during off school hours can’t be for real.
First of all, this whole thread is based on one kid’s blog post. Until I hear some credible confirmation, I’m not buying that his assertions are at all accurate. I did talk to one person I know at NNHS who said the post is highly exaggerated.
@Mike Striar – because some court decisions are bad, they are all bad? student rights have been limited in several decisions, and our school administrations are expected to prevent bad behavior and ensure safety within the gates of the school as well at school sponsored activities.
Anyway, this thread is all speculation because we don’t actually know a) the policy or b) how it is implemented.
The question of how effective various policies are at dealing with a difficult and prevalent problem is a whole other question. But this is an illegal and potentially dangerous activity and some people will not behave unless there is the threat of a consequence.
@Steven– Breathalyzers are used at our high schools. I know that to be a fact. The court case[s] you’re referring to simply allowed what might otherwise be considered unconstitutional behavior on the part of school administrators. The court[s] did not mandate the process, nor require common sense not be included. So let me ask you this again… Is the approach working? Has student drinking been reduced? Have breathalyzers and zero tolerance policies made a difference? My opinion… They have made things much worse by creating a climate of secrecy, where kids are afraid to speak openly about problems they or their friends are having with alcohol.
The question isn’t whether breathalyzers are used or not, it’s how they are used, how the policy is communicated, whether the administrators have reasonable justification for using it, etc. The court doesn’t have to mandate it for it to be constitutional. It has to be done within the legal limitations. It’s certainly allowable within certain constraints.
Regarding effectiveness, I don’t know, but it’s one part of a broader set of strategies to combat underage drinking. Do you have evidence that it’s not a deterrent? I guess one indicator would be the number of kids that fail the test – if ~zero, then it’s working. It’s certainly a lot better than letting the kids get hurt or arrested. And it seems like a good way to send the signal that underage drinking will not be tolerated.
But if you can show me some proof that it doesn’t work, I’d love to see the data.
Mike Striar — I’m uneasy about the breath test only because there are no similar tests for such things as heroin use, in school bullying, among other serious offenses. The gathering of evidence for expulsion shouldn’t be different just there is a cheap gadget available. We wouldn’t tolerate a lie detector test, for example. But I do disagree if the test is used to control unruly behavior on game buses. The bus is supplied by the district and it would be way too uncomfortable if the bus arrived in another town with rowdy drunken kids. Do we expect any adults on the bus to sit back and say well they are Newton kids and they are special in terms of asserted rights? Hell no. If the conditions for the ride say possible breath test, then go ahead and use it. There’s no special right to enjoy a game with travel on a district bus
Come on people, this isn’t “news” in any sense of the word – it’s a blog post from a college student who thinks his old high school has gone soft. Let’s be honest – everyone thinks that their high school or college was more fun when they were there. The list of “rules” is only loosely factual, and even the ones that are mostly true are not new. Kids are NOT breathalyzed as they enter basketball games, but yes, appearing to be drunk at a school event will get you a breathalyzer test and a call to your parents to come get you (and an unhappy ride home.) This has been true since at least 2008, presumably while the author was still at North; same with the 6th man and prom bus policies. The only thing on that list that’s new (and which probably sparked the post) is the “promposal” thing (a big, dramatic, very public “ask” to the prom.)
The rules are facts, ignore it if you please.
@Steven– If you’re not sure breathalyzers effectively curb drinking among high school students, [“Regarding effectiveness, I don’t know”] why do you support their use? And don’t you want to know if it’s not working?
@Hoss– I don’t disagree with your point. Perhaps there’s no good solution. But given the two apparent options, I’d allow kids who may be intoxicated to take the bus, rather than risk them driving to an event. I just see a cat-and-mouse game here, where kids drink, and administrators try to catch them. I don’t object to punishment being part of the equation, but I think it’s more important for the system to encourage open and honest dialogue between administrators, parents, and at risk teens. When fear of punishment drives the process, it encourages nothing but secretive behavior. I don’t like to see kids keeping secrets, because then they’re afraid to ask for help.
