Does anybody know the incident recently happened in Sidwell?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, response seems very tepid to me so far. As a Sidwell parent, I was expecting something more commensurate with the abhorrent incident. Suspension or expulsion. I am profoundly disappointed. There is a bright red line here and it was crossed. It needs to be answered by the school’s leadership. Takes moral courage, I know.

I agree, but also understand that the school has to do enough diligence before taking decisive action. It has only been 1 school day since this happened.

Has the student been identified? If not, the school can’t take any action.

Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

It is a Quaker school. Should you not expect hate to be confronted with peace and love?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, response seems very tepid to me so far. As a Sidwell parent, I was expecting something more commensurate with the abhorrent incident. Suspension or expulsion. I am profoundly disappointed. There is a bright red line here and it was crossed. It needs to be answered by the school’s leadership. Takeps moral courage, I know.

I agree, but also understand that the school has to do enough diligence before taking decisive action. It has only been 1 school day since this happened.

Has the student been identified? If not, the school can’t take any action.

Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

Then just tell us what you Will do? make an announcement that the student will be expelled as soon as being identified? You mentioned other schools and give us more details so people can compare. For example what GDS did last year.

For example, what STA did when students posted anti-Semitic social media posts: expelled them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, response seems very tepid to me so far. As a Sidwell parent, I was expecting something more commensurate with the abhorrent incident. Suspension or expulsion. I am profoundly disappointed. There is a bright red line here and it was crossed. It needs to be answered by the school’s leadership. Takes moral courage, I know.

I agree, but also understand that the school has to do enough diligence before taking decisive action. It has only been 1 school day since this happened.

Has the student been identified? If not, the school can’t take any action.

Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

It is a Quaker school. Should you not expect hate to be confronted with peace and love?

Dang, you don’t know anything about Quakerism, do you? When someone violates community norms, they are “excluded from the community.” Quaker version of expulsion. Guessing student involved is well-connected and they don’t want to offend parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, response seems very tepid to me so far. As a Sidwell parent, I was expecting something more commensurate with the abhorrent incident. Suspension or expulsion. I am profoundly disappointed. There is a bright red line here and it was crossed. It needs to be answered by the school’s leadership. Takeps moral courage, I know.

I agree, but also understand that the school has to do enough diligence before taking decisive action. It has only been 1 school day since this happened.

Has the student been identified? If not, the school can’t take any action.

Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

Then just tell us what you Will do? make an announcement that the student will be expelled as soon as being identified? You mentioned other schools and give us more details so people can compare. For example what GDS did last year.

For example, what STA did when students posted anti-Semitic social media posts: expelled them.

Exactly.

By the way, you can have peace and love for a person but still have rules and consequences that preserve the honor code and the overall community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, response seems very tepid to me so far. As a Sidwell parent, I was expecting something more commensurate with the abhorrent incident. Suspension or expulsion. I am profoundly disappointed. There is a bright red line here and it was crossed. It needs to be answered by the school’s leadership. Takeps moral courage, I know.

I agree, but also understand that the school has to do enough diligence before taking decisive action. It has only been 1 school day since this happened.

Has the student been identified? If not, the school can’t take any action.

Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

Then just tell us what you Will do? make an announcement that the student will be expelled as soon as being identified? You mentioned other schools and give us more details so people can compare. For example what GDS did last year.

For example, what STA did when students posted anti-Semitic social media posts: expelled them.

Expell whom? The student has not been identified yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

Did you actually read the letters? They condemn the person’s actions completely and totally probably 30 different times. And they specifically discuss expulsion. No one could read those letters and doubt how seriously the school takes this.

[Anonymous]

They could if they want to disparage the school anonymously on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They could if they want to disparage the school anonymously on DCUM.

Pp--no intent to disparage. Was expressing an opinion. Others can, and some others do, disagree. Just an opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They did issue swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation. Both in the parent-alumni communications and also directly in conversations with the students. Just because they don’t run the behind-the-scenes details by you and sharing every detail at this stage doesn’t mean they’re not doing their job. Get off your high horse and show a little restraint as this plays out.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever the status of identifying the student, there have been at least three letters sent out, each one more infuriating than the last. Emphasizing the light in the student who engaged in hate speech without any strong language about the fact that an inexcusable line was crossed. Almost no talk of consequences or how seriously the matter will actually be treated. Little talk of how seriously it OUGHT to be treated. Stating how the school wishes the incident could have been prevented (ha!) while failing to discuss any ideas for revisiting technology policies, etc. Mentioning discussion groups and meetings that occurred after the last incident (yes, there have been more than one!) without seeing the irony: clearly the "discussions" weren't terribly effective.

Other schools facing similar incidents responded with swift, appropriate, and unequivocal condemnation when faced with similar incidents. knowing the student's identity is not a necessary prerequisite to showing backbone on hate speech.

Did you actually read the letters? They condemn the person’s actions completely and totally probably 30 different times. And they specifically discuss expulsion. No one could read those letters and doubt how seriously the school takes this.

A lot of bla blah; zero action.

[Anonymous]

These things are dealt with by the administration. At no point are they required to have a transparent policy of how they go about that.

I agree with the poster who says just because you're not getting the finer details doesn't mean they aren't happening.

[Anonymous]

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These things are dealt with by the administration. At no point are they required to have a transparent policy of how they go about that.

I agree with the poster who says just because you're not getting the finer details doesn't mean they aren't happening.

You are missing the point. Action should be swift and transparent so that consequences are known to the community. That sends a clear signal of what is accepted or not. Rather than a slap on the wrist like community service.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These things are dealt with by the administration. At no point are they required to have a transparent policy of how they go about that.

I agree with the poster who says just because you're not getting the finer details doesn't mean they aren't happening.

You are missing the point. Action should be swift and transparent so that consequences are known to the community. That sends a clear signal of what is accepted or not. Rather than a slap on the wrist like community service.

Actions have already been taken. No slaps on wrists. Let's respect the privacy of those involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These things are dealt with by the administration. At no point are they required to have a transparent policy of how they go about that.

I agree with the poster who says just because you're not getting the finer details doesn't mean they aren't happening.

You are missing the point. Action should be swift and transparent so that consequences are known to the community. That sends a clear signal of what is accepted or not. Rather than a slap on the wrist like community service.

Actions have already been taken. No slaps on wrists. Let's respect the privacy of those involved.

what action?