@MikeStriar – When I say “I don’t know” the effectiveness of breathalyzers as a deterrent, I mean I don’t know of any good data to quantitatively prove how effective they are. But from a common sense standpoint, it’s a good policy in that it’s *likely* to deter underage drinking at a given event. Telling the students that there could be random tests would make them think twice about showing up intoxicated. It’s not going to eliminate drinking, but it will tend to reduce it at the event.
This is a practice that is going on all over the country, so evidently there are a lot of officials that think this might help and that it’s not problematic legally. Obviously it should be combined with other educational, psych/social services, etc to try to combat the behavior. But until a court says no or until someone shows that it’s a bad policy, I think it’s a great idea.
Two comments were removed from this thread at the request of the author.
@Steven– I respect your opinion, but I’m afraid we’ll have to agree to disagree. I don’t support questionable school policies just because other school districts do it, or even when it appears there are local school officials who might think something is a good idea. There was a time when most schools and officials thought paddling was fine too. Currently we have a School Committee that thinks it’s a “good idea” to start high school at 7:30 in the morning, despite the proven link between sleep deprivation and depression in teens. Nothing, not even an epidemic of stress and three recent suicides have caused them to rethink that policy. So you’ll have to forgive me if I don’t put as much faith in the school system as you appear to have. We’re all entitled to our opinion though. Just curious… Do you have any kids in high school?
Students actually need to experience the difficulties/effects of alcohol during the high school years. I’ve seen many college age students badly affected by alcohol and unprepared as to how to deal with it. They are far from home/family and unable to cope.
At least in high school kids can learn quickly from their mistakes. I do believe that too many rules at school events do not solve the inherent problems with over drinking.
I don’t think anyone is claiming that breathalyzers at events stop drinking in general. The point is to control intoxication at the event, the same way no smoking areas reduce smoking in that area. No one is complaining that smokeless restaurants aren’t reducing how many people smoke. Don’t conflate two disparate goals. The schools can teach kids they shouldn’t drink, and, in addition, that they won’t tolerate it at school events.
Mike, I am not necessarily disputing your claim that starting school later would help with sleep deprivation but I do have a question for you: our kids are very busy these days with extracurriculars and some of them with jobs. They are not going to stop doing these things if school gets out later (a byproduct of them starting later, I would assume)… So the extracurriculars will just start later, and end later, like dominoes. So the kids will stay up later, and wake up later. It will all just roll along, won’t it? Honestly, I am not trying to be argumentative – I am truly interested in your response. It seems like the school start time is less important to sleep deprivation than the pressures of “packaging” our kids for college!
I would personally much rather go to school earlier and still have the rest of the day…
Sleep deprivation may cause depression, but students should learn to budget their time better. In my opinion high-school never started too early. Usually if I don’t have to be up until later, I stay up later… I doubt you would see an overall trend in students being better rested. Besides, most households wake up around 6:30-7 anyway. I know my parents would often drop us off early on their ways to work, which included my father having to be in Boston before 8.
Having overly full schedules is more likely the culprit. I do find it funny that I have had significantly more time to my self (including all the homework) getting a BS in bio than I did at NNHS.
Mike
Native Newtonian– Thanks for asking. There’s no question that starting later would reduce sleep deprivation. A large part of the issue is that teens are biologically wired to sleep later than 7:30am. So the question becomes, would extracurriculars wipe out that benefit by forcing kids to stay up even later at night? I don’t believe that’s what would happen.
Let’s use your example of a student with an after school job. In some cases that may mean the student gets to the job later, but that does not mean they stay at the job later. A store or restaurant for example, closes when it closes. Granted it’s an assumption, but mine would be that students who now work a job until 9pm, would still work until 9pm. If school started an hour later, [and actually ended an hour later as well, which may or may not be the case], that student may lose an hour of work at their job, but they would still gain that extra hour of sleep. It’s a trade-off. A question of priorities. More sleep in exchange for perhaps a slightly smaller paycheck.
There are other issues too, like bus schedules, school sports, and after school clubs. These are issues that would need to be resolved by school administrators, just as their counterparts in other school districts have solved them when they decided on later start times.
I think the most important thing is understanding the health consequences of starting high school at 7:30 am, because that presents a compelling case. Sleep deprivation has been indisputably linked to depression in teens. We’ve had three teen suicides over the course of one school year. Newton’s own survey indicates epidemic levels of stress among our high school students. Many of them skip breakfast because of the early hour, thus undermining the healthy lifestyle our school system should be encouraging. Studies also indicate sleep deprived students don’t test as well, and are more likely to develop other medical issues. I suggest googling “sleep deprivation in teens.” That will give you a sense of how bad this problem is, and how irresponsible our School Committee has been in dealing with it.
If a student is intoxicated at a school event, he/she could be asked to leave. I do not believe school authorities should ever be allowed to administer a breathalyzer test. This smacks of power over reach and should not be implemented.
@Colleen– I agree with you 100%.
So if a student that is intoxicated is asked to leave a school event because of this and they get into a car and drive and either kill themselves or someone else – wouldn’t the school be liable for not having either called the parents or the police for said intoxicated minor?? And maybe they should just call the police and let them deal with the situation since it would supposedly be illegal for the school to administer breathalyzer tests.
It’s pretty funny that this thread still has legs even though no school comm member (present or past), no teacher or administrator, and no student or graduate has said breathalyzers are used or that a policy exists.
@Joanne– I agree with Colleen that breathalyzers have no place in Newton schools. A drunk or drugged student should be asked to leave, and their parents informed. In no case would I allow them to drive. Additionally, I’d require them to attend a mandatory counseling session, and whatever follow-up sessions the counselor deemed necessary. If the problem persists, I’d suspend the student until they received appropriate treatment.
@Hoss– I independently confirmed the use of breathalyzers. The School Committee members are unlikely to comment, because I’ve raised the issue of sleep deprivation as well.
Mike Striar — Did they give a context? Using it as part of the condition for an exclusive bus ride among NNHS students is understandable. Using it as part of a public event seems undefendable since drunks other than students would not be required to submit. Using it during a school day where the student doesn’t elect to show up, they are required, is what some would say is a gray area> Because the administration can’t get similar evidence for heroin, etc — I say it’s not fair or proper.
@Hoss– I should have said, I’ve independently confirmed the use of breathalyzers at some Newton high school events. I can’t currently offer more than that, but will endeavor to add context in a follow up post, unless someone beats me to it.
i found something. On the NNHS site, there is a doc called “2010-2011
Students’ Rights and Responsibilities Handbook” where on p9 it says:
1. Breathalyzers and Protective Custody
In keeping with the expressed goal of Newton Public Schools of having all school activities remain free and safe from alcohol use, principals or their designees will have the discretion to use either a passive or an active individual breathalyzer on any student attending school or any school activity if they have a reasonable suspicion that the student is under the influence of alcohol. Students found to be under the influence of alcohol will be subject to the Discipline Code M12. If a student is found to be under the influence of alcohol or other drugs at school or school events, attempts will be made to contact parents or guardians; if no parent or guardian is available, the student may be taken into protective custody by the police.
This link opens a PDF: http://nnhs.newton.k12.ma.us/component/docman/doc_download/18-2010-2011-student-rights-a-responsibilities-handbook
This rule makes sense. An adult makes a reasonable judgment based on a students questionable behavior. I am sure the student has the right to decline the breathalyzer test however and leave the event of his/her own free will.
However, I do not believe that breathalyzer tests should be used randomly on students by administrators without serious breach of behavior by a student.
Thanks, Hoss. I remain entirely opposed to the use of breathalyzers in NPS. I think our policies regarding alcohol and high school students should focus less on punishment, encourage open and honest dialogue, and provide more counseling for at risk teens